WTF?

[Fking]

Hello
I'm the owner of the program and site in question, let me try to explane how this really works and why we are not violating any laws.

GetPorn24 is a search engine, just like google.com (well more like images.google.com) it spiders publicly submitted content. In our case we have set the spider to filters and show only galleries, so we can provide categorised and quality, porn only, results.
We output links to the original gallery, without changing any ref codes, using frames or other kind of tricks. We send targeted free traffic to your galleries just like google does.

The only difference with the other search engines is our monetizing model.
- They use your content to provide quality service and then profit from ads on their sites.
- We run an ad free site and instead profit from the tiny fee we charge the surfer. This charge is for the convenience to use an ads free site and have the possibility to search and easy find whatever porn they need.

So, the surfer gets convinient service, you (the gallery submitters) get FREE TARGETED traffic, and we get the fee

[Useless]

Originally Posted by Fking

GetPorn24 is a search engine, just like google.com (well more like images.google.com) it spiders publicly submitted content.

When was the last time that you paid to see Google's search results? Though Google does indirectly (via advertising) profit from it's ability to deliver search results, it doesn't charge in order to display other people's content. Even with their business model, they've faced many copyright and trademark infringement lawsuits.

Over the years, I've seen people suggest that link list and TGP owners could increase their profits by protecting their archived listings with an AVS. But the one argument that comes up and knocks it down, over and over again, is that charging to show other people's content without proper licensing is a big fucking problem.

Trust me, I want to make money every way I can, but I smell cease and desist orders and lawsuits for that business model.

I responded in your SPAM thread too. http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/...38&postcount=4

[Fking]

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

When was the last time that you paid to see Google's search results? Though Google does indirectly (via advertising) profit from it's ability to deliver search results, it doesn't charge in order to display other people's content.

Let me say it again, we do not charge for access to other peoples content, we dont own it, we dont host it.
We charge them to use the full functionallity of our site.
And the site delivers links, just links! And again linking is legall!
And if we choose to profit from ads or charge for the service we provide, is completly up to us, since both ways are legal.
Just the other model is pretty much over used, so we decided to try with ads-free but paid site.

Originally Posted by Useless Warrior

Trust me, I want to make money every way I can, but I smell cease and desist orders and lawsuits for that business model.

I dont see lawsuits coming from gallery submitters receiving free targeted traffic. Neither they will have legal reason to do so, since im free to link to whatever i want as long as its not CP or hate/racism propaganda....
The fact that i charge for full access to my site doesnt change that. I dont sell content i sell functionallity, i sell service....


edit: my spam thread is in the spam section
btw you have answer there too

Also what about discusssing this normally, without hate-oriented comments? You are grown man, long enough in the biz, lets keep it professional and in a good manner?

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Fking

Also what about discusssing this normally, without hate-oriented comments? You are grown man, long enough in the biz, lets keep it professional and in a good manner?

I think UW is being quite polite. Especially for him.

I'm sure you got advice from your attorneys telling you this is a legally-safe way to proceed. I suspect you could get another perfectly valid legal opinion strongly advising you not to do it.

It's not the affiliates who are likely to file cease-and-desist orders, but rather other large sponsors, who may not be very happy that content they have licensed to webmasters solely for the purpose of free promotion of their programs is being used as a sales tool to profit one of their competitors.