Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Matthew Parvis of pokernews wants the industry to rally together against pokertube for stealing Matthew Parvis of pokernews wants the industry to rally together against pokertube for stealing

02-08-2015 , 01:00 AM
I think you do what you do for money and not because you love poker. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

The new WeakTight site looks nice but it doesn't work for me (Merge HH).
02-08-2015 , 01:05 AM
"Additionally, we have received emails from PokerNews stating they have reported PokerTube to Google to attempt to get the site blacklisted"

If this is true, and you have proof, poker players (and people in general) should boycott pokernews.

There is absolutely ZERO reason to blacklist a site from the web. To do so is akin to the attempts to blacklist online poker. Just as bad as Sheldon, if not worse.

Edit: This is coming from someone who has never visited Pokertube.
02-08-2015 , 01:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteBlow
Seeing as Pokertube don't remove the Pokernews branding from any of Pokernews' videos, they are driving traffic to Pokernews.com

What's their problem?
A lot of people win money straight from the fact that the video is uploaded on their own channels/youtube. When it's somewhere else, they don't.

Besides, that's their (Pokernews') content, so whatever they wanna do with it, they have all the right in the world to do so.

PS. Although I truly believe it's impossible to stop that kind of thing from happening, and trying to do it is the absolute worst of the lines to take, so gl to them. #napsterfeelings #metallica
02-08-2015 , 01:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mubsy Bogues
Anybody have more info on these claims?

It seems people involved in the affiliate business are inevitably branded 'scum of the earth' by other people. I suspect those who started these rumors are competitors and what they have to say should be taken with a very large grain of salt.

From my limited observations, PokerVIP/PokerUpdate/PokerTube etc seem to be run pretty professionally, as far as the online poker industry is concerned.

As to this copyright issue, you guys need to educate yourselves on the DMCA. If he's not complying with it, you can simply go to his host and have the website taken down.
Just pointing out that Pokerupdate.com is no longer owned by Jamie or part of his group of sites. Was purchased just over half a year ago by a different company.
02-08-2015 , 02:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieNev
Hi All,

My name is Jamie and I am the person mentioned in this thread. I am ultimately responsible for all 180Vita brands.

Personally, I do not care much for 'the industry' and the self gratification that goes along with it. When businesses focus too much on award ceremonies, making friends with others in the same business and so forth, they lose sight of what is really important - The customer. I am not sure if readers here are familiar with the phrase 'Circle Jerk', but this is unfortunately what the poker industry has turned into.

I do not have much time right now, but would like to address a few key points:

1. 2+2 - We decided we no longer wished to work with 2+2. Not the other way around. They have attacked us on numerous occasions without any attempt to reach out or have a conversation. In my opinion this is unprofessional and not the kind of business we wish to pay money to. By all means they are entitled to hold their own opinions, but being attacked by a business who you have paid over 6 figures to, without a friendly phone call or email, is odd to say the least.
I remember a long phone conference Mat Sklansky and I had with you and your father about ten months ago where you promised to do better. Also, our advertising rep informed me last week that you wanted to renew the advertising at a much reduced price.

Quote:
Of course 2+2 is poker's 2nd strongest community to Pokerstrategy, but I would also encourage all members who hold it in such high regard to ask: Where does all the money go? Certainly, not as much of it is re-invested into growing poker as it should be. I don't say this to attack the forum, but to highlight that nobody is perfect.
This is not worth responding to. I think it's obvious the role that 2+2 has played in the growth of poker since we first formed the publishing compny in 1987.

Quote:
2. Copyright Law - As another posted pointed out, copyright is governed by the DMCA. As a company, we are pretty much online 24/7, but instead of emailing us and going through the correct motions, some of our competitors prefer to do it in public, without specifying the infringing material or following the correct process. Whilst we are not legally obliged to respond to such requests, we often do and despite what many believe, genuinely do our best to ensure infringing content does not re-appear.

Some competitors will imply that we do not respond to takedown requests - This is simply not true. We are very responsive and in reality do not receive many requests. Probably around 7 or 8 in the last 12 months. Always consider the source of these statements and ask for evidence.

Nobody posting in this thread can truthfully state they have found us to be unresponsive when emailing about such issues. In fact, multiple parties had agreements with us before and gave explicit permission for content to be posted. Later requesting for it to be removed. PokerNews or SrslySrius are not instances of us randomly posting their content without permission - there were actual discussions and later they asked for their videos to be removed, and we obliged every time.

Compared to most 'Tube' sites we are incredibly vigilant.
OK.

Quote:
3. Bad Logic - You cannot ask for content to be taken down that you do not own. Many of our competitors willfully refuse to understand this. A society where I could enforce trespass on land I do not own, or request for content to be taken down that is nothing to do with me, would be anarchy.
OK.

Quote:
What's more, how does Mason or anyone else for that matter know which content we have explicit permission for? They do not. We follow legal process and if any of our competitors believe we do not, they are welcome to band together to file a class action.
I don't run your company and am not interested from whom you may have or not have permission from.

Quote:
The reason they are resorting to these attacks is because they know we are not behaving unlawfully and this is their only option.
So when you tweet out our 2+2 Pokercast and have no permission to use it we're not suppose to know that you don't have permission from us to do this.

Quote:
4. PokerNews - Some back story needs to be given here because PokerNews are misleading you, by not offering the full facts of the situation.

* Around 16 months ago we partnered with PokerNews and they asked us to showcase PokerNews videos on PokerTube.
* They did not get the results PokerNews had hoped for and they asked us to remove all videos.
* We did our best to remove the videos, but we did miss some. Probably 100 out of 2,500.
* Over the next couple of months PokerNews would email us from time to time. Never specifying the videos that were infringing, but with vague statements like 'Remove all PokerNews videos'. Each time we sought confirmation that they were happy with what we were removing and they acknowledged this.
* Most of their emails were coupled with a barrage of Tweets, always from the same group of people. Never specifying the infringing content.
* Additionally, we have received emails from PokerNews stating they have reported PokerTube to Google to attempt to get the site blacklisted. Poker advocates indeed and of course their attempts failed.

Keep in mind, this all started with an agreement that PokerTube would host their content and then a matter of months later they were attempting to use the very same content as a means to significantly damage our business.

Finally, I would like to invite PokerNews to email me personally an exhaustive list of remaining infringing content. It will be seen to within 24 hours and I can personally confirm that no new PokerNews content has been published to PokerTube for several months. Email - Jamie@PokerVIP.com & Hello@PokerTube.com

Question for Mr Parvis (AKA: The pitbull): Were you aware of the above details and communication between 180Vita and iBusmedia?
The dispute is between you and PokerNews and is not 2+2's fight. However, since you have now posted this here, PokerNews is also welcome to post their response.

Quote:
5. Motivation - We must consider why the fact PokerTube shows High Stakes Poker, upsets Mason,
I did not know, and this is the first I heard about it, that High Stakes Poker was being shown on Poker Tube.

Quote:
PokerNews and others so much. It surely cannot be damaging to poker? HighStakesPoker is on torrents, YouTube and many other sites - The only difference with PokerTube is that there are no adverts on the videos (absolutely none) and the videos are nicely curated.
Don't you have banners on the page where someone watching High Stakes Poker will see them? But I really don't care about this.

Quote:
In my personal opinion this is evidence of an agenda and a very sad one for poker. Why are these people so hell bent on service no longer being available for poker players and enthusiasts? They do not own High Stakes Poker, we can demonstrate we do not make money from it, so what remains? If they are crusaders vs copyright, there are far more productive ways to fight this cause.
OK.

Quote:
Consider, that Bluff are dying and cannot adapt, 2+2 are getting squeezed by Stars and PokerNews have recently pulled out of doing official WSOP coverage.
Saying that 2+2 is getting squeezed by Stars is news to me. Perhaps you know something we in 2+2 management don't. If not, don't you think it's best not to make statements about other companies which appear to be based purely on speculation.

Quote:
The 'industry' is no longer booming and if these businesses are not going to thrive, they will do their best to make sure as hell nobody else does - No amount of industry awards and circle jerking will change the reality of what is happening to your business guys.
In general, 2+2 operates independently of other companies and does not have the type of relationship with other commercial entities that you are describing here.

Quote:
Competitors - Why does it upset you so much to see HighStakesPoker on PokerTube? Let's get down to the crux of the issue.
Quote:
6. Video Page - I would invite anyone who is still interested in this 'debate', to go to PokerTube and view a video. There are no adverts.
Quote:
7. Value - I genuinely believe that PokerTube offers exposure to small video producers. A couple of days ago we received an email from a gentleman named Mark Hoke who does a video podcast. He wanted a discussion about his content, but did not request to take it down - I am still awaiting his reply.

Anyway, I researched his show a bit and found that his YouTube channel had very few views, maybe 10 views per video. Now, our competitors would argue that we are hi-jacking his content, but the opposite is true.

If you search 'Mark Hoke' or any associated keywords, PokerTube is usually on the second page, so there is no way we are taking away his organic viewers and re-directing them to PokerTube. The reason the show gets views with us, is because we are posting it on our social media, putting it out in newsletters and actually getting behind it because we think it's great. We are demonstrably giving the show exposure and it deserves it. I would be happy to discuss this in more detail, as I think there is a lot of bad logic being banded about by competitors here.

Of course it will be Mark's decision (not ours and not any of our competitors') whether he wishes the videos to remain on PokerTube. Either way, we will respect his wishes.
That's fine, but 2+2 does not feel the same way.

Quote:
---

Cliffs:

* Some companies in poker are getting squeezed.
* Instead of improving their own business, many think the answer to their problems is in attacking others.
*

This does not apply to 2+2. We're not getting squeezed and if you follow our site, recent improvements are clearly there.

Quote:
There is no legal basis for these attacks. If our competitors believe there is, they know where we are.
* On a personal level, if you are an impartial reader, you are seeing some people with not enough to do on a Friday night.
Quote:
My business genuinely re-invests money into poker. There are no multi-millionaires here, and I think the quality of our sites and service demonstrate this. We recently bought and re-developed WeakTight for example, which is a key tool for online poker players. We do this because we love poker. Personally, I am excited by ways we can use technology to improve the game. Soon, you will be able to share poker hands directly to Twitter for example, check this out.
2+2 has always gone to great lengths to do much for poker. This includes putting out top notch books where we paid our authors far higher than industry standard royalty rates, and all the work and improvement that has gone into www.twoplustwo.com over the years. But you already knew much of this because of free markets and competition.

Quote:
I am not perfect and as a business we have made a few slips - For example, we did have rogue freelancers who plagiarised a handful of news articles and this was a mistake I cannot apologise enough for. However, on the whole I am confident we are good for poker and I hope to continue to serve real poker players and enthusiasts for the rest of my life.


Yours respectfully,

Jamie
02-08-2015 , 02:30 PM
pokertube is so 2007
02-08-2015 , 05:04 PM
This is actually a pretty interesting topic
02-08-2015 , 11:02 PM
Very well written rebutal from pokertube imo and I rarely view that site.
02-08-2015 , 11:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvas
Very well written rebutal from pokertube imo and I rarely view that site.
It's well-written and makes some good arguments. The question however, is if it's true. If not, it doesn't matter how good the points are, the argument would be moot.
02-08-2015 , 11:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokeraddict
It isn't just videos either. I have had my own issues with this company scraping my news articles and presenting them as its own under a different author name. I wrote an article about this a couple of weeks ago on my blog.
Is it fair to ask the PokerTube rep to respond to this post?
02-09-2015 , 12:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieNev

3. Bad Logic - You cannot ask for content to be taken down that you do not own. Many of our competitors willfully refuse to understand this. A society where I could enforce trespass on land I do not own, or request for content to be taken down that is nothing to do with me, would be anarchy. What's more, how does Mason or anyone else for that matter know which content we have explicit permission for? They do not. We follow legal process and if any of our competitors believe we do not, they are welcome to band together to file a class action.
Hang on.

I might need someone with some legal expertise, but isn't this (the bolded) akin to seeing a stranger break into my neighbor's home then calling the police (and/or my neighbor) about it?


Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieNev
Yours respectfully,
Oddly, there's quite a bit of disrespect in your post and in your tone, even though you generally make some perfectly fair points (which Mason himself acknowledged in his own reply).

For what it's worth, I've long felt PokerTube could (and does) play an important role in filling sizable gaps in poker-related video content. Only via grass-roots efforts could we see some of the shows that came out during the first few years after the boom. It's not like you're driving traffic away from DVD sales* by carrying old Poker Superstars Invitational episodes. Bravo wouldn't go broke if you offered its Celebrity Poker Showdown series on your site. I could see why anyone with a vested interest in driving content to their outlets would submit C&D letters, and props to you if you're honoring them expeditiously.

[We'll ignore for a moment how bad the two shows I cited were: the first for its format, the second for its actual play. They were just examples of some of the early post-boom shows that I could remember offhand. Not even sure if you have them.]

Now if you could somehow wrangle Joe Sebok away from his grapes and see if he'd release PokerRoad's Poker Weekly Update videos to PokerTube (these were poker versions of SNL Weekend Update with Scott Huff, Joe Stapleton and Amanda Leatherman as hosts). No one seems to know where those are, and Sebok is probably the only one who could realistically locate them.






*Pause for laughter.
02-09-2015 , 02:46 AM
Spoiler:
Hi, this is Rikard from Pokertube
02-09-2015 , 07:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilbury Twist
I might need someone with some legal expertise, but isn't this (the bolded) akin to seeing a stranger break into my neighbor's home then calling the police (and/or my neighbor) about it?
No, stealing IP is theft. So a valid comparison is you seeing someone steal a DVD at Walmart.

If you want to do anything about that, you tell a Walmart employee who alerts security. If someone steals IP from ESPN, you can contact them and they alert their laywers if they want to.

FWIW, if you have to put "because we love poker" in bold as your motivation, you're probably either doing a very poor job of phrasing your business model or you're just lying..
02-09-2015 , 08:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieNev
1. 2+2 - We decided we no longer wished to work with 2+2. Not the other way around. They have attacked us on numerous occasions without any attempt to reach out or have a conversation. In my opinion this is unprofessional and not the kind of business we wish to pay money to. By all means they are entitled to hold their own opinions, but being attacked by a business who you have paid over 6 figures to, without a friendly phone call or email, is odd to say the least.
Paying whatever sum you agreed for advertising just gives you that advertising. It doesn't entitle you to their copyrighted material. Copyright is governed by the Berne convention, not just the DMCA. I am not connected with 2+2 but the 2+2 podcast is particularly interesting because if you are tweeting about it then it is clear that it is not a rogue user uploading things you don't know about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamieNev
7. Value - Mark Hoke
You make some good arguments why content producers should want to have their content hosted on your site. The applicable moral and legal standard though isn't should want; it is do want and have approved it.

Part of the attraction of working for oneself rather than as part of a large organization responsible to shareholders is that one isn't obliged to always make the financially rational choice. If the 2+2 founders or any other content owner from the poker world has decided they don't like you and are willing to forego the potential financial gains from working with you then you're just out of luck.
02-09-2015 , 05:24 PM
Jamie - You make several valid points but there are a few things I want to discuss while you are here.

Quote:
Nobody posting in this thread can truthfully state they have found us to be unresponsive when emailing about such issues.
I feel like I can, but will give it a * and say that was in 2013 to a site you no longer own. My two 2014 emails I sent directly to you got the content removed but I had to figure that out on my own since nobody bothered to reply to my emails.

Quote:
The reason they are resorting to these attacks is because they know we are not behaving unlawfully and this is their only option.
IANAL, but I don't think it is lawful for your company to copy a large portion of an article I published at another site and present it as its own without permission from me. That certainly isn't what I consider "fair use".

Quote:
In my personal opinion this is evidence of an agenda and a very sad one for poker. Why are these people so hell bent on service no longer being available for poker players and enthusiasts? They do not own High Stakes Poker, we can demonstrate we do not make money from it, so what remains? If they are crusaders vs copyright, there are far more productive ways to fight this cause.
Do you display the Borgata banner ad for free?

The safe harbor under DMCA applies to service providers that unknowingly host copyrighted content uploaded by users. You know the content is there and know you don’t own the rights to host it. On top of that, you slap your logo on it and place a banner ad above it. All of this is done under the claim, “They have never contacted us to take it down”.

I don't think that falls under the spirit of the DMCA safe harbor, at least as I understand it. Do you feel that you comply with all 5 of those safe harbors?

I’m especially interested in how embedding a Pokertube logo applies to:

Quote:
5) the material is transmitted through the system or network without modification of its content.
Quote:
6. Video Page - I would invite anyone who is still interested in this 'debate', to go to PokerTube and view a video. There are no adverts.
I see a Borgata banner above the player, a Pokertube logo at the start of a video and that logo burned into the top left of the video in its entirety while displayed in the player.

Quote:
7. Value - I genuinely believe that PokerTube offers exposure to small video producers.
I absolutely agree that your company provides a great service to those that agree to have their content used or upload the content themselves, which I know is the case for many online poker rooms. I think that if you adopted the policies used by You Tube for monetization by producers, and automatically blocked previously reported content, the goodwill would be invaluable and you would never again have to deal with this. It would take your company to the next level. I just about guarantee it.

Quote:
If you search 'Mark Hoke' or any associated keywords, PokerTube is usually on the second page, so there is no way we are taking away his organic viewers and re-directing them to PokerTube. The reason the show gets views with us, is because we are posting it on our social media, putting it out in newsletters and actually getting behind it because we think it's great. We are demonstrably giving the show exposure and it deserves it. I would be happy to discuss this in more detail, as I think there is a lot of bad logic being banded about by competitors here.
I don't think anyone would ever argue this point and it goes with the above one made, but it is completely irrelevant to the larger issue. If Hoke wants his work promoted on Pokertube, that is great for both of you. This type of relationship should be exactly where your site thrives. The people complaining don't want their work promoted there under the current business model, which is an entirely different issue.

Quote:
I am not perfect and as a business we have made a few slips - For example, we did have rogue freelancers who plagiarised a handful of news articles and this was a mistake I cannot apologise enough for.
It is nice that you can apologize for this now. This would have been a far better solution than what you pulled in 2013 when I pointed this out. I do want to dig a bit deeper into the topic under the assumption that you are sincere about your remorse.

I think the fact that this keeps happening shows issues with your company's vetting of authors. This wasn't just one or two people doing it.

Are you letting unknowns publish work without an editor's approval? Are you finding authors in non-gaming freelance forums that know nothing about the topic? Are you paying just a few cents per word? Are you hiring authors that are not fluent in English?

Those are all recipes for ending up with plagiarized content.

There must be some common thread between these authors. If you are serious about putting an end to this problem, figure out what it is and plug that hole.

After all I have been through with you and your company on this topic, I have a hard time believing that you care about fixing the problem. I sincerely hope that you will prove my opinion wrong.

Quote:
However, on the whole I am confident we are good for poker and I hope to continue to serve real poker players and enthusiasts for the rest of my life.
I have said this many times. There is so much upside to your company. This industry has an extremely short memory when it comes to conflict. Figure out a way to make the content producers happy and the rift will heal quickly.

Wouldn't you like to not have to waste your time with this over and over? So would everyone else. I hope that you will think about why you are in constant conflict with others and fix it.

Last edited by John Mehaffey; 02-09-2015 at 05:53 PM.
02-09-2015 , 06:31 PM
02-09-2015 , 07:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Divided By Zero
Original tweet:

Matthew Parvis @MatthewParvis · 1h 1 hour ago

We as an industry need to stand together against @pokertube's continuous abuse of intellectual property. Please RT.
LOL, what industry. Poker media is done.
02-09-2015 , 08:36 PM
Mark Hoke just posted on his facebook page his perspective on the situation since Jamie brought him up in his post. link :

https://www.facebook.com/MarkHokeSho...nf&pnref=story

The last part includes the quote "For these reasons, I demand that you remove my material from your site immediately. Thank you for your swift attention to this matter"
02-09-2015 , 08:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by madlex
No, stealing IP is theft. So a valid comparison is you seeing someone steal a DVD at Walmart.

If you want to do anything about that, you tell a Walmart employee who alerts security. If someone steals IP from ESPN, you can contact them and they alert their laywers if they want to.
Yeah, same idea. Point being, Jamie's notion that only the victim may report a trespass, and that anyone else doing so constitutes anarchy, is quite ludicrous.
02-09-2015 , 09:18 PM
Mark Hoke doesn't use twoplustwo but asked me to post this reply for him.


Mr. Nevin,
Thank you for taking the time to answer me. Being that I am incredibly busy currently covering the Seminole Hard Rock WPT Lucky Hearts Poker Open, my schedule is very tight and dealing with an issue such as this requires significant time to formulate a response. Because of your very public comments on a forum site and needlessly interjecting me into this debate, I now have to focus time and energy that needed to be spent elsewhere to make a response to you which I also will have to make public because of your actions.
First I have to say that taking a private email, twisting it and using me as part of a post on a public forum to prove your point is horribly disappointing. It's fairly clear you do not know very much about my show or how it operates. Its primary focus is my terrestrial radio show on KLAV 1230 AM in Las Vegas. I am also attending my eighth live event since the 2014 World Series of Poker doing live reporting, broadcasts and commentary and am currently scheduled for four more between now and this year's World Series of Poker. I also spending 49 back-breaking days covering the WSOP each year from morning until night. These videos of those live shows and other videos for my radio shows make up a very small portion of downloads and revenue that I generate and they have far greater purposes than generating raw views. I have worked incredibly hard over the past three and a half years to establish myself in an industry where when I first started I had no standing whatsoever and have now become one of the industry's standard bearers in the media. My status and reputation is incredibly important to me and I do want as many people as possible to view my shows.
But what you are doing here is wrong. You say you are not hurting me and giving me exposure but you are hurting me along with everyone whose material you are using without permission. As is the case with many of us, the content we create is something on which we spend our own or our company's money and work tirelessly to put together. And with you posting it and presenting in the manner you do, you're taking credit for being a part of something you are not and are also insinuating that we have some sort of working relationship with me which is not the case.
To me, the views that you get on your site are not worth the de facto theft of mine and other people's work to drive traffic to your site. You may not think those views going to you and away from myself and others don't hurt, but YouTube offers the opportunity to monetize our videos by adding their advertisements to them. So every time someone goes to your site instead of looking to myself or anyone else's YouTube page, it costs them. If they go to your site instead of the rightful property owner's site to look for that material, it takes away web hits, thus taking away traffic which for many people putting out content can be the difference between a lucrative sponsorship/advertising deal or something far worse.
In your response to me, you made it clear there would be no monetary opportunities allowing you to use my content and in all candor I have a difficult time believing your claim that "we truly make nothing" considering the fact that just on your front page I saw no less than seven advertisements. Taking an even deeper look at your "store" you are selling coaching video packs, tracking software, poker books, individual coaching videos, education tools and apparel. Content like mine drives people to your site thus giving you the opportunity to sell products and make money from affiliate relationships. Are you offering a revenue share and/or monetization opportunities from your affiliate deals and sales to people whose material you use? I'm sure we probably know the answer to that. And the more offensive part is that you are doing all this without their permission. Without the content you are taking, your site gets no traffic and those monetary opportunities do not exist.
Normally, I don't like to give people tips on how to do business. I've fought and struggled my way through this industry without someone guiding me through it or the benefit of being hired by such organizations as PokerNews, Bluff, AnteUp Magazine, WSOP etc. For the most part, I have had outstanding cooperative relationships with many in the poker media. I also directly benefit from relationships with Rounders Radio and PokerFuse. Those companies do things the right way. They are certainly not part of the "circle jerk" you called the poker industry which you criticize and insult but one that and your colleagues are currently participating in and using for financial gain. I'm not going to tell you how to correct your business model so that it would be offensive to no one and could actually be welcomed.
But what I am going to tell you is this: Never, ever post anything in a public forum about a private seven-line email (two of which were a greeting and farewell) and twist it into something that it's not. I do not support your use of other people's material nor the business model you currently use. Unfortunately, you have not made a friend within a very small and tight-knit industry by dealing with it in the manner that you chose.
For these reasons, I demand that you remove my material from your site immediately. Thank you for your swift attention to this matter.
Mark Hoke
Twitter: @MarkHokeShow
Facebook: The Mark Hoke Show


Mark Hoke
02-09-2015 , 09:26 PM
Oh snap
02-09-2015 , 10:28 PM
Poker Media

Does not use 2p2

lol @ pokermedia
02-09-2015 , 10:38 PM
Wait are you saying that it is wrong to copy and download without paying for things on the internet?
02-09-2015 , 11:05 PM
surprised affiliates haven't come in here to share their stories about Jamie. weren't there a lot of rumors going around about him (1) using dirty tactics and threats to poach high volume players from other affiliates, (2) offering rakeback above site maximums to poach said high volume players, and (3) hooking US players up with ipoker accounts post-BF as a way to drum up business?

these are admittedly all 2nd or 3rd hand rumors but I know affiliates absolute detested him a few years ago.
02-10-2015 , 12:31 AM
Sorry if I am late..

Does anyone know if this applies to regular users who upload videos to YouTube? I've had a few of my videos ripped and hosted on PokerTube without my permission, right down to the video title and video description. Do I legally have the right to do anything?

      
m