HouseholdsFlatmatesGuestsOpen Wi-FiVPN exits
For studios and paysitesAttribution for the content you are responsible for
You follow the rules. The copy on the tube site does not.
You verify every performer, keep the records, answer removal requests within days, and screen your uploads. A leaked copy carries your brand and your performers to places that do none of that. ICU tells you which account it left through.
01Why attribution matters more in this industry
Consent is revocable.
When a performer withdraws consent, you take the scene down. The copies that already left keep circulating under your name. With ICU you can say which account the copy came from and when it streamed, close that account, and put the attribution in the takedown.
Processors ask about controls.
Card-network rules for adult merchants cover monitoring, blocking and removing unlawful content and verifying age and consent. ICU is not required by those rules and does not satisfy them by itself. What it adds is a record: for every leak you investigated, the account it was traced to and what you did about it.
Age-verification laws push traffic to pirate copies.
Dozens of US states now require age checks on adult sites. Pirate sites skip them, and your content is what they serve. Attribution does not fix the law; it makes the supply of fresh copies traceable.
Repeat leakers are the problem.
One account ripping every new scene is worth more to find than a thousand one-off viewers. ICU finds it on the first clip.
02
A transaction, not an IP address
The enforcement route this industry knows is the torrent suit: a monitoring firm logs IP addresses sharing a file, the studio files against "John Doe", subpoenas the ISP, and sues the subscriber. Tens of thousands of such cases have been filed. The weakness is in the first step: an IP address identifies a connection, not a person. Households, flatmates, guests, open Wi-Fi and VPN exits all share one.
ICU starts from the other end. The leaked copy carries the combination of one account, and that account bought or subscribed with a card. Behind it sits a transaction id, a cardholder name, a billing address and a date. Whether you close the account, charge back, write to the person or file, you begin with the buyer of the title, not with a subpoena.
Torrent suit starts with203.0.113.—
ICU starts withAccount 18 231
Transaction id—Cardholder name—Billing address—Date—
Two cautions
The account holder may have shared their login, and what you may do with the identity is governed by your terms of service and local law. The evidence is stronger than an IP log; it is still evidence, not a verdict.
03What you get, in operational terms
1
A dashboard where staff drop a leaked clip and get the title, the account, the stream date and the certainty.
2
An evidence sheet for the takedown notice, the processor or counsel.
3
The account's full access history for that title, exportable.
4
Streams and downloads both covered, so “they just used the download button” is still a traced account.
04What ICU will not do
×
It will not, by itself, prove who pressed record. It identifies the account that received the stream and, through your records, the transaction that paid for it. Whether the cardholder is the leaker is your investigation, under your terms of service and your local law.
×
It will not remove copies. Pair it with the takedown service you already use; we are building hand-offs with them.
×
It is designed to survive ordinary copying, not every attack: a deliberate mix of copies from two accounts defeats any per-viewer mark. It also cannot mark content that was never served through ICU. The FAQ has the full list.
05Performer-facing angle
Suggested wording
Studios may want to tell performers that leaks are now traceable.
“Scenes on this site are individually marked. If a copy of your scene appears elsewhere, we can usually identify the account that leaked it and act on it.