Adult Content Piracy: A Men’s Issue

by J. DeVoy on December 29, 2010

Jay DeVoy is an attorney focusing on First Amendment issues and regular contributor to the award-winning law blog The Legal Satyricon.

The Salon-esque parody headline aside, copyright infringement lawsuits are an issue that have affected and will continue to affect men in the future.  Men will be most overrepresented in the wave of infringement lawsuits regarding pornography, though.  It doesn’t take any deep statistical analysis to figure this out, either.  Thought experiment: Who is more likely to torrent porn, men or women?  Considering that this activity 1) uses the internet, 2) in a manner more sophisticated than point-and-click social networking, and 3) deals with visual depictions of sex, it’s easy for anyone honest about gender differences to see where such lawsuits will affect men more than women.

This is a men’s issue on both sides, for both content producers and consumers.  A few exceptional women-owned studios aside, such as Jennaration X and Burning Angel [N.B. - I won't link to any studio for courtesy to content-sensitive readers, and to spare them from the resulting dreaded HR "meetings"], most of the industry largely has been founded and advanced on the backs of men like Larry Flynt, John Stagliano, Jules Jordan and John Leslie Nuzzo, among others.  Adult Entertainment, and the men who created billing services to bring it to people’s homes – documented in the movie Middle Men – created the entire micro-economy of e-commerce.  For those who question the amount of work needed to sell a product to people who want it, bear in mind that most of the successful people in the industry faced criminal charges for obscenity at some point, even recently, and others still do.

Understanding the Business

While the entire industry brings in a couple billion dollars a year, it is by no means as large as many people like to think.  Forbes breaks it down here.  When you cut up that porn pie, you will see that many of the slices are diet sized. Given the niche nature of the industry, most DVD titles sell around one thousand units. When you rip off a Metallica song, you may contribute to a large aggregate loss for the record company, but your individual theft doesn’t really change the record label’s bottom line.  When you steal a single adult movie, you may have stolen a significant portion of that movie’s sales.  And that’s when you steal from the companies that crank out DVDs, which tend to be the larger producers.  Internet-only companies face a bundle of related, larger problems, as their content is already optimized for digital transmission and sharing.

Aside from a handful of market leaders, most internet porn companies are smaller businesses than your local Chipotle franchise, and they are often run by the very people on screen. When you steal Up, it doesn’t really take much money from Pixar. When you steal porn, it very likely will have an immediate and measurable negative impact on the actor, director, and publisher. With the current degree of online piracy, most adult studios’ profits are down 60%. Though hardly poor, they lack the resources to pursue every instance of infringement solely to make a point.  Recast in a different light, a local hardware store could not stay in business if 60% of its inventory being moved out the door was stolen.  Adult entertainment businesses are the same size, and rely on the same ethic, and yet there is less stigma attached to theft by torrents and other peer-to-peer sharing.

The adult entertainment industry is a collection of many smaller companies without a monolithic trade group to represent its economic interests in court and before Congress.  While the Free Speech Coalition and ASACP are trade organizations representing the industry’s principles and a subset of their legal interests, there is no equivalent of the MPAA, RIAA or even a BMI/ASCAP-type entity to bankroll sector-wide anti-piracy endeavors.  This eliminates the cost-spreading structure that allowed the RIAA and now MPAA to ruthlessly pursue thousands of litigants for years, and the adult entertainment industry is left with individual studios acting alone to enforce their copyrights against the most egregious pirates.  Framed in gender didactics, it’s the same advocacy disadvantage men have when confronted by NOW and the League of Women Voters.

In 2000, right when online piracy became a huge issue, Courtney Love gave an eloquent defense of file sharing, essentially backing up the argument that a lot of online copyright thieves employ — that when you steal music online, you’re not really stealing from the little guy musician, you’re stealing from the fat pig record companies. While not making it less illegal, that rationale has some moral justification when the main profiteers of music and movies are large studios producing thousands of titles and employing even more people.  A small business, however, cannot sustain such losses without feeling them immediately.

More than Naughty Pictures

Weighing social and technological advances together, the adult industry’s impact on American culture has been second only to NASA.  In the 1980s, porn’s choice of VHS over Sony’s Betamax ended the format war.  In the 1990s, pornography was at the spearhead of internet development both in terms of technology and business models, designing affiliate programs and billing services at the same time it pushed for video, audio, and more efficient photo services. If you watch any video online, thank the porn industry. In fact, if you use the world wide web, thank the porn industry. While porn didn’t invent the internet, it certainly acted as the amniotic sac for the fetal Web.

This trend has not slowed.  The adult film industry swiftly adopted the now-dominant BluRay media format, ensuring its viability and winning the war against HD-DVD.  Ironically, this helped Sony’s format win, after doing the opposite decades earlier.  Porn has also been instrumental in transcending format wars with video on demand (VOD) technology.  Vudu, an early VOD service that offered a channel catering to adult entertainment, was recently acquired by Walmart and forced to end its adult offerings.

The net result of adult entertainment’s viability as an industry has been an undercurrent towards faster, higher quality and more widely accessible technology.  Every other sector has benefited from the accessibility and ubiquity that adult entertainment has sought to achieve, given its patrons’ frequent need for discretion.  Culturally, people are experimenting more and, as the data above suggest, enjoying themselves more as well.  Not to say that people are uncreative on their own, but the adult entertainment industry gives them ideas, whether for technology, business or physical activities, that they may not have thought of on their own, and that entrenched interests like film and music companies have no interest to develop.

To those who say that “the model needs to change,” they’re right.  That’s why the adult entertainment industry has constantly been in a state of flux, and has material available in print, on DVD, and online.  This has also been a major reason why the industry has not been able to establish trade cabals like the RIAA and MPAA.  The common thread of the industry, and reason for its existence, is original content — content that is copyrighted and entitled to a range of legal protections.  All of the structural change in the world will not alter the fact that a right to produce and protect original content is at the core of adult entertainment; it is the industry’s sole commodity, like coal, oil or copper, that derives value by virtue of its relative scarcity.  Content producers want you to have access to it on your phone, computer and television, but legally, and can only advance the technology required for this goal if they have the money to research and perfect it.

Helping a Brother Out

In the world of content creation, U.S. Copyright law governs what can be protected and how those protections work.  There are limits to what can be copyrighted, so that someone cannot claim a proprietary interest in a mere idea.  For economics wonks, there are individual rights within a copyright that can be broken down and sold, licensed or assigned to others, such as rights of republication or broadcast.  And, to protect the creator, there are provisions that allow for recovery of up to $150,000 for willful infringement.

There is a constant drone about copyright law from those at the technological frontier – that it stifles innovation, that it’s stilted in favor of large studios, and that it’s become obsolete.  These may all be valid criticisms, but the law on the books remains the law on the books until it is changed.  Feelings are irrelevant to the law as written.  But, feelings – or plain old good taste – are relevant to how one chooses to use it as a sword.  If someone was reposting The Spearhead articles because they agreed with the message and wanted to get the word out to others – or even if they disagreed and wanted to critique the piece’s arguments – it seems unlikely that Mr. Price would hunt them down and sue them, absent some kind of rampant misappropriation and profiteering (and, even then, my dealings with W.F. Price lead me to believe he’d try to settle everything as quickly and cordially as possible).  When you create for your livelihood rather than your cause, though, then every penny lost to piracy counts that much more.

The easiest way to not get caught in such action is to not steal.  People caught in such lawsuits have claimed it is unfair to bring up what the pirated content was in order to shame the pirate into settlement.  I think lawyers who employ that tactic are undermining their clients.  There is no shame in creation, or in commerce, and what one does in the privacy of his own home would not even be under public scrutiny but for one important fact: the defendant stole.  There is no reason to steal, and bring caught will carry a penalty worth several dozen legitimate DVD purchases or monthly website passes.  Knowing the industry demographics, though, why would you steal?  Adult entertainment is unique in that the average woman is paid more than the average man – often by factors in a scene where they both appear.  The field predominantly is run by male small business owners, though, who are also well represented in this publication’s readership, and can relate to the myriad of issues faced when creating something new and important.

As always, honesty is the best policy.  Otherwise, change your network password often, even if you give it to friends occasionally, and make sure you know who’s using your network.  If someone comes over for a weekend, logs on, and has a torrent running in the background, a motivated plaintiff will have your IP address when he comes knocking.  Actually, he won’t – it’ll be a letter from your internet service provider telling you that they’re giving up your internet account information, followed by a visit from your friendly neighborhood process server.  At that point, it’s a matter of how little you can get away with paying – motions to quash subpoenas for identifying information in copyright cases tend to have a low return on investment; when a case is brought properly, a motion to quash’s likelihood of success is low.  At that point, it’s time to admit wrongdoing and try to get off as lightly as possible, even if you’re forced to suck it up and pay a “d’oh tax” for failing to properly secure or monitor your wireless network.

Conclusion

People are free to dislike pornography and choose not to buy it.  They can keep strip clubs and video stores out of their cushy suburbs if they can convincingly show that it will increase crime and harm property values.  If all of the major studios were to shut down tomorrow, there would still be more porn around than any one person could need in his or her lifetime, but that’s not the point.  However indignant or repulsed one might feel, there is a bright line between what is and is not theft; distaste for something does not excuse stealing.  As an inexorable force for technological change, porn is intrinsically valuable, and its producers have to defend their ability to stay viable – profitable, even – for the rest of us to benefit from its existence.  Nobody likes to be sued, or to pay a settlement of several thousand dollars.  But, widespread piracy has destabilized an entire industry, and one that has worked to be rather versatile, as opposed to the recording and movie industries’ desperate grip on decades-old models of distribution.

Special thanks to Marc Randazza.

{ 62 comments… read them below or add one }

danalddack December 29, 2010 at 06:07

(reposting as internet connection failed the last time I tried posting).

Off topic, but: instead of the bulk of readers here wanting to do away with marriage and avoid women, how about demanding institutions like family court/alimony/child support were completely abolished?

You do realize that if women have no system to play, they would unlikely contemplate divorce in the first place, don’t you? In fact, my guess is that divorce was rare in the old days because these institutions weren’t the feminist-cancerous bodies they now.

Welmer is doing this site a huge disservice by NOT putting a banner on the top of this website that simply says, “Abolish Family Court”. That would be a good start. Does he not understand constant repitition of simple phrases is key to penetrating public consciousness?

While this article is interesting (to a point) there are much more worthy topics for conversation. One of them is this: MGTOW is a poor choice for men who actually want a wife/children, and so in order for men to have these things, feminist institutions like family court must be abolished. This site needs an overhaul and even if I get red marks for this, so be it. It’s time for a simple banner on the front page of this site that exclaims (in bold lettering) “Abolish Family Court”.

Hows that for a bit of libertarian thinking?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 5
Poester99 December 29, 2010 at 07:00

I think your angle of saying the law is THE LAW, is not going to get much traction among men who tend to be more than aware of the possibility of the law itself being immoral and/or unethical. When this occurs law enforcement are just a bunch of thugs, with no more justification, except having the resources to bring more violence to bear, than your average mafia, or street gang.

I partially agree with you about the small porn producers and their greater vulnerability to piracy but first of all the fallacy that content = physical inventory.

Theft of physical inventory means that is can no longer be sold, contents however can, because unless the master copy is stolen, the content producer can continue to sell it.

Secondly sales of a product whose price has been reduced to zero = lost sales of a product that costs a certain amount. This is nonsensical but is the standard way that they pump up piracy stats.

Thirdly controlled piracy is the best way for the smallest publishers to gain exposure. Microsoft did it because they were the only software publisher that did not have very effective and expensive software protection on their software (hardware dongles). The old companies became more open and used exposure (via limited piracy) to build their businesses or maintained the closed model and perished.

They have to come up with a way for users to pay for those million copies out there and leverage the pirates as “distributors”. The new media is NEW and it needs new solutions, not a bunch of Luddites in black robes with the force of the state behind them trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
Peter December 29, 2010 at 07:24

It’s an interesting topic, definetely.

Although I’m not a social conservative, I can see the social conservative arguments (and, ironically, anti-sex feminist arguments) against adult content piracy. Mainly that limiting piracy would limit the amount of adult content that is available to children. Some of us still remember the days of a stolen Playboy tucked under a mattress, but then 1994-1995 came around and it was goodbye to all that, because the internet came of age then. Who knows how warped we’ve become because of what we’ve seen in our formative years? And we weren’t exactly paying for that stuff back then.

In the olden days, all but the most depraved sheiks would maybe see a few naked women in a lifetime. These days a young man experiences thousands of naked women who offer the illusion of non-rejectability. So on the one hand, he sees women who want sex so badly all the time, they exchange but a few words before commencing intercourse. On the other hand, he also grows up with a destructive feminist narrative about male sexuality, where he as a man is portrayed to be a rapist and victimizer. He’s got weird social conditioning telling him women want sex all the time and indiscriminately, and he’s got a little feminist commissar on his shoulder saying “nuh-uh, it’s not nice to think that”. So viewed this way, it’s another form of social control – a way of making sure the default male feelings about their sexuality are shame.

In addition, the wiser feminists know that the vast majority of beta men who keep society operating have to be appeased with something, so they keep their anti-sex feminists “sisters” at bay, and keep porn legal. Yeah, supposedly it’s because of “unenforcability” and idea that the first people victimized by a porn ban would be kinky gay somethingorothers. But we know the real reason why feminists tolerate porn – it’s because it’s a way they get to sell sex to beta men without actually having to interact with beta men.

Hundreds of thousands of women every year around the world sell their bodies to the porn industry in one way or another, for at least a 1000 bucks a pop for a basic “modelling” session. In other words, it’s just another wealth-transfer scheme from men to women, like welfare and child support. Subverting this vehicle for female sexual power through piracy is no different than spoofing women’s hypergamy drive through game. In both cases, the only losers are the women and a few alphas. So why not pirate?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 2
Zammo December 29, 2010 at 07:40

There is also the commoditization of porn through free, amateur websites. As the technology for producing quality audio and video becomes cheaper and more accessible to the suburban swinging couple with an exhibitionist streak, it will be the amateurs willing to share their home-made porn for free who will continue to cause the continued shrinkage (yeah, I know) of the professional porn industry.

For anyone who reads “erotica”, the available books have been eclipsed by Literotica.com, a free website that continually updates its erotic stories with fresh material. A book publisher simply can’t compete with that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
El December 29, 2010 at 07:48

Sounds like a PR piece for the pornography industry. I fail to see how such pro-industry sycophancy is relevant to anti-feminist/masculinist discourse.

And enforcing copyright law vis a vis pornography (or other entertainment) is not a anti-feminist/masculinist issue.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1
El December 29, 2010 at 08:01

As the MRM movement grows, there will be various eagle third parties – who don’t necessarily care about us or our concerns – wanting a piece of the action.

They see a growing body of men who can be co-opted or politicized, possibly to their detriment. They see the opportunity for slipstreaming their own self-serving agenda into the masculinist discourse.

One Machiavellian opportunistic third party – who don’t care about us or our concerns one iota – who have a high presence are the neo-conservatives. They see an opportunity to co-opt us into the “anti-(new) left” coalition. They offer a flawed, inaccurate discourse and don’t care about the facts – only about getting suppporters. Part of the neo-con’s mala fides polemical discourse is an inaccurate analysis of how feminism came about, and how it can be solved.

The neo-cons see masculinist as useful idiots, as they did when they politicized and co-opted the christians in the 1970s and 1980s.

Various types of political conservatives behave as eagle third parties – thinking that masculinism is a place for their tired, cliched, simplistic narratives. When in reality masculinism/anti-feminism should be about stepping outside of the narratives and paradigms of feminist Western Civilization altogether. It should be about radical thinking, forging our own discourse.

Perhaps we can add the pornography industry to this list of opportunists, seeking to make masculinism a carrier for their agenda (with no benefit to ourselves).

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 1
Philip December 29, 2010 at 08:45

Whats next?
Is a pimp going to complain about game so we will pay his ho’s
Go to hell

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
NWOslave December 29, 2010 at 08:48

The reason the “porn” industry will ultimately fail or fail to have adequate “laws” protecting it’s profits is because straight men are the major consumers. I’ve read where “they” the Guv is trying to enact laws to “shame” men by listing their names as “porn users” if they download any porn.

Recent articles of feminist groups trying to ban Hooters or laws to “shame johns” but not hookers which has been affectionately renamed “human trafficking” is to punish straight men for their “nature” of being sexually aroused by skantily clad or naked women. Groups like “Holla back” seek to shame straight men for having the audicity to even talk to women who are clad in clothing that makes many a hooker look modest by comparison.

We have barely teen girls running around in public wearing barely-there clothing, women posing naked or skantily clad for the porn and fashion industry, women as hookers, ect. all being done for money, attention, vanity without anyone holding a gun to their heads. Many men and especially boys who haven’t had the chance to mature sexually experience quite a bit of sexual frustration. Straight men are “told” to control their “sexual urges” while women are “encouraged” to explore and flaunt their sexuality. Men apparently are the problem.

Now lets look at the flip side of this and the “Julian Assange case” is an excellent example. Men are visually sexually excited and women are verbally sexually excited, this is just the way it is. So Mr. Assange used his “verbal enticements” to sexually excite and bed these women. Since he is up on charges of “rape,” again straight men are the problem. A woman might be initially attracted to a handsome man, but if he opens his mouth and says, “duh you pretty,” thats a deal breaker.

Romance novels further demonstrate womens propensity at verbal arousal. Most of these novels revolve around a barely teen girls’ feelings of being sexually attracted to a much older “White Knight.” The next time you’re in a book store flip thru one of these novels, the picture of a naked woman you look at pales in comparison to the smut being peddled in a romance novel.

Women gorge themselves on these novels of young girls and older men, they get sexually aroused on the dialogue, (verbal) plot of the story and use their imaginations to fill in the visual picture of the event. Women are not visualizing young girls in burka’s doing dishes while reading this stuff. Men on the other hand look at a pictures and use their imaginations to fill in whatever dialogue (if any) they see fit in their story line.

Women love these novels and can’t gobble it down fast enough, when they read about young girls and older men it’s all about “true love” and “innocence” and “romance.” If a 25 year old man in real life, (who would be the “White Knight”) in one of these stories, looks at a picture of a skantily clad 16 year old girl in real life, (the sexually blossoming young girl) in these tales of romance, he would be consider the vilest creature to walk the earth.

Straight men are considered “perverts” and “letcherous slime” if they look at pictures of naked and skantily clad women/girls and fill in their own dialogue. Women are considered “romantic” and “poetic” if they read dialogue about about naked and skantily clad women/girls being “excited” and “fulfilled” and filling in their own visual. Man = Bad, Woman = Good.

Make no mistake, Corporations, the Guv and Mass Media have declared all straight men their enemy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 2
SingleDad December 29, 2010 at 09:27

@ NWO

Even on a mens issues web site we can’t admit that men have a sex drive.

I think it is a wonderful storm some here are creating. Could you imagine a coalition of mens rights activists, feminists and neo-cons decending on the porn industry. That is what I read in some of these comments.

Well porns legal and all so not to worry, wrong. Some of the biggest producers are currently either in jail or just stopped, after years of litigation, from being prosectuted.

The war on porn is going full force. It is driven by our enemies because as you so accuratly stated there is a war against straight white males.

The war on white men has been going on my whole life, 50 years. How many shooting wars last that long? And it’s getting stronger and bigger reaching all corners of the globe. And battel fatigue sets in.

Well f* marriage, I’m done buying women houses and watching them screw up the kids, f*strip clubs I would not give a dime to a woman who didn’t do something for me of real value. I pay my housekeeper.

But take away a mans right to porn and we are back to pre-1950′s purity laws in a country in which women can cheat at will, screw all the children they please, slap on the wrist, create a social system of education that half the students, the boys, hate, and you are rewarded.

With mens heads so far up their asses it is hard to imagine whats stopping the feminists from making laws that limit where single men can live or associate, like in public parks, oh, sorry, they are doing that already.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 8
mgtow December 29, 2010 at 09:31

Porn companies, like recording companies, are raging against the dying of the light.

There’re live streams, social porn, amateur porn, leaked scandal videos… all more interesting than scripted porn with that production gloss. And they’re mostly free.

The porn issue is highly related to feminism. The most rabid anti-porn brigade are the feminists, besides the conservative-religious moral crusaders. The feminists say porn degrades and objectifies women, and some even say that watching porn causes men to be more prone to raping women (go watch that particular Penn and Teller Bullshit! episode that elegantly debunked this).

The reason why feminists are against porn is the same reason why they’re against prostitution. These things rob women of their sexual power and stranglehold on male sexuality. If a man does not need a woman to get off, what other use does he have left for a woman?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 5
Keyster December 29, 2010 at 09:33

What’s killing the porn industry right now is the “amateur” video maker. The grissly old dinosaurs like Flynt and Leslie, et al. are still churning out re-hashed 70′s porn (without the wah-wah guitar soundtrack). Meanwhile there’s reams and reams of great free amateur porn, real people having real sex. People are simply making their own porn, much like home music studios are killing the big name studios. The internet solves the big problem with entering the market, DISTRIBUTION of content.

Now you combine this with female role models like Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian having sex tapes “leaked”, and young women find it quite trendy and liberating to have their sex tapes “leaked” as well. Everyone’s a porn star, just like Paris and Kim! This trend produces a never ending lineage of young women who have no problem with having their participation in various sex acts video taped. Much of this is also coming from Eastern Europe and Russia, where before they would have had no access to the very controlled US distribution channels.

I know porn has been a driving force behind tech development, but theft is not their problem right now. The internet, like so many other aspects of our lives, changed the paradigm. It’s changing everything, including the exposure of the feminist myth…right here, right now.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 2
scatmaster December 29, 2010 at 09:59

mgtow said:

The reason why feminists are against porn is the same reason why they’re against prostitution. These things rob women of their sexual power and stranglehold on male sexuality. If a man does not need a woman to get off, what other use does he have left for a woman?

Says it all right there.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 2
Richard December 29, 2010 at 10:05

Anything that a large enough group of men like – will be attacked by feminists.

Football – labeled as causing domestic violence.
Porn – labeled as causing rape.
Sex – labeled as rape.
Sexy Women – labeled as having no self-respect.
Thin Women – labeled as anorexic.
Beer – a type of date rape drug of course.

Hell, I know women who, if they had their way, would outlaw StarTrek and Star Wars – or any other T.V. show that takes men’s attention away from them.

It does not matter what the issue is.

If you see a large enough group of women/feminists opposing it or b*tching about it, there must be a large enough group of men who enjoy it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 1
Peter December 29, 2010 at 10:31

The reason why feminists are against porn is the same reason why they’re against prostitution. These things rob women of their sexual power and stranglehold on male sexuality. If a man does not need a woman to get off, what other use does he have left for a woman?

IF the majority of feminists were against porn then it would be gone. As I argue above, the majority of feminists support porn because it gives women MORE sexual power and increases a female stranglehold on male sexuality. In the case of porn, it’s all about getting money from sex from betas without actually having to be seen associating with betas.

In addition, it keeps the masses of men satisfied, and so keeps them paying into the system. As I also have said before, it’s a control mechanism – feminists like porn because it perpetuates the idea that female sexuality is like male sexuality; i.e. indiscriminate. They then use the anti-sex wing of their movement to simultaneously deride men who think this way as perverts. For example, is it a straightforward matter if you’re with a girl who likes you and who you like back to take her to bed? No, if you do that, you’re a rapist, so you’ve got to play all sorts of mind f***ing games with her. Which makes you an emotional abuser. Who but the strongest, most determined men can deal with such bamboozlement?

My thesis is supported by current feminist trends regarding porn. For example, Australia banned porn with anyone under 21, and other feminists have been floating similar ideas in other jurisdictions. Why are they doing this? They want to further use it because they think they can socially shape men’s sexual desires – in this case, towards older women. I predict feminist demands for laws in the future regarding quotas for “realistic” body shapes in porn, as well as unionization of the California industry, which means only the women with the most “seniority” get the prominent roles and releases.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c) December 29, 2010 at 10:33

In any case Jay the ‘copyright legislation’ is not law, it is only legislation. Men who know the difference between law and legislation can easily deny copyright infringement cases in the UCC courts. I certainly can.

Just look at the lunacy going on in the Ukraine now where they have made porn illegal. I mean, in a country where the age gap in deaths is one of the largest in the world and men a dropping like flies the ‘guvment’ wants to take one more little piece of possible enjoyment away from them! LOL! And OTHER MEN enforce these ridiculous items of legislation! Out ‘enemy’ is not ‘women’. It is the men who use women to oppress men.

And doing things like making ‘prostitution’ illegal (when it is perfectly lawful) is just men oppressing men. If two consenting adults want to do something, let them be. If someone wants to hand their shingle out and sell something? Make sure you know how to protect what you are selling and don’t rely on the ‘guvment’ because ‘guvment’ is all about oppressing men. They are NOT your friends.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3
NWOslave December 29, 2010 at 10:36

@ SingleDad, “The war on white men has been going on my whole life, 50 years.”

The war on white men is all part of the same war. Black men are taught they don’t measure up, are lazy an uneducated. White men are taught to be ashamed of their heritage. Mexicans are taught they’re gangland drug running thugs. The common thread no matter your race is women are blameless, innocent victims.

It’s like asking Affirmative Action and the Mass Media to promote pieces on everyone having racial pride. Be proud of being white or black or hispanic. If Affirmative Action was honest and told the truth that every race does have strengths and weaknesses as a biological fact they would promote themselves out of a job.

Affirmative Action, The ACLU, ect. are multi-billion dollar industries, they’re in the business of promoting hate, not “peace” or “truth” or “racial harmony.”

If every white and black man got together today and said “ya know, this is all bullshit, no one deserves anything just because of their race and no ones to blame for their race.” The Mass Media , Guv and Corporation would be blasting messages over every media outlet, even reviving morse code to tell everyone that racial hatred is at it’s zenith and hate groups abound. The entire existence of special interest groups depends on their promotion of hatred. It’s in their interest of funding themselves to promote as much hatred as possible.

I’m the same age as you SingleDad, born in 1960, so I’ve seen it all. The only war is the marxist/feminist attack on straight men. I’m sure you’ve perused feminist sites and how they “claim” to support minorities, which of course means women, (usually with abortion in poor countries, they apparently just can’t kill unborn children fast enough). The point is they “support” women of color, gays, lesbians, transgendered, bisexuals and other “genders” I’ve never even heard of. I’m old school like you, when I grew up there were only 2 genders.

The goal of marxist/feminist is to destroy the family, even as the family is being systematically dismantled and reinvented, there is still one enemy of the state. The straight man is still their enemy and if they can get straight white and black men to fight, so much the better to prove the point of the inherent violence of straight men and their need to dominate and destroy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
Anon December 29, 2010 at 10:54

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 26
misterb aka misterbastard December 29, 2010 at 10:57

Technically a majority of women are already thin-skinned. Personally I don’t watch porn, it’s damn shame to see a nice bodies banging so many schmoes.

Naturally young fellows are attracted to women with nice bodies with a nice face to boot. Given on the numbers of straight men as consumers of porn. Unless some guy has a fetish. Aside from that, a typical young Joe, only wants to see firm breasts, firm body, doing some hip and groin action or munching on the pelt.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Anon December 29, 2010 at 10:58

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 30
SingleDad December 29, 2010 at 11:10

@ NWO

Sorry about the white statement, that relates to me personally but I have to apologies because IMO men of color, even asian men, are more demonized than white men.

I meant straight men.

Although, I do think gay men are next. I don’t think feminists or lesbians like gay men. Their men and potential rapists and thats all they are, right? To feminists gay men are useful tools only.

Ironically, t was a gay friend of mine that turned me on to the mens rights movement. My gay friends are very politically aware, I believe gay men don’t really believe that when it’s their ox being gored feminists will stand up for gay men.

But for now it’s an alliance of convenience. When it’s not convient the feminists will throw gay men under the bus. And for their support of feminism, I will not shed a tear.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
El December 29, 2010 at 11:12

“The only war is the marxist/feminist attack on straight men.”

Feminism and Marxism are not the same thing. Feminism is however equivalent and uniquely synonymous with Western Civilization.

(Neo-conservativism is concerned with the protection and spreading of Western Civilization: tending towards global supremacy. “Globalization” so-called (global Western Civilization) means global feminism.)

Ever hear of Senaca Falls? “That’s first wave feminism”, you say “before it got corrupted in the 1960s. Those women only wanted just rights and freedom [sophistry]“.

Nope. Feminism is the same always. The basic mindset and intentions of feminist females through the ages is the same always.

And the “just rights and freedom” legal, “formal” stuff of the first wave inevitably leads to the type of feminism we have today.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 8
misterb aka misterbastard December 29, 2010 at 11:15

@ NWOslave.

I thought there were only two genders. A male and a female. It seems to me that certain people are creating confusion, in stating that there are so-called more than two genders.

speaking of which, making porn illegal is not the answer. The urge to dominate and destroy is primal, long before the Roman Empire and the Assyrian Empire were established.

In modern times. Only two things comes to mind, idiocy and lunacy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Cloud December 29, 2010 at 11:48

Off Topic but interesting,

“Teen Mom” arrested for domestic abuse against her Fiance. A court has told her to stay away from him and their child.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/40838661#40838661

She should definitely lose custody of their child. Men have been banned from seeing their kids for doing less (or nothing at all).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
WOW December 29, 2010 at 11:49

One has to ask, at what point did so many men begin to prefer porn over an actual real woman?

How bad have Western Women become that a man would rather turn on his computer than chase a warm female body?

The answer to this can only come from deep female introspection…which of course is an an impossibility.

Let’s see? Screw a bitchy, banged out 38 year old single mother, or turn on the computer? Hmmmmm?

/click…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 3
Jonathan Mann December 29, 2010 at 11:50

I think that men in America need to wake up before things get as bad here as they are in Europe. Feminists will stop at nothing to put any man in jail if he doesn’t pull out of a consenting woman fast enough, or, if they can start prosecuting men for making porn they’ll do that too (though you can be sure that the female porn stars won’t be held criminally liable, there “the victims”.)

In light of the fact that neither of the two major parties are the slightest bit willing to acknowledge that there is an ever widening divide between men and women in almost every sense ie. education, spending obligations, compulsory military service; I think that men should form their own Political Party.

There are going to be many millions of unemployed men in this country over the next decade and there will be no hope in sight for any of them to be employed with a livable wage in the future. Its time for us educated MRAs to give those men hope, and to give them something other than the desperation and despair that lead to arbitrary criminal acts. We should start drafting a Party Platform and get organized!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
Jonathan Mann December 29, 2010 at 11:53

I meant “they’re the victims”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
tsurupettan December 29, 2010 at 12:02

@Poester99: “Theft of physical inventory means that is can no longer be sold, contents however can, because unless the master copy is stolen, the content producer can continue to sell it.”

Pondering whether piracy is theft is a giant herring, since piracy is a free-riding problem, and as such more analogous to, say, tax evasion than stealing physical property.

@Poester99: “Secondly sales of a product whose price has been reduced to zero = lost sales of a product that costs a certain amount. This is nonsensical but is the standard way that they pump up piracy stats.”

You are right, the equality doesn’t hold, but an inequality does: actual losses are no more than market price times the number of pirated copies. A fraction of pirates would by the copies were they not available for free; but we have no way of telling how large a fraction.

Similarly, the tax-loss due to working under the table can easily be overestimated since, theoretically, the evaders might lose their incentive to work if they had to pay the taxes.

@Poester99: “Thirdly controlled piracy is the best way for the smallest publishers to gain exposure.”

Giving out free samples is not “controlled piracy”, but a perfectly legal and time-tested marketing technique (think shareware). But ultimately, it should be up to the content owner, not the pirates, to decide how much free samples are given.

(I agree, though, that true “controlled piracy” may have worked for a giant like Microsoft at establishing a monopoly in a growing technology area. But for most publishers working in established areas — such as pornography — it will never work; they will have to see cash flowing in rather sooner than later.)

@Zammo: “There is also the commoditization of porn through free, amateur websites.”

I agree this holds for erotica, but not for video. The demand for porn videos is simply too great to be satisfied by volunteers. Also, virtually no amateur that regularly shows their faces in HD is willing to do so for long without a fee; that’s why we have sites like clips-for-sale.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
NWOslave December 29, 2010 at 12:56

@ SingleDad
No problem about the “white” statement, I’m a white guy myself and years ago I can remember being furious about the hatred directed at me for my “supposed” privelege as I worked in many a sweat shop scraping out a living, until I figured out what the game was and who was being played.

I disagree with your assesment that feminist “will throw gay men under the bus.” I see the opposite as being the more likely scenario, feminist can hold up gay men as , “intelligent, gentle and non threatening, more in touch with their feminine side.” Gay men will be portrayed as non-rapists, non-sexual assault beings with their masculinity properly neutered and their falsely indentified “violent natures” held in check.

@El
Even though marxism and feminism aren’t the same things the goals and methodolgy are; both seek to undermine the family as the base power structure of a nation and transfer that power to the state.

Both use the oppressor/victim class dictum to enact “law” to disenfranchise one group while enabling another. Men are deemed the “bugiouse/oppressor” class and women are deemed the “peasant/victim” class in all social, economic and political realms. The end result is the same; a globalized marxist state with Gig Daddy Guv as the ultimate authority, women (the victim class) under the state’s protection and men (the oppressor class) needing to pay reparations for past percieved grievances.

Yes I’ve heard of Seneca Falls, which means nothing. What we need to eradicate from our conciousness is the apparent belief that women were oppressed in the past. If “women” as a class were oppressed it can only be judged against “men” as a class. No matter where you look in history men were treated more harshly as a “class” then women ever were.

Also when we talk about “Men” being in power they all had wives/women who were also in power. These women didn’t give a flying crap about the masses, their only concern was what fine silks or sparkly rocks they could adorn themselves and what exotic foods, spices and perfumes they could consume. The reality of history shows that women as a “class” were far more protected and provided for, and men as a “class” were the one who were truely oppressed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4
Traveller December 29, 2010 at 13:09

Excellent article. It does not happens to me very often to read something in defense of porn.

In general terms, I always though porn = freedom. As bad as it can sounds for some, even if they do not use it, knowing it is out there means there is freedom. If there is no porn around, it means someone is censoring it.

And censorship is always a bad thing. Once done for porn, there is no end. Censor violent movies (what is violence anyway? What women and elites want it to be). Forbid chocolate and pizza otherwise you will become fat and you will not work so much and you will not pay more taxes. And if you die of illness because of fat, no more taxes for the communist government.

Once the power gets the right to decide what is right and wrong, there is no end.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
sharp December 29, 2010 at 13:14

Richard:

Anything that a large enough group of men like – will be attacked by feminists.

Off topic, but I’ll add to your list videogames. Occasionally made of fun by men but mostly shamed by women since the beginning. Why? Because women usually stink at them or just don’t like them. It’s a hobby boys, teens, and increasingly, men of all ages (Call of Duty anyone), have done for decades that largely excluded and took attention away from women. Therefore it gets shamed. “Nerd!”

The Nintendo Wii came along, sold boatloads, particularly among women and moms. The motion controls and Mario type games are easier and more female friendly. Now, the media gives gaming much more attention than they ever did with the PC, the X-Box, and even the Playstation. Suddenly it’s socially acceptable because it appeals to women. Extremely smart move by Nintendo though from a business perspective.

Microsoft is doing the same thing with their new hands free motion control peripheral called Kinect. The thing debuted on Oprah of all places. Guess what, it’s selling like hotcakes. I guess the moral of the story is, want to mass market something? Dumb it down, oops sorry, I mean streamline it and make it more palatable for women. It’s the same thing that’s happening to music, movies, television and the rest of our entertainment. Notice how they are really starting to suck? (particularly music, many women especially young girls have god awful taste in music, sorry its true). Not a coincidence that our entertainment is becoming shit when corporations started going after the biggest consumers, women.

P.S. There’s nothing wrong with guys enjoying the Wii or Kinect, but you see my overall point.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3
Traveller December 29, 2010 at 13:23

About the copyright laws, I agree with who says it can be difficult today speak about laws and morals.

I mean, today the value of laws is totally declining. Think to political corruption, laws done for the interests of some groups (feminists for example), capricious trials and judges, truly expensive proceedings for poor people, criminals released because otherwise there is sexism or racism, etc.

So, today law is seen by the majority as an arrogant act from who has the power. It is just a force balance, there is no more moral compelling to respect the law. People do what they want, they do a calculation about the benefit of the act against the probability of being caught.

And piracy of digital content is really easy to do, and the probability of being caught is really low, even because the ways to combat it are against some of the fundamental rights of the people (the few still standing, like some sort of privacy or free speech).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
SingleDad December 29, 2010 at 13:30

@ NWO

I agree this is how feminists currently hold gay men. Better men than straight men in every way important to women. Straight men should emulate gay men even to the point of having gay sex (thus relieving yet another woman of that dasterdly task).

But the gay men I know do not like women. They see them as political allies but know, deap inside, women hate them. At least that’s what my friends tell me.

Gay men have no use for women at all.

Looking at the issue conversly, women have held up lesbianism as the ultimate feminism. They have lesbians in charge of all their important national orgs. They don’t trust any woman that likes men. Marrying is for reproductive purposes and should only be done with a house husband.

What makes you think feminists think men in the mens right movement should do anything different?

As has been said by someone smarter than me, us MRM guys are one bj away from getting married again.

Not true for our gay brothers.

Other than their current marriage of convience, women have historically detested gay men.

Once they are no longer necessary, or if gay mens agenda diverges from womens, women will turn on gay men, IMO.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
SingleDad December 29, 2010 at 13:57

And here, I swear I didn’t see this before I wrote the above, but here, from todays feminist news organ Salon:

http://www.salon.com/news/national_review/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/12/29/jonah_goldberg_gay_rights

Which basically says, that it would be unwise for gays to leave the liberal umbrella, threat?

In response to this article in the National Review:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/255996/gay-becomes-bourgeois-jonah-goldberg

Which basically says that once gay men have access to the military and gay marriage, they no longer will identify as liberal and all that free love stuff was junk, and that monogamy, even gay monogamy and hard work is the secret to happiness.

So the divide is opening and is public. I predict it will widen. I believe the Salon piece understands what liberals will lose if they lose gay men, alot of political clout.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
Poester99 December 29, 2010 at 14:38

@Poester99: “Theft of physical inventory means that is can no longer be sold, contents however can, because unless the master copy is stolen, the content producer can continue to sell it.”

Pondering whether piracy is theft is a giant herring, since piracy is a free-riding problem, and as such more analogous to, say, tax evasion than stealing physical property.

No, not really, it’s actually completely new and there is nothing quite like it.
Stealing digital property is not like physical property because it isn’t, it isn’t missing, you can continue to sell it and exposure may be more advantageous for a small company than physical units sold. We need new paradigms to protect content providers, and without turning to a totalitarian statist control of information, which would be the only way to do it as things stand now.

@Poester99: “Secondly sales of a product whose price has been reduced to zero = lost sales of a product that costs a certain amount. This is nonsensical but is the standard way that they pump up piracy stats.”

You are right, the equality doesn’t hold, but an inequality does: actual losses are no more than market price times the number of pirated copies. A fraction of pirates would by the copies were they not available for free; but we have no way of telling how large a fraction.

No, that’s not true, it’s illogical, again, because demand for a free item will hugely outstrip demand for an item that costs something. So making a lost revenue estimate based on “sales” of content going out for free, based on the retail price of the content, is not useful in this context, it is only if you’re actually trying to find a solution other than building more prisons (for a new, theoretical, “war on piracy”).

@Poester99: “Thirdly controlled piracy is the best way for the smallest publishers to gain exposure.”

Giving out free samples is not “controlled piracy”, but a perfectly legal and time-tested marketing technique (think shareware). But ultimately, it should be up to the content owner, not the pirates, to decide how much free samples are given.

If they can. Solid and effective control (with the required draconian enforcement) will again, as in the past, limit exposure to the big players.

(I agree, though, that true “controlled piracy” may have worked for a giant like Microsoft at establishing a monopoly in a growing technology area. But for most publishers working in established areas — such as pornography — it will never work; they will have to see cash flowing in rather sooner than later.)

It may benefit them some now, but I’m mostly talking about when Microsoft was small and the software giants had solid control of their software, and figured that they would be around forever.
DOS, Windows, got into every young hacker’s hand and it was what they chose instead of something else that was much harder to get a copy of.
When they got their tech jobs and rose through the ranks at the large corporations, their recommendations reflected what they were comfortable with.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
El December 29, 2010 at 14:41

“Not true for our gay brothers.

Other than their current marriage of convience, women have historically detested gay men.

Once they are no longer necessary, or if gay mens agenda diverges from womens, women will turn on gay men, IMO.”

Unlikely as homosexual men and the homosexual men movement are key in instigating/normalizing homosexual parenting.

This is vital for feminists because homosexual parenting is known to cause a large increase in homosexuality in the children. This breaks down that pariah that females complain of: “heteronormativism”, which they equate with “patriarchy” (i.e. male power).

It’s true that it’s feminist females that are pushing homosexual sexual marriage/parenting legislation – dreamt up of course in Western academia (the patriarchy oppressing wymyn so bad by giving them control over the high-level cultural apparatus which sets the discourse boundaries – note this never occurred in the USSR or China).

Phyllis Schlafly has said this. [Schlafly is an ineffective/doubtful anti-feminist (she has said that more capitalism can stop feminism (absolutely incorrect; capitalism and feminism are the same trend).]

She is basically correct, however, on this point.

I wouldn’t invest must hope in homosexual men joining anti-feminism. I’m pretty sure they’ll either be feminism’s useful-idiots or true-blue allies. I don’t think feminists will alienate themselves from the homosexual men lobby any time soon either – because they help achieve key strategic goals in the war on heterosexual men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
SingleDad December 29, 2010 at 14:49

@ El

In the short term I absolutely agree.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
LushFun December 29, 2010 at 14:59

I think torrents will simply evolve to perfect anonymity where you simply randomly coalesce files. Clients like tribler where trackers aren’t indexed and perhaps you will simply have more features incorporated to completely be able to get anything online without tracking. Not sure how but surely there will be a way.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
continent December 29, 2010 at 15:24

I’m not sure if copyrights for porn producers is a “Men’s Issue”. Many of them are located in the San Fernando valley, according to HBO and seem to prey on girls who come to Hollywood to seek stardom and end up either working in strip clubs or porn industry. While all should have freedom to watch what they want, porn producers pay meager fees while actors lives are ruined. One teacher was fired after she admitted that in her youth she had participated in porn. Also AIDS is supposedly prevalent because viewers prefer unsafe sex.
Also, organizations like “Perverted Justice” likes to lure men into police traps. Some sites hijack your computer and user doesn’t know that his/her machine is infected.
http://www.rickross.com/groups/perverted_justice.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5
Jonathan Mann December 29, 2010 at 16:04

@ Continent, while I certainly agree with you that copyrights is not a ‘Men’s Issue’, I do differ with you on the porn industry. The girls performing in those movies make RIDICULOUS amounts of money for a couple hours of sex on camera. The men starring in them make on average one-fourth of their female co-stars. If the teacher, you mentioned, was fired for being in a porn years earlier, she should sue and she should win. Its not the porn industry’s fault that she was fired, it was the puritanical school board. AIDS can be a problem but those industries mandate the use of AIDS testing and the actresses and actors know they’re taking a risk going into the business.

As for your comment on perverted justice, I don’t know what that has to do with anything that J. Devoy just wrote.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
NWOslave December 29, 2010 at 16:11

@ SingleDad & El

Gay marriage will soon become a national law without a doubt.

SingleDad, you are of the opinion that… “Other than their current marriage of convience, women have historically detested gay men.”
“Once they are no longer necessary, or if gay mens agenda diverges from womens, women will turn on gay men, IMO.”

El, you are of the opinion that…”Unlikely as homosexual men and the homosexual men movement are key in instigating/normalizing homosexual parenting.”
“This is vital for feminists because homosexual parenting is known to cause a large increase in homosexuality in the children. This breaks down that pariah that females complain of: “heteronormativism”, which they equate with “patriarchy” (i.e. male power).”

I lean towards El’s point of view, more than likey we are all wrong. If gay men “break” from feminism because the “marriage of convenience” is over, the state will pick up the pieces. Hate laws are already in effect, they won’t go away, they will only grow into thought policing like “Holla back” for gays. Straight men will be the lone social, political and economic bottom feeders.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
tsurupettan December 29, 2010 at 16:51

LushFun: I think torrents will simply evolve to perfect anonymity where you simply randomly coalesce files.

The ability to do so is mostly thanks to the global nature of the Internet, which greatly impedes all efforts for regulation (e.g., regulation of anonymizing proxies, mandatory logging, P2P bandwidth limits, realtime blacklists, and traffic analysis).

Also, anarchist groups like EFF like systematically oppose Internet regulation in the name of “free speech” — which is about as believable as Bernie Madoff calling for abolishment of accountancy laws for “financial privacy”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Joeb December 29, 2010 at 16:55

I think at the same time they can look into fair pay for men in the porn industry. Men in general make 1/10th of what women make in the porn industry .
It is shrugged of as the way it is ,but if feminists were on the other side of this argument it would go strait to the supreme court .( Like this pun ) men all over the porn industry are getting screwed.
This is just another example of Metaphysical law being pushed onto industry. They say are Country is not being run by clerics and religious prognosticators , But we can all see through the rhetoric and Dogma.
Freedom of speech has always cover this issue , Theirs more then one way to skin a cat. They will try them all.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
continent December 29, 2010 at 17:40

@Jonathan Mann,
You make a valid point with PeeJ (acronym) having as much to do with “mens rights” J Devoy’s article. It just make The Spearhead a target for feminist ridicule.
But the point abvout PeeJ was to alert those who cruise the interne not to click on suspicious links and get arrested.
Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perverted-Justice

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
DirkJohanson December 29, 2010 at 19:08

@ Jay,

Is there any legal issue with simply viewing free porn on a website?

@ Everyone:

If you happen to have any interest in seeing some pretty mediocre porn, about the sole virtue of which is that I am in it, check out this link. http://vod.adultemart.com/dispatcher/movieDetail?movieId=64834&theaterId=40407 I’m the guy in scene 2. The checks actually cleared.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Korst December 29, 2010 at 20:00

Forgive me if I’m reiterating a previously made point, but equating one pirated copy of a movie to one lost sale is a bit disingenuous.

There are different “breeds” of pirates, with both significantly different aims, regardless of their identical legal culpability.

Like most commonly thought of, and probably the most popular version, is that some pirates just don’t want to pay.

Others however, pirate things they wouldn’t pay for, or may pay for afterwords for whatever reason, enjoyment, guilt, developer patronage, etc.

Of course piracy is still piracy, and the moral distinctions between reasons are muddled at best and non existent at worst.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
J. DeVoy December 29, 2010 at 21:50

Dirk-

Hey buddy. No, there’s no legal issue with *viewing* the content on tube sites. Morally, it’s equivalent to enjoying the property someone else stole. I understand why people do it, but it’s killing the industry, moreso than torrents are. People are concerned about downloading iffy torrents, but can block anything going on in the background of a tube site where they stream video no differently than on youtube.

The sites themselves and the video uploaders have the most to lose. Whether the site is liable for infringement hinges on their compliance, or lack thereof, with the Digitial Millennium Copyright Act. There are too many factors at play in the DMCA to give a succinct answer within one blog comment. Uploaders, if they can be found, can be held liable for infringement. If the work they pirated has a registered copyright, they can be on the hook for up to $150,000 in statutory damages.

J. DeVoy December 29, 2010 at 21:54

@Jonathan Mann

Conceded that copyright litigation is not a traditional men’s issue. But when there are more of these mass infringement suits, I hope the readers here take note of the disproportionately high proportion of defendants who are male. While not as horrible and controversial as paternity fraud, these lawsuits will affect many more men over the next 1-3 years.

DevilDog December 29, 2010 at 23:07

Pornography is great, I don’t give a damn about the sluts or dudes doing it, I just wanna see some porn so I can rub one out and go about my business. Especially when I’m deployed, porn has kept me content in Afghanistan especially hah.

Censoring/banning porn is something feminists will never achieve, I’m not worried about it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Jean Valjean December 30, 2010 at 01:03

While I might be sympathetic to the porn industry’s dilemma I am still unconcerned for several reasons.

1. Pornography is a capitalist industry which contributes taxes to the female hegemony. However, I am a male who is fighting that hegemony and therefore paying for things and contributing to that capitalism is contrary to my goal. Therefore, porn is not an essential commodity that I am forced to buy or even want to pay for.

2. There is no shortage of gutter slut tramp stamped skanks who are willing to fuck some slick stud while in front of the family video recorder or iPhone. I have no doubt that this burgeoning source of free amateur porn is doing more damage to the porn industry than all the downloading.

3. Pornhub. Yeah, I said Pornhub. This site and others offer it up for free. Tons of variety dozens of categories all streaming to my home for free. Why buy a one hour DVD (15 minutes of which are credits) when a 5 to 40 minute video on Pornhub is 2 to 38 minutes longer than I need? Not only is it free but I don’t have to return the video to the store or contribute more garbage to the world. With Pornhub and other sites Torrent is obsolete.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Pankaj December 30, 2010 at 01:10

There is no “copyright”, there is no “piracy” and if you think there is – its your burden to defend it.
There is no need for men to make sure small businesses whether serving porn or women only car insurance survive.. let them go bust, new ones will take their place.. with better porn. No need to deify those who made porn or are making them today. If they feel the industry is not profitable, let them close shop and go do something else. The reason these folks are screaming now for legal protection is because the amateur porn generators have gained much popularity. Folks don’t need a “business” to put a camera and shoot a session – they are willing to do it for free. Nor do they try to make it their bread and butter. So what if they just do it once or twice.. They still would produce enough to go around anyway.

The matter of fact is this is simply an attempt to “guilt” people into supporting laws that are against their own interests. By calling them “thieves” and “pirates”, these folks are trying to convince that copying electronic pattern is theft… well.. my succinct response is FU.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Spinemore December 30, 2010 at 02:42

Boring, only read the first two paragraphs, too long too. So this lawyer works for the pron companies, so what? I’m a libertarian I don’t believe in intellectual property. If these idiots documented a couple having sex, and that document can be copied at zero marginal cost to produce another copy, who cares? not me.

I am sure even if the whole industry dies, there will still be amateur porn put online by private couples.

There is already enough porn that has been filmed to last us the next 50 years. There is a glut. I don’t cry for anyone dumb enough to get into the intellectual property game in the age of the internet, you all have known the score since Napster in 1999. It’s been obvious.

It’s like a teacher who knows the pay is lousy, knew this going in, and then strikes. It’s like shut up, you knew the risks.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
DevilDog December 30, 2010 at 04:39

I wasn’t aware people still BUY pornography..

Step it up guys, stream websites, torrents, messageboards with free links.. I’ve never bought any pornography.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
DirkJohanson December 30, 2010 at 05:19

Jay wrote:

No, there’s no legal issue with *viewing* the content on tube sites. Morally, it’s equivalent to enjoying the property someone else stole.

You just ruined PornHub for me! Now if I watch it, I’ll feel like I’m facilitating a crime, but without the self-cred of knowing I am actually doing the crime. Oh, well. Back to the 15-second clips. Better yet, time to finally completely give up the spanking and save up my goo for live girls.

BTW, I got turned-on to PornHub by a 21 year-old hooker. The little freak asks me to put it on every time she comes over. The last time, she got so horny watching, she gave it to me free.

Of course, even though plenty of women are downloading free porn, more guys will surely get prosecuted for it. After all, if it took 3 months to file charges against the teen mom for battering a guy on global TV, … And will a woman ever get prosecuted for buying one of those imitation Louis Vuitton handbags?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Philip December 30, 2010 at 05:37

I got told about ‘Youporn’ by a girl, women love porn too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
El December 30, 2010 at 07:07

“Censoring/banning porn is something feminists will never achieve, I’m not worried about it.”

Feminists don’t even want to. Pro-porn feminism is where it’s at today; indeed the qualification pro-porn feminism is becoming redundant as it is adopted into the standard feminist canon. Anti-porn feminism has been a dead movement decades.

The pro-porn feminists feed their discourse into the pornography industry and porn industry legal firms, such as Devoy’s.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Poester99 December 30, 2010 at 08:28

@tsurupettan

Also, anarchist groups like EFF like systematically oppose Internet regulation in the name of “free speech” — which is about as believable as Bernie Madoff calling for abolishment of accountancy laws for “financial privacy”.

You seem to have great faith that the regulators will be above reproach (since you believe the EFF’s mission is a sham).
I guess you probably sleep better at night than me, since you believe that the powers-that-be are always working for your best interest (instead of their own).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
mgtow December 30, 2010 at 17:53

@tsurupettan

The demand for porn videos is simply too great to be satisfied by volunteers.

That’s why the professional porn industry is still around. It is a thriving, multi-million industry. It is also a lucrative and satisfying career path for many.

There is nothing wrong with porn – amateur or professional. Beware those who protest against bond saying:
1) Porn degrades and objectifies women
2) Porn causes addiction
3) Porn destroys bonding with women
4) Porn causes sexual deviancy, including but not limited to child porn
5) Porn is a waste of time and/or money

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Satyajit Roy December 30, 2010 at 18:24

In the olden days, all but the most depraved sheiks would maybe see a few naked women in a lifetime. These days a young man experiences thousands of naked women who offer the illusion of non-rejectability. So on the one hand, he sees women who want sex so badly all the time, they exchange but a few words before commencing intercourse. On the other hand, he also grows up with a destructive feminist narrative about male sexuality, where he as a man is portrayed to be a rapist and victimizer. He’s got weird social conditioning telling him women want sex all the time and indiscriminately, and he’s got a little feminist commissar on his shoulder saying “nuh-uh, it’s not nice to think that”. So viewed this way, it’s another form of social control – a way of making sure the default male feelings about their sexuality are shame.

Peter, you’re lucky that’s all you have to contend with. If you’re Indian add to that list thousands of years of “culture” to shame you into being an outcaste for taking up “degraded Western habits” like watching porn which flies in the face of “India’s family values” and ruins the name of your great ancestors!

And then on top of that – not being allowed to date or choose your own spouse.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
Muk December 30, 2010 at 23:57

I say, let them die. It’s not my problem if they can’t make money, and since there are people willing to do it for free, then it obviously lowers the value of their product.
If they can’t compete, then they should die. Why should I be expected to grab a bucket and pail the water out of a sinking ship?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
CashingOut January 1, 2011 at 13:13

@ OP:

I hate to say this, but most US porn really isn’t worth paying for.

When me and friends discuss the virtues and vices of porn, I often remark that the porn industry in the US is a lot like the fast food industry as compared to other countries: so far as quantity goes we have a lot more of it than other places, but when you get right down to it, most of what we have are hamburger joints, and most of those are bad.

Your argument toward supporting the adult porn industry suggests that the adult porn industry is a viable industry worth supporting. If anything, the truth is that the US adult porn industry as it stands is probably too big, and needs to collapse under bankruptcy or lack of interest. Out of all of the downloads of porn I have ever done in 10 years, I can think of maybe 10 movies that I would pay for, and 6 of those are foreign.

Most porn is the same: the blonde with tattoos, scars, ugly moles, and trackmarks taking some half inflated dick while having fake orgasms, the brunette with tattoos, scars, ugly moles, and trackmarks taking some half inflated dick while having fake orgasms, the redhead with tattoos, scars, ugly moles, and trackmarks taking some half inflated dick while having fake orgasms. Occassionally you’ll find one who will take it up the ass, one who can squirt, or one who is extremely flexible. Regardless, it’s mostly all the same. If the market goes from 200 or so companies providing this cookie cutter entertainment to maybe 2 or 3, would I really care? Would you care if all of the McDonalds, Wendy’s, Burger Kings, Rally’s, and such suddenly closed down, leaving you with only mom and pop stores?

The truth of the matter is that adult movies are getting pirated for the same reason that music is: most of it is crap. Just as with music, many a porn customer has walked into the porn store, brought movie or mag X, and gotten home with it to find out that for 29.99, they’ve brought 3 minutes of an attractive girl having sex, and 237 minutes of bullshit; or for 9.99 they’ve brought 4 attractive pictures of a girl, and 54 pages of skanks and magazine ads. Do that enough times and you say to hell with it.

So in closing, let me say that instead of chastising customers to pay for their porn, you may instead want to chastise the porn companies for not adding something of value that makes peole want to pay of the product they’re getting.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
anon January 5, 2011 at 17:49

I find it ironic that some of the same men that criticise women for getting something for nothing through child support or alimony think that they are entitled to free porn. Isn’t that something for nothing?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
austins best locksmith February 6, 2011 at 09:53

Glad I stumbled upon this site, great read.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: