• The TMF is sponsored by Clips4sale - By supporting them, you're supporting us.
  • >>> If you cannot get into your account email me at [email protected] <<<
    Don't forget to include your username

The TMF is sponsored by:

Clips4Sale Banner

Foot Fetish website investigated for fraud

Glad He Got Caught!

Phineas said:
No tickling involved, but I think it's related.

Stop me if you've heard this one before; a guy approaches a woman and concocts some story about being a student who needs pictures of feet for an art project.

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/playlist/12009/761434?title=cinema_sole
Click to expand...

I think what really pissed the woman off was, besides the fact that he lied to her, the guy was making money off the pictures on his website!

Sounds like the guy had a good gimmick going, but he has now been caught! I would surely hate to be him if the rest of his "victims" check out his site and decide to bring charges!

When we practice to deceive... You might get jail time!
 
jm157 said:
I think what really pissed the woman off was, besides the fact that he lied to her, the guy was making money off the pictures on his website!

Sounds like the guy had a good gimmick going, but he has now been caught! I would surely hate to be him if the rest of his "victims" check out his site and decide to bring charges!

When we practice to deceive... You might get jail time!
Click to expand...

I agree. One thing I'm wondering now is how many other sites are up front with their 'models' about who they are and what the pictures are going to be used for - especially given how so many of us think it's no big deal to lie about our fetish to people. After all, if they don't know, who's it hurt, right? /sarcasm
 
It was criminal fraud, he obtained the photos under false pretenses to use them for profit. Such characters do give us a bad name. :sowrong:
 
It would probably have been harder to find people to agree. Plus, models who pose for stuff like that usually want money for the pics.
 
*sigh* another and big reason why we need to deglamorize this 'fetish' thing. got to keep yourself under control and behave and it will ease off and even get rid of this 'make us look bad'

i wouldnt be surprised if someday soon someone vandalizes all this fetish nonsense
 
It wouldn't have been any different if someone posted regular nude pics of his ex-girlfriends. I don't see why this would shed a particularly bad light on fetishes,
 
I might be wrong (im sorry if i am and I offend this person) but in the photo shown on the news-cast, you can see his legs in shorts reflected in a mirror, looks very similar to the guy who does the pedisole junction videos, in which he also goes up to strangers and asks to film/photograph their feet.
Again, if im wrong, very very sorry.
 
There's always one asshole with no self-control that makes it more and more difficult for honest, straightforward to people to do their thing.
 
I am SO glad that idiot got caught. While I assume some foot fetish producers who do "candid" work are legit, it's pretty obvious that others aren't totally honest with the models about what the pictures/videos are for. I mean, do they tell the models they're meant to be fetish material? Or posted online on fetish sites? Even if they do tell them about the online fetish thing, do they tell them the material is sold?

On the MousePad (arguably the most important foot fetish forum) I see many threads, some of them huge, with plenty of enthusiastic replies, featuring tons of pictures of random women the producers find and convince to pose barefoot, and I find many of these to be quite suspicious. There's no way all of these producers actually tell the models that the videos are for sale to a fetish clientele and get the models' explicit written permission. I also doubt that all these models get paid. Frankly, I am thoroughly disgusted by producers who not only take advantage of women who have no idea what they're getting into, but actually have the gall to make money from it. I can't say that I'm sure about any specific producers, but I do suspect a number of those that post stuff on the MousePad. I hope some of them get caught eventually, even though it's rather unlikely.

That being said, if there are actually producers who manage to produce a decent catalog while being totally honest with the models and paying them, well, my hat to them.

I guess pulling the same stunt with tickling videos would be somewhat harder, which is a very good thing. I hope never to find out that one of us is doing something so dishonest. Stuff like that really gives us a bad name.

If it hasn't been done already, maybe someone should post a link to the article on the MousePad. It might make some of the producers there a little nervous about their own businesses.
 
I'm really glad the guy got caught. That's a seriously messed up thing to do to anyone.
 
That guy is a complete jerk off. Yes he might have a foot fetish and it might turn him on tricking people doing videos for foot fetish, that gives him no right to be a dickhead doing anything for a buck.

I've been legit with everything I do my whole life and when i hear stories like that, i hope they get busted and get what they deserve.

(Yes I was smiling when writing this)
 
rhiannon said:
It wouldn't have been any different if someone posted regular nude pics of his ex-girlfriends. I don't see why this would shed a particularly bad light on fetishes,
Click to expand...

Cause its not vanilla honey. People criticize or immediately have a negative connotation with something that isn't vanilla and ends up on the news cause something happened. Almost like a reflex.
 
Does she really have a case? She consented to photos\video. Yes she was under false pretenses but this wasn't a covert OP.

Would this be the same issue if it was discovered on a free site or a forum like here had pix up and someone discovered them?

Im just not keen on the law when it gets into this realm. I would think if you consent to being filmed, the shooter\filmer can do what he\she pleases with the content.
 
Goodieluver said:
Does she really have a case? She consented to photos\video. Yes she was under false pretenses but this wasn't a covert OP.

Would this be the same issue if it was discovered on a free site or a forum like here had pix up and someone discovered them?

Im just not keen on the law when it gets into this realm. I would think if you consent to being filmed, the shooter\filmer can do what he\she pleases with the content.
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's probably a legal difference when you're doing that for a paysite. Especially if you don't compensate your models.

If its free all around though, I don't think it would matter as much. I mean, you can't legally tell people how they can and cannot view something you willingly gave them or put online yourself. You can personally just try not to put pictures of yourself online or have people take them but, to me, that seems a little anal. A better option is just to let people have their own minds and save yourself the stress.
 
solescratcher99 said:
Yeah, there's probably a legal difference when you're doing that for a paysite. Especially if you don't compensate your models.

If its free all around though, I don't think it would matter as much. I mean, you can't legally tell people how they can and cannot view something you willingly gave them or put online yourself. You can personally just try not to put pictures of yourself online or have people take them but, to me, that seems a little anal. A better option is just to let people have their own minds and save yourself the stress.
Click to expand...

There are definitely legal differences. I remember when I worked on a video game adaptation of a major motion picture a few years ago - we didn't have rights to the likeness of the lead actor so we had to make the in-game character look like him without actually looking like him. This is also why models and photographers alike work with consent/release forms.

Your jurisdiction may vary, but I'm pretty sure that where profit's involved the person whose photo you're using has to sign a release except in the case of things like crowd scenes where it's not feasible to track down everyone in the crowd.

Either way, the woman never consented to have her photos sold on a fetish site. The guy told her they were for a personal art project, and I'd bet dollars to donuts the reason why he lied to her was precisely because if he'd told her what he intended to do with them, she'd have refused to be photographed.
 
waitin2btkled said:
Cause its not vanilla honey. People criticize or immediately have a negative connotation with something that isn't vanilla and ends up on the news cause something happened. Almost like a reflex.
Click to expand...

I don't know if that really is the case, sweetie. ;) Maybe it seems to us that way because we are a little oversensitive to it since we are the ones not being vanilla, but personally I have made the experience that people who are generally open towards sexuality don't really care if it's fetish or not, and people who are not open towards sexuality would have a cow no matter if someone posted pics of feet or a nude person. Eeeew, porn...you know what I mean.

Like my grandma....I think she would think it's weird to get off to foot pics, but she wouldn't be as upset about it as someone actually taking nude pics! I mean....it's just a foot! ;) That's probably because she can't really totally grasp the fetish thing though, so I guess it's a bad example.

@Goodieluver, solescratcher & Phineas: Sorry guys, have to correct you a little here. Even if the photos are published somewhere WITHOUT the intent to make money, there has to be a model release! Agreeing to photos does NOT mean you agree for them to be published!

When I do a TfP shooting, me and the photographer ALWAYS sign a release that allows him and me to publish the photos for our own advertising, not with profit involved. If that agreement didn't resist and the photographer or I found a published photo somewhere, we could sue the other person and if would have to be taken down!

Otherwise it would be legal to post nude pics of your ex online - it's not!
 
Apparently, what you're talking about is simply a civil offense rather than a criminal. I say simply because, as a libertarian, I think civil offenses are usually petty. The image of judge judy and daytime court room drama comes to mind. lol.

Anyway, according to the article, a model release is required in public use of the photos (not private or personal use). Also, model releases don't apply to photos published over the web at the moment. Even if its for sale on a website. (I'm interested how they'll apply the word public and publish to cyberspace though?)

It probably will in the future, with its own special criteria of course, but its still under debate according to the article. And, I suppose, its likely going to be under similar guidelines online as it is offline; in other words, its not going to apply to simply showing a photo to someone, photo journalists and its probably not going to apply to anonymous users sharing an image (an image of a celebrity for example) in a private or public forum.

I know its wiki article but this will do for now:
Note that the issue of model release forms and liability waivers is a legal area related to privacy and is separate from copyright. Also, the need for model releases pertains to public use of the photos: i.e., publishing them, commercially or not. The act of taking a photo of someone in a public setting without a model release, or of viewing or non-commercially showing such a photo in private, generally does not create legal exposure, at least in the United States.

The legal issues surrounding model releases are complex and vary by jurisdiction. Although the risk to photographers is virtually nil (so long as proper disclosures of the existence of a release, and its content is made to whoever licenses the photo for publication), the business need for having releases rises substantially if the main source of income from the photographer's work lies within industries that would require them (such as advertising). In short, photo journalists never need to obtain model releases for images they shoot for (or sell to) news or qualified editorial publications.

Photographers who also publish images need releases to protect themselves, but there is a distinction between making an image available for sale (even via a website), which is not considered publication in a form that would require a release, and the use of the same image to promote a product or service in a way that would require a release. Whether or not publishing a photo via the internet requires a release is currently being debated in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It is likely that any and all exposure to the public of unreleased photos via any vehicle will constitute civil liability for the photographer.
Click to expand...
 
Hm, this all sounds pretty...I don't know...not set in stone! Meaning if you found a picture of yourself that you didn't agree to be published and you went to court with it, you can force the person to remove it. And I guess if you suffered some kind of hardship from it, I guess it would be possible to also sue the photographer for compensation.

With the right lawyer of course. ;)

I can't imagine though it doesn't apply to pics published over the web.... I know for sure it works like that in Germany, not sure about the US though.

A friend of mine is a journalist, I guess I could ask him about it, he should know the details.
 
I just read a little more about it....in Germany it is even illegal to publish school photos on the net. You have to have a release from every single person on the photo!
 
rhiannon said:
I just read a little more about it....in Germany it is even illegal to publish school photos on the net. You have to have a release from every single person on the photo!
Click to expand...

Like I said, your jurisdiction may vary. :)

Regardless of the letter of the law, though... it was a sleazy thing to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Door 44 Productions
What's New

5/11/2024
The TMF Art and Story Archives collect some of our communities best creators work in one place!
Tickle Experiment
Door 44
NEST 2024
Register here
The world's largest online clip store

Live Camgirls!
Live Camgirls
Streaming Videos
streaming tickling videos on demand at the TMF!
Tickling videos on demand!
Pic of the Week
Pic of the Week
Congratulations to
*** brad1701 ***
 The winner of our weekly Trivia, held every Sunday night at 11PM EST in our Chat Room
Back
Top