Oh definitely it’s why I said that this is a cycle since I’ve semi watched the space since my minecraft days where mediafire was the go to after mega. I think mediafire is only still alive due to the filesize limitations being too small for being using for the big porn videos that were being DMCA head hunted. (they did get a hit a bit though) Ah I remember that period of where there was a bunch of freemium hosting sites where you choose a few hours of slow download speed or chuck out money for month long premium fast speed with no download cooldowns.
Your filehaus.top doesn’t work for me as when I go to the site I get that annoying: Error code: SSL_ERROR_RX_RECORD_TOO_LONG
Chrome meanwhile is giving me the same: ERR_SSL_PROTOCOL_ERROR
Workupload is one of the ones I edited in as being a previously popular one (during Gofile and a bit before) though never the first choice always secondary. I believe it’s because it sometimes went down or was inaccessible which made it not be used that much anymore, no idea of it’s current status but I would use this at the same time as another site. (2gb file limit sucks though unless you split up the file via something like Winrar or 7zip)
Okay so uh…oddly a lot of those sites I’ve never seen used. Like I’ve only seen WeTransfer, Uploadhaven, Mixdrop, FilesFm (once, maybe twice) and Krakenfiles (very new) used and well I think only WeTransfer works for me still but I’ve used it a plenty to know it’s a only good for short term small file hosting.
(agree not to) transmit anything that is illegal, abusive, defamatory, harassing, harmful to reputation, pornographic, indecent, profane, obscene, hateful, racist, or otherwise objectionable;
We also reserve the right to terminate any user’s right to access the Site or Services at any time, in our discretion.
I haven’t really been as active as I used to, and it’s really sad to see what’s going on ATM, but if the site’s P2P ban/rule wasn’t so strict it would really benefit the recent crisis ES seemingly has fallen into.
It would also future proof the website, since all the torrents would still be alive and kicking because of a decentralized sharing system.
Somebody could just continue where the last person left off.
I think turning into a private tracker would be the ultimate way of insuring longevity of the scripts + source in general.
I don’t know how changing the P2P ban would affect the site juristically though, since it already is in a kind of gray zone with us sharing content etc.
Torrenting and P2P is banned for a very good and simple dual purpose reason in my mind, website and user safety. As public trackers easily result in problems for keeping the website up (Legal trouble will come) and allow fake uploads with viruses and such to go around for a bit if not just grabbing your IP. Private trackers can’t let in too many people at once to avoid these same results occurring. As a result of this site primarily only being for scripting and sharing of said scripts not the videos as said in the general rules I fully understand and support not having that put on this site or have the function added.
I would suggest going over to this topic to discuss this any further about Torrents and such since I believe what I’ve said here is the limit before we may risk being seen as promoting it which again I do not for this site. (I don’t want this topic to be locked)
as a site maintainer, I don’t want to deal with the potential legal issues around that. Additionally, a lot of scripters probably won’t be on board to do that because then they 100% lose all control over their scripts, and idk how you’d even enforce paid scripts.
I could definitely see a private forum and tracker being an alternative. Just not something that I am looking to take on myself.
I’m curious, how do you guys handle copyright takedown requests at the moment?
For example if someone scripts a JAV, lets say they post a mega link, and a link to eporner.
What if instead of that eporner link, someone posts a link to a torrent site. not a direct magnet link, not something they uploaded themselves, and not even a private tracker, but a link to the public page. Aren’t these the same?
One can be removed, the other can’t.
P2P isn’t subject to takedown requests, unlike server hosting. You can request a takedown of trackers but not all the peers seeding a torrent. A platform condoning illegal torrenting is super risky.
Seems like Pixeldrain has been forced to start making more changes or risk very very bad consequences (region blocking currently) for hosting stuff that violates county’s policies.
Policy update
Sometime this summer pixeldrain will start requiring you to be logged in to an account in order to upload new files. This is necessary due to the large amount of regional blockings that have been implemented against pixeldrain recently.
None of the countries that have blocked pixeldrain have specified a valid reason, nor have I been able to contact them to ask what’s going on. But I can only guess that it has something to do with abusive content being uploaded. Pixeldrain currently uses an IP address banning system for restricting uploads from users who have violated the content policy, but at the scale the site operates at now that has proven to not be effective anymore. For that reason pixeldrain will be switching to an account ban system.
The account ban system will restrict file uploads to your account for a certain amount of time which depends on the type of the offence. Serious violations might get your account banned for up to a year, minor violations maybe a day or a week per file. It will depend on the amount of abuse that slips through. Once the account ban system is activated the IP ban system will be disabled.
Account banning is only effective if there is some system in place to prevent the automated creation of accounts. There is already a CAPTCHA in place on the registration page. I might start requiring e-mail addresses for new accounts as well. The lack of an e-mail address requirement has caused many issues with lost accounts as well, so it had to happen anyway. I will also be looking into integrating with OAuth providers (Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Patreon, etc) to make the login flow simpler for newcomers.
After the site has been cleaned up it might take a long time before all the regional blocking issues are resolved. Because of that I will be adding alternative domain names for premium subscribers to use. Most of the blocks are only on DNS level, which means they can be circumvented by using a different domain name.
How I take that update as affecting us generally is that it’s moving to account banning from IP (although ban length will depend on violation) along with requiring an account to be banned if uploading. Good news is currently no need to associate email address or IP with the account by the sounds of it but…email association is on the table to come possibly.
So probably best to make a few dummy/spare accounts with two main accounts, one for ‘safe’ content and another for ‘risky, potentially banning’ content so if stuff gets reported (if your having to use pixeldrain for hosting ‘risky’ content) you don’t lose all that’s been uploaded and need to re-upload again.
However I wouldn’t be surprised if this isn’t enough and pixeldrain is forced to do further things.
This never made sense to me: I can understand hosting infohashes, magnet links, or .torrent files here directly is not viable because there is nobody to forward the DMCA to. But if links to external file hosts that may or may not contain infringing content are allowed because the DMCA can be forwarded to them and/or the link here removed, then links to external trackers that may or may not contain infrining content should also be fine for the same reason: you’re not hosting it yourself here, you’re referencing it somewhere else - in either case you’re not in control of the content or responsible for it, and you have the exact same lack of legal liability for both. Why is it then one way for linking to file hosting providers, and another for linking to trackers? Neither are hosted by you, neither are your responsibility, either can receive the forwarded DMCA. Either you allow linking to external sources, or not, but this double standard is shooting yourself in the foot for no discernible reason.
Great illustrative example. There is no difference from a hosting vs. linking perspective and DMCA forwarding perspective, and so either both or neither should be allowed.
Exactly, so make the rule to link to trackers only, since the request can be forwarded there just as much as it can be to any file hosting provider.
This also doesn’t make any sense: hosting the .funscripts themselves was never a problem to begin with, and can always be done right here on-site. It’s just referencing the media that needs a solution, and so the scripters’ interests are simply not part of the equation here.
That I is where I found it interesting when I found an script topic or two which resulted in myself then posing a question here about if we can mention torrents by what site their own and their ID but not link to them.
While that is even more indirect, even a direct link to the a tracker page of the torrent would be fine, for the same reason that a direct link to the file on a file-sharing platform is fine.
