Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  on the hook

You Owe Corbin Fisher $25K If Your Account Gets Hacked And Someone Pirates Their Videos

CorbinFisher.com — the gay porn company (which itself estimates 80 percent of its talent is straight) that’s intent on going after some 40,000 illegal file sharers, closeted gay teens be damned — will also go after its paying customers. That is, if they’re accounts somehow get hacked and intruders use your login information to download and illegally distribute the company’s smut. You’re on the hook, yo!

When you sign up for a credit card, any unauthorized transactions due to fraud are not the responsibility of the card holder. (Legally, you’re liable for up to $50, but most card companies hold you accountable for $0.) But that’s not the case at Corbin Fisher, which, a reader alerts us, recently updated its Terms Of Service to hold paying customers accountable for not safeguarding their username and password. And what if your computer, like hundreds of thousands out there, falls victim to a malware attack due to an operating system vulnerability, and your login gets stolen unknowlingly? Too bad: Corbin Fisher says you’re still on the hook for 25-large. (Emphasis ours.)

6.6
You agree to take all possible measures to keep your username and password secure.

6.7
You agree that if your password security is breached, you are solely responsible for any damage or liability occurring by this breach.

6.8
You agree that, even if you can prove hacking by clear and convincing evidence, you are still liable for any 3rd party use of your username and password.

6.9
You specifically agree that if your account is used to download any of Our content and that content is later found on a one-click hosting site, a file locker site, a torrent site, a tube site, or any other site, service or server or any other medium used for sharing content, that You will pay liquidated damages of $25,000 to Us.”

Just like its copyright infringement fishing expedition, I’d love to see a judge uphold these contract terms as valid. Because, FYI to Corbin Fisher’s legal department: You cannot force someone into an ad hoc responsibility; any court would consider these terms void ab initio, and nullify them if this ever reached a courtroom.

But once again it’s evidence Corbin Fisher, a subsidiary of Liberty Media/Excelsior Productions (which also operates AmateurCollegeMen.com) that is run by CEO Jason Gibson, is willing to go after easy marks rather than true culprits.

We checked the Terms Of Service of CorbinFisher.com’s competitors.

• At RandyBlue.com there appears to be no similar mandate written into its contract, though they will hold you liable for $25k if you report a legitimate charge from the site as fraudulent.

• At SeanCody.com, which also threatens a $25k fee if you fraudulently report a charge from the site, your access will be revoked for for intentionally letting someone else use your login (“You agree that if You share Your unique Login name, Your Password or any other online security information with another individual, that Your access to the Web Site is subject to immediate termination without notice or reimbursement of any kind. Any sharing of passwords or any other methods of unauthorized access to the Web Site with any other person is strictly forbidden”). Though like Corbin Fisher, password security is the customer’s responsibility, though note the use of the word “negligence,” which is very different from “You’re responsible no matter what, even an act of god” (“You further acknowledge and agree that You will remain liable to the Company for any unauthorized use of the Web Site or Materials or services associated with the Web Site or Your Membership that is due to Your negligence or any intentional acts in which You were directly or indirectly involved. You further agree that You will remain liable for any such unauthorized use until You have notified Company’s Customer Service”).

So there’s another reason to totally spend $29.95 on a monthly membership. In the end, it could cost you $25,029.95.

[photo: CorbinFisher.com]

By:           JD
On:           Mar 24, 2011
Tagged: , , , , , , , ,

  • 71 Comments
    • bob
      bob

      Gay people should boycott gay porn companies. Oh wait, they have a monopoly on gay people.com

      Mar 24, 2011 at 1:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Known2stunt
      Known2stunt

      There is free porn , you just gotta know where to find it.Pp

      Mar 24, 2011 at 1:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan
      Ryan

      This is no shock, I think it’s widely known that the people behind “Corbin Fisher” are inept dolts.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 1:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Don’t count on your credit card company in this case – if you signed the agreement, it becomes a contract dispute between you and the porn company, not a fraudulent charge in the usual sense. Whether the courts would uphold such a contract is a different matter. Your main protection regarding credit cards in this case is a low credit limit – a $25,000 charge would bounce for the typical levels set for most individuals.

      However, the only way for Corbin Fisher to tell if a video you downloaded (legally as a customer) ended up on some other person’s server is if they give each customer a slightly different copy of the file. This can be checked – have two people download the same video, each with a separate Corbin Fisher account and then compare the two files byte for byte, or compare a message digest of the files (e.g., use the Linux program named “shasum” to compute the message digest). You can publish the output of that without making the video accessible.

      Also, there is an interesting defense if the court doesn’t throw it out on general principles – point out the possibility of an inside job at Corbin Fisher where a disgruntled employee steals user names and passwords from Corbin Fisher’s servers (if you modify the web server or run it under the control of a debugger, you can get information that would normally be inaccessible). Then when they say this is not credible, ask them to prove it by providing their source code in court and a complete description of their computer operations. They’d really love that!

      Mar 24, 2011 at 2:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • niles
      niles

      God, I’m sick of hearng about Corbin Fisher! Their videos have about as much sexual excitement as watching paint dry. All the models look to be a variation on the same person, and the photography has a washed-out lifeless quality which I loathe. If they want to sue people, go ahead and do it, and quit threatening everybody with their incessant saber rattlings.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 3:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • 1L
      1L

      @B: You’re forgetting another important defense to a lawsuit seeking enforcement of a $25,000 liquidated damages provision in a $29.95 per month contract to provide porn. According to the Restatement of Contracts, “A term fixing unreasonably large liquidated damages is unenforceable on grounds of public policy as a penalty.”

      When it comes to exposing a company’s source code and computer operations, there are limits on discovery. At least in federal court, a judge can “issue an order to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense, including … requiring that a trade secret or other confidential research, development, or commercial information not be revealed or be revealed only in a specified way.”

      Mar 24, 2011 at 3:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Charles
      Charles

      Is that porn company run by the mob or something? Jeez they are scum.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 6:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • justiceontherocks
      justiceontherocks

      So many lawyers on Queerty.

      The liquidated damages provision might very well be enforced. Large damages often flow from small contracts.

      It’s not so clear a court would enforce the penalty without some finding of wrong doing or negligence. That would depend on the law of the state where the contract was written. As a general rule people can waive defenses to contract claims. However, a lot of courts won’t enforce those provisions if they are “against public policy,” a vague standard for “really really unfair.”

      I agree with Niles. This company would be a lot better off spending more money on better films than better lawyers.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 9:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • scott ny'er
      scott ny'er

      $30!!! A month. Sheesh. Gays must have a lot of discretionary income. I’m unemployed so that means a lot to me but still. that $360/yr could go towards several meals, paying down debt, some nice clothes, rent, gym, etc.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 10:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John
      John

      I could care less whether this penalty is legally enforceable or not. I’m a customer, not a lawyer. They have just gone way off into predatory territory which they may be legally able to do if they wish, but they are not entitled to my business. I always paid my bill and never illegally downloaded anything from CF, but that apparently isn’t good enough. Nope, now he wants to threaten his customers with potential bankruptcy because they fall victim to a hacker’s illegal activities. Corbin Fisher can kiss my ass because he’ll never get another dime from me again.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 10:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chupa Chups
      Chupa Chups

      @bob:

      gay people have to boycott those gay-porn companies which take part in ghetto ceremonies named GayVN and supporting gays marginalization and segregation

      Mar 24, 2011 at 11:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ronin
      ronin

      Well, even though that 40,000 ip thing is still being thrown around, the head of corbin fisher said in his interview that they weren’t going to focus on people who downloaded one or two videos, but the people who were aggressively uploading and downloading a lot, which would significantly lower that number. It’s hard to imagine how people could stay subscribed to this site now with the PR damage they have been doing. This company just gets grosser and grosser.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 11:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Fitz
      Fitz

      Ok, you know.. I was all about supporting Corbin when he did those PSAs.. but now I am done, and ready for some tweaked out co-star to take him out.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 11:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Greg Theron
      Greg Theron

      Their videos suck anyways, who the hell wants to watch them?

      Mar 24, 2011 at 12:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tavdy79
      tavdy79

      Hmmm, $1K vs. $25K, what ya gonna choose? Are these guys thick or what?

      Mar 24, 2011 at 12:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Stephanie
      Stephanie

      Wow, I really feel sorry for CF members. They can do the right thing by paying CF for what they watch instead of pirating, and still get sued through no fault of their own. Now that this is known, how can anyone with common sense take a chance on this company?

      Mar 24, 2011 at 12:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Armand
      Armand

      Pass.

      Corbin has ugly guys anyway. There’s better looking guys in prison.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 12:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Josh
      Josh

      CF is the worst. Besides, free porn is all over the internet. Just google “gay tube” or “porn tube”.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 1:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chujek
      Chujek

      I cracked only 3 accounts at CF site ever (to exchange pass and get access to other sites). Moreover 80% of good combolists comes from bad secured login servers (most of exploits available over the Internet works against it!). Also Googlebot sometimes ‘steals’ combos, so it’s even a sin not to use it.
      Anyway CF sucks with quality porn, recently even RB is quite ‘boring’. Only sites I enjoy are Chaosmen (subscribed there), StagHomme (basic authorized, subscribed), Dirty Tony (uses lame strongbox), and Jake Cruise sites (some forms, some basic authorized), also HardBritLads (form) and Lucas Enterteinment is quite nice.

      @CorbinFisher even I don’t like you here’s tip for you:
      invest in other security system – like Ajax for example – making working profile to crack it takes even skilled cracker at least 30min (there’s 3 PT made for cracking that system)
      your current security system – is crackable with almost all private tools currently available via Google and Bing

      Mar 24, 2011 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      Again, Corbin Fisher has been making threats and demands for almost 2 months now and I’ve yet to hear of an actual suit brought against an actual person by them, but it intrigues me that every week or so they issue a new threat so as to stay relevant on blogs like this.

      Until I read a story of someone who was brought to trial in this fiasco, I can’t help but dismiss all of this as nothing more than pathetic, greedy threats.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 4:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CFBear27
      CFBear27

      Wow , people here are already litigating this case and we have not even heard of any names of any one that has been affected by the supposed “crack down”. It is my opinion that CF is just barking right now to scare people from stealing or file sharing. Who ever thought of this tactic to resolve their $$ loss problem should be fired. It’s ridiculous if they think that any court will be all too concerned that they are loosing money on content that they themselves (CF) put out there for people to see. If the F^(kn idiots didn’t want the content to be shared then they should have streamed the videos on a particular player and disable downloading, or better yet go back to the stone ages and only sell DVD’s LOL. Oh and while you are at it CF , fire your lawyers cuz they are all a bunch of idiots as well for thinking that you could have your cake and eat too! I’ve seen the video previews and its not like they have the only men in the world.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 4:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alistair
      Alistair

      @Steve – Corbin Fisher is suing 59 people who hacked into their servers and distributed their films:

      http://copyrightlitigation.blogspot.com/2011/02/copyright-lawsuit-is-alleged-to-be.html

      I have no problem whatsoever with that. But to threaten to sue any members who get hacked themselves, when Chujek up there makes it seem rather simple to do if you know how, is just wrong, IMHO.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 4:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brice Forshin
      Brice Forshin

      Hey guys,

      I brought your issues to to our general counsel. After reviewing your concerns about the terms and conditions on Corbin Fisher we adjusted the language to be more relaxed. We do not want to punish our users for our own security issues or system breaches. We are specifically targeting users who share their accounts with infringers or are direct copyright infringers who lie and use the “my account was hacked” excuse. We are also aware that moderators on this board seek out our members’ usernames and passwords through password sharing sites and use that to post our content to torrent sites like this one. We do not want to penalize our honest members, just stop unauthorized access and account sharing.

      Thank you

      Mar 24, 2011 at 5:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brice Forshin
      Brice Forshin

      @Brice Forshin:

      Correction: “We are also aware that moderators on this board seek out our members’ usernames and passwords through password sharing sites and use that to post our content to torrent sites like this one.” was a copy-paste mistake and was not intended for this board. Sorry.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 6:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andy
      Andy

      wow, Brice Forshin is a busy little bee. He also posted the EXACT same post at Justusboys and Gay-torrents and even had to go BACK to Justusboys with the SAME correction he posted here.

      Guys, honestly, you wouldn’t have to run around mopping up PR spills if SOMEONE in charge there had even the tiniest clue. You deserve all the bad press you get.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 6:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alistair
      Alistair

      @Brice Forshin: But before folks put up a fuss you thought it was just fine to hold innocent account holders liable for being hacked. The fact that the idea was ever a good one to you speaks volumes about how little you care for your customers.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re: No. 6 · 1L …. I wasn’t forgetting that, but rather pointing out the difficulty of proving what CF would have to claim: I wrote, “Also, there is an interesting defense if the court doesn’t throw it out on general principles …” The phrase “throw it out on general principles” was meant to cover the sort of legal argument you raised (I’m more interested in the technology, not purely legal issues).

      While they might not want to make their source code public, the fact is that you cannot prove whether or not the code is buggy without being able to examine it, so I think there is a legitimate reason for the defense in such a case to ask to see it. The defense would certainly want to know if passwords are encrypted when stored and how long they persist in memory while the web server logs the user in, and how good the encryption is, and how long it takes to encrypt or decrypt a password. If you have 9 character passwords, all lower-case letters, there are roughly 5 trillion passwords to try. If you can do that off-line because you copied the data, gaining access due to working there, and can test 10 million passwords per second, you can find the password by exhaustive search in about 150 hours.

      When you wrote, “When it comes to exposing a company’s source code and computer operations, there are limits on discovery,” you missed a key point – CF whole claim for 25K rests on the assumption that, if a password is compromised, it is the fault of the user. The user cannot offer an adequate defense against that claim without knowing how the system works to show that a compromised password may have been the result of an inside job.

      While 25K may be laughed out of court as you suggested, suppose they asked instead for $500? At some level, the monetary amount is no longer unreasonable. Then you need a legitimate technical argument about who was actually responsible.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 7:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian Miller
      Brian Miller

      Wow, dishonest, shady and possibly illegal terms from a porn production company — who would have thought it?!?

      PS — more than likely, those terms and conditions are a violation of a typical merchant agreement for credit card processing. Someone should inform their processing bank that the company is claiming the right to make dodgy charges to credit cards at its discretion. Such charges can become HUGE nightmares for credit card companies and issuing banks alike, and should result in the bank dropping the shady firm like a hot potato.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 7:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • justiceontherocks
      justiceontherocks

      @Brice Forshin: I know everyone is grateful that you’re now totally unreasonable instead of being grossly and totally unreasonable.

      Your company is total scum, at the bottom of a truly disgusting barrel.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 7:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PoopyJoe
      PoopyJoe

      I would NEVER trust Corbin Fisher. Even if they were the last porn company on earth, I’d start making my own porn. This company can not be trusted.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 9:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ty
      Ty

      No one should give these lawsuit-happy creeps from Corbin Fisher another penny.

      I certainly would be concerned if I were a member of their site.

      When CF needs to build another studio, who will be next on their sue list. It’s becoming their standard profit-making scheme.

      Cancel your memberships, or YOU may be next.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 9:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John
      John

      @Brice Forshin: Yeah, right. I don’t believe you. Damage control and spin because you are beginning to realize the extremely bad PR you’ve generated even among good customers do not cut it. I’ll never give you SOBs my credit card info ever again.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 11:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B C
      B C

      How about no one buys any of their boring same old same old videos so they go out of business, and the models that I like won’t be tied down by Corbin Fisher’s draconian contracts and can go work with studios that still make exciting content.

      Mar 24, 2011 at 11:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chujek
      Chujek

      @Brice Forshin
      Seriously dude ?! Whose going to believe you ?
      You started new project called guysgonebi.com – and you didn’t even made any effort to secure it properly! Just one stupid form, without OCR or https connection! No e-mail form field (like VOD sites have – e-mails are harder to get).
      Moreover you did it again:
      6.9 You specifically agree that if your account is used to download any of Our content and that content is later found on a one-click hosting site, a file locker site, a torrent site, a tube site, or any other site, service or server or any other medium used for sharing content, that You will pay liquidated damages of $25,000 to Us. (Terms and Conditions)
      Do you really think that your customers are idiots ?!

      Mar 25, 2011 at 6:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 34 · Chujek wrote, “@Brice Forshin
      Seriously dude ?! Whose going to believe you ?
      You started new project called guysgonebi.com – and you didn’t even made any effort to secure it properly! Just one stupid form, without OCR or https connection!”

      All someone (an employee) has to do is to configure an appropriately placed a router or switch to use a mirror port, plug a laptop into it, and run a program like tcpdump that can put the ethernet interface into promiscuous mode so it give you all the packets it sees, not just the ones destined for your address. You’ll have a slew of passwords in short order.

      Mar 25, 2011 at 6:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • i.n.3some
      i.n.3some

      Does Andrew Rasmus (Dawson) have to pay for his CF subscription or does Brian Lowderman comp him?

      Mar 25, 2011 at 9:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bobby Businessman
      Bobby Businessman

      I just stumbled upon this page by accident tonight and I am disturbed by this. My laptop was hacked (Xtube) a couple days ago however I was able to restore the system to an earlier date in Windows. I don’t trust the laptop anymore so I will be deleting the system this weekend and using the backup CD to restore the system to the new state.

      I used this laptop for web surfing during business travel and was careful to put very little personal information on my computer in case it was stolen or lost. I accessed Corbin Fisher on this laptop so does this mean I am responsible if someone stole my login information? I normally type in my username and password so there is no way to for a hacker to grab that information right?

      Lucky I only used one credit card on that laptop (used for BiLatin men site) so I am going to cancel that card as a precaution. I would think hackers are looking for credit card numbers not gay porn passwords.

      Do I need to cancel my account to Corbin Fisher as a precaution as well? I will be highly upset if they charge my AmEx with $25,000.

      I am able to log into Corbin Fisher on my other computer and everything seems fine. Should I tell Corbin Fisher Customer Service? If I tell them will they make up something like “Your login has been used by hackers” just to charge me $25,000.

      Sorry for the long comment but I am irritated by this news. I don’t understand why a gay porn subscription has to such a hassle. Why did I have to read queerty tonight?

      Mar 26, 2011 at 3:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aaron in Honolulu
      Aaron in Honolulu

      Who pays for porn?

      Mar 26, 2011 at 3:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bobby Businessman
      Bobby Businessman

      I am really irritated. I clicked on the Support Tab on Corbin Fisher and there is no option to report potentially stolen usernames/passwords. I’m 99% sure my Corbin Fisher username/password was not stolen but the problem is that there is a 1% chance that it will cost me $25,000.

      I really don’t want to deal with this potential problem this weekend. I pay for a site and as a customer I have to pray that a trojan/virus doesn’t steal my passwords. This is nonsense. People get hacked all the time and somehow it is my problem no matter what.

      I’m p*ssed off right now. I feel like writing a sh*tty email to the owner of CF.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 4:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John
      John [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @B: I like how you think, B. :)

      Mar 26, 2011 at 12:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andy
      Andy

      I wouldn’t worry about it so much, Bobby. No credit card company is going to approve a $25,000 charge if there is some controversy over its validity. I’m also not 100% sure they can actually change the terms and conditions AFTER you’ve joined and then hold you accountable between that point and the end of your subscription period.

      Think about it, they tell you that your are responsible if your password is stolen in new terms and conditions printed on (let’s just say) the 15th of the month and your subscription runs till the 30th. Even if you immediately cancel your subscription (which I hope you do) and NEVER use the site again, your password is still valid for two weeks and, if stolen, is your responsibility when you never agreed to it in the first place and have NO option to opt out? Its insane!

      Letting it roll over into a new subscription period is a tacit approval of any and all tos at that time (I guess) but don’t sweat a new horse in mid-stream. How can you even change a contract without the consent of both parties?

      Corbin Fisher lost with me during the Jake Lyons fiasco. Sure, maybe he’s a high-strung pain in the ass (I don’t know him) but he’s a 19 year old kid and this is the porn business. You should be used to dealing with high-strung pains in the ass without the maniacally gleeful triumphalism (“fly meet hammer!”) they displayed while (ham-fistedly) attempting to smear him all over the internet. He used some pictures (of himself) without their consent, he didn’t shoot anyone. That, and their rumored treatment of other models (Zeke, Taylor, etc) was enough to put a bad taste in my mouth and I decided not to renew.

      Now, after this ridiculous extortion scam (MAYBE we have your IP and MAYBE we’re gonna sue you….you never knnnnnoooooowwww) and the obvious contempt they have even for their own customer base, I can’t fathom why anyone in their right mind would continue to support this company.

      Sorry, off track rant over.

      Honestly though Bobby, I wouldn’t let this ruin your weekend. Just because they say something is so doesn’t mean it will hold up (Corbin Fisher is a purveyor, he isn’t the Tsar of Russia or the Pharoah of Egypt,) but I would caution against sending an angry letter without thinking it through, remember what happened to the unicorn/rainbow/leprechaun guy. His letter pissed Randazza off (don’t you just KNOW he must have been picked on when he was in school and he’s just determined to SHOW everybody they can’t fuck with him) and he went after him. In other words, if you need to send a letter, compose it carefully. These are not rational people.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 12:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ryan
      Ryan

      How can any competent person continue to pay for a Corbin Fisher subscription?

      Your own money is going to be used to fund lawsuits against YOU.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 1:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John
      John [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Brice Forshin: Hi there.

      It’s good to learn that you folks are proactively going after the sources who pirate your company’s products instead of merely focusing on threats to effectively shake down closeted gay teen (and other) downloaders (who SHOULDN’T be stealing, but…).

      In that vein, how about implementing this part of B’s suggestions from post No.4?

      “However, the only way for Corbin Fisher to tell if a video you downloaded (legally as a customer) ended up on some other person’s server is if they give each customer a slightly different copy of the file. This can be checked – have two people download the same video, each with a separate Corbin Fisher account and then compare the two files byte for byte, or compare a message digest of the files (e.g., use the Linux program named “shasum” to compute the message digest). You can publish the output of that without making the video accessible.”

      Slightly varying the length of each individual video download to achieve a unique shasum (or an md5sum) checksum identifier for that file should help C.F. to match said video(s) with a particular customer.

      Editing some C.F. customer-identifying info into one frame of the video at a specific point in time may be worth looking at also.

      There has to be SOME combination of practical DRM technologies worth deploying instead of pursuing bad PR-generating & pricey litigation.

      How about approaching The Jester (th3j35t3r) to act as a consultant in hardening your company’s servers? He’s the guy who took the Westboro Baptist ‘Church’s collection of godhates________ sites off-line as well as knocking down terrorist sites like tenpins.
      For up-to-date details, Google:

      Hacktivist Maintains Attack on Westboro Baptist Church

      Mar 26, 2011 at 1:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bobby Businessman
      Bobby Businessman

      @Andy: I am less worried now. I may have overreacted to the sensational headline of this post and was overly sensitive since I was just hacked.

      I am a little irritated that I never got an email from Corbin Fisher explaining the policy of coming after paying customers who have “clear and convincing evidence” of being hacked. I only get emails saying “Your CF ACM membership is up for expiration”.

      Nowhere in the Support tab is a place to change my password on the off chance that it was stolen.

      I did notice that near the login it states “By Logging in You Agree to the Terms & Conditions”.

      My membership ends in two weeks. So I will just cancel and signup for a new username/password.

      BTW CF is $34.95 per month not $29.95.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 4:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • justiceontherocks
      justiceontherocks [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Ryan: That is a very good point. You’ll alos be paying to watch unattractive guys, pretending to be straight, who have the smallest cocks in porn. That seems like a loser all the way around.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 5:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andy
      Andy

      @Bobby Businessman:

      Well, not to be be asshole Bobby, but if you re-sign, knowing that they hold you the paying customer in such contempt, and continue to give your money to a company like that (which is certainly your right) then you have lost my sympathy completely. You will deserve what you get.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 5:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alonzo Joshua
      Alonzo Joshua

      The most interesting scuttlebutt out this week from the majors (Disney, Paramount, etc) is that they have been advised to stay far, far away from the current wave of litigation. They have been told that the Department of Justice, alarmed by the sheer number of lawsuits and potential for abuse of due process, is investigating them and in particular the solicitation of settlements prior to discovery in “name and shame” cases.

      An implied or real threat of causing significant damage to another person simply by filing suit is not going over well with the federal courts and they, in turn, have pressed the DOJ for a review. It could certainly be argued that in the current socio-political climate in the U.S., threatening to reveal someone’s sexual identity in litigation is simply a form of coercion designed to force cash settlements while stripping an individual’s right to due process.

      If you live in a jurisdiction with absolutely no protections for LGBT folks, you could be subject to job discrimination/dismissal, bullying, ostracization by family and religious organizations, expulsion from private religious schools and rejection by social and community groups.

      There will be push-back, regardless of the counterarguments of plaintiffs who take a “well they deserved it” approach.

      And lawyers really just want to make money; getting caught up in DOJ investigations takes time away from profitable activities.

      In addition, there is concern that certain content providers are turning to these lawsuits as profit centers and have intentionally avoided taking steps to prevent infringement or delayed issuing take-down notices, etc. to protect copyrighted material. Wait until subpoenas are issued for financial records from various parties along with correspondence relating to the discovery of copyright infringement and the steps taken to address them come into question.

      The major “legitimate studios” want to curtail piracy by cutting off the avenues available to downloaders. They are investing in technology to curb theft. The choke points are the file hosts and the bit-torrent software providers.

      As more and more lawsuits are farmed out to underemployed lawyers with limited experience in the field, expect counterclaims and, from what I hear among the EFF crowd, class-action suits against the content providers regarding their tactics.

      There are other ideas floating around and ultimately someone will figure out how to profit from those working on behalf of one or more wrongfully accused “pirate.”

      And on one final point, these suits have brought renewed focus from OSHA on barebacking practices in certain productions. There are – and without any substantiation – rumors that certain “amateur performers” have been approached by third parties to join a class action against certain studios as they were induced to perform unsafe sex without access to an “effective exposure control plan.”

      Some industry players have begun portraying themselves as moral paragons, outraged that they have been so mistreated. These lawsuits are bringing them a lot of attention, most of which I reckon is unwanted.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 6:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Stephanie
      Stephanie

      @Alonzo Joshua: “In addition, there is concern that certain content providers are turning to these lawsuits as profit centers and have intentionally avoided taking steps to prevent infringement or delayed issuing take-down notices, etc. to protect copyrighted material.”

      I’ve been wondering about that myself. I admit to not understanding most of what was discussed in the technical posts on this thread, but it sure seems like someone would have a good argument against CF on those grounds.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 6:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Re: No. 43 · John

      The technique is called “digital watermarking” and you can find an introductory description at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_watermarking (without much in the way of details).

      You can’t just delete a few frames to change the file size – if you do that and users know what you are doing, they’ll do the same thing. The research in this area includes the development of algorithms to make the watermarks robust – they will still be detectable even if you modify the video in some way (e.g., by decreasing resolution slightly to hide any tiny features (e.g., a single pixel in size) that could be inserted.

      Here’s a typical paper: http://vision.ece.ucsb.edu/publications/98SPIE.pdf . One thing isn’t clear – if you take a number of copies of the same video, each with a different watermark, can you average them in some way in order to wipe out the parts of the watermarks that differ between copies?

      Mar 26, 2011 at 9:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alonzo Joshua
      Alonzo Joshua

      @Stephanie: I was not referring to CF in particular so I do not know if there is any specific argument there.

      It does strike me as odd that any company delivering digital content would fail to implement safeguards beyond simple password protection to protect its copyrighted works.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 9:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • justiceontherocks
      justiceontherocks [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @Stephanie: Anyone involved in the court system in any way can tell you that lawsuits as a “profit center” do not work unless you consistently sue “deep-pocket” corporate defendants. If that’s what they’re doing, only their lawyers will profit.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 10:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FunMe
      FunMe

      Free porn? Oh gosh, anyone paying for porn today is an idiot.

      Gotgayporn & lovethecock are 2 of the freebies that come to mind.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 10:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Stephanie
      Stephanie

      @justiceontherocks: It is my understanding that the money to be made is in sending out thousands of pre-trial settlement letters *threatening* to sue if a couple thousand dollars isn’t paid – not in actually suing.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 10:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • justiceontherocks
      justiceontherocks

      @Stephanie: yes, that’s the only way your collection costs are low enough to make any sense. But collection letters are ubiquitous – you wonder how effective they are.

      It will be interesting to see what the federal government, maybe the FTC, does about the rash of claims. Attorneys involved in it may have a lot of explaining to do to their state bar.

      Mar 26, 2011 at 10:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Josh
      Josh [Different person #1 using similar name]

      Well i sure as hell am not going to sign up for cf ever again after reading this bs!

      Mar 28, 2011 at 8:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ty
      Ty

      Corbin Fisher have begun their witch hunt in California against John Does who downloaded “Down on the Farm”.

      They also have included this ridiculous claim as part of their suit:

      All “reasonable” internet-users are able to secure their routers from illegal activity, that failing to do so constitutes “a breach of the ordinary care that reasonable persons exercise in using an internet account” and that defendants with unsecured systems are guilty of conspiracy by neglect.

      I’m beginning to think that Randazza and Dunlap should be “Down on the Funny Farm”. They are delusional.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 10:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      All the more reason to stop watching the tripe that Corbin Fisher puts out that is considered “porn”.

      I’m never going to sign up for their site again.

      Mar 31, 2011 at 10:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      I’ve heard people mention in other places that CF’s subscription rate is down. Is there any evidence of that?

      Apr 1, 2011 at 4:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Stephanie
      Stephanie

      @Michael: The only way to know for sure is if CF came out and said so, and I can’t imagine them being willing to admit it. Anecdotally, I’ve seen many posts on boards like this where people have said they have cancelled, so I hope CF’s numbers are truly falling. The only way to make CF change their behavior is for people to stop giving them money. With the new twist to their Terms and Conditions I don’t understand why anyone would put up with them anymore – not when there are so many similar sites that don’t disrespect their members like this.

      Apr 1, 2011 at 9:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Prk
      Prk

      I just looked at their website and the terms you have in your articel are not the terms that are on corbinfisher.com. Where do they come from? Are you making this up?

      Apr 1, 2011 at 10:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Frank
      Frank

      @Prk: Did you not read through the comments? At least read #23 and #34.

      Apr 1, 2011 at 1:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ty
      Ty

      I love how Randazza is posting on other sites (post 50) lying regarding this Queerty story. Then read post 56 expose his lies and rip him a new asshole.

      http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110401/02191713720/porn-company-says-you-owe-25k-if-content-your-account-ends-up-pirated-even-if-you-prove-you-were-hacked.shtml

      Randazza is a lying scumbag who further destroys Corbin Fisher’s brand every time he opens his mouth.

      Any person who subscribes to their site is a potential lawsuit target. They have a new studio to pay for dontcha know.

      Apr 3, 2011 at 11:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ty
      Ty

      Clarification: The posts 50 and 56 refer to the link I provided to Techdirt, not the comments posted here.

      Apr 3, 2011 at 11:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pornretort
      Pornretort

      Corbin Fisher is homophobic to an extreme, and should be shunned by all Gay Consumers. The story’s you hear from ex-models about the frankly shocking statements made to the “fags” on set would make you think CF is really a straight site catering to homophobic GOP Closet cases! The Self-Loathing and Self-Hatred create a poisonous stew of dysfunction!

      Apr 6, 2011 at 10:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dane Anthony
      Dane Anthony

      @1L:

      I think you are on to something here. I remember Spitzer, as US Attorney for NY, going after a whole bevy of porn companies that were preauthorizing credit charges and some other underhanded bullshit. Spitzer got a Cease and Desist Order for the illegal interstate commerece stuff and reimbursement for the card holders, with awards ranging from $100 to $1000 or so for the cardholders.

      Me thinks that Corbin Fisher is stuffing the Golden Goose with seed that is not producing golden eggs and seems bent on pissing off customers.

      May 12, 2011 at 1:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dane Anthony
      Dane Anthony

      @John:

      AMEN!

      May 12, 2011 at 1:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TONYC
      TONYC

      @bob:
      ONE problem with that and I am all for boycotting this a-hole….most or I do NOT know the % of performers, are straight…I do not like looking at straight porn or if I find out they are straight and “gay for pay”..sorry…we really have to MOBILIZE a movement cause all of us look at Porn(most????)….to give the business to gay owned,gay performers etc WE have enough stunning people within our community to go outside. The problem lies in moola!!..I have been looking at porn forever but recently the actors have become less attractive (to TONY)…and I have been there, sitting in a porn theater in the 70s-80s, horrified what I was seeing going on around me..HA HA…mind you, it took me up to 2 hours, to get up the nerve to BUY A TICKET, so I walked around that block so many times I lost count, never counted..I just “ran out of gas”…oh man, the things I did when I was younger, just to see cock and I was not OUT then and in NYC,no less!
      Cheers…
      TONY(NYC)

      Jul 6, 2011 at 12:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TONYC
      TONYC

      @Ryan: LIKE that word DOLTS!!

      Jul 6, 2011 at 12:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KZ
      KZ

      CorbinFisher seems to be aiming to get rid of all the pirates which is impossible. Their rules simply put, are ridiculous. You would have to at least learn basic internet security hacking to be safe from anonymous hackers if you would pay for subscription, a big hassle for every member. In reality though, basics wouldn’t be enough. You’ll need to study more advanced internet security to avoid non-amateur hackers. Worst case scenario, a master hacker would still get through your defenses and all your efforts would be in vain – in vain just like corbinfisher.com’s previous efforts in their fight vs. piracy. Seems like they want to cause the same pain to their subscribers they experience from piracy. Truth is, piracy can’t be beaten from the outside for now i.e. capturing pirates and closing tube sites. It just wouldn’t work. The idea of piracy will continue to spread to others who’re desperate for opportunities in life. It can only be stopped from the inside – when piracy becomes big enough for the whole of the world to face it or when the world becomes small enough to face it. So what CF needs to do is to wait and be strong, maintain the morals and compassion that I’m sure they have . They have to focus on the right targets only which are the big, blatant, abusive ones and let the petty bonus targets to slide, for now. Do they have a choice? We’re all on this together so we shouldn’t be making it hard for ourselves to help each other.

      Aug 26, 2011 at 8:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KZ
      KZ

      @KZ: Anyway, kudos to CorbinFisher for being an amazing porn site and for taking care of their performers well. Also for being brave to take a stand against piracy in the best way they can.

      Aug 26, 2011 at 9:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Annelenee

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.