itsme

RLC violates copyright all the time. Every time they broadcast one of tenants watching tv, playing music, or show a logo. I don't know why they are such sticklers about it, if anything its free advertising.

That or posters just need to limit their uploads to cc. The only reason I shared them to VoyerTube was to be generous, but that just ended up with shitheads downloading the videos and then re-uploading them to other sites. I really don't get it, one day I upload them to VoyuerTube, then the next day they are on 4khd. Why not just leave them where they were first posted? 4khd is a shit site anyway.

So I've now found at least 4 of my videos re-posted to 4khd or whatever that scam site is, despite the fact that they were already available on VoyeurTube. After the videos were uploaded to 4khd my account was banned. When people take the time to capture, encode, and upload videos people shouldn't take advantage of that by re-uploading the videos as it makes it much easier for RLC to find. A few people even had the nerve to complain about where I was uploading the videos. If people chose to share stuff you should be thankful for it, and not beg or complain about how they did it.

Thoughts on this:

Irma & Ilona Rubbing each others tits Irma & Ilona Tit Play.mp4

I moved it. Thanks.

Video from today's fuck session: Vanessa and Thomas Sex 06-23-16.mp4

How so?

[Media Removed]

I can't imagine much pleasure coming from eating that beastly woman's oyster pie.

Video from a bit earlier: (Attachment Purged)

I put them on VoyeurTube so that people don't have to download them. As far as I know VT dosen't remove videos ether there are some that have been on there for more than 2 years.

Going to be some action shorty in the Nelly and Bogdan household.

Irma & Ilona Massage Video Irma & Ilona Massage.mp4

It works just fine for me, and I've never had an issue with it. I uploaded it to the downloads area for people to download the video.

Here is the video. Probably one of the better ones I've ever managed to capture. (The Video Content is No Longer Accessible and Has Been Removed)

I'll be uploading a video to voyeurtube.

How about clam or beaver?

I get this message on one of my machines, but not any of the others. Do you have Ad block on? What OS are you running?

Bate video: http://voyeurtube.cc/videos/4354872/mash-masturbates-on-the-couch/

I don't remember where I saw it but earlier someone posted a picture of RLC that said "Invalid RMTP URL" and someone said that it means their ip has been banned. I have received this message on one of my home computers while not receiving it on others that are on the same network, which would suggest that it doesn't necessarily mean it's a sign of being banned. The computer that I received it on actually has a windows server os on it and it's running Firefox. I don't know exactly what would be preventing RMTP from working but it might be a firewall issue. I would have the person try it on a different computer just to make sure.

Indeed, porn isn't nearly as glamours as it is made to seem. This site has some great bloopers, it's not for the lighthearted: http://efukt.com/. I've heard that the pool at the Playboy mansion is falling apart and it's pretty nasty.

The Playboy Mansion has been sold to Daren Metropoulos, of Metropoulos & Co., the private equity firm that famously helped rescue Twinkies snack cakes from extinction when it boughtHostess out of bankruptcy. He's a 32 year old multimillionaire whose father is billionaire Dean Metroupoulous. The funny thing is Hugh gets to live in the house until he dies, which likely won't be too long given that he's 90 something years old. http://money.cnn.com/2016/06/06/real_estate/playboy-mansion-sold-twinkie/index.html

It's not a matter of need, it's a matter of convenience and efficiency. Why pay someone to monitor a forum all day when you can have a web crawler automatically scour the web for your content? These types of forums aren't the only place RLC content shows up, I am sure there are 10's if not hundreds of other sites that routinely have RLC content uploaded to them.

After doing some research on this I've come to the conclusion that RLC is likely using both digital watermarking and digital fingerprinting. Watermarking "adds information, embedding it within a video and/or audio signal, while Fingerprinting does not add any information — it analyses the media, identifying a unique set of inherent properties" (Digimarc). In other words, the dots that we all see are a form of watermarking (it is also possible to make invisible watermarks), behind the scenes they are fingerprinting their video streams. So it is very likely that no matter what you try to crop out or obscure from an image or video they can still find out who you are. Here is what I think is the most interesting thing which explains a lot: The search service only crawls the public web, which means that if someone posts one of your photos on a private Facebook post, we can’t find this for you. The same is true of other social media platforms including Twitter, Instagram and others that allow users to mark posts as private. There are an estimated 1 billion sites on the public web, and we're currently crawling on the order of 100 million annually, scanning billions of individual images in the process. Sites are selected for crawling based on their age and adjacency to other known sites, and are crawled based on their link structure. So likely what is happening is that RLC is using Digimarc or a similar service to Watermark and Fingerprint their content, and then paying them to crawl the internet in search of images and videos that match said fingerprints, and then banning whomever posted the content. In theory, if you use a publicly available image host such as postimage.org, or anony.ws, they could find your file before you even have a chance to share it here or anywhere else, depending on how fast they crawl those sites. Putting this all together: It is unlikely that RLC is employing someone to monitor this site for their content 24/7, rather it is completely automated and not being performed by them. The takeaway is that they likely can’t use this method to find content that is not publicly available I.e. the attachment center or private messages. Secondly, it may be possible to use some type of filter or re-encoding to make the watermarks and fingerprints invalid. This might also explain why some videos are still up on sites like YouTube after several years while others are removed within a few days, either they are pre-fingerprinting, or they have been modified enough to remove the fingerprint. https://www.digimarc.com/docs/default-source/technology-resources/white-papers/rhozet_wp_fingerprinting_watermarking.pdf