Here are the facts...

Acacia has...

demanded customer lists as part of its licensing package...

employed members of the adult internet industry as consultants...

made confidentiality promises that it has broken...

continued to characterize its V-chip patent as valid despite losing in a Summary Jugment...

been involved in an investigation for connections to securities improprieties...

Here are the theories...

Acacia is...

in league with some of the industry "players" to bring more patents down on the industry and create a monopoly that would shut out all the "Young Turks" that have hurt their existing market share so substantially...

the consultant(s) is/are being paid a percentage of licensing revenue...

will not keep future promises or create ambiguous settlements open to unfair interpretations...

going to lose the DMT patent faster than they lost the V-Chip...

manipulating stock success with support from some adult industry "players"...

I know in some ways the facts and the fictions of theories seem to blend together but it is important to keep them separate and distinct from one another and not allow one to influence the interpretation of the other. Nor is it recommended for facts to be considered in any other light than as simply a basis for developing new theories as a constructive manner of seeking and determining new facts. So, while the relationship between facts and theories may further confuse the distinction between the two, we urge the reader to look upon the facts exclusively and develop the theories further on thier own...

I think the riddle of the Sphinx posed to Oedipus must conclude this discourse on searching for truth in a world of presumptions and lies...

"What walks on four legs in the morning, two in the afternoon, and three in the evening?"

By saving the city... are we not also going to destroy ourselves?

The plot thickens... find out what happens in the next quarter/chapter/act...



Last edited by Far-L at Oct 22 2003, 02:21 PM

I am not a big fan on conspiracies.... I think most are hairbrain schemes from crazy people.

However, in this case, based on my OWN snooping around, I am coming to the conclusion. in my opinion, that some big players in this industry are in collusion with acacia, to try and eliminate competition and to personally profit. ( through stock or more business).

I also think this is the first step, that other patents are going to be tried to be enforced against the industry.

An enterprising attorney might have a very nice CIVIL RICO case... It is time the light it put on all of these deals for everyone to see.

Of course, this is all my opinion, I could be wrong.

We need names! Name Names!!! :matey:

I am sure it will be as R_n said... "when the truth comes out, you will all be surprised..."

oh, oh, oh, i got a conspiracy theory Mister Cot-tah....

A GFY poster thought I might be working for Acacia.... .so that Acacia makes money from the license and gets the rest of the money from people who are pledging to fight against them.

Yes, i know its GFY...

:headwall:


Fight the Patent!

Reading up on Civil RICO causes of action....

Far-L, it is my opinion, that this is something you should have attorneys to look into.


http://www.lectlaw.com/files/lit08.htm


A nice article, the title " RICO: Businesses' Best Weapon Against Bribes, Kickbacks and Other Forms of Corporate Corruption "

http://www.ricoact.com/ricoact/articles.asp

I wonder if Berman and the boys are smart enough to actually be in collusion with anyone in this business. They might be getting a big surprise as well as anyone else...

I agree. The same big players who have caused visa to crack down, are working with acacia. Coincidence, I do not think so. They may be scum, but you never hear them called stupid.

now that would be interesting, you should patent that idea

hmmm, maybe I need to do some more reading, never heard of a civil RICO before

rico has been applied civily plenty of times.

i dont think there is any law on the books that could do more damage to this industry.

if ashcroft and his cronies had a brain they'd attack biz practices, not the naked pictures.

It was used to get the Catholic Church for protecting the molesting priests. It was used against anti-abortion foes who were blocking clinics. It was used by someone against celeb sites.

All successes.

hmmm, well . . . it looks like it has been attempted more than it has succeeded . . . RICO has some pretty specific standards, but apparently some clever usage also.

Well, I like tolearn something new every day, and looks like this is mine for the day :wnw:

" manipulating stock success with support from some adult industry "players"...

I have seen it first hand.

They even openly post on GFY about their stocks with Acacia and future trends.

I had no idea this industry was so cut throat back stabbing as this. I mean.. sponsors turning in the guys making them money? And this IS HAPPENING

Now I feel insecure.. who wants to make alliances with me not to screw me over and make lots of money together?

By the way I'm Squirtit from Ynot and GFY .. this is my first post in this forum.



Last edited by Squirt at Oct 22 2003, 04:36 PM

Sponsor(s) given info about their affiliates to Acacia - thats a bad move, and will probably hit them like a ton of bricks, if it should ever be known which sponsor(s) are behind this...

Rolo what if the program who gave the info away doesn't care, because they are no longer in business?


Squirt, good to see you here.... I read this on Yahoo, thought it made a lot of sense, and is apparently written by someone who is not in the porn biz

There is a lot of interesting reading on the Yahoo group:

That could be the case, and I´m sure that those who have done this probably have thought about what would happen if anybody found out, and decided that the possible problems are nothing compare to whatever "sweetheart", "stocks" or "cash" deal they got.

But the Acacia "stigmata" will be there forever - no matter the outcome of the Acacia patent claim.



Last edited by Rolo at Oct 22 2003, 05:48 PM

In my non-educated, non-legal opinion, it's looking more and more like those who settled with Acacia made a really bad move - both legally and professionally. :unsure:

Another interesting post, its probably how real business is done, its is kinda depressing.....

Did I ever tell you all how much I love you?

:inlove: :okthumb: :salute:

Maybe legally, Peaches, but I doubt professionally.

Unfortunately, the majority of webmasters don't have a clue about what's going on, and probably could care less.

These are the type of people you can screw over, time and time again, and they'll still come out and use your programs because you announce "Fifty Dollar Fridays", or any other type of hype.

A lot of us here have been around since the beginning. We've all seen the same guys screw webmasters, get caught, and just do it again. These guys know they'll lose a few webmasters, but will probably gain more in the long run due to the publicity.

Many thanks to Far-L, Spike, et al, for keeping up the fight and the pressure. My only hopes is that when this finally does blow over, the "traitors" will be unmasked, and shown the respect they deserve.

Maybe legally, Peaches, but I doubt professionally.

Unfortunately, the majority of webmasters don't have a clue about what's going on, and probably could care less.

These are the type of people you can screw over, time and time again, and they'll still come out and use your programs because you announce "Fifty Dollar Fridays", or any other type of hype.

A lot of us here have been around since the beginning. We've all seen the same guys screw webmasters, get caught, and just do it again. These guys know they'll lose a few webmasters, but will probably gain more in the long run due to the publicity.

Many thanks to Far-L, Spike, et al, for keeping up the fight and the pressure. My only hopes is that when this finally does blow over, the "traitors" will be unmasked, and shown the respect they deserve.[/b][/quote]
Sad.... but true.

Interestingly enough... we go back to the days of streaming when Intervu was still around...

A employee named Chris Levy was working for them at the time...

Him and a crew came over with their "boxes" to show us how much better our live NETSHOW feed could be...

After a half an hour of delay into our scheduled start time, we took down their boxes, put ours back on and had our amazing feed with audio up in minutes.

But... of course we didn't sell our company for a couple billion dollars either, now did we?

Still, just pointing out that we go way back too and seems to me that Intervu cat is making some very interesting points in that Yahoo thread...

I always said that if this patent was validated it would be in Acacia and a few License holders benefit to reduce the number of people serving videos to a very small number.

From Acacia's point they can deal with a few willing partners and from the license holders, they can eliminate 95% of their competition. All they will need is "Porno Videos" in their meta tags, well not completely but promotional cost will drop like a stone.

So what is in "Vivid and Wicked's, for example" best interests? Purely as a "Business Decision"

Maybe legally, Peaches, but I doubt professionally.

Unfortunately, the majority of webmasters don't have a clue about what's going on, and probably could care less.

These are the type of people you can screw over, time and time again, and they'll still come out and use your programs because you announce "Fifty Dollar Fridays", or any other type of hype.

A lot of us here have been around since the beginning. We've all seen the same guys screw webmasters, get caught, and just do it again. These guys know they'll lose a few webmasters, but will probably gain more in the long run due to the publicity.

Many thanks to Far-L, Spike, et al, for keeping up the fight and the pressure. My only hopes is that when this finally does blow over, the "traitors" will be unmasked, and shown the respect they deserve.[/b][/quote]
Optimistic there Danny, I think. :(

And just think...a lot of people thought my term of porn royalty was bullshit.
Gonna be interesting to see how this plays out.

How anyone can see it as a wise "business decision" to let this company with a dubious patent claim, which no one is licensing because they actually believe in the merits of it, use strong arm legal tactics to pull 150 to 200 million out of our industry is beyond me.

Truth and justice will prevail.

"it is not giving your word that counts, it is who you give it to" - Ernie Borgnine in Pechinpah's "The Wild Bunch"



Last edited by Far-L at Oct 23 2003, 07:12 AM

Maybe legally, Peaches, but I doubt professionally.

Unfortunately, the majority of webmasters don't have a clue about what's going on, and probably could care less.

These are the type of people you can screw over, time and time again, and they'll still come out and use your programs because you announce "Fifty Dollar Fridays", or any other type of hype.

A lot of us here have been around since the beginning. We've all seen the same guys screw webmasters, get caught, and just do it again. These guys know they'll lose a few webmasters, but will probably gain more in the long run due to the publicity.

Many thanks to Far-L, Spike, et al, for keeping up the fight and the pressure. My only hopes is that when this finally does blow over, the "traitors" will be unmasked, and shown the respect they deserve.[/b][/quote]
Sadly, you're correct. Through the years it's never ceased to amaze me how people will stand back up after getting rammed repeatedly in the ass and then set themselves up for it again if they think they might make some $$$.

I guess that's why I'm poor - I refuse to get rammed more than once. :awinky:

Far L keep tuned to Oprano...

We gonna have an interesting thread soon on the over all implications of this. I can only bust one ass a day and someone is ahead of that one.

I have exchanged emails with Buck, and his prior art references are all 1990 and beyond... not valid for invalidating Acacia's patent.



Fight the Patent!

An oprano account could read their financial statements and make a presentation to the group.. a friend of mine briefly looked at the numbers, and it's a mess.....

his quick analysis is that ACTG has expenses dumped into it.. almost like in preparation for ACTG to end up failing, protecting the rest of the companies in their group.


Fight the Patent!

Oh now stop!! your getting me all worked up :yowsa:

I have heard from different sources, that the defense for companies like Hustler, Vivid, and Wicked Pictures to settle was that a small part of their business is internet-based.

That sounds true to me... but, Acacia's patents cover video-on-demand (VOD)... they already convinced LodgeNet (the leading provider of video on demand to hotels) to pay the license... so if Digital Video is more towards their core business, then they have EVERY reason to worry about Acacia.

And let's not forget USA Video, who's patent claims to owning the process of downloading video from a web server, also covers VOD.

I read somewhere that an Acacia-lover believed the LodgeNet deal to be worth about 50K/year.



Fight the Patent!

Conspiracy, you say? We all know you can't have a conspiracy without media involvement.

well, gee ... I got an interesting piece of mail today making patently false claims that I was violated somebody's patents that included a nice glossy reprint of a CNET "news" item from back in August using "broad patents on streaming media upheld" as a headline.

Of course, a high school sophmore who's watched a total of 4 episodes (combined) of "The Practice" and "Law and Order" would have known by reading the article itself that the headline was misleading at best.

Things that make you go hmmmm ...

Hey Squirt. Nice to see you over here. - Kev :bwave:

An analogy to explain this Acacia mess:

They fictiously patented a personal transport with 4 wheels.

Someone else cited them in their own patent, but called it a car with low ride suspension.

Acacia comes out to sue the auto dealers for patent infringement of selling cars with wheels, which they say is the same as a personal transport. They could sue the manufacturer, but they have deep pockets, so they pick on the smaller dealerships that have tight margins and high overhead (ie. inventory).

In this simple example, Acacia is looking to sue everyone for a broad patent claim... the problem is that so many companies were making "personal transports" prior to their patent, that the patent claims should be invalid.

But why would the USPTO grant this fictiious patent then if there was prior art? The language in this patent was so obscure and science fiction like, talking about the ability to turn invisible, transform into a robot,etc.. that the patent office thought it was novel and new. but acacia decided to just focus on the broader claim of a car with wheels.

But some auto dealerships decided to fight..they didn't want to pay someone a licensing fee for the sales of their pimp-mo-biles. So these dealerships fight back by challenging the big bad patent.


Hope you have enjoyed this analogy to explain how absurd this Acacia patent is.

Hey Squirt. Nice to see you over here. - Kev :bwave:[/b][/quote]

:bwave: :okthumb:

Far-L,

I know you are not making any accusations, but with all of the mis-information flowing around, I just wanted to clarify a few things with regard to Hustler and Vivid. Hope you don't mind....

I can't speak for anyone else, but I was personally involved in the contract negotiations between Acacia, Hustler and Vivid, so I can speak on their behalf.

1. We were never asked for our customer lists and by contract, we have no obligation to give up our customer (affiliate) information. If we were asked, we would NOT give up this information under any circumstances.

2. Nobody from any of our combined organizations has been employed by or has helped Acacia in any way, shape or form. We simply settled and moved on.

Again, this is not directed at you Far-L because I know you were not pointing the finger at us, but some people have been pointing fingers without having all of the facts so I wanted to clarify.....

Far-L,

I know you are not making any accusations, but with all of the mis-information flowing around, I just wanted to clarify a few things with regard to Hustler and Vivid. Hope you don't mind....

I can't speak for anyone else, but I was personally involved in the contract negotiations between Acacia, Hustler and Vivid, so I can speak on their behalf.

1. We were never asked for our customer lists and by contract, we have no obligation to give up our customer (affiliate) information. If we were asked, we would NOT give up this information under any circumstances.

2. Nobody from any of our combined organizations has been employed by or has helped Acacia in any way, shape or form. We simply settled and moved on.

Again, this is not directed at you Far-L because I know you were not pointing the finger at us, but some people have been pointing fingers without having all of the facts so I wanted to clarify.....[/b][/quote]


Ken, you word is gold.

Some people got letters a long time ago, before Hustler/Vivid settled. From what I have been reading, it seems that possible culprates are CE, babenet, matrix content or a combination thereof. Of course this is mere speculation based on posts I have read by people talking about their accounts with these companies.

Knowing the history of Cockholstery of the owner of CE, and babenet, it would not suprise me if not only they turned over affiliate information, but also are acting in concert with them.

Ken: I appreciate where you are coming from and I am glad that you don't think I am accusing you of anything because I am not.

For the sake of clarifying my current confusion; however, I do recall an exchange between us on another thread where you said that you were not involved in the deal that was made. You stated that the decisions came from higher up for what all those companies finally settled for. I know you are not able to be specific about the deal, but I wonder if there is any way for you to elaborate on this dichotomy in the interest of clarity and to prevent anyone from getting a false impression.

In the meantime, just looking at the history here, Acacia did and does continue to ask for that infomation from other potential licensees. Right now there are plenty of people stepping forward to say that there is only one way that they could have been found... Even if it is not Hustler/Vivid/Wicked that does not mean that some other "player" did not do the dirty deed done dirt cheap. Look at all the people independently stepping forward to say that there is only one way they would have gotten a letter because the addressee info was so specific.

I know every Acacia licensee is hesitant to say that they sold out their "affiliates" (our definition...) but sooner or later I am confident the truth will emerge. Then the people that worked to make those programs rich will find out how appreciated their efforts really were.

Listening to their misleading "lawyer-speak", Acacia seems to define "affiliates" differently. Under their definition, they can easily go after those webmasters that we call our "affiliates". IMO, Acacia considers them all to be independant contractors, not actual legally defined "affiliates", and viable for licensing. There is obviously a method to their madness.

All I can say for those that did actually turn over their customers, and now are trying to lie about it, that is not the way to run an ethical business.

I won't be surprised at all when the truth comes out. Nor will I be surprised when we all find out who is on Acacia's payroll as a "consultant" helping beat the industry over the head with these abusive business practices.

I turned my rose colored glasses in and exchanged for a pair of binaculars to the future of this affair some time ago.



Last edited by Far-L at Oct 23 2003, 07:28 PM

and this is where Acacia is really double (and triple) dipping regardless of what they say

Acacia wants to have a feed provider pay license fees, then paysites like myself pay the license fees for linking to feeds provided by feed providers and then have the free site operators pay license fees because they link to paysites

Thats why I laughed (from shock) when Berman said Acacia would not double dip (maybe he meant Acacia was going right to the triple dip)

and let the record show I have received 4 notices from Acacia (2 packets and 2 letters)

See ya in court (unless you want to make me a real sweetheart heart deal - something like 10,000 shares of Acacia stock, lifetime free license and lifetime indemnity for all affiliates in all my programs)



Last edited by Vick at Oct 23 2003, 11:19 PM

Maybe he meant, he doesn't double-dip with his chips into the dip.

:rokk:

Fight the Patent!

Far-L,

The decision to settle was made by Hustler and Vivid independently. However, once they decided to settle, they asked us to review the settlement agreements and provide our input, which we did. One of our primary concerns was that our decision to settle did not have a negative impact on our affiliates.

I agree that something stinks and it is possible that someone leaked info to Acacia. I can only speak for Hustler and Vivid when I say that it was not us.

I've worked long and hard to build a solid reputation in this industry. I certainly wouldn't put my own ass on the line if I wasn't 100% sure about what I was saying.

I'm sure the truth will come out at some point. When it does, everyone will know that Hustler and Vivid did NOT sell out their affiliates. That will never happen.

Whoever did should be boycotted. Period

Far-L,

The decision to settle was made by Hustler and Vivid independently. However, once they decided to settle, they asked us to review the settlement agreements and provide our input, which we did. One of our primary concerns was that our decision to settle did not have a negative impact on our affiliates.

I agree that something stinks and it is possible that someone leaked info to Acacia. I can only speak for Hustler and Vivid when I say that it was not us.

I've worked long and hard to build a solid reputation in this industry. I certainly wouldn't put my own ass on the line if I wasn't 100% sure about what I was saying.

I'm sure the truth will come out at some point. When it does, everyone will know that Hustler and Vivid did NOT sell out their affiliates. That will never happen.

Whoever did should be boycotted. Period

I agree 100%...

I also agree that Ken's word is gold.....

I also agree.

Maybe we finally have an issue that has touched enough people directly and pissed off enough folx to make them shun cockholsters who deserve it.

Unfortunately history says that as long as the check shows up on time webmasters will put up with most anything.

I also agree.

Maybe we finally have an issue that has touched enough people directly and pissed off enough folx to make them shun cockholsters who deserve it.

Unfortunately history says that as long as the check shows up on time webmasters will put up with most anything.[/b][/quote]
And Ill say it again...we should boycott all you fuckers that settled! And I dont give a shit if you gave up your affiliates or not. Your funding them and their efforts are to squeeze the rest of us.

And Ill say it again...we should boycott all you fuckers that settled! And I dont give a shit if you gave up your affiliates or not. Your funding them and their efforts are to squeeze the rest of us.[/b][/quote]
yup i agree

even if they are donating to impa

thats just fence sitting anyway isnt it?

KRL posted this on GFY
It applies i think

and a possible pearl ( I know from GFY? LOL)



"A shrewd old businessman once told me early on in my career,

"If there is one thing to always remember and live by in business, never believe anything people say at its face value when money is involved." "