Brendon Wharton (@brendanwhartonfit)

Anguia10

Superior Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2018
Posts
590
Media
4
Likes
4,062
Points
313
Location
Los Angeles (California, United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
I wonder if the “pick me girl” ran back to his very close friend Brendan to let him know what’s going on with people liking the content and subscribing.

But I do agree, his nut looks really good. I’m sure it taste good too.
 

Xyzhomo

Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2019
Posts
219
Media
0
Likes
1,277
Points
288
Location
Los Angeles (California, United States)
Gender
Male
I wonder if the “pick me girl” ran back to his very close friend Brendan to let him know what’s going on with people liking the content and subscribing.

But I do agree, his nut looks really good. I’m sure it taste good too.
Lmaoooo she’s probably mad
 

williamsburg954

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2018
Posts
20
Media
0
Likes
221
Points
63
Location
Austin (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
let's just be logical here: in the situation where someone violates DMCA, the creator then hires a very expensive attorney (if any attorney would even take the case cause it's so low stakes), they then issue a cease and desist to the SITE, then the content gets pulled, also likely the user gets banned and scolded for violating both (very very vague) contracts (OF and LPSG), and then the violator finds some other way to rejoin both sites and behaves or doesn't. Meanwhile, if youre in the grace period before the content is pulled, you're basically experiencing a flash sale.

I mean, it's a $15 video from an adult content creator's broadcast channel for fans. What lawyer is gonna take on that case? How the heck can they even prove damages when there is clearly residual beneficial clap back (especially on BW's thread).

Like yall ever listen to the radio? Thats basically what a leaked ppv is, it's one song...and its hopefully a good enough sample for the full album, but is it worth the subscription?

And also, leaked adult content has almost ALWAYS catapulted celebrities into household names. Unless you're that actor who played screech on saved by the bell or Fred durst. OF literally made it NOT revenge porn. Like their content is contractually and prolifically made to be posted on the internet. It's not some stolen VHS from his bedside table or anything.

How likely is BW worried about too much celebrity leading to TOO MANY subscribers which means TOO MUCH money?? And if so, it's worth reiterating that this thread compared to almost all the others on this site has been incredibly supportive and respectful to his hustle?? There's so many subscribers in the thread and tons of new subscribers JUST from the feedback on here.

the screenshot perfectly epitomizes this site
 

Attachments

williamsburg954

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2018
Posts
20
Media
0
Likes
221
Points
63
Location
Austin (Texas, United States)
Sexuality
60% Straight, 40% Gay
Gender
Male
let's just be logical here: in the situation where someone violates DMCA, the creator then hires a very expensive attorney (if any attorney would even take the case cause it's so low stakes), they then issue a cease and desist to the SITE, then the content gets pulled, also likely the user gets banned and scolded for violating both (very very vague) contracts (OF and LPSG), and then the violator finds some other way to rejoin both sites and behaves or doesn't. Meanwhile, if youre in the grace period before the content is pulled, you're basically experiencing a flash sale.

I mean, it's a $15 video from an adult content creator's broadcast channel for fans. What lawyer is gonna take on that case? How the heck can they even prove damages when there is clearly residual beneficial clap back (especially on BW's thread).

Like yall ever listen to the radio? Thats basically what a leaked ppv is, it's one song...and its hopefully a good enough sample for the full album, but is it worth the subscription?

And also, leaked adult content has almost ALWAYS catapulted celebrities into household names. Unless you're that actor who played screech on saved by the bell or Fred durst. OF literally made it NOT revenge porn. Like their content is contractually and prolifically made to be posted on the internet. It's not some stolen VHS from his bedside table or anything.

How likely is BW worried about too much celebrity leading to TOO MANY subscribers which means TOO MUCH money?? And if so, it's worth reiterating that this thread compared to almost all the others on this site has been incredibly supportive and respectful to his hustle?? There's so many subscribers in the thread and tons of new subscribers JUST from the feedback on here.

the screenshot perfectly epitomizes this site
That being said, I refuse to share his PPVs Lolol but "BW's friend" needs to lighten up
 
  • Like
Reactions: flyer84

LPSG Support

Mythical Member
Staff
Moderator
Gold
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Posts
26,516
Media
178
Likes
49,043
Points
208
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
let's just be logical here: in the situation where someone violates DMCA, the creator then hires a very expensive attorney (if any attorney would even take the case cause it's so low stakes), they then issue a cease and desist to the SITE, then the content gets pulled, also likely the user gets banned and scolded for violating both (very very vague) contracts (OF and LPSG), and then the violator finds some other way to rejoin both sites and behaves or doesn't. Meanwhile, if youre in the grace period before the content is pulled, you're basically experiencing a flash sale.

I mean, it's a $15 video from an adult content creator's broadcast channel for fans. What lawyer is gonna take on that case? How the heck can they even prove damages when there is clearly residual beneficial clap back (especially on BW's thread).

Like yall ever listen to the radio? Thats basically what a leaked ppv is, it's one song...and its hopefully a good enough sample for the full album, but is it worth the subscription?

And also, leaked adult content has almost ALWAYS catapulted celebrities into household names. Unless you're that actor who played screech on saved by the bell or Fred durst. OF literally made it NOT revenge porn. Like their content is contractually and prolifically made to be posted on the internet. It's not some stolen VHS from his bedside table or anything.

How likely is BW worried about too much celebrity leading to TOO MANY subscribers which means TOO MUCH money?? And if so, it's worth reiterating that this thread compared to almost all the others on this site has been incredibly supportive and respectful to his hustle?? There's so many subscribers in the thread and tons of new subscribers JUST from the feedback on here.

the screenshot perfectly epitomizes this site

A lot of what you wrote is incorrect. A lawyer is not required for content to be removed. The copyright holder can send a dmca themselves and do it for free.
 

Porn_please

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Posts
24
Media
0
Likes
94
Points
53
Location
San Francisco (California, United States)
I think he will eventually show everything
I feel like ppl are also willing to pay too. He’s probably working up to it. Where his latest content is going, feels like we’re close! Give the ppl what they want and cash out in the process!! :p
 

focus0t

Superior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Posts
1,607
Media
0
Likes
6,862
Points
418
Location
USA
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Male
Brendon and I are friends. I don't like it that he is losing income when someone posts a picture or video of him without his permission. This content is for his subscribers, and his subscribers only. If you want to see his imagery, pay for it and don't share it freely. Brendon is aware of this thread and he has asked the moderators to remove this content. He has filed a DMCA Notice of Copyright Infringement Form. He is still waiting for their response.

If this looks like I am a "buzzkill", I will gladly accept the label in defense of my friend. I hope any friend of mine, and yours, would do the same.

to be fair, you've been on this website since 2011 and my guess is that you've enjoyed other subscription-based content shared here that you didn't pay for yourself. Don't be hypocritical just because it now includes someone you know personally.