Cam Model Protection

[Poker_Babe]

has anyone else heard of this or used it? I'm interested in what everyone thinks about it... idk, but something about this seems fishy to me. Your thoughts??? Anyone???

https://cammodelprotection.com/

 

[emma_skye12]

It looks kind of legit. It's got all those tags at the bottom. "Certified Privacy" and whatnot.

But I could also be dead wrong.

 

[Lorelei]

Just glancing at the site and their Twitter, I'm going to guess that they're reputable—Shaye Rivers did a testimonial for them, and she's a pretty legit lady. (Legit lady = I met her at Camgirl Mansion and she is a total sweetheart.) She's also on ACF, maybe she'll see this and comment? Or maybe you can ask her about her experience with them.


In any case, from what I can see from the site, I'm pretty interested. I'll wait to hear what other ladies have to say before signing up.

 

[HarmlessSquirrel]

Dang, I was hoping it was a service that allowed you to hire cam girls as bodyguards.

 

[schlmoe]

This looks like a "cam model" version of Life Lock, which IMO is a scam. Maybe not a scam, but they don't do much more than you can do yourself.

Plenty of threads here dealing with piracy/DCMA takedowns/etc. And a ton more dealing with personal privacy for cam models. Piracy is a concern, but I am skeptical that this "business" can do that much more that you can do yourself. As for privacy, if you are taking reasonable steps to ensure your online privacy and you're still paranoid enough to buy a "service" that cannot guaranty 100% success (no company can)...well maybe you're in the wrong business

Pricing: the mid-tier (which sounds like they are steering you towards) is $169 per month. To me, that seems like a LOT of money. That's over $2000 a year.

That feature to "let your fans pay": well, if I heard a model ask for that, I'd click "next" quicker that you know what. But that's just me :twocents-02cents:

Another thing on pricing: Every model referral nets you $75.00. That tells me that the mid-tier is "really worth" less than $50 per month. Probably a lot less.

It looks kind of legit. It's got all those tags at the bottom. "Certified Privacy" and whatnot.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but those tags are meaningless for you. The is no official body that certifies that companies can protect your "online privacy".

Truste "seal" indicates only that the site has self-certified as complying with the site's own privacy statement.

Trustwave Ecommerce seal is only to let customers know that their purchase info (credit cards) is secure "by their standards".
From the Trustwave website: The Trustwave seal will:
*Increase customer confidence during checkout.
*Decrease shopping cart abandonment.
*Provide proof of PCI compliance.

None of this tells me that it will do anything for your online privacy as a cam model, only as their customer when you buy the service.

The last "seal", ONSIST, belongs to the parent company. So of course, they will tell you it's so awesome and everything.

Bottom line: go ahead and get it if you think you need it. But caveat emptor!

 

[Poker_Babe]

This looks like a "cam model" version of Life Lock, which IMO is a scam. Maybe not a scam, but they don't do much more than you can do yourself.

Those were my exact thoughts.

 

[Lorelei]

This looks like a "cam model" version of Life Lock, which IMO is a scam. Maybe not a scam, but they don't do much more than you can do yourself.

Plenty of threads here dealing with piracy/DCMA takedowns/etc. And a ton more dealing with personal privacy for cam models. Piracy is a concern, but I am skeptical that this "business" can do that much more that you can do yourself. As for privacy, if you are taking reasonable steps to ensure your online privacy and you're still paranoid enough to buy a "service" that cannot guaranty 100% success (no company can)...well maybe you're in the wrong business

Bottom line: go ahead and get it if you think you need it. But caveat emptor!

Most certainly caveat emptor! Always!

That said, *if* this company is reputable: While $169 a month might seem like a lot of money, consider how much money models make live on-cam versus the amount of time we spend doing work off-cam. I'd wager that there are many ladies on ACF who spend more than two or three hours a month dealing with DMCAs. If you consider that a large number of ACF models average $60 or more per hour when they are *live,* that's potentially time better spent focused on camming and not on sending DMCAs. $169/mo would be three hours a month (or less) for these models, which may be significantly less time than some girls spend searching for their stolen content, sending DMCAs, and following up on those DMCAs.

TL;DR: If the company is reputable, consider the cost/benefit of the service. $169 seems like a lot of money, but time is money, and perhaps that time could be better spent focused on camming.

Disclaimer: I don't use Cam Model Protection, nor am I in any way affiliated with them. I'm just thinking that this service could free up some time and brainpower, particularly for girls who are more sensitive about being capped. (I say this as someone who's literally never sent a DMCA in my life, but it's something that I might get around to doing, someday.)

 

[JerryBoBerry]

That said, *if* this company is reputable: While $169 a month might seem like a lot of money, consider how much money models make live on-cam versus the amount of time we spend doing work off-cam. I'd wager that there are many ladies on ACF who spend more than two or three hours a month dealing with DMCAs. If you consider that a large number of ACF models average $60 or more per hour when they are *live,* that's potentially time better spent focused on camming and not on sending DMCAs. $169/mo would be three hours a month (or less) for these models, which may be significantly less time than some girls spend searching for their stolen content, sending DMCAs, and following up on those DMCAs.

TL;DR: If the company is reputable, consider the cost/benefit of the service. $169 seems like a lot of money, but time is money, and perhaps that time could be better spent focused on camming.

This is kind of what i was wondering, but the reverse of it. Is this really worth that much money? Honestly most people who would rather download videos someone posted elsewhere were never going to buy your videos in the first place. So you're not out any money, other than wasting it on a service like this. For the overwhelming majority of models who don't make this much money in 3 hours it seems like just a drain for no reason.

And here's the thing, let's be honest. That $60 per hour average is misleading. Yes when they are on cam some make that much per hour, no argument there. But it's not really $60 per hour compared to any other job out there. Take how much you make on average per week and divide it by 40 hours. Then see how much you 'really' make per hour compared to other jobs. At that point most models aren't making $60 per hour. Not even close. So this monthly fee actually represents a significant chunk of the bill paying ability. All for very little gain, none in my opinion.

 

[Lorelei]

That said, *if* this company is reputable: While $169 a month might seem like a lot of money, consider how much money models make live on-cam versus the amount of time we spend doing work off-cam. I'd wager that there are many ladies on ACF who spend more than two or three hours a month dealing with DMCAs. If you consider that a large number of ACF models average $60 or more per hour when they are *live,* that's potentially time better spent focused on camming and not on sending DMCAs. $169/mo would be three hours a month (or less) for these models, which may be significantly less time than some girls spend searching for their stolen content, sending DMCAs, and following up on those DMCAs.

TL;DR: If the company is reputable, consider the cost/benefit of the service. $169 seems like a lot of money, but time is money, and perhaps that time could be better spent focused on camming.

This is kind of what i was wondering, but the reverse of it. Is this really worth that much money? Honestly most people who would rather download videos someone posted elsewhere were never going to buy your videos in the first place. So you're not out any money, other than wasting it on a service like this. For the overwhelming majority of models who don't make this much money in 3 hours it seems like just a drain for no reason.

And here's the thing, let's be honest. That $60 per hour average is misleading. Yes when they are on cam some make that much per hour, no argument there. But it's not really $60 per hour compared to any other job out there. Take how much you make on average per week and divide it by 40 hours. Then see how much you 'really' make per hour compared to other jobs. At that point most models aren't making $60 per hour. Not even close. So this monthly fee actually represents a significant chunk of the bill paying ability. All for very little gain, none in my opinion.

Can I just say, as an aside, how happy I am that generally speaking most of the discourse on ACF is so incredibly civil? Seriously, I think we all deserve a pat on the back.

As for the percentage of girls that this service might be useful for, you're right, it's probably something like 80/20 or 90/10. But for the 10-20% (hell, maybe even 5%?), I can imagine it being an incredibly useful tool. To each his/her own, it's just nice to know about options!

 

[Sevrin]

There is also the question of what kind of content is being pirated. Most of what I've seen on tube sites, for instance, are caps from streamed public shows, as far as I can tell. I've not spent a lot of time looking for it, but I've not come across any HD videos that models sell to members, or at least none that I would have bought. The people who want stream caps are not likely to be the same people who would otherwise buy HD videos with tokens, so the revenue supposedly lost is probably something that models would not have received anyway.

If a model wants to limit her exposure, then a service like this might be worthwhile. If her objective is to maximize income, however, I doubt that something like this would be useful.

 

[Shaun__]

There is also the question of what kind of content is being pirated. Most of what I've seen on tube sites, for instance, are caps from streamed public shows, as far as I can tell. I've not spent a lot of time looking for it, but I've not come across any HD videos that models sell to members, or at least none that I would have bought. The people who want stream caps are not likely to be the same people who would otherwise buy HD videos with tokens, so the revenue supposedly lost is probably something that models would not have received anyway.

If a model wants to limit her exposure, then a service like this might be worthwhile. If her objective is to maximize income, however, I doubt that something like this would be useful.

I ran across a model's entire video collection when on a tube site's randomish page of what other people where looking at. That page has shown me some scary stuff. I saw someone that looked like a model who had gotten super pissed at me, so I followed the link to the gallery it was in and it looked like every video she sold was there. Since it was not like she would listen to me or anything I went back to the randomish porn browsing without doing anything about the gallery.

 

[JessieWolfe]

There is also the question of what kind of content is being pirated. Most of what I've seen on tube sites, for instance, are caps from streamed public shows, as far as I can tell. I've not spent a lot of time looking for it, but I've not come across any HD videos that models sell to members, or at least none that I would have bought. The people who want stream caps are not likely to be the same people who would otherwise buy HD videos with tokens, so the revenue supposedly lost is probably something that models would not have received anyway.

If a model wants to limit her exposure, then a service like this might be worthwhile. If her objective is to maximize income, however, I doubt that something like this would be useful.

This is a good point, I think all (that I know of) of my shows and stuff on tube sites are put there by streamate themselves. So they wouldn't actually be able to be taken down since streamate can do whatever it wants with them. (keep in mind i can message streamate any time and tell them I don't want my videos on tube sites. Then have them all taken down and not have any new ones put up) I don't think Ihave any HD videos that have been stolen. And even if so they would probably pass around the download link rather than uploading it to a tube site.

I honeslty think the only option that would ever benefit my circumstances would be the 269$ one since it goes through facebook and stuff. But even then I have easily had facebook take down the accounts for me just by reporting tham. I don't even need a dmca for that. So paying 269$ for that just doesnt make sense. Also you have to find your own links to give to them on the other two options. Stage three is the only one (in my understanding) where they find the links for you.

I'm also one of those kinds of people that doesnt mind their capped shows out there. I like that it advertizes me and brings some people into my room. Who do sometimes end up buying more HD videos. Also a lot of the people who watch the videos but have no intent on visiting my room were never potential income for me anyways.

I have a lot of content out in the internet, but I don't see a point in paying almost 300$ a month for the possibility of taking down an HD video of mine if one happens to be uploaded. I would be much more willing to join the site if it had a pay-per-link takedown with maybe a 5$ monthly fee (or even a flat 60$ yearly charge) for holding an account with them. So if in the future I find one of my videos on the internet that I don't want anywhere, I can pay them 20 bucks to get it taken care of.

 

[KylieJacobs]

Just an FYI, they do have an affiliate program, so some models might get compensated for recommending it.

Here's a link that shows you the affiliate button towards the top:

https://my.cammodelprotection.com/cart.php

The main thing that I think this site would help with is if you decide to quit being a camgirl, and want all of your images and videos removed with the $269 option. Who's to say that they will find them all though.

 

[Sansa]

This is kind of what i was wondering, but the reverse of it. Is this really worth that much money? Honestly most people who would rather download videos someone posted elsewhere were never going to buy your videos in the first place. So you're not out any money, other than wasting it on a service like this. For the overwhelming majority of models who don't make this much money in 3 hours it seems like just a drain for no reason.

And here's the thing, let's be honest. That $60 per hour average is misleading. Yes when they are on cam some make that much per hour, no argument there. But it's not really $60 per hour compared to any other job out there. Take how much you make on average per week and divide it by 40 hours. Then see how much you 'really' make per hour compared to other jobs. At that point most models aren't making $60 per hour. Not even close. So this monthly fee actually represents a significant chunk of the bill paying ability. All for very little gain, none in my opinion.

I suppose it's the principle of the matter. Say someone caps one a show, and that's after the room contributed heavily towards the countdown. It's not fair to the people who tipped that now there's other people who aren't even camsite visitors who are freeloading off of the model's work and the members tips. It's one thing for active guests and members on the site to view it, that's the nature of public shows, everyone knows that. You never know when one of them might be prompted to go premium after seeing and interacting with a model they like, and experiencing more than just the show. It's another for it to be on a tube-site where there is none of that. A porn star might benefit from that, but a camgirl, not so much.

Another model I was watching a few weekends ago pretty much begged her viewers that if someone uploads her videos or her shows to please add her model name and to make sure that they are in HD. That way if someone sees her show, they know where to find her, and because she wants whatever is out there to be of better quality. It seems like camming is really lucrative for her, and when you have what's essentially a business, you want that to have the best reputation as possible. In addition, it seems like videos are a big seller for her, and if someone sees a shitty quality clip elsewhere, they'll probably be less inclined to figure out where she cams, less inclined to tip her, and less inclined to buy a clip, because in their minds, a grainy video is what you get for free, and if that's all she offers in their minds, why should they give her $20 for a video that's "free" quality.

 

[Zoomer]

So basically you pay them, give them authorisation to act on your behalf and they'll simply fill in the forms for DMCA take down requests/notices etc. That's it.

They'll do Google searches for things on well known sites that'll act on any self-submitted form... and submit search engine ones for you too. Not rocket science at all.

Their 24/7 monitoring is most likely Google's own alerts for certain search terms coming up with new results. DMCA is US only, so European based hosts can just ignore it (there's an equivalent for Europe). No-where does it say any legal action will be taken (without further cost) on your behalf to have content removed if the take down notices aren't honored... but maybe I'm missing something?

It simply sounds like someone trying to make some money out of camgirls pockets by praying on their fears provide a service. But in all honesty, the amounts being charged are nuts. I'd not be surprised if what actually happens is that they've got a $10 per month subscription to DMCA.com and then just use that service to submit your DMCA requests for which you're paying them $69+ per month... And that's every model through one $10 per month charge.

And lastly - do you even own the copyright in the first place in order to serve up the DMCA's anyway?

I don't think it's a scam per se, I do think it's someone coming up with a way to make money. I'd speculate that it's got links to a cam girl directly - as in she's branching out with a side business.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

So basically you pay them, give them authorisation to act on your behalf and they'll simply fill in the forms for DMCA take down requests/notices etc. That's it.

They'll do Google searches for things on well known sites that'll act on any self-submitted form... and submit search engine ones for you too. Not rocket science at all.

Their 24/7 monitoring is most likely Google's own alerts for certain search terms coming up with new results. DMCA is US only, so European based hosts can just ignore it (there's an equivalent for Europe). No-where does it say any legal action will be taken (without further cost) on your behalf to have content removed if the take down notices aren't honored... but maybe I'm missing something?

It simply sounds like someone trying to make some money out of camgirls pockets by praying on their fears provide a service. But in all honesty, the amounts being charged are nuts. I'd not be surprised if what actually happens is that they've got a $10 per month subscription to DMCA.com and then just use that service to submit your DMCA requests for which you're paying them $69+ per month... And that's every model through one $10 per month charge.

And lastly - do you even own the copyright in the first place in order to serve up the DMCA's anyway?

I don't think it's a scam per se, I do think it's someone coming up with a way to make money. I'd speculate that it's got links to a cam girl directly - as in she's branching out with a side business.

When I was looking into it one thing I noticed was Shaye Rivers, who is promoting the service, has had 1 (one, single, uno) file removed from google listings for dmca. There could be others not listed with google. But I was amused by it.



The funny thing was it was sent by myfreecams, not this company. :lol:

 

[alienzombie]

has anyone else heard of this or used it? I'm interested in what everyone thinks about it... idk, but something about this seems fishy to me. Your thoughts??? Anyone???

https://cammodelprotection.com/

CamModelProtection.. all they do is send DCMA notice and it just waste of money.
They are another bunch of guys who wants to make money using the word "piracy".

 

[Teagan]

So basically you pay them, give them authorisation to act on your behalf and they'll simply fill in the forms for DMCA take down requests/notices etc. That's it.

They'll do Google searches for things on well known sites that'll act on any self-submitted form... and submit search engine ones for you too. Not rocket science at all.

Their 24/7 monitoring is most likely Google's own alerts for certain search terms coming up with new results. DMCA is US only, so European based hosts can just ignore it (there's an equivalent for Europe). No-where does it say any legal action will be taken (without further cost) on your behalf to have content removed if the take down notices aren't honored... but maybe I'm missing something?

It simply sounds like someone trying to make some money out of camgirls pockets by praying on their fears provide a service. But in all honesty, the amounts being charged are nuts. I'd not be surprised if what actually happens is that they've got a $10 per month subscription to DMCA.com and then just use that service to submit your DMCA requests for which you're paying them $69+ per month... And that's every model through one $10 per month charge.

And lastly - do you even own the copyright in the first place in order to serve up the DMCA's anyway?

I don't think it's a scam per se, I do think it's someone coming up with a way to make money. I'd speculate that it's got links to a cam girl directly - as in she's branching out with a side business.

I have no idea how to do search engine ones actually.

 

[emma_skye12]

This looks like a "cam model" version of Life Lock, which IMO is a scam. Maybe not a scam, but they don't do much more than you can do yourself.

Plenty of threads here dealing with piracy/DCMA takedowns/etc. And a ton more dealing with personal privacy for cam models. Piracy is a concern, but I am skeptical that this "business" can do that much more that you can do yourself. As for privacy, if you are taking reasonable steps to ensure your online privacy and you're still paranoid enough to buy a "service" that cannot guaranty 100% success (no company can)...well maybe you're in the wrong business

Pricing: the mid-tier (which sounds like they are steering you towards) is $169 per month. To me, that seems like a LOT of money. That's over $2000 a year.

That feature to "let your fans pay": well, if I heard a model ask for that, I'd click "next" quicker that you know what. But that's just me :twocents-02cents:

Another thing on pricing: Every model referral nets you $75.00. That tells me that the mid-tier is "really worth" less than $50 per month. Probably a lot less.

It looks kind of legit. It's got all those tags at the bottom. "Certified Privacy" and whatnot.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but those tags are meaningless for you. The is no official body that certifies that companies can protect your "online privacy".

Truste "seal" indicates only that the site has self-certified as complying with the site's own privacy statement.

Trustwave Ecommerce seal is only to let customers know that their purchase info (credit cards) is secure "by their standards".
From the Trustwave website: The Trustwave seal will:
*Increase customer confidence during checkout.
*Decrease shopping cart abandonment.
*Provide proof of PCI compliance.

None of this tells me that it will do anything for your online privacy as a cam model, only as their customer when you buy the service.

The last "seal", ONSIST, belongs to the parent company. So of course, they will tell you it's so awesome and everything.

Bottom line: go ahead and get it if you think you need it. But caveat emptor!

Did you miss where I said

But I could also be dead wrong.

?

I was just trying to be helpful.

 

[ashtyn_rain]

What's funny is that all the models who rave about it on twitter or wherever, all have scads of vid caps on sites, they just happen to be the shady forums and sites. The reputable sites like pornhub, etc. all remove content when they receive a DMCA which is something MFC will do for any of their models stuff that is vid capped. The disreputable ones do not, and those are the ones that no 'protection' can help with.

 

[TacoBelle]

What's funny is that all the models who rave about it on twitter or wherever, all have scads of vid caps on sites, they just happen to be the shady forums and sites. The reputable sites like pornhub, etc. all remove content when they receive a DMCA which is something MFC will do for any of their models stuff that is vid capped. The disreputable ones do not, and those are the ones that no 'protection' can help with.

Actually, MFC will only remove the videos if it was capped from MFC. If it's a video that you made on your own, they won't take it down anymore. You'll have to either send a DMCA yourself or hire a company to do so.

 

[ashtyn_rain]

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

 

[ramblin]

You'll have to either send a DMCA yourself or hire a company to do so.

I know it gets said often, but worth saying again: Please be careful when you issue DMCAs yourself. Folks like chillingeffects.org will, by default, post the entire DCMA request online for all to see, including your real name and address if you provided it. It's much safer to either send a more informal sort of cease and desist notice including only your cam persona info (name you use online, PO box) or to go through someone with a legal department.

If you do find yourself listed on chillingeffects.org, write them at team@chillingeffects.org or call them at 415-436-9993 (USA San Francisco). They have redacted complainants' info in the past.

 

[JerryBoBerry]

Please be careful when you issue DMCAs yourself. Folks like chillingeffects.org will, by default, post the entire DCMA request online for all to see, including your real name and address if you provided it.

And that's why it's better to just lie on the DMCA's with fake names.