Uh nope, don't agree with you on this one and I'm definitely no fan of lawyers.

Did the wedding videographer/photographer NOT use copyrighted music in a video he made for commercial purposes, for which he was paid, and NOT pay the legal owner of the music used for the soundtrack? That is a fact, correct? Last time I checked, that's copyright infringement and grounds for a lawsuit. Just because it's commonly done by small time Mom and Pop wedding photographers doesn't make it right. There should be payment for it's usage, especially if one is profiting from that usage.

Let's reverse it shall we? You take a video of some lovely landscape and some band decides to use your bootlegged images lifted from some site for their new video they're selling. They then sell your images without paying you for it's usage. That'd be ok with you? Wouldn't be for me! While flattered by it's usage you can bet your butt I'd be contacting my attorney looking to be paid!

Gary M Knotts wrote:

Actually, I agree with you about the use of copy righted material for profit, but I did not comment on that aspect of the article.
only my own opinion on a certain industry...all i wrote was "lawyers..."

Gary, you used a story citing Romo's wedding vid going viral on U-tube and the lawsuits resulting from it due to obvious copyright infringements which are now common within the wedding industry. You inferred this is another negative example of "lawyers" with the "rolleyes", no? That's how I interpreted it. Was I wrong in my interpretation of what you were implying??

IMO, the linked story isn't a valid example of negative lawyer actions. They're bringing suits on behalf of their clients who are hiring them in order to be fairly paid for the usage of their intellectual property.

Since the advent of the Net and digitalization of various media forms, Hollywood, the music industry, and yes, my own, the adult industry have lost a tremendous percentage of our incomes due to the theft of our products being uploaded to various tube sites where we aren't paid, and others ARE profiting from it. In this particular example you noted, I've got to admit I'm glad the lawyers are going into action....though it's far too little, far too late. That Genie's been out of the bottle since the advent of all the free file sharing sites.

OK, this is gonna be wordy as, IMO, you used an incorrect example to cite the negativity of attorney's being "abulance chasers" or corporate "legal teams". Are some? Yes. Was this a good example of it? No. If that was your point, your example using a story regarding current piracy/copyright issues is a debatable analogy.

Piracy is an issue that I've been directly affected by on a first hand basis. It has substantially hurt the business I'm in, AND my paycheck. It's why I take issue with you using it as an example of "rolleyes" attorneys. I wish there was more legal enforcement to the copyright laws and that more attorneys were going after piracy with a vengeance.

Gary M Knotts wrote:

going after "mom and pops" one high profile case? Whats gained?

It has slowed some folks from doing it. In the article you linked as an example of these negative lawyers it WAS noted that quite a few of the wedding photographers doing it are taking their vids with the bootlegged soundtracks off of their websites, so as not to draw attention to themselves resulting in potential litigation, because they ARE stealing soundtracks. Are they still doing it? Yup, of course. They just don't publicly advertise they're doing it now. I hope it leads to these wedding photographers/videographers paying for the usage rights. It can't be much of an expense, and they can build that cost into the retail sale of the vids they produce, IMO. Doubtful it'll negatively affect their profit margins doing it legally.

Gary M Knotts wrote:

Can the lawyers go after the copyright violators outside the US? (China/Eastern Europe/Southeast Asia)

Two chances of that occuring currently. Slim and none, and "Slim" has long since left the building. International Copyright laws and their enforcement have no teeth whatsoever. You're correct in inferring that the international piracy problem can't be cured in courtrooms with lawyers as it stands now. At least not until these rogue nations who allow this piracy also enforce the agreed upon international laws and go after the offenders operating within their borders. Not likely anytime soon.

Gary M Knotts wrote:

Remember when the music industry sued all those people over "illegal downloads" What did they gain? Public scorn and yet the problem remains.

I do remember it well. It scared the sh*t out of alot of folks (still does), and a percentage of these did stop their piracy. I DO recall that the largest file sharing site on the web at that time, Napster, ended their "business as usual" practices for fear of huge litigation expenses and potential fines for enabling the piracy of copyrighted images, vids, and music. They were then sold to Best Buy as a PAID content site, and exist in that format to this day. Are there others who sprang up afterwards and located outside of US geographical jurisdiction? Yes, and they remain a huge problem. The Net isn't limited to national borders, which contributes greatly to the copyright problem. I've linked an article below on the RIAA lawsuit you are alluding to.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/0 … g-file-sh/

Gary M Knotts wrote:

As for the Adult industry, the military adage "Adapt,Improvise and Overcome" comes to mind,the Adult industry has always,from what little i know of it,been the first to innovate to stay profitable.

Do we use cutting edge technology in the adult biz? Absolutely, we've always led the way. Is there a technical cure for the existing piracy problem we are dealing with daily? Not currently or it wouldn't be the issue it is for us, and has been, for roughly 5-6 years now. To the degree that the gross dollars netted by the Top Ten in the adult industry is down roughly 60% from figures generated 4-5 years ago, and they're still the same Top Ten for the most part.

It was no big deal when it was VHS/cassete tapes being pirated, as the quality level of the copies viewed/listened to was rarely at the quality levels of legit copies burned from a master tape. As soon as things went digital, the 1,000,000th copy was every bit as good in quality as the masters. While the music and movie industries were negatively affected by this almost immediately with the copying of cd's and dvd's, we weren't to the same degree until our products were sold via the Net predominently. It has now, however, grown into an economic holocaust for one and all dealing with online digital media with the advent of the file exchange sites and the lack of policing/enforcing copyright laws.

Are you aware that in less than 4-5 hours of a new vid being uploaded on a Reality Kings site, that the porn tube sites have a downloadable free copy of it, where it can be viewed without paying RK's $19.95 monthly membership fee to do so? We know it! Think this piracy hasn't affected us, or that it's easy to overcome? Here's a fact. The gross monthly earnings of Reality Kings, who happens to still be the biggest website owner in the adult industry, is roughly $6-$8 million per mo currently. That sounds like huge numbers, right? Well, 4-5 years ago that number was roughly $15 million a month. The same declining percentages are across the board affecting all the other top industry leaders, Brazzers, Scoregroup, BangBros, Karups, et al.

How has it affected a journeyman shooter like me? Using RK as an industry example, they were located in South Florida, and shooting their content almost exclusively here. With 30+ websites needing to be updated regularly, that meant 20-30 shoots a week. That entailed a large staff of fulltime employees and part time performers. Girls were flown in from all over the country, housed in area hotels, paid $1,000-$1,200 for a particular scene and flown out once done. Photographers, videographers, computer geeks, MUA's, and various other folks were fulltime employees whose FICA's, insurance plans, etc were included benefits that most fulltime employees enjoy in their mainstream corporate jobs. Lose that job and you qualified for unemployment.

When the revenues got cut in half, they no longer were a centralized company doing that volume of shoots down here. It was far cheaper to sub contract out the work to companies in LA, Dallas, etc to do the shoots and to pay them for ONLY the content. Say goodbye to the vast majority of fulltime employees with their benefits. I shoot as a subcontractor on a freelance basis now. FICA is paid entirely by me as an independant contractor, and who the hell can afford health/medical insurance now? Also say goodbye to the girls earning the rates they earned just a few years ago. These same scenes are being shot now for $700-$800, and RK is considered a good paying company. Oh, and as there are far fewer of these scenes to be shot here locally, I'm shooting far less than in year's past and earning far less. So yeah, piracy has made a huge difference in my lifestyle! You can also be sure that employees working in the music and mainstream movie studios are experiencing similar hardships that I am with their studios downsizing as well.

You say it's a technology problem? Perhaps. But technology hasn't come up with the cure to protect our products from piracy as of now. If I had that answer I'd be the richest guy in the adult industry, and would also be a veritable Guru to the music and mainstream movie industries as well. Until then, the only other answer is remedy via the court system with their functionaries, the lawyers playing their parts.