Web model threatens to take legal action for having her chat room promoted.

[GFED]

OK, so as far as I know... or have always thought... if a performer is part of a cam network, then anything that performer streams through that cam network is copyright of that cam network and thus the cam network and it's affiliates may use the content as seen fit... especially in promotion of the cam network or the performer.

Now let's say I have a web site that promotes a cam network and I take a snapshot of a performer of the cam network to promote that performer and the cam network through my website. To my knowledge this has always been acceptable. I do not need permission from that performer since all content streamed though the cam network is property of the cam network and not the performer.

I do not have a problem with removing the photo or link to the performers that have a problem with being promoted, although I don't understand why anyone would be against it.

Am I mistaken?
Thank you.

[wehateporn]

From time-to-time I get contacted by a Playboy Casting Call girl who doesn't want to be promoted.

[Sly]

I think you are mistaken. Every time I have asked a WebCam network they told me it was a very gray area. Some girls do not like their content being used, and the WebCam networks seem to respect that and make sure that affiliates respect it as well.

[CourtneyR]

Some of the cam girls cant get it through their head that if they are working on a cam network they are not only going to be seen on that cam network. They don't take into consideration the promo material and all that fun stuff.

[NaughtyRob]

99% of Models and cam girls = no clue about anything besides "where is my check?"

[AllAboutCams]

I would have thought that the site the girl appeared on would be able to use anything the girl produced but not the AFF they should ask (i would) the program first.

[newB]

Out of curiosity, was the model 'recusant4u'?

I got a couple of similar messages from someone claiming to be that person on a webcam splog I had. Since the info came from the programs RSS feed, I told them to take it up with them and I would remove it if they told me to, as I had no way to verify whether the person contacting me was the model or not.

ps: Interesting that Sly should weigh in, as the program in question was adultcams, which I believe I was promoting through TopBucks at the time.

[SexKey Scott]

Don't some of the models limit via geo location as to where they want their shows to be view-able from ? Some programs have a clause in their T&A mandating you enforce that as well via geo ip.

[Roald]

Originally Posted by SexKey Scott

Don't some of the models limit via geo location as to where they want their shows to be view-able from ? Some programs have a clause in their T&A mandating you enforce that as well via geo ip.

Yes, that's the reason we got a few times

[Chris]

ive always wondered the same thing
if you look at some of these girls profiles on sites like mfc and chaturbate they have this huge laughable legal statements saying you can not use their image for any reason

[Barry-xlovecam]

Look at your affiliate agreement -- most agreements of this sort limit the affiliate to use "authorized" promotional tools (images included).

This is the problem with affiliate produced promotional images of performers usage.

While cam sites have copyright to broadcast and model uploaded image's copyright assignments are usually in absolute form -- the site policy may be to remove a former model's images on request as a courtesy and not as a legal duty.

This is where an affiliate's unauthorized use of images might become a problem. But an affiliate has no real legal liability to the model to remove said images -- they should be removed as a courtesy -- it's is not important enough to get into a shouting match over IMHO.

In the normal course of business we would remove the images requested by the ex-model that affiliates could access thus saving everyone the hassles as indicated. Hot linking of cam model images is recommended as they could be updated or deleted for you.

[JP-pornshooter]

lol, at one of the shoot houses i use, there is a girl doing webcamming in a bedroom.
she is very good and very very hot, but she is all under the radar. not interested in adult modeling whatsoever as she has plans to be a mainstream model (and is connected as well).
my guess is there are tons of girl webcamming "under the radar".

[helterskelter808]

Originally Posted by GFED

OK, so as far as I know... or have always thought... if a performer is part of a cam network, then anything that performer streams through that cam network is copyright of that cam network and thus the cam network and it's affiliates may use the content as seen fit... especially in promotion of the cam network or the performer.

So if they broadcast a porn video through the cam site, do you believe the cam site becomes the new owner of that porn video? If they're playing music in the background, do you think the cam site becomes the copyright holder of that music? If they're broadcasting to two or more sites at once, do you believe more than one site has the copyright on the same material?

The studio/model might be giving permission for the material to be recorded and used, via the terms and conditions or user agreement, but the idea that a cam site automatically becomes the new copyright holder of any material passing through their servers is absurd.

Now let's say I have a web site that promotes a cam network and I take a snapshot of a performer of the cam network to promote that performer and the cam network through my website. To my knowledge this has always been acceptable. I do not need permission from that performer since all content streamed though the cam network is property of the cam network and not the performer.

Even if it were the property of the camsite, it's not your property, is it? So how would that be "acceptable"?

I do not have a problem with removing the photo or link to the performers that have a problem with being promoted, although I don't understand why anyone would be against it.

You can't think of any reason why anyone would object to you copying and publishing material you don't own, without asking permission?

[adultmobile]

In general as someone said, most models just know about they want their money, when they start to work. Some more smart will use geo blocking to not show their cam in own country (I do this automatically for russians, romanians and such, just to be sure). Still no one will really figure the promo tools or iframe thing, even most webmasters can't understand promotion, so imagine a 18 year old cam girl.

Then at some point later, some cam girl find own screencaps in forums and they freak out. I remember some Kiev model who got her naked sessions printed in paper and sticked on her flat door plus on every flood of her building plus around the bus stops of her street and even down to metro. Eventually some neighbour recognise her and do the joke, she did not liked and did not expected eventually (she can be also jailed for being a cam girl in countries such as Ukraine, except not nice all your neighbours and relatives see you naked jumping on a toy in printed posters all around your building and street).

I can say Streamate shows recorded clips, including naked, of random private chats they like, some models confirmed me, in some of their promo materials who are not live. I recognised the girl in a popup, she was in my cam site doing something else, I asked her, I shown her screenshot I took, and she said was some private of a year ago, she had no idea how it ended there. But, models confirm me too, this is clearly stated in Streamate TOS. This was just one example, other it is VS (flirt4free) got screenshots of VOD with the private sessions, and from thumbnails you quite see she doing it all - some models disabled this feature of course.

So I would say affiliates who use standard promo tools are innocent enough, should the cam program not give those tools to affiliates in first place.

Now the question it was, can a camgirl take legal actions against nayone, if she figure out very late that she had agreed to have her naked images contaminating the whole free internet?

Answer: It depends by the agreement the model accepted or signed. By the site terms of service. By the settings about promotion and geo blocking the model selected if this is an option in their control panel. So it very depends.

But will anyone read the agreements and terms of services, or even understand if had read it?

[DBS.US]

Originally Posted by NaughtyRob

99% of Models and cam girls = no clue about anything besides "where is my check?"

and "how much will you pay me"

[Barry-xlovecam]

but the idea that a cam site automatically becomes the new copyright holder of any material passing through their servers is absurd.

Every cam site has a contract and without that signed they will not broadcast the cam.

[helterskelter808]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Every cam site has a contract and without that signed they will not broadcast the cam.

You can dream up a contract saying whatever you like. Doesn't mean you automatically own the copyright of whatever is broadcast through your site.

[CDSmith]

I've always found it odd whenever someone (as in some model or program owner usually) has a problem with being promoted. In my experience more promo = more traffic to them = more $$, which unless I'm mistaken is the reason why they do what they do in the first place... for $$.

I'd remove their stuff and find some other girl (or program for that matter) to invest your time in.

[GFED]

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

So if they broadcast a porn video through the cam site, do you believe the cam site becomes the new owner of that porn video? If they're playing music in the background, do you think the cam site becomes the copyright holder of that music? If they're broadcasting to two or more sites at once, do you believe more than one site has the copyright on the same material?

The studio/model might be giving permission for the material to be recorded and used, via the terms and conditions or user agreement, but the idea that a cam site automatically becomes the new copyright holder of any material passing through their servers is absurd.

Okay, so obviously my choice of the word "copyright" isn't the best. Model release, liability waiver, legal release or whatever... I'm not sure what it's called but everyone else seems to understand without having to give fatuous retorts.

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

Even if it were the property of the camsite, it's not your property, is it? So how would that be "acceptable"?

Many camsites if not all of them will record video as well as take snapshots of all models online periodically. Most of them also offer tools or the ability to include a list of online models on your own website. These plugins or feeds usually contain a snapshot of the model and a link to their webcam. So, why wouldn't I find it acceptable to have a page of "recommended models" that includes ONE snapshot, a text that says 'this girl is hot, visit her page at blabberbate', and a link to her page?

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

You can't think of any reason why anyone would object to you copying and publishing material you don't own, without asking permission?

No, I can not fathom how a webcam model could oppose having a snapshot of them with a link promoting her webcam. But like I said, I have no problem removing it. So now they're no longer on the "recommended models" page but guess what... when they're online they still show up in my plugin that shows all the models currently online, and I still get an RSS feed that posts a snapshot of them with a link to their cam on my "Featured Cams" feed.

[LatinCams]

Take in consideration this.
If a model works in a site she normally uses GEO restrictions, to not be seen in her home country.
If you just take a Thumb of her while shes working that material that you use would be visible everywhere.
Have you thought about that ? and that maybe thats the reason !!!

[Barry-xlovecam]

Originally Posted by helterskelter808

You can dream up a contract saying whatever you like. Doesn't mean you automatically own the copyright of whatever is broadcast through your site.

Our lawyers "dreamed up" Article 13 : Intellectual Property in the model's contract and I would guess they are qualified to defend it in the courts ...

[GFED]

Originally Posted by LatinCams

Take in consideration this.
If a model works in a site she normally uses GEO restrictions, to not be seen in her home country.
If you just take a Thumb of her while shes working that material that you use would be visible everywhere.
Have you thought about that ? and that maybe thats the reason !!!

That's actually a very good reason that I did not consider.

+1

Thank you.

[LatinCams]

Originally Posted by GFED

That's actually a very good reason that I did not consider.

+1

Thank you.

What sites are you promoting ?
We have hundreds of models in almost every site.
We would love to have some promoted and maybe we can provide you unique content from them videos or images for that

[Bat_Man]

My opinion is, any thing non-permitted could be taken to trial and to be taken for justification.Good day.

[dev777]

These women have consistently been the dumbest people I've ever encountered in the industry, with no grasp of how the business works and certainly no appreciation for free promotion.

Send 20k uniques to a ccbill site and you'll likely get a thank-you email from the site owner.

Send 20k uniques to a cam model's profile page and you'll likely get a poorly written legal threat.

[helterskelter808]

Originally Posted by GFED

Okay, so obviously my choice of the word "copyright" isn't the best. Model release, liability waiver, legal release or whatever... I'm not sure what it's called but everyone else seems to understand without having to give fatuous retorts.

Yeah, sorry about the way that sounded. It wasn't intended to be directed at you, more about cam sites who have the idea that just because something is broadcast via their site, they automatically own it. Which I find arguable.

Many camsites if not all of them will record video as well as take snapshots of all models online periodically. Most of them also offer tools or the ability to include a list of online models on your own website. These plugins or feeds usually contain a snapshot of the model and a link to their webcam. So, why wouldn't I find it acceptable to have a page of "recommended models" that includes ONE snapshot, a text that says 'this girl is hot, visit her page at blabberbate', and a link to her page?

Well I guess if they provide material, then you're expected to use that, and not other stuff. Though I suppose if you asked the site they might provide different content.

No, I can not fathom how a webcam model could oppose having a snapshot of them with a link promoting her webcam. But like I said, I have no problem removing it. So now they're no longer on the "recommended models" page but guess what... when they're online they still show up in my plugin that shows all the models currently online, and I still get an RSS feed that posts a snapshot of them with a link to their cam on my "Featured Cams" feed.

They probably don't understand how cam sites are promoting themselves these days. Cam models don't like the idea of themselves all over the internet, and they think the cam site is the only way they can be seen. So if they see their pic on your site, they'll object because they think there's more chance they'll be 'exposed'. I assume that's the reason anyway.

Latin Cams mentioned geo targeting too. The cam model might not even be aware of geotargeting or how it works, but it might explain why they complain about your pics (that they can see) rather than the cam site feed/plugins (that she isn't aware of, because her content is blocked for her country).

[DVTimes]

The content is the models.

the wecam system is just a tool.

its like a tv station streaming its shows online. the content belongs to them.

[Mutt]

Cam sites in an effort to recruit models use the GeoIP blocking feature to sell them on the idea of doing webcam work, never informing the girls that GeoIP blocking is far from 100% effective, never informing them that affiliates who don't use GeoIP blocking may use their photos and videos, never informing them that many webcam customers do screen recordings and then share them with the entire Internet. Most cam girls, the newer ones, absolutely believe they are working on a cam site completely in secret. Most learn the hard way that they aren't.

[mchacal]

Originally Posted by NaughtyRob

99% of Models and cam girls = no clue about anything besides "where is my check?"

99% of girls are dumb. The rest are ugly.

[ilnjscb]

Originally Posted by DVTimes

The content is the models.

the wecam system is just a tool.

its like a tv station streaming its shows online. the content belongs to them.

Not if there is a contract in place.

"Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Xxx hereby grants to YYY during the term of this Agreement a non-exclusive, worldwide license to (a) use, reproduce, distribute, and publicly display the Xxx Content via the YYY Service and via any and all distribution channels and platforms for the YYY Service, including without limitation, through the YYY Web Sites and other Web Sites and applications owned and operated by YYY or its Affiliates, wireless/mobile versions of the foregoing, other wireless/mobile channels (including, without limitation, mobile phones and wireless navigation systems), Internet distribution, xxTV, television (including xxTV), telephone, and the Web Sites, applications and other distribution channels of all of YYY's Third Party Distributors (and YYY may permit each Third Party Distributor to further reproduce, distribute, and display the Xxx Content as part of its distribution of the YYY Service under the same terms as provided for in this Agreement), and other technologies and forms of communications now known or hereafter developed (collectively, the "YYY Advertising Network"); and (b) add and append Ancillary Content to the elements of the Xxx Content displayed by YYY. YYY may allow the display of the Xxx Content by YYY's Third Party Distributors in conjunction with the YYY Service by means of an application program interface, so long as the Xxx Content is mixed with the other data within, and incorporated as part of, the YYY Service. The placement, location, and sequencing of the Xxx Content with respect to other data on the YYY Web Sites shall be solely determined by YYY. "

If you sign that, they can use the content where and when they want.

"All material submitted becomes the sole property of the ZZZ and will not be
returned. ZZZ reserves the right to (a) reproduce/distribute all content
submitted in any and all media throughout the world in perpetuity, (b) alter,
amend, edit or change entries prior to distribution and (c) use, distribute,
reproduce, alter, amend and copyright entries for purposes of advertising and
trade without further compensation, unless prohibited by law. Submitters do not
retain any ownership of or copyright in any Contest submissions. ZZZ are
not under any obligation to use submitted content."

If you sign that, they own it. Simple as that, one paragraph, and that would be upheld in many countries.

[shimmy2]

worse things have happened