Porn site with BM all over it

[beachburner]

I ran into these guys on the playa and finally got around to checking out their site. It's a little odd, because they seem to claim they love BM, but yet, it's definitely a porn site with BM all over it. I know BMorg has been diligent about this kind of stuff in the past, but who/what/where do you notify of this kind of stuff?

Here's the link.

http://www.pinkgasm.com/blog/

[ibdave]

I don't see anything wrong with them or the site....

[Lassen Forge]

Just the title of this topic makes me a little queasy...

Now, I don't really mind porn sites... but with BM all over it?? YEECH!!!

Sounds like someone oughtta "jots" down the info on this one...

bb

PS - BTW, what's wrong with their site? I didn't find anything particularly offensive or pornographic on it... Well, I also didn't see any evidence of "bm" or other orficial excretement on it. Hmmm...

bb2

[EB]

I agree with ibdave.

Yes, they're burners and, yes, the site sells porn (?) BUT...

I don't see them as appropriating BM's image to sell porn. It's like when I shopped around for el-wire, I saw a lot of websites that featured their creations at BM. They referenced BM, but they didn't use BM to sell their el-wire. This feels like the same thing.

My point of view would be different, however, if Halcyon, et, al (whose posts on e-playa lead me to believe he's a viable, contributing member to the BM community) were selling footage of Critical Tits and selling it as porn. At first blush, this doesn't look like the case.

EB

[spectabillis]

oh no

[Kinetic IV]

There ain't nothing wrong with that site. And for me at least there's not much right with it, at least enough to keep my attention beyond a few seconds. Yawn. Next?

I have teapots with tempest stirrers available for sale......

[Ranger Genius]

Well, they're clearly using pics taken at BM on a commercial venture. Whether they've got permission to do so I don't know. All the pics I see, however, seem to be of them. So their main crime seems to be that of what may be life-threatening narcissism.

[beachburner]

It's funny because one of the most consistent complaints is about all the leering yahoos shooting pictures of the naked girls.

This site the front page of a pay-porn site - the banner has a nice big ballon that reads "$29.95 a month for XXX vids and pics," so - aside from the fact that they're using Burning Man as an advertisement/ enticement for their porn, they are furthering the image of BM that drives most burners insane.

They do seem to be really into it - sure - but then they should know better.

[Kinetic IV]

I'll take a plate of crow please. Semi-warm, no utensils please as I have those tempest stirrers.....and some tea to wash it down with.

I looked further at the Press Kit and media guides for BM and found this....

http://www.burningman.com/press/pressRandR.html

There's enough rules and regs on that site regarding the use of images to hang these people 15 ways to Sunday. But will the ORG do anything? I wonder how a few people might answer that question considering some simmering controversies of late.

[falk]

I looked at the site and it looked like a pay site. I didn't see any Burning Man pics on the front pages; were they there, or did you have to pay to see them?

[Tay]

You didn't see anything? The top two pictures, under the banner, are on the playa.

and if you search the page the words Burning Man appear at least 5 times, with several other pictures. There's also a reference to video - which appears to be a pay thing.

Hmm. Is anyone upstairs paying attention to this stuff?

[Ranger Genius]

And if you scroll down there's a picture of the two of them (surprise) in front of the man. That one and the one with the public burn platform in the background are both clear intellectual properties violations. Unless, of course, they've got permission to use those photos. It's possible they do.

[bdeywoo]

Well the two people on that site are also displayed in the images page of this site so I would imagine they have gone through all the hoops.

http://images.burningman.com/index.cgi? ... _year=2005

[Tay]

Not necessarily. And they didn't take that picture.

Also, the image gallery is just that, an image gallery. BMorg doesn't check out all the people in the photograph. And if they did APPROVE their use of the images for a porn site, then forget Malcom, we're in a whole other world.

[gawul]

how funny. i've got a picture of them on my photobucket site

[IMG]http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b150/ ... dc0793.jpg[/IMG]

[CagedKitty]

I didn't know it was wrong to use the Burningman name to sell sex. I thought it was just wrong to use sex to sell burningman stuff.

Is that what the other thread guys are mad about, is Malcolm stealing "their" name, and making a profit on it?
Or are you worried about your reputation in front of your friends who know you go to burningman?

We're gifting to eachother, but holding back from the rest of the world, this wonderful thing we've discovered. Let them have it. Let them see everything they want to see about us. Let them have their opinions.

Everyone holding on to their images, it's reminding me of the rest of the world.

[beachburner]

To be honest, I'm not that bummed about the Malcolm thing, but the porn thing is another story. It's not about selling stuff, though it is to some extent. It's about the perception of BM that is presented to the world at large as a place where sex is the primary factor. It inhibits self-expression because it draws people to the event who are there purely for voyeuristic reasons - or there because they think sex is easy and free and everyone wants it.

My friends all think I'm nuts anyway, so what they think of BM couldn't concern me less.

[Sensei]

My only objection concerns her botched boob job. It looks more like the work of a landscaping crew than any self-respecting plastic surgeon.

[HughMungus]

They're into porn and burning man. I don't see a problem. If they had images of OTHERS on their site, that would be a problem. In fact, they seem to be deliberately NOT putting up images of others they saw out there (which would be really easy to do).

[brotherjohn]

This is Brother John on the BM Media Team. Thanks so much for posting this. To answer a few of your questions: if you find something that leaves you concerned or scratching your head, shoot us an e-mail:

press <at> burningman <dot> com

We'll check it out and contact the people responsible, if appropriate. We're always thankful for the help. Some of the most offensive material we've addressed (videos of women showering in their theme camps sold on porn sites) is the result of a fellow burner sending us an e-mail.

As for the blog: no, this is not okay with us and I've contacted the people who run the it. It's not the nudity; we have certainly approved the sale of artistic nude photos (check out Patrick Rodde's "Hips" for example). Some shots that include nudity are published in newspapers, as long as the photographer has a release and the photo provides some context (rather than appearing purely salicious or exploitive).

But the blog site, with the urge to "Upgrade! $29.95 per month!" definitely runs head-on into this part of the photo policy:

"...(Film / video / photos cannot) be used in association with any commercial venture, advertising campaign, nor sold or transferred to a third party, without prior written consent from Black Rock City LLC."

And I can't honestly think of a single example where we allowed someone to use a photo taken at the event for commercial promotion, unless it's part of the advertising for an authorized project about the event (like a documentary or book of photos).

Some of you may know about the pic that showed up in an ad on the wall of the London Underground. That was quickly removed.

We just don't want Burning Man used to sell stuff and do our best to keep on top of that issue. The policy is also designed to protect the privacy of the attendees--not every one wants a photo of their Burning Man costume showing up on the Internet.

You can check out the full photo FAQ here:

http://www.burningman.com/press/pressRandR.html#pressRR

Yeah, it gets pretty lengthy. We sure wish it didn't have to be.

jc <at> burningman <dot> com

[beachburner]

Thanks for keeping up on this.

[Fat SAM]

What's the deal with the London Underground thing?

[ZaphodBurner]

To be honest, I'm not that bummed about the Malcolm thing, but the porn thing is another story. It's not about selling stuff, though it is to some extent. It's about the perception of BM that is presented to the world at large as a place where sex is the primary factor.

Hey, folks. All you have to do to figure this out is look at Mardi Gras.

Across the south, it's a family and community event with parties, gumbo feasts, horse-riding contests, flagellation (love the cajuns), parades, dancing, music. But sometime awhile back it became known for exposed tits and flying beads.

The ones who didn't get it came in with their cameras, video recorders, fake tits...now breasts are a commodity on Bourbon Street; beads that used to cost pennies now cost dollars, because the girls want more/bigger beads, the guys want more/bigger breasts, everything has a beer sponsor stuck to it, everyone has a camera in their face or in somebody else's, nobody on Bourbon Street has any idea anymore what Mardi Gras is all about. On Royal, the locals will throw you beads for a smile, a song, a quick two-step or just because they like your costume. A block away, guys are demanding pussy, girls are demanding $10 beads to flash a breast. Ain't one of 'em knows what a king cake is or how the business of throwing beads came about.

But you can get MARDI GRAS XXXTREME!!! videos of girls flashing for sale in the Quarter and on the internet, you get hotels costing $1000/night filled with corporate tourists going out in t-shirts and jeans jamming their cameras into every crowd...

Welcome to Burning Man 200x, if people don't look to New Orleans and see what has happened to Mardi Gras--a CATHOLIC holiday--in the French Quarter.

-c

[we0ne]

I went to burning man for the first time this year with my 3 year old. Upon return, my feedback to the org was to ban camers and video all togehter and close the gates after Thursday. This will hopefully after a year or two decrease the "girls gone wild" weekend warrior crowd who were glued to their camers and didn't paarticipate in anything but filling up the portapotties.

[brotherjohn]

For those of you who were following this, I wanted you to know that the couple who runs the site that started this thread were very responsive, understanding and respectful. They agreed to remove the pictures as soon as possible (I think they're down now).

[ZaphodBurner]

I went to burning man for the first time this year with my 3 year old. Upon return, my feedback to the org was to ban camers and video all togehter and close the gates after Thursday.

I extend the benefit of the doubt that you participated in some context and didn't just show up and enjoy everybody's art before telling the org that people shouldn't be able to take pictures of it.

Cameras are how we exchange our experiences for the rest of our lives after the event. This year, our dumped over $3,000 into supplies to provide a root beer saloon, a public viewing platform, live music and thematic art. It's unreasonable to suggest that our group shouldn't be allowed to photograph ourselves doing it.

If folks are so ashamed of going to Burning Man that they don't want to be filmed, they shouldn't go. Or, wear a costume.

Last year my wife and survived a near-rollover animal collision on the side of the highway in bumfuck nowhere on the way to the Burn. We literally used HER tools, some duct tape and raw determination to fix our transmission cooler, radiator, cooling lines, headlight, hood and hoses more or less on the side of the road in order to get to BRC in time.

Had we got there and somebody said "Oh, you can't go in. We closed the gates", we would have gotten into BRC one way or another, commando if necessary, with the same determination we used to get there. It wouldn't have made any difference.

Not intending to bitch anybody out here, just stating my POV. Peace.

-c
Photos: http://www.zaphodburns2005.org

[Alia]

I guess the pictures are gone or something, because I never saw any of them at Burning Man on their pay site. They have pictures of them on their personal blog sites, but from what I've read of the, they really like Burning Man, so that's understandable.

[Isotopia]

If folks are so ashamed of going to Burning Man that they don't want to be filmed, they shouldn't go. Or, wear a costume.

Feeling sick.....to....stomach.

C'mon dude. Don't defualt back to lame sloganeering. Seriously.

[Blonde Iguana]

Speaking of Critical Tits on porn sites...the links below are a couple reasons why I won't ride in CT again...

http://www.troutbrook.com/bmgallery16.html
Look at the bottom of page, you'll see an option to purchase prints.

http://www.coccozella.com/zPATRON/1new_gal_exhibit.htm
A website selling to the option for members to pant over their pics of probably mostly unconsenting women. Look just a little more than halfway down the page for Critical Tits. You need to pay to join and look at the pics.

Are these things addressed by BM Media? Should I send them on to someone in charge?

[Simply Joel]

My only objection concerns her botched boob job. It looks more like the work of a landscaping crew than any self-respecting plastic surgeon.

yeah, what Sensei said.

and

why aren't burners offered a discount to site?