Jordan Capri - Queen of Cute (No Copyrighted Material)

[steelydan53]

Open letter to the Mods

So owned by Lightspeed, is now on the Forbidden Subjects list:
"Added July 28 2008

However, in your words:
"Discussions that concern these women ARE allowed, however attachments,
links, requests and offering copyrighted content IS NOT and they WILL BE DELETED!"
I was very careful to avoid posting anything that could be considered the copyright of Lightspeed, and yet you deleted the entire thread!

Does this heavy-handed approach mean that you won't even bother to consider the contents of a post before you destroy it?

There is plenty of material out there -- images and video -- that doesn't breach Lightspeed's




copy

It is obvious that the distribution of material 'stolen' from paysites means a loss of revenue to the site We are forbidden to continue that practice, and that is

On the other hand, the spreading of authorised, legally obtained, public domain publicity material can only be good for Lightspeed, as we will be doing his job for

What is your view on this?

[MARKK]

[

Hi steelydan53!
First that as you can see I'm not a mod, then that I agree with

Sometimes (or should I see most of the times?) when the board gets a complain from the copy rates owner of the material, in the rush to avoid problems the whole thread is cancelled, but then, if you start it again, so long you don’t post forbidden material the thread stays without This has happened

So I guess that in this case or the moderator did not check if your new posts were or not copyrighted or he thought that all Jordan Capri’s pictures are owned by Which is not the case-

I can not see any other reason why your new thread has But if the published material is not Lightspeed’s there’s no reason to cancel anything and if part of the material is under copy rights, then this material should be cancelled, but not the whole Or this is at least my point of

[sackett]

Jordan Capri has been put on the Forbidden List, and her pictures deleted, for legal (remember our latest down time???)

could have gone thru the entire thread and deleted just the pics, leaving the the have />


If you want to discuss Jordon Capri, you can start a new thread in the Members MORE PICTURES!!!

until someone with more know-how on the legalities says />

In other words, there are 18,000 porn star threads, trust us, if Jordon, or any porn star's, thread disappears, it's for the good of the

[gryphondo]

Does this heavy-handed approach mean that you won't even bother to consider the contents of a post before you destroy it?

That's Nothing could be farther from the No worth while content that is within the rules is ever indiscriminately destroyed Everything that is done here, be it perceived as heavy handed or otherwise, is done for the good and the health of the board and is done with careful

ThePlanet (our hosting provider) has blocked this server due to this /> Theplanet has sent us a ticket which we didn't /> That was the reason why was />

MATTHEW COLLINS
Attorney at Law
PO Box 191062
Atlanta, GA 31119
404-214-6070
Fax: 678-669-1518
July 19, 2008


VIA EMAIL AND FIRST CLASS MAIL

ThePlanet Internet Services
1333 Stemmons Fwy, Suite 110
Dalla, TX 75207


Claimant Information:

Matthew Collins
Attorney for Lightspeed Media Corporation
PO Box 191062
Atlanta, Georgia 31119
Telephone: /> Fax: />

RE: Images contained on the following pages:



I represent Lightspeed Media Corporation and I am writing regarding the images contained on the above referenced web pages, which are owned and copyrighted by my Pursuant to Federal law and under penalty of perjury, I state that the information in this claim is accurate and that I am the authorized representative of my client and that I have full authority to bring this complaint on behalf of my client, the owner of these />
This Notice of Claimed Infringement is sent to you pursuant to 17 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976 (as amended) as well as the notification provisions contained in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (17 This notice of claimed infringement is sent to you as you are listed as the agent for copyright infringement />
This notice is to inform you that the images referenced above are used in an unauthorized manner and said use has not been authorized by the owner of the copyright, Lightspeed Media Moreover, this notice is to inform you of the unlawful acts of copyright infringement being committed by the posting of these images on the above referenced web site for which you are the service Moreover, my client is the copyright owner and has not given permission or authorization for the use of the images by the above referenced web />
Your customer& #8192; s unauthorized use of these valuable photographic images constitutes copyright infringement, as prohibited by the Copyright Act, 17 101 et and is in direct violation with the international rights of my Similar conduct has been expressly forbidden by such reported federal cases as Playboy Enterprises, Frena, 839 1552 1993); Playboy Enterprises, Webbworld, 968 1171 />
Each intentional unauthorized use of an image belonging to my client subjects your customer to potential liability for statutory damages and your failure to act expeditiously to remove the copyrighted images may subject you to liability as Said liability, under 15 504 and 505, can include up to $150,000 per work, plus any costs and attorney''s fees incurred by my client in pursuing legal recourse against you and your />
Accordingly, we demand that you immediately comply as follows:



At this time, you are on notice that your facilities are being used to infringe the copyrights of Lightspeed Media Corporation, and therefore you also risk being held liable for any further infringements by your />
Nothing in this letter shall be deemed to waive or limit any of the rights or remedies of my client all of which are hereby expressly />
Until this matter is satisfactorily resolved, we reserve the right to take such action as deemed advisable to assert our statutory right to recover damages, lost profits, attorneys'' fees, and any costs of recovery, and to otherwise take all available and reasonable steps to protect our interests, including but not limited to preliminary and permanent injunctive />
We appreciate your cooperation in this matter and I hope to hear from you />
Sincerely,


/s/
Matthew Collins
Attorney at Law
PO Box 191062
Atlanta, GA 31119
Fax: 678-669-1518

[sackett]

Echoes can be such a pain in the :P

Thanx for throwing in the legalities, was waiting for someone with OLDER) over me to post

I find it amusing that we delete a thread, put it on a Forbidden List, and people diss us for I mean, Steely Dan knows EXACTLY why it was done, and posted why it was done, and still harshes on us for />
A)JC is on the Forbidden No more That makes it end of /> B)Discuss JC all you NO />

WHAT IF we had decided, or were allowed, to post public domain pictures of JC??

What is more logical?? Spud deletes the whole 44 pages, and we start from scratch?

Or some poor schmuck of a moderator(SPUD) has to wade thru all those posts, deleting copyrighted stuff, even sorting within individual posts?

Seems more logical to a half smart farm boy like myself that Spud's valuable time be spent moderating current stuff, and let the members repost appropriate material in a new It's not like you guys don't have it all on your hard

Think a little bit, Don't make us do ALL the drudge />
[/scold]

[idspud]

I was the one who moved this thread to this forum where it more properly My opinion is that she gets no thread in the Internet Model forum per the legalities - No Any discussions of her would properly be in the Chat forum />
and just we Mods are not really We strive to maintain the rules and keep the forum functioning The good of the whole completly outweighs one single

[sackett]

and just we Mods are not really

[spike70]

The good of the whole completly outweighs one single color="darkblue">A direct quote from Spocks dying peroration in Star Trek if I'm not src="http://www.smileycons.com/img/classic/0353.gif" border="0" alt="" />

[echoes]

actually, it was: "The needs of the many for needs of the although that could be used as a justification for bad stuff /> any /> i know you were joking spike but don't quote star trek & expect a trekkie not to

[butler bill]

thought that you guys were called Starkies

[echoes]

Fuck there a mod convention remember this many mods in one thread

apparently we take full advantage when we see an opportunity to make a smartass remark, at least in my

[MARKK]

Fuck there a mod convention remember this many mods in one thread

apparently we take full advantage when we see an opportunity to make a smartass remark, at least in my still I've some doubts, let's say that Jordan or any other "forbidden" lady attends a convention or is present at the Oscar's ( ) ceremony or in Cannes, the journalists or just private admirers take some photos that are freely published around… we will still not be able to post those pics? Why? No Light or Slow speed could claim that there are his, or her property!

In my humble opinion when a fresh new thread is axed; the poster, in this case steelydan53 should be notified with a message about the reasons I would find it more

And yes this looks as a mod Quite depressing actually!
Nothing against you mods but what about the rest of the people????
Not anybody else with something to say?

[steelydan53]

Many thanks for the I appreciate that you are hardworking volunteers and have a difficult legal tightrope to I wasn't "dissing" anyone, and I apologise if I caused any />
I certainly didn't suggest that anyone should go through the original thread, which was I was just a little annoyed, and confused, that my attempt to revive a "legal" JC thread had been stamped on />
If you rule that no images of JC, or even the girl who models as JC, regardless of who owns the copyright, are permitted, then I will respect that />
However, if Lightspeed Media publish a gallery of images as part of their marketing of the JC paysite, am I permitted to share its URL? What about the public URLs of the images linked from that gallery? And, what if I put those URLs between "Img" tags? At what point, if any, have I breached the copyright?

Regards,
Paul

[spike70]

In my opinion we do not lose that much by banning her stuff entirely and we do not run the risk of crossing swords with this dude color="darkblue">Abse-bloody-lutely right

[Turtle]

In my opinion we do not lose that much by banning her stuff entirely and we do not run the risk of crossing swords with this dude color="darkblue">Abse-bloody-lutely right

We don't need the hassle her thread could bring, an outright ban should />
And why is there an ant crawling over your signature Spike?