Oh I was fairly sure of that but that still means some people will try to hedge their bets for a bit just in case.
Simp Chat Laurenkimripley - Discussion Thread
- Thread starter DummyProfile
- Start date
Oh I was fairly sure of that but that still means some people will try to hedge their bets for a bit just in case.
There are no foolproof methods for detecting leaked content on OnlyFans. There are no distinct codes or hidden watermarks, except for the ones added to the image by OnlyFans settings. Identifying the person responsible for the leak is challenging, unless they post something unique to themselves and not mass-distributed. Even OnlyFans themselves cannot take action against leaks, as stated in their Terms of Service. Their role is limited to assisting in the removal of leaked content. OnlyFans is not responsible for policing leaked content.
It's basically a scare tactic because some people do not understand.
They can't detect that anything has been saved or that anything has been downloaded, that's not how the site works.
Correct. The sites can basically file a DMCA request on behalf of the model requesting a takedown of the infringing material. Anything beyond that would be entirely up to her to pursue in a court and that can get messy with multiple international jurisdictions. But, as you say, some people will overreact to the scare tactic.
if OF actually cared about leakers there are a bunch of tools they could implement to at hidden watermarks to videos and pictures which are unique to the user. I dont even understand why models post that stupid shit about you agreeing not to post their content as though its somehow legally binding
It's to provide the basis for when they file a DMCA request. The same thing as posting a No Trespassing sign. While it should be fairly obvious that you not wander onto someone else's property unless you have reason to be there, without that sign, you COULD argue that you weren't aware you were actually trespassing.
The DMCA request comes from Onlyfans terms and conditions which you're required to physically agree to, to be able to use the site. You cant add supplementary terms and conditions by simply posting them as a bio. So if the only grounds for removal was a few words in a bio, a user can simply say they havent read it therefor they havent agree'd to it and are not bound by them, so you cannot take the photos down.
Its like when a bunch of 50 - 60 year olds on facebook posted saying that facebook and Instagram didn't own their photos because they were posting saying they didn't.. thats not how it works, they're just words, nobody is bound by them. I cant, on a street, announce if you look at me, you give me the right to punch you.
She’s a hypocrite. She has plenty of videos on tik tok saying she wasn’t going to do it. Then 2-3 days later she made one a took down all the videos saying she wouldn’t. Also said there wouldn’t be nudes but as you can see in the the internet here she’s posting nudes now.
Money talks. Bullshit walks. Theres an above average chance she recognized that denying it increased views. Once she realized there were a few thousand people willing to pay $30 to see her tits its a bit of a no brainer.
2 of them in fact, $100 each. The 2nd one described as naughtier than the first ass pic... still a little too rich for my blood.
Yeah, I'm not sure I believe it either. Even if she figures "well my bits are already out there" that doesn't seem like a reason she'd lower the costs of content.
Ngl surprised by her nipples, I was expecting super pink. Nice and dark ones she has are 😘👌
The white knights did their job, but they may regret not just leaving it contained to one subreddit.