if you post here , your account of RLC will Banned !!!!!!!!!!!

[mini2012]

if you post here , your account  of RLC will Banned !!!!!!!!!!!

so better let them beg  ,

i posted only one pic yesterday , account banned  !!!!!

so better closed down that forum !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Or is RLC  the admin ??????

[StnCld316]

Your computer stores Cookies. The cookie from RLC has the identifier number that is usually in the bottom left hand corner of the picture and possibly your IP Addie is stored there. This is used for their tracking purposes. Any information on that cookie is immediately sent to them.

They have a feature on most browsers where a do not track request is sent to whatever site you visit but that is those most useless feature of the browser. They'll track you regardless whether you want them to or not. You can try disabling your cookies but some sites won't load unless they are on. I've never tried it.

Plus likely someone has an account on CC that likely has something to do with RLC or they wouldn't be able to see the posted pictures if they weren't.

It's not the Admin, he has already clarified he has no affiliation with the folks at RLC.

CC has an attachment feature below the comment box where pics and videos can be stored. Since I have been here well over a year all content placed there still stands and stays with no removal unless removed by the user. I can't say for sure if other members that have posted in the attachment center have still had RLC account bans or not. Only ones I have ever heard of is direct posting without using the attachment feature.

[mini2012]

i used the feature below to post the pic  , and removed it my self ,

there was no code visible on the pic  ,

i dont have to look for removing or blocking cookies  , because  permanently banned

so i cancelled the membership

[mini2012]

i don't know what is the reason of this board ,

if you pay , you can see movies and pics and if you post something u be banned from RLC

ho is posting the pics and video's then ?

so in my eyes everything here is fake and just a way to banned  the members of RLC

[Foamy T. Squirrel]

RLC's techniques for matching captures of their feeds to their end users are well known. We all know about the visible codes (easily cropped out of a picture) and the blinking braille dots (which also use the same tracking number tagged to the user's account name). There very well may be more subtle encoding going on, simply my manipulating pixels on the screen. It was once theorized that you could transmit instructions for making a nuclear bomb within a series of jpg's and no one would notice.

(Newbies: The history of CC posts and RLC's DMCA actions is here. Though the visible code can be edited easily, the blinking dots have made posting of videos difficult and laborious at best. Things have gone downhill since then, but so far they haven't slapped CC with a take-down order. Perhaps because CC is cheap advertising, or, more likely, because they fear the wrath of our mighty Admin. http://camcaps.net/random-discussion/rlc-is-getting-serious-about-violating-their-terms-conditions/ )

[JoJoGunne]

hiding files in pics and other types of files is something that has been around for a very long time.  It's called "steganography".

Here is a link if you want to know more about it.

http://lifehacker.com/230915/geek-to-live--hide-data-in-files-with-easy-steganography-tools

[Foamy T. Squirrel]

hiding files in pics and other types of files is something that has been around for a very long time.  It's called "steganography".

Here is a link if you want to know more about it.

http://lifehacker.com/230915/geek-to-live--hide-data-in-files-with-easy-steganography-tools

Gee, am I old school or what? I've been struggling away with my Kriegsmarine Enigma Emulator too long. No wonder it takes Leora, Nora, and Maya so long to respond to my love letters...  :D

[komptreyes]

RLC's techniques for matching captures of their feeds to their end users are well known. We all know about the visible codes (easily cropped out of a picture) and the blinking braille dots (which also use the same tracking number tagged to the user's account name). There very well may be more subtle encoding going on, simply my manipulating pixels on the screen. It was once theorized that you could transmit instructions for making a nuclear bomb within a series of jpg's and no one would notice.

(Newbies: The history of CC posts and RLC's DMCA actions is here. Though the visible code can be edited easily, the blinking dots have made posting of videos difficult and laborious at best. Things have gone downhill since then, but so far they haven't slapped CC with a take-down order. Perhaps because CC is cheap advertising, or, more likely, because they fear the wrath of our mighty Admin. http://camcaps.net/random-discussion/rlc-is-getting-serious-about-violating-their-terms-conditions/ )

When we can scale the picture for our different resolutions or page sizes, altered pixels will get blurred or changed in the compression and scalling process, so there's not much chance that embedding a code in the pixels will survive from their server to a screen capture posted on a site.

[StnCld316]

RLC's techniques for matching captures of their feeds to their end users are well known. We all know about the visible codes (easily cropped out of a picture) and the blinking braille dots (which also use the same tracking number tagged to the user's account name). There very well may be more subtle encoding going on, simply my manipulating pixels on the screen. It was once theorized that you could transmit instructions for making a nuclear bomb within a series of jpg's and no one would notice.

(Newbies: The history of CC posts and RLC's DMCA actions is here. Though the visible code can be edited easily, the blinking dots have made posting of videos difficult and laborious at best. Things have gone downhill since then, but so far they haven't slapped CC with a take-down order. Perhaps because CC is cheap advertising, or, more likely, because they fear the wrath of our mighty Admin. http://camcaps.net/random-discussion/rlc-is-getting-serious-about-violating-their-terms-conditions/ )

To what I have seen so far the only getting the ban from RLC are the ones that are using Third Party uploading. If they use the attachments and other options below the message box RLC cannot access that part unless they join CC and pay the $12 to see this.

I have been on CC for about 18 months and to this day all the pics and videos that are in the attachment center are still there and readily available. The only one that I have seen where the pics are still available from a Third Party Uploading service are the ones that use http://www.subirimagenes.net.  That server seems to be somewhere that's out of RLC's reach.

I really don't see why RLC gets their shit in a knot over a few pics and vids. It's free advertising for them. No one is actually selling what they copy for money, so really there is no infringement on any copyright.

[Foamy T. Squirrel]

I really don't see why RLC gets their shit in a knot over a few pics and vids. It's free advertising for them. No one is actually selling what they copy for money, so really there is no infringement on any copyright.

In the US, we have what is called "The Fair Use Doctrine," in which you can cite short snippets of works from others to help express an idea or concept. It's necessary to ensure freedom of speech, especially that of a political nature.

We have this ability in the US (not granted by a government -- it's that exceptionalist thing educated people understand and that everyone thinks is evil), and it's necessary. However, it doesn't necessarily apply to borrowing large works of others engaged in personal or commercial work (it's that legal thing that makes lawyers make a living.) However, RLC is a public entity, worthy of comment, so I think they allow some "Fair Use" to rule: as long as it's controlled and people are not just ripping them off. CC does work as advertising and the fact that publication of pictures on CC lasts is because we have a paying membership base and it excludes the massive rip-off sites from stealing the pictures that we have "borrowed" from RLC to illustrate our comments.

That's just a fricking guess, of course.

[StnCld316]

I really don't see why RLC gets their shit in a knot over a few pics and vids. It's free advertising for them. No one is actually selling what they copy for money, so really there is no infringement on any copyright.

In the US, we have what is called "The Fair Use Doctrine," in which you can cite short snippets of works from others to help express an idea or concept. It's necessary to ensure freedom of speech, especially that of a political nature.

We have this ability in the US (not granted by a government -- it's that exceptionalist thing educated people understand and that everyone thinks is evil), and it's necessary. However, it doesn't necessarily apply to borrowing large works of others engaged in personal or commercial work (it's that legal thing that makes lawyers make a living.) However, RLC is a public entity, worthy of comment, so I think they allow some "Fair Use" to rule: as long as it's controlled and people are not just ripping them off. CC does work as advertising and the fact that publication of pictures on CC lasts is because we have a paying membership base and it excludes the massive rip-off sites from stealing the pictures that we have "borrowed" from RLC to illustrate our comments.

That's just a fricking guess, of course.

Sounds logical.  In Canada we don't have that.  We are free to download, post, upload which is not against our laws for now. They have been working to get that changed but the SCC keeps striking them down.  It's all fine here as long as you don't sell what's downloaded or uploaded for monetary gain. I imagine sometime in the not so distant future that will change.

[Maturin]

I really don't see why RLC gets their shit in a knot over a few pics and vids. It's free advertising for them. No one is actually selling what they copy for money, so really there is no infringement on any copyright.

In the US, we have what is called "The Fair Use Doctrine," in which you can cite short snippets of works from others to help express an idea or concept. It's necessary to ensure freedom of speech, especially that of a political nature.

We have this ability in the US (not granted by a government -- it's that exceptionalist thing educated people understand and that everyone thinks is evil), and it's necessary. However, it doesn't necessarily apply to borrowing large works of others engaged in personal or commercial work (it's that legal thing that makes lawyers make a living.) However, RLC is a public entity, worthy of comment, so I think they allow some "Fair Use" to rule: as long as it's controlled and people are not just ripping them off. CC does work as advertising and the fact that publication of pictures on CC lasts is because we have a paying membership base and it excludes the massive rip-off sites from stealing the pictures that we have "borrowed" from RLC to illustrate our comments.

That's just a fricking guess, of course.

Sounds logical.  In Canada we don't have that.  We are free to download, post, upload which is not against our laws for now. They have been working to get that changed but the SCC keeps striking them down.  It's all fine here as long as you don't sell what's downloaded or uploaded for monetary gain. I imagine sometime in the not so distant future that will change.

Wouldn't the answer be to upload pics and vids to hosting sites owned by Canadians in a Canadian domain then? I guess if it's a free site, not one of those pay to download-at-a-decent-speed-ones, then it should be ok right?