APIC

[PaulC]

If there's anyone here who has been contacted by APIC regarding celeb content can you please contact me?

Also, does anyone know the connection with APIC and http://www.safesearching.com ? They really don't explain themselves at all...

[Much0S]

APIC = you're fucked. do as they say.

[PaulC]

Yeah don't worry I am!

But since I run a daily movie site if I'm not even allowed to use a celebs name in links then I'm kinda fucked.

[WiredGuy]

What is APIC?

[Much0S]

Association Promoting Internet Chaos

[PaulC]

Have a look here:
http://www.apic-adult.com/
http://www.a-w.org/

Here's an example of a post you can find in their discussion board:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Interestingly enough, as soon as we opened our website to public consumption, we began receiving email asking us why we did our site in FLASH. By doing that, they couldn't download any of our images. It would appear from the way they wrote these letters to us, that they honestly think the images on various websites are there for the taking! I truly think they feel that way. I feel that there is outright pirating, yes, but I also think that the bulk of the theft that takes place is being perpetrated by people who simply don't know the law! They obviously think it's simply a perk of the internet for them to grab photographs for themselves. This leads me to ask this, should we place a message on every website containing photography, art, etc. that states: "It is illegal to download these images by any means, and, if traced to you, punishable by fines and possible imprisonment." Do you think this would have ANY effect at all? Comments? David Mecey, Photo Director/ EGO magazine & a photographer
</font>

[PaulC]

I can't believe they gave me a list of names and said I'm not allowed to use them. If they said "Remove pic A and B" then that would be understandable, but to say I can't use the words "Jenna Jameson" or "Jennifer Love Hewitt" on my page is ludicrous! I bet a lot of people here have "Jenna Jameson" written on your pages.

[WiredGuy]

I don't understand how a text description or para-phrasing of "jenna jameson" is a violation? Can you send us a link to the offending page PaulC, maybe also the letter they're harrassing you with? I think this is a topic we should all look at.

WiredGuy

[PaulC]

Sure here's my page: http://www.totalcelebs.com
You'll notice there's a thumb with a big "?" - that used to be a thumb of Alyssa Milano. I've also replaced a couple of text links with question marks because of the email.

And here's the email:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
2nd Notice to this Webmaster for this domain






YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO COMMERCIALLY EXPLOIT NAMES, LIKENESS OR IMAGES OF THE FOLLOWING CYBERTRACKER CLIENTS

VIOLATIONS OF UNITED STATES CRIMINAL CODES and STATE CIVIL CODES

Such impermissible exploitation is a violation of " right of publicity", "right of privacy" under both common law and California Civil Code section 3344. See, "Empowering Celebrities in Cyberspace" at http://www.rmslaw.com/articles/art6.htm. Pursuant to California Civil Code section 3344, these celebrities will recover their attorney's fees in any resulting litigation as well as actual damages. As you may know, such lawsuits routinely result in large judgments against websites. See "Actress Given Six Figure Award Over Nude Photographs" at http://www.msnbc.com/news/226315.asp.

Infringing Domain:

http://www.totalcelebs.com/

Available Data:

domain: totalcelebs.com
status: production
origin-c: paulcorrigan@cableinet.co.uk#0
owner: Paul Corrigan
email: paulcorrigan@cableinet.co.uk#0
title: Mr
address: 16 Moray Place
city: Blantyre
state: Glasgow
postal-code: G72 0DX
country: GB
admin-c: mail@totalcelebs.com#0
tech-c: mail@totalcelebs.com#0
billing-c: mail@totalcelebs.com#0
nserver: ns.isprime.com
nserver: ns2.isprime.com


Upstream Provider:



Cybertracker Clients Must Be Removed

Lisa Marie Presley
Helen Shaver
Alyssa Milano
Athena Massey
Jenna Elfman
Jennifer Love Hewitt
Kathy Ireland
Tyne Daly
Catherine Zeta Jones
Holly Marie Combs
Kathryne Dora Brown
Kelly Le Brock
Marilyn McCoo
Portia de Rossi
Sharon Lawrence
Tamara Mello
Tori Spelling


ALSO: represented by M. Kamarck

Karin Taylor. Alley Baggett, Cindy Margolis



We hereby demand that you immediately cease all uses of names, likenesses or images on your website and that you immediately contact all search engines or portals to which you website is registered using names of CYBERTRACKER'S clients. Unless you comply with this demand, you will be turned over to Cybertracker's attorney who has a proven track record prosecuting these matters throughout the world.

See
http://www.rmslaw.com/attorneys/kamarck.htm.


Be governed accordingly.

Sincerely;


Lin Milano Cybertrackers
http://cyber-tracker.com/

cc: M. Kamarck Esq.
</font>

Any comments/advice is more than welcome!

[PaulC]

I just noticed down the bottom of the email it's signed by "Lin Milano Cybertrackers" but the email was from "apic-worldwide" - apic@mindspring.com

[shane94]

I have been contacted by them before. Ask them what pic. They can't say your site is in violation without telling you why.

SHane

[Abbadon]

Is it just me, or does it seem to anyone else that a message coming from APIC should be coming from somebody@apic-worldwide.com, or somebody@a-w.org (as found on their site) instead of apic@mindspring.com?

(Not making any claims or representations either way, just seems funny with a nice domain of their own that they'd be sending mail from a mindspring mail account. On the other hand, there is a link to CyberTracker from APICs site, so they must at least be aware of each other)

[PaulC]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Abbadon:
Is it just me, or does it seem to anyone else that a message coming from APIC should be coming from somebody@apic-worldwide.com, or somebody@a-w.org (as found on their site) instead of apic@mindspring.com?</font>

I was thinking this myself - that's why I added a post with the email address after the email.

[Ravo]

PaulC:

I see this on your website: "All images on this site are believed to be public domain, they are gathered from all over the net and there is no copyright on these pictures as far as I am concerned". Buddy, you're fucked!

Take down your whole website before APIC gets nasty.

[shane94]

That is a good point that Abbadon makes. I have gotten them before (i am 100% legal! BTW) APIC does make mistakes. If I remember right it was APIC@apic-worldwide.com
I think someone is trying to hose you!


Shane

[shane]

If you have licences for your pics then theres no prob, otherwise your fucked

[WiredGuy]

Actually, someone raised a good point here. Where can you license erotica content of celebrities. By erotica, I mean the use of photo shoots and pics of celebrities but used in the sense of an adult nature?

[PaulC]

I only added that disclamier yesterday cos I looked through all the other movie sites and they all had something similar.

I guess it's time to move from the celeb niche http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/wink.gif

[PaulC]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by WiredGuy:
Actually, someone raised a good point here. Where can you license erotica content of celebrities. By erotica, I mean the use of photo shoots and pics of celebrities but used in the sense of an adult nature?</font>

I've never seen any. I think the closest you can get is porn star content. Even if a celeb was willing the costs would be too high since celebs are worth millions.

[jayeff]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by PaulC:
I just noticed down the bottom of the email it's signed by "Lin Milano Cybertrackers" but the email was from "apic-worldwide" - apic@mindspring.com</font>

On the contrary... it is merely courtesy that they are contacting you at all. They could sue you without any contact at all. International boundaries are no problem with copyright law and the penalties are fierce.

[Abbadon]

I'm not a celeb webmaster nor do I play one on the net....

But...

Actually, I'd think it wouldn't be so much an issue of what the Celeb would charge -- they are public figures, and as such I don't think they've got much say over things like paparazzi shots when they appear in public -- as much as it is if you're using such shots, you're using the copyrighted work of said paparazzi... If you got out your polaroid and shot your own, you'd probably be fine, or licensed it from the original photographer... Obviously this isn't liable to involve much 'erotic' material (unless you catch 'em having sex on the beach or something), nor does it get you modeling images, scenes from movies, etc...

[phogirl007]

I don't use any celeb pics, but is it illegal to use pornstar names in the text of your website and in your keywords, metas,etc? What if you used "jenna jameson" as a kewyord but promoted club jenna in one of the ads? All my content is legal but can I get in trouble for using pornstar names in kewords?? I'm seriously worried here

[WiredGuy]

pornstars i wouldn't be worried about really. Celebrities is different though. I honestly would like to see a comment from an IP lawyer on their thoughts about the use of text in meta tags and other related use of celebrities in porn to see if we should change anything before its too late. Any lawyers out there have comments??

[PaulC]

Here's the reply I recieved from Steve Easton from APIC about the issue:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Paul,

There are many mis understandings of copyright and trademark. Newspapers can use a trademarked name for news. You on the other hand are operating a for profit adult related website which is using trademarked names to either draw traffic or entice memberships, which is a direct infringement, and YES JENNA JAMESON is a registered trademark. Therefore if you do not have licensed images of her or are not promoting her site in her program you are essentially violating her trademark rights.

That's the truth.

Steve Easton</font>

So if you don't have licensed photos or are promoting her work then you can't use the name "Jenna Jameson". I still think this is harsh but at least I got an official reply.

[toker]

Its always better to play dumb you were kinda tring to play them with the public domain stuff. If you start adding words like that it sets a flag that says obviously this guy is worried about lawsuits or must have something to hide.

If you have that sorta disclaimer remove it celeb or otherwise before you do get sued by a legit copyright owner. We all know why you put it there and as for this celeb issue there are a few work arounds here.

Now you can use a disclamer using the word "likeness" ie.. all images found here are merely likeness and may portray similarity to real life persons and we take no liability of such likeness. However if you have an issue with any content herin please contact the webmaster at blah.com and we will be happy to discuss any issues (or some shit along those lines).

If your in this biz i suggest you pay a lawyer a few bucks to draw you up something better im just spitting basic terms. Also get legal advice there is always a loophole to protect the criminal just incase his name is Bill Clinton (jeez i hope Billy dont sue me for usin his name). Dont email me if you get sued eather pay a lawyer and sue him instead please.. http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/wink.gif

Keep in mind not all celeb content is real prob 90% of the nude stuff is faked and 100% legal to use by the artist to promote his creativity or art. Take for example if i have a sister or friend who looks almost like jenna or some other chick and i put up pics i can call her whatever i want (stick to first names is safer though). If an issue arised i get the chick to say her nickname is Jenna because thats her idol... http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/tongue.gif

Now if you have Alyssa Milanos face pasted on some chicks body they would have to actually prove 100% that is her face (They could but it will cost them if they are wrong). If the face is enhanced digitally to look like her and some fake body what can they do?? Jack Shit!

Why its my art i made it its not her!

This faked issue is why they contact you instead of just sueing because the burdan of proof is in their hands. We all know how much faked shit is used on so many sites and its been around for years but some of the big celeb sites that are makin it dont seem to have any issues.. Kinda wierd if you ask me.

When you have thumbs better not to put names with them eather keep em apart and this will help you a little in legal aspect. Try also to only use 100% faked this will help you even more if you do get sued and last signup with niche specific sponsors and use their free content to cover your ass. If you get some images of a celeb from a celeb pay site its their ass and you can then point the finger.

Im no fuckin lawyer but i do know how to cover my ass.. http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

Now days everyone is lookin for a quick lawsuite or to patent everything on the planet and own the world. I personally think its supid of celebs to bitch as this is free publicity for them and publicity aint cheap.

Ok im done rambling here can i get $.02 from everyone for this post? Yea i take paypal!!

[*Kimmykim*]

Lin Milano is Alyssa Milano's mother if I'm not mistaken -- and using Alyssa Milano is a no-no -- there was some court case to that effect --

As for the others, I'm not an attorney but I do think you ought to consult one --

[PaulC]

Thanks for the reply toker!

I'll use some of your points to change the site a little to protect my ass a bit more http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/wink.gif

[Buzzman]

Here's some reading for you:

http://www.ew.com/ew/daily/0,2514,866,00.html
http://www.canoe.ca/JamMoviesArtistsM/milano_alyssa.html
http://www.courttv.com/legaldocs/newsmakers/alyssa1.html
http://www.courttv.com/legaldocs/newsmakers/alyssa2.html

Burtman

[PaulC]

Thanks Burtman those were very interesting. Hopefully I'll have switched from celebs very soon to a niche I can buy content for http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/wink.gif

[Mr Exotic]

Just take all the names on their little list off your site and they wont bother you anymore. Just take those names off and tell them that I am sorry and that I have removed the names that you have listed. And oh ya use all fake pics. I have got one of those before and I know people that said thay have gotten several of those before, your not fucked, dont worry so much, like I said before just do what they say and you will be alright.

[PaulC]

Everyone they had on their list has been removed and I'd had APIC reply to some questions so everything should be fine now. http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/smile.gif

[Cyberdog]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by shane94:
I have been contacted by them before. Ask them what pic. They can't say your site is in violation without telling you why.

SHane</font>

Nope, you're wrong. They CAN say it, and they don't have to tell you what pics either. In fact, legal copyright holders do not even have to CONTACT you at all before sueing you for illegal use etc.

The only time a copyright holder will tell you what pics are in violation is when they simply want you to remove them. You can then ask to see their proof of ownership on said pics, but believe me when I say that they do not have to give you notice at all, they can proceed to court and make you answer (and pay) for using pics without consent.

Btw, I've often wondered about how webmasters can just go ahead and use pics of celebrities without thinking there might be some kind of retribution for it. And how can even the big sponsors think that they can use celeb content without specific permissions as well? I too am a photographer and content provider, and I make sure that I have signed release documents and proof of age on all my models, why are celebs any different??
_____________
CD http://members.home.net/cyberdogs/Anti-Censorship%20Site/g_cool_shine.gif
* ERASER CASH! (http://www.erasercash.com/wm.html?ID=1380291) $35/sale, + 10% webmaster referrals 4 levels deep
* Babe Galleries Network - Now accepting tgp2 Gallery Submissions (http://www4.smutserver.com/babes/bgnetwork/submit.html)
* Top BUCKS is HERE! (http://www.topbucks.com/affiliate/clickthru.cgi?id=1448) Too many great options to list here!

[theo]

if you leave something, through time becomes permanent. If something becomes permanent,it's hard to change since nobody cares


-------------------
Soul_Rebel

[APIC]

FAKES

There certainly is a bunch of misinformation here.
It's listening to people like other Webmasters that will be ultimately your problem source. Like the Webmaster who started the "Public Domain" myth.

You people need to learn that this is a business, and as such will have regulations and legal issues. Where there is money there are lawyers, and there is reasons for that.

Right here in this forum are several reasons.

You can't use people's reputations or endorsement rights for your own commercial gain, or you face slander, defamation and trademark lawsuits.

If you morph heads on to x-images you still are responsible and the odds double, because the original photo has a copyright. Most of the fakes out there are violating Suze Randall, Playboy etc.
We are in the process of finding the individuals responsible for these fabrications, which are a criminal offense.

In the U.S. if you remove copyright markings you have committed a felony with a max 20 year federal prison remedy.

All you get here is bad advice from people that would rather spend time looking for loopholes then learn the truth.

As for movie sites, we have several governments now interested in reports of illegal adult sites. So if you think you can beat the system in NL or Spain??? or France or ??? guess again. We won't even send you notices. Your door will be busted down and you'll go to jail. That's the bottom line.

The ADULT industry is plagued by parasites and scammers who think they are slick, but are destroying the business for the people who rightfully own the content. We are at a zero tolerance level for theft and abuse. All Pay programs have agreed to terminate offenders. All freehosts, and All ISPs and credit card processors.

If you want to scam, we suggest you are prepared for the consequenses.

[Tam]

All I can say here Paul is you best damn listen to APIC here, I work as Asst. Manager for Vector Force and we have gotten several emails regarding this same situation and they damn well mean business. We emailed and emailed the domain owner in question about these complaints and he wouldn't act on the emails sent to him. We finally were forced to shut his site down until he decided to comply.

What has not been touched on here much is that your HOST also has a responsibility to see that this is acted upon or THEY can also face a world of shit. So don't be surprised if you wake up one day and your site is gone.

This person had no idea, seriously, that he was in the wrong, he was a fairly new webmaster and just plain didn't know where to get content without paying for it........ I sent him to a few places to get free content to do his sites with and he is fine now...... but these people damn well mean what they are saying here babe........ We have had to deal with this one a few times on Vector........

Just my two cents worth, they do mean it. http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/smile.gif

Tam

[PaulC]

This thread was started on the 14th August and since then I beleive I've gotten everything cleared up. I'm now using lisenced porn star content for my daily movie and am phasing out all other celeb content.

For me it's just not worth it to work with the celeb niche any more due to the lack of legal content so I'm moving over to porn star and softcore.

[bitz]

i was going to send toker $.02 paypal but i dont see any email in his profile http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/frown.gif

[basschick]

of course since EVERY pic you use on a website must have i.d.'s and modeling releases held by a custodian of records to be legal, that lets out any photo of any celeb.

APIC, to quote you

"All you get here is bad advice from people that would rather spend time looking for
loopholes then learn the truth."

inaccurate and i guess slanderous because that is NOT all you get here.

i have been on many threads telling people that you can't use celeb, and you can't use any pic that you don't hold a license for AND that license must include the custodian of records info.

i have seen many others say the same thing. so how is that ALL you get here?

i have never bought content that wasn't specifically for website use.

i have always respected your goals, but have also found that your hostile attitude that i keep seeing hurts your message. no one respects the word of people that hit them over the head with authority - it feels like bullying.

i suspect you have a very hard job, but if you want people to listen, telling them more softly might help.

[NakedPanda]

APIC you realy tickle my nuts
if you arent just using your dominant legal knowledge to try and intimidate people then what you do is unconsionable, the type of penalties you talk about and kicking down doors (think of the type of crimes you are equating this to in peoples minds )you say this like it is something to be proud of or maybe your own ability to question things just got lost in the day to day detail of your job.

As for the rest of you I cant believe the way you folded isnt this the type of question that is at the heart of the internet.
ie do we want the internet to be the first space were we can actualy be honest and say and portray things in the way we want them to be seen ie Alyssa Milano cant act the only reason we watch things she is in is to see her tits.
Or do we want the internet to be about companies big enough to strike up deals with stars over agressive lawyers spoon feeding us info about celebrities star signs and what their favourite type of shoe is in the hope we'll buy some shitty poster???

Business first philosophy second is the reason the world sucks shit it reduces people to jigsaw pieces in puzzles they dont like or understand and then everybodies like well how the hell did things get like this well if you want an example look above.


Panda
If anyone was going to misread this as an attack on copyright generaly it was not.

[Viking]

The losers over at sexhound.com (and I really mean LOSERS) wrote this down:

http://mf.sexhound.com/copymf2.html

I once got a mail from APIC saying something like "You Got A Picture Of Anna".

I said: "What pic?".

Reply from APIC: The picture of Anna.

I said: "would you please prove that it's your picture cause I've bought it on the net and have a piece of paper with licens.

Reply from APIC was the biggest mail I've ever gotten in my entire life, but not one single prove was attached. Just a lot of bullshit about US law, European law, who they work with in what country, and bullshit like that.

The picture is at the exact same spot and APIC knows it. I never removed it.

I wonder why it's still there APIC and you never proved a damn thing.

[NakedPanda]

I dont know about that
I was just commenting on APIC's aggressive attitutude when someone had already taken stuff down and willingness to work within a framework whereby
"In the U.S. if you remove copyright markings you have committed a felony with a max 20 year federal prison remedy."
I mean what if this was a court verdict would this be a "success"??
I obviously dont understand copyright law though cos I thought the papparazzi/magazine/movie studio owned the copyright to stuff So what a lawyer representing individual clients has to do with that is beyond me???

Panda

[matuloo]

That article at sexhound is very interresting, I just wonder whether it vontains the truth.

[matuloo]

I wanted to say "contains", damn typo http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/redface.gif)

[NakedPanda]

I particularly enjoyed this bit of the sexhound article.
"Steve Easton, director of APIC-Worldwide
Steve you seem to have your own "mosquito bully buzz" plan of harassment and downright lying to these adult webmasters about copyrights laws and procedures. You even go so far as to scare them with threats of some 'big black ugly guerilla lawyer' who will go to their ISP, impose fines and stick a banana in their ass if they dare to challenge you. You're a bad boy Mr. Steve Easton, and you need a good spanking by some London, UK, Madam, and maybe me!
Maybe the reason he does just kindly request you take them down rather than suing is like the sexhound article says."
It did seem strange to me that individual celebs rather than the many different magazines etc that I would expect to own the copyright were the ones he claims to represent.???

Panda

[Viking]

NakedPanda,

Exactly... Good Lord I truely don't give a damn about APIC. I keep my sites clean and I buy my pictures. When APIC then starts to bullshit me about licens and shit like that I get really pissed off.

This llame ass Steve is a fake attorney who got an idea on how to make money on the net. Well he do tell people that he's NOT an attorney. Just look at this snippet from his mail to me:

"Steve Easton is the director of APIC-Worldwide, NOT an attorney.

On behalf of the owner of the exclusive right to the copyrighted material at issue in this notice, I hereby state that I have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.

I hereby state, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States, that the information in this notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is being infringed as set out in this notification."

"I hereby state that I have a good faith belief" ????

Well ain't that lovely APIC. You now only need to get attack the correct webmasters and not the ones with licens in order.

[toker]

I guess he thinks no adult webmasters have rights to anything that reflects these celebs images or names and every celeb paysite is violating the law.

Just remember MEDIA attention thats negitive can really affect these celebs he claims to work for. I bet you start bringing media attention down on him and he will change his tune as many celeb fan sites would also be shut down. These celebs would take a blow by their pissed off fans real quick.

I would also think news, radio and other media who makes much bigger profits of these celebs with commercial ads should be liable just as he claims adult webmasters are.

I tell ya what i will put a link that says "Alissa M" on my site and i wana see some APIC fucker sue me!! http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/wink.gif

[toker]

I just realized after lookin around their site they do not show any legal binding relations to any celebs. Their supposed cybertracker thing says comming soon and their news talks about past lawsuites which none were that of APIC.

Their http://www.safesearching.com/2k/ is a celeb site and furthermore their site a-w.org sells banner space at prices almost as big as the hun $500 a month for a 120x60. I think this is total BS since they are makin hugh bucks to place feer on webmasters and gain promotion to their sites and sell ads.

They claim to be non for profit yet have 2 sites selling 5 banner spots at $200-500 a month and text links for $250 a month.

$2500 for 5 frontpage ads
$1000 for each resource page
$250 for each text link they have

Then they have their adult version with 5 BBS ads at $500

$2500 for 5 frontpage ads
$2500 for 5 BBS ads
$1000 for each resource page
$250 for each text link they have

Thats well over $10k easy and i doubt the site cost near that to host so i figure someone must be makin a profit.

Then you look at their Attorneys list and find Steve Easton does not show up in there. Nor do i find anything on this site that relates to any celebs being protected by this company.

All it says about this guy is "Steve Easton is a World renowned erotic and glamour photographer whose work has appeared in most major magazines around the World. Steve's work with copyright infringement in this arena is internationally recognized and proves that copyright can be controlled in the most hostile of environments." which it appears he is the editor and made that up himself.

I see this whole APIC as a big self promotion and no part of the site claims endorsement by any celeb. I dunno but it does not look kosher to me rather a way to stop out competetion for this celeb site.

Maybe he has some special deal setup to gain profits for starting legal battles with celeb sites but hes no lawyer and i see this as a big sham myself. I would love to see legal documents that show him to be a legal reperesenitive to speak on behalf of any celeb or pornstar.

If he contacts you i think you should ask him to produce proper legal documentation or contracts that refelect him to be authorized.

[NakedPanda]

I know exactly what you mean toker
I mean what good would it do for Alyssa Milano to get an attorney to represent her anyway apart from her endorsement what copyrights does she own? Her name as a description?? questionable photos or films she did for other people I doubt it.

I guess when this guy got in touch with the big celeb paysites the ones with their own legal advice the response he got probably scared the shit out of him its just the little guys who have to fold and their isp's who dont have time to check detail.
The sad thing is from the first page of this post its still working that Paul C has now moved on to licensed movies is a good thing but if anyone tries to intimidate you in to saying you cant put a celeb name or your page in a way that doesnt imply endoresment then they must just be tickling your nuts many people probably arent even still reading this post though just got the heebeegeebees when APIC started acting in a way they may have found intimidating.

And it seems like you said probably jut trying to monopolize the market by smokescreening afore mentioned celebs.Making big bucks by killing the competition and acting like the whiteKnight.

Panda

[toker]

Also this Steve Easton guy i have seen one of his modeling sites before hes nuttin but a photographer. It all dawned on me who this guy was after reading the sexhound article and noticing the 954 area code in his number i remembered the name.

There arent many adult photographers in my area so when i saw that it all came to light. He is just a competetor who shoots and markets his photography work. Seems he is tring to get good with all the other content disros on the market to gain some control. I also noticed some content sites not flying his APIC banner on their sites. I guess they get his free representation for doing that.


Furthermore he is not endorsed by anyone not on APIC or even on his own personal site!!

[Janky]

I have been HARASSED by that bitch Steve Easton adn his sorry little company APIC to no end. I am willing to help ANYONE with their fight against them. I have many resorces my finger tips and am SICK of APIC's shit!! <img border="0" alt="[Finger]" title="" src="graemlins/finger.gif" />

[Due]

Damn what a long thread. Didn't read half of it <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> <br />Anyway. Take all the names on the list and put in the buttom of your page writing that you do not accept submissions from any gallery makers that use their names.<br />Then you can mail Apic and tell them you complied with their request and you still got their names on your page to catch a bit of SE traffic mayby <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

[RaiDeN]

Those guys from Apic are really nuts..<br /><br />I was contacted by them and treathened with law suites ones, taking down my servers, websites and so on.. for a domain i didnt even own..<br /><br />I owned the ".net" version of it, doing nothing illegal with it (i took out the names of that list, and Alyssa Milano in particular for a long long time)<br /><br />so i told him in a nice reply email that he should do some better research about the owner of the domain since it wasnt me.,.. he just replied that i was lieying <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> ) hahaha.<br /><br />well since i wasnt i just replied with the link to register.com whois database. and since then never heard anything anymore from them / him.

[toker]

No worries man i heard some shit about companies dropping APIC because of his unethical threats against webmasters. The guy is making both sides of the field look like total shit the people he represents and the people he goes after. <br /><br />I wont go into too much detail but i can tell you some of the emails ive heard about that were sent from him would get him thrown out of any court. No judge is going to let you call people names, insult them, threaten them and their family (which he has done) then grant that person any type of lawsuite.<br /><br />The guy is very stupid and seems to be tripping over his own feet. Maybe he should hire somone to represent him. <img border="0" alt="[ROTFLMAO]" title="" src="graemlins/rotflmao.gif" />

[RaiDeN]

lol toker. im not worried <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="smile.gif" /> )

[Labret]

APIC are true cock smokers.<br /><br />There is no life form on Earth lower than a lawyer.<br /><br />Well, cept maybe Canadians.

[toker]

Well hes not a lawyer in the first place. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

[matuloo]

Well, I guess with the recent lawsuite mentioned somewhere on this board couple days ago -I mean the one when a webmaster won the case just because the copyrighted images have been changed in size <img border="0" alt="[Finger]" title="" src="graemlins/finger.gif" /> - APIC can go lick nuts anyways.

[Cappy]

Isn't it interesting how APIC takes itself so seriously in the copyright domain, but you look at their splash page-which is viewable by any member of the public-you see thumbnail links to child porn and various other adult sites?

[louanne]

I also recived an email from APICs. That asshole was going around telling my sponcers and hosts that I have been using unlicensed pictures. <br /><br />I bought 2 CDs when I was on holiday in Europe last year. I told that to APIC, that was not good enough. <br /><br />APIC seems to think that they can shut down ANYONE with no proof that the content is not licensed. Steve Easton seems to think that God gave him the power to police the internet. <br /><br />I was ammused by the part of his email that says that he is not a lawyer. If he was a lawyer, He would know that in the US, a person is innocient until proven guilty. NOT Guilty until proved innocent. <br /><br />After a few emails back and forth, He is such a arrogant prick, I filed a complain with the Florada Attorney General's office. I charged Steve Easton, APIC, APIC-Worldwide with US Federal and State Constitutional Right Violations.<br />I posted a mesage on APICS bullitin board stating that I had filed a complaint and that asshole took down my mesage. <br /><br />If everyone who has been annoyed by APIC files complaints to the Florada Attorney General, MAYBE, they will take a look into APICS tatics.<br /><br />APICs tatics, in my opinion, are unconstitutional in the US. <br /><br />Another thing I find amusing is that APIC uses a mindspring email address and his sites are hosted on a free email site. How can you take someone seriously when he does not pay for his own hosting.<br /><br />Louanne.<br /><br />"If I accuse APIC of linking to child porn.........."

[[Dan]]

LOL I think you don't get the idea. APIC works for content providers; he finds the stolen content and informs the "thieves" to remove it. Sure he's not a lawyer but if you don't comply he will inform the copyright holders, and trust me THEY have lawyers that can sue you.<br /><br />Buying CDs wherever you want doesn't mean shit, I can download content from the web and burn it on a CD and sell it to you; that doesn't mean you own the licenses to use that material. In fact I've seen a couple of cases like that, where a person had bought some CDs in a store but it contained stolen material...<br /><br />There might not be many cases of copyright holders suing small webmasters like us, but it's a matter of time. When APIC contacts you, you'd better be 100% sure that you have full rights to use the material otherwise you could end up in big troubles.

[toker]

Very true about the CDs they may be licensed to sell but not for resale or distrubution by a third party. You must relly check for things like that otherwise you could get screwed over. <br /><br />If you have the license on paper then its the person who sold it to you that would be in trouble. You would still need to stop using the unlicensed content even if you paid the cash for it.

[mozart989]

Hey guys, reviving the topic again...My host and I both just got a letter from APIC and it scared the crap out of me at first. The other thread with the letter in it is here: <a href="http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=013918" target="_blank">http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=013918</a> . I keep seeing 2 different opinions on what people should do and i'm a bit confused, is it ignore them or bow to them? <br /><br />Theres a few points that confuse me. One, in the beginning of this thread there was a list of celebs that the webmaster was asked to remove. Apparently APIC was 'representing' these specific celebs (otherwise he would say take the entire site down). The thing is, in the letter he sent me he did not list some of these. For example I have Catherine Zeta Jones galleries and he did not list her name on it but only Alyssa Milano, Denise Richards and Jennifer Love Hewitt. In APICs letter to the original webmaster CZ Jones was listed, why would he the list have changed?<br /><br />Also I noticed that <a href="http://www.safesearching.com" target="_blank">www.safesearching.com</a> , which is affiliated with APIC, has these three names on their site. I've heard of this site on TV , Alyssa Milano's mom started it to promote a safe site to search for celebrity related material (non nude). The major complaint the Milanos had , and the lawsuit that she won, was over nudes though. I had 1 semi nude vidcap of Alyssa and a 2 of Denise Richards and none of JLH (they dont exist). The rest were mostly scans. Now if its nudes they are after why was JLH listed? If its not nudes they are after, is it all pictures that exist on the entire internet, thereby making fansites illegal? This seems kind of insane. I see it as free promotion of the celebrities name if you ask me. TV shows have pictures and video clips of celebrities all the time and they are for-profit organizations why are they not sued? It's free promotion, I assume. <br /><br />If anyone can give me their opinions or any help on this matter I would greatly appreciate it. ICQ 118163993 email: redhotcelebz@hotmail.com. <br /><br />(as a sidenote I also wonder if all of the pics on safesearching.com have all of their copyrights in order. I saw some maxim online pictures etc on there...who owns the picture , the photographer or the celebrity?)

[mozart989]

Just wanted to mention something that I realized about the APIC threat letter. He says "Under penalty of perjury" that he represents the copyright owners that are being infringed upon. Now in his letter to me he listed 6 pages as well as a few specific pictures. The thing is, theres no way in hell he represents the owners of ALL 102 pictures that I have there. Maybe he does represent a few of the owners (probably very few) but theres no way he represents EVERY one of them. This means that by his own admision he is perjuring himself. I am considering telling him that but I'm unsure if this will anger them into persuing me more. First, am I right and second, should I send them a mail stating this?

[louanne]

It looks like I have to throw in my "experience" with that asshole Steve Easton.<br /><br />That asshole accused me of using copyrighted material on a gallery I submitted. I bought a few CDs when I ran a BBS. All 3 Cds gave me a license for electronic transmission. Years ago, I attempted to find FAO to inquire about the license for internet use. Since I already have the license for "electronic transmission", I feel that the license is still valid.<br /><br />Well, one day, one of my sponsors gets a letter from that shit head, telling them that I am using copyrighted content. <br /><br />First off, Steve Easton did not send me a copy of the email. I had the sponser send me a copy of the email, and, my email address was not on the email. That dumb fuck never emailed me. <br />A DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE DMCA! on APIC/Steve Easton's part.<br /><br />Now the plot thickens, the sponser put a hold on my account. After 10 or so email, the sponser reinstated my account. <br />Here is a side note-the sponser is telling me that they will not pay me for for the months in question because their was an issue. <br />Thats fuckin Bullshit!.<br /><br />While this BS was going on, I did some research on the DMCA and I discovered that APIC/Steve Easton is violating the DMCA himself..<br /><br />1) APIC is 1 guy who goes around make accusations without providing ANY proof. DMCA Voilation<br />2) APIC "claims" to be the agent for several copyright owners. <br />APIC/Steve Easton is NOT registered with the US Copyright office as an agent. <br />Violation of the DMCA.<br />3) APIC has had several complaints filed against it according to the FLA Attorney Generals Offce. His tatics are in voilation of the DCMA.<br />4) The US Attorney General has a few complaints against APIC/Steve Easton. <br />5) APIC uses the logic that you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent.<br />The list goes on ....<br /><br />Someone mentioned about posting on his BBS. He deleated ALL of my posts that were very negative towards his scam. <br /><br />I really don't take him serious. If he fucks with me, in any way, I'm going to strike back on his sorry ass.<br /><br />Fuck APIC/Steve Easton. <br />He should have the slogan:<br />"APIC. You are guilty of copyright theft until you prove yourself innocent"<br /><br />Louanne<br /><br />--------------------<br />APICS is a scam