Porn Pirates Exploit Well-Known Loophole To Upload Raunchy Videos On YouTube (thenextweb.com)

Adult video websites appear to be exploiting a YouTube loophole to host explicit material on the platform. An anonymous reader shares a report on The Next Web: A number of adult streaming websites have begun using a known backdoor that ultimately makes it possible to store infringing material on Google's servers -- entirely free of charge. To pull this off, the pirates essentially take advantage of YouTube's option to upload content without sharing it publicly, which effectively allows them to embed the videos on their websites and bypass Google's Content-ID takedown system. This means the content remains unlisted on YouTube and is served directly from the GoogleVideo.com domain instead. While the move hasn't gone unnoticed by the porn industry, California-based adult content-maker Dreamroom Productions claims it has made it much harder for producers to hunt down and flag infringing material, since the videos are not shared publicly.

Comments

Porn Pirates

[Anonymous Coward]

what do you mean? there is porn on the internet? when did this happen?

Re:Porn Pirates

[houstonbofh]

Porn exploiting a backdoor? Never!

Re:Porn Pirates

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be a shitty thing to do.

Re:Porn Pirates

[Anonymous Coward]

Porn exploiting a backdoor?

But I post from there!

Well duh

[simcop2387]

> California-based adult content-maker Dreamroom Productions claims it has made it much harder for producers to hunt down and flag infringing material, since the videos are not shared publicly.

Of course it's harder to find infringers when they aren't advertising to you that they're doing it.

Discarded

[Anonymous Coward]

>Write an article like this without links
Shameful

I've had ContentID flags for private videos

[Anonymous Coward]

'bypass Google's Content-ID takedown system'

Citation needed.

I've had several videos uploaded to YouTube, and left private, never published (slideshows with music for family). They've had their audio flagged by the ContentID system and removed.

Re: I've had ContentID flags for private videos

[John Allsup]

Is that for audio? Most porn movie audio tracks sound the same.

Re:I've had ContentID flags for private videos

[omnichad]

Article update:

Update: As pointed out by our readers and contrary to TorrentFreak’s coverage, it appears private videos don’t automatically bypass YouTube’s Content-ID system.

More hardcore goodness on YouTube...

[__aaclcg7560]

Can't beat two girls playing with a big snake.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpmZKwTu6pI

Links

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Links please, or it didn't happen.

Re:Related Links?

[PopeRatzo]

Meanwhile, good luck finding stories about the DisruptJ20 people who were caught plotting to gas people with butyric acid

Here's why you don't see those stories:

https://boingboing.net/2017/01...

Because all of those "DisruptJ20" people turned out to be James O'Keefe.

I call bullshit

[darthsilun]

...harder for producers to hunt down and flag infringing material, since the videos are not shared publicly.

I've uploaded video of a dance routine that contained edited music – used under the Fair Use provision of the law.

It was not publicly shared.

That didn't stop the music owner from having it taken down.

I have to wonder how the music owner would otherwise have found it unless Google/Youtube themselves told the music owner about it.

MegaUpload

[zedaroca]

Isn't this exactly megaupload's case? They were a legitimate service for storing and sharing files publicly and privately, just like youtube. They had a takedown system and were compliant to the DMCA, just like youtube. But not enough for the content "owners" liking, like youtube. Their system was used for piracy some of the time, just like youtube (and the proportion BS people tell about torrent sites does not apply here, the legitimate use was huge).

If the US had a decent prosecutor, he/she would go after Google with the same methods and arguments used in megaupload's case. To lose the case, of course, and set some precedents for the small people and the foreigners (Kim is anything but small).

American imperialism sucks.

Re:MegaUpload

[brit74]

Google was playing nice with the music/film companies and was willing to take stuff down. Megaupload was being really shifty and trying to avoid taking down content. Case in point: "When a file is uploaded to Megaupload and another file with the same hash is already found to exist, the uploader is asked if they would like to link to the already existing file. Therefore, a single file may contain multiple links to it. This has caused some controversy, since when a DMCA takedown notice is issued only the link that was provided is removed; not necessarily the file itself." and "Prosecutors claimed in the indictment that Megaupload was not DMCA compliant, and cited the example of an alleged infringer on the site known as "VV." Over six years, VV had allegedly uploaded nearly 17,000 files to Megavideo.com, resulting in more than 334 million views. According to prosecutors, although numerous takedown e-mails had been sent, none of the files had been deleted."

Basically, Megaupload was trying it's best to keep serving up pirated content by doing as little as possible in response to a takedown notice.

Re:MegaUpload

[zedaroca]

I read the wikipedia page too, but the prosecution's side ignores the technical reason why they didn't necessarily delete the files. I read an example of the file deletion thing, it was on these lines:
1. user1 makes a copy of the file for personal use (legal);
2. user2 makes a copy for sharing in his blog (illegal according to American laws)
3. user3, the rights holder, makes another copy of the file, for private use (legal).

If they deleted the file because of a notice on user2's link, the other users that had legitimate access to the file would have their legal property destroyed.

But about them not "playing nice", that's arguable, and my point is that according to the "rights holders", youtube is both a violator AND isn't playing nice, see 1, 2 and RIAA Says YouTube is Running a DMCA Protection Racket. They are all about how youtube and google are pirate heavens and are not helping enough in the good fight. In TFA they are talking about well-known loopholes (claiming/implying youtube should be doing something about it).

Megaupload was taking down the links for infringing content, that means that the alleged pirate lost access to the file, but without destroying the data of those users that were never accused of infringing anything. This is what caused controversy, the prosecutor thinks they should have deleted people's files.

The fact that they were complying with the DMCA notices the way google and everybody else does should be enough. People shouldn't have to do more than what the law says, they should to as little as possible. Specially if going through extra lengths would hurt legitimate users. Being prosecuted or not shouldn't be about playing nice with the powerful or about being one of them.
While megaupload is being prosecuted, and torrent sites are constantly being persecuted, Google is the big pirate. The best way to find a torrent is still googling FILENAME .torrent and to find a song is still youtube. They are not prosecuted because it is google.

How long until they get detected?

[iTrawl]

I once uploaded a self-captured 2 minute sequence from Doctor Who to Youtube. The video wasn't just unlisted, but it was private. The title was some random noise like "X". I had 2 or 3 views, because I uploaded it to show a friend the scene in the context of a chat we were having and then I totally forgot about it. Yet after a few months after uploading it I get an email from Youtube telling me that they found infringing content in my account.

Surely they can find unlisted porn too?

Thanks a lot, Slashdot

[PPH]

Now, when I Google "back door pirates" all I get is references to this damned story.

YouTube as a criminal enterprise?

[shanen]

Here's a simple trick. Search for some popular show on YouTube, such as "Bill Maher Real Time" and then select the filter for "Upload date". Your results will include lots of pseudo-pirate computer-pwning hits.

These accounts are created constantly on YouTube and this has been going on for many years. A typical account will have lots of videos that are supposed to be the popular shows, but each video just says YouTube blocked the video and promises the suckers that they can get the actual videos by following the links and installing the software to pwn their computers into zombie networks. Generally annoying, but it especially bothers me that a lot of these videos are popular with children, and targeting innocent children strikes me as a higher level of EVIL, even for the monster that the google has become.

There are some obvious countermeasures, but rather than implement any of them, YouTube has chosen to tolerate, perhaps even encourage, this situation for some years. My conclusion is that YouTube believes they are deriving profits from supporting these criminals. (Perhaps they're selling them bandwidth?) I don't think google employees are naive and innocent as the children who are getting victimized, and it would make me a bad person to hope that their own kids click on the links.

Just reading Googled , another history of the google with emphasis on the "Don't be evil" thing. I think that google needs to hire a chief exorcist.

Re:Related Links?

[JustAnotherOldGuy]

Is that like the Planned Parenthood people who were "caught" selling baby parts, except they weren't?

Hey hey, lets not get all "facty" now. Just because it was proven to be false doesn't mean Trump supporters still won't believe it.