Latest Announcemnent
New thread

User from GFY tries to take down file hosts. Not with a DMCA, but...

Status
Not open for further replies.
^ LOL may be he is waiting for some donations before he can send that legal document
according to him each legal document costs around 400$ to be drafted :D

looks like Manwin's pawn is earning big time from donations ;)
 
He says he won't openly post how much a donator has donated, and this is why he wont disclose the amount donated by manwin. But if you read the article at AVN, you'll see he boasts about Nautilus's weekly 250$ donation:

And we've had some very generous donations. The most generous donation has come from Manwin. I've been asked to not say how much it was, but while it was not a considerable amount of money, it was the most generous that we have received. Now, I am only surmising, but my guess is that Fabian is throwing money at a few different efforts and seeing which ones stick, so we may receive another donation from him; we may not.

A few have also provided recurring donations. Nautilus, for instance, is providing $250 a week until the 6th of December, which is when the chip-in fundraising effort stops
Click to expand...

Makes me wonder, it's kinda like extortion I guess. You pay this guy off, and he looks the other way? I've never seen any REAL rights holders organization being funded by the people that they say they are trying to pursue.
 
Chasingstar said:
After a lot of research & digging, I have discovered that yes in fact Robert King has been renaming otherwise legal files with illegal titles so he doesn't get burned for uploading them. {fraud} He then makes a screen shot of the alleged "illegal file" & posts them to his site http://stopfilelockers.com/ {slander} Implying that Paypal sells "bestiality" & "pedo". He digs another hole by posting email replies from Paypal violating their email privacy policy. http://coldcopy.com.au/paypal-merry-go-round-complaints-ignored/

I looked up a few definitions regarding the content on his sites & his conduct then sent him robert[at]fastwebdomination.com, robert[at]adplus.com.au the following letter:

Robert King,
It has come to my attention that you have been manipulating payment processors with fraudulent pretenses. I intend to collaborate with file host site owners, affiliates, & premium membership purchasers to file a class action law suit. Allegations & actions sought may include, but not limited to:
1.) Computer Fraud and Abuse Act: 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(2), 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2), 1151, S.Rept. 112-91 § 2111, 18 U.S.C. 1030, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(d)
2.) Electronic Communications Privacy Act: 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510
3.) Communications Act: 47 U.S.C. §§ 553 and 605
4.) National Stolen Property Act: 18 U.S.C. § 2314
5.) Misrepresentation of © claimant: § 202.3(a)(3)(ii)

I will also work with Paypal providing proof of your fraudulent activities, violation of privacy policy, & recommend that they seek legal action against you.

To which he has not replied.
Click to expand...

Hand the evidence over to your lawyer and go for it. 8-)
 
justpeace said:
Complete idiocy, and not even Paypal is going to accept such a ridiculous demand. First, let's discuss what "no piracy" means.

Some might assume that no piracy only means stay whithin the law, but SFL like other copyright maximalists argue that the amount of infringing content on a file host or the number of infringement claims are equivalent with facilitating piracy.

No service provider can't even hope to comply with such a condition unless it (1) Implements filtering/monitoring of all uploaded files; (2) Bans use of file encryption; (3) Require paper identification before any user is granted the privilege to upload/download and (4) Bans any anonymous use -- including free accounts and connections from VPN or IP obfuscating services.

Your proposal is therefore unworkable, unless you expect Paypal and other processors also to ban VPN, proxy and other services who can't guarantee no piracy.

Your logic proves in a nutshell why The Pirate Party's criticism of copyright enforcement is well founded.

Copyright enforcement can't coexist with the right to privacy and anonymity.
Your side got almost all it wanted in the DMCA, and even now you are bitching about the safe harbor being "unfair" to copyright holders.

If you want to take down anything, you can send the file host a valid DMCA notice. And if it's too expensive for you, perhaps you should hire more staff or find another job.
Click to expand...

So file lockers are going to have problems. Your "We can't comply." Argument, means you can't process. They can do a lot to comply.

No service provider can't even hope to comply with such a condition unless it (1) Implements filtering/monitoring of all uploaded files;

Perfectly reasonable. Once uploaders are told no file will be downloadable until it has been checked for it's legality. Uploads will drop like a stone.

(2) Bans use of file encryption;

Simple.

(3) Require paper identification before any user is granted the privilege to upload/download and

A start would be no free emails. For instance if you upload a "Brazzers" scene and don't have a @manwin.com email. It's not allowed through.

(4) Bans any anonymous use -- including free accounts and connections from VPN or IP obfuscating services

Simple.

All your objections come down to "We can't pirate and comply."

Why should someone be allowed to upload a lot of content with a free mail address?

Why can't all files be checked? Simply put if you're too big to comply to the rules, it doesn't give you the right to break them. Why can't they ban file encryption. Ban free mail addresses only allow the rights holders to upload. The DMCA law was created to protect only hosting services, File lockers are selling content via a paid access. The payments can and are being cut off.

Your argument is so weak. It's a wonder you didn't see it yourself.
 
SFL and AK are pathetic
The problem i believe is that filehost scrpts haven't been prepared for this.According to me the following could be done by filehost
1.Prevent file uploads based on filenames.
For e.g AK will upload file to your site with filename "Bestiality"
If you prevent any file Upload that has "Bestiality" word in it, AK strategy fall-->No screenshot for paypal -->Beat the dust
I believe that others have also point out many proofs how AK is fucking every filehost with false allegation
Lets combine efforts and prevent this fucker from destroying businesses
I would really LOL if he tries to attack rapidshare IMAO
 
Ifirst said:
SFL and AK are pathetic
The problem i believe is that filehost scrpts haven't been prepared for this.According to me the following could be done by filehost
1.Prevent file uploads based on filenames.
For e.g AK will upload file to your site with filename "Bestiality"
If you prevent any file Upload that has "Bestiality" word in it, AK strategy fall-->No screenshot for paypal -->Beat the dust
Click to expand...

This is a good start. Banning words would work fine. There's an obvious list of words beyond Bestiality. That can get processing withdrawn for just having that name in a link or description. A few more are, Rape, Incest, Lolita, Pre-teen, young teen, etc. Carry it through to Wordpress, Photoshop, Rolling Stone, Sherlock Holmes, etc and blocking them would do a lot to lessen the pressure.

Ban traffic coming from known piracy promoting sites.

Use the methods SFL use to track piracy files and delete them. He seems to do it on a limited budget, so you can do it as well. Or pay someone to do it.

Affiliates with a free mail address uploading more than 50 files need to be approved. Or just their payment withdrawn until they prove the content isn't pirated.

To me it seems perfectly possible to stay in compliance with the terms agreed between the merchant and processor to retain the privilege of having processing. There's no clause in any processing contract that I'm aware of that says, unless it's too much trouble to stick to our terms and conditions.

If you know of such a contract please tell us.

And that's where your argument falls flat. Moogie may have his Paypal account back now, he may lose it tomorrow. People who want to gamble he can pay, can upload to his site. :(

I believe that others have also point out many proofs how AK is fucking every filehost with false allegation
Lets combine efforts and prevent this fucker from destroying businesses
I would really LOL if he tries to attack rapidshare IMAO
Click to expand...

Than Paypal are being fooled very easily, sue them.
 
Sooo......by the nice little bold statement above Roberts the one who makes the world wide rules on piracy...Thanks for pointing out that you have many other words that paypal can ban an account with...We thought you never had any role in paypal's decision. Thanks for coming out of the closet man, took long enough.

Edit: Congratulations moogie on getting paypal back. Good to see someone going through a mid-life crisis never wrecked you.
 
SFL take down

Because Robert James King refuses to tell the truth, suffers microphallus, & took it upon his self to upload illegal titled files. (he has yet to affect R/S) I have been reporting his sites for the content he is responsible for such as:

The web site http://stopfilelockers.com/letitbit...-software-and-child-pornography/#comment-1931 is displaying information of how to obtain illegal pornography provided by the site owner.
All network servers hosting stopfilelockers.com may be held liable.

sent to: abuse@glcom.net

Also reported @ http://crime.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=...13&bt=0&bts=1&zu=http://www.cybertipline.com/

Results so far:

http://www.statscrop.com/www/stopfilelockers.com

Website Not Found

You have requested information about stopfilelockers.com website.

Unfortunately we removed it for violations.
 
Lol...Robert's a pretty lonely man posting himself on his forum, why not on his site? :P We should toss this on the torrentfreak article, I know we would get alot of people who are in favor of file lockers to report.
 
his campaign started with lies mate and he has based his whole project on lying and deception and forging evidence ! what else could you expect but fake facebook likes mate XD
-------
also reported him !
 
19661837@tickets.hostgator.com
2:23 PM (2 hours ago)

to me
Hello,

Regarding Electronic Communications Privacy Act: 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510, sites hosted on Hostgator.com's service(s) are regulated only by U.S. law. Given this fact, and pursuant to Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act. The language of Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act fundamentally states that Internet services providers like Hostgator.com and many of hostgator.com's other web hosting services and brands are republishers and not the publisher of content. Our service merely provides a hosting platform and space on which to host content, and any creation or publication of content on our services is the sole responsibility of the third-party user which creates or publishes the content. Therefore, Hostgator.com should not be held liable for any allegedly defamatory, offensive or harassing content published on sites hosted under Hostgator.com's web hosting service(s).
HostGator reserves all rights and remedies, at law and in equity.


Regards,

Patrick Harrison
Senior Security Administrator
HostGator.com
 
Chasingstar said:
19661837@tickets.hostgator.com
2:23 PM (2 hours ago)

to me
Hello,

Regarding Electronic Communications Privacy Act: 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510, sites hosted on Hostgator.com's service(s) are regulated only by U.S. law. Given this fact, and pursuant to Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act. The language of Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act fundamentally states that Internet services providers like Hostgator.com and many of hostgator.com's other web hosting services and brands are republishers and not the publisher of content. Our service merely provides a hosting platform and space on which to host content, and any creation or publication of content on our services is the sole responsibility of the third-party user which creates or publishes the content. Therefore, Hostgator.com should not be held liable for any allegedly defamatory, offensive or harassing content published on sites hosted under Hostgator.com's web hosting service(s).
HostGator reserves all rights and remedies, at law and in equity.


Regards,

Patrick Harrison
Senior Security Administrator
HostGator.com
Click to expand...


there must be a way to cut off hostgator's payment processors since they are informed a user who's site they host is explaining how to get a child porn
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top