Comments on: Luxuriousity - OSS Application Scammer

By: ray

ray — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:33:54 +0000

The site now comes up as “under maintenance” and says that we should come back later.

You should still knock out an email to the FSF.

By: Ken Jennings

Ken Jennings — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:59:35 +0000

“I’d like to point out that OpenOffice.org is clearly not Sun’s software, but Open Source software which is contributed to by Sun.”

I think Sun may be less a contributor and more like a vulture with its claws dug in. The recent programmer comments made on an OOo issue I entered YEARS ago and which is only now being addressed suggest that the problem could have been fixed long ago, but Sun’s lack of cooperation obstructs progress. If Sun was merely a contributor they shouldn’t be able to interfere and bog down the community like this.

http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4925

Thanks, Ken.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:18:04 +0000

Ray: I was thinking about it, but the FSF will probably pick it up anyway - they’re bound to find it after a while. I wonder what the site is “Under maintenance” for…

Ken: Hi - I didn’t know Sun was so deep into the project! But still, while that issue (which as you said should have been fixed years ago) does show Sun’s involvement, it is because of thousands of developers worldwide that OO.org has become what it now is. I’ve skimmed through the issue you submitted, but I couldn’t find where Sun was inhibiting its progress - although I saw that a patch has recently been made and will (supposedly) be in the upcoming 2.0.3 release.

By: Vik

Vik — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:42:19 +0000

Searching for “luxuriousity” in google and accessing the website through google’s Cached Pages works. The rest of the site seems to be working fine … looks like he’s just taken the main page down!

By: Thomas

Thomas — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:42:50 +0000

Sun bought the StarOffice from the German company Star Division and released it as open source and cleaned it up. I think it is unreasonable to have such a harsh view of Sun in this regard. Sun gave us OpenOffice - let’s be thankful.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 21:51:00 +0000

Vik - Good point (I cleared my cache and now I’ve realised that Ray is right - it’s still under construction).

What I don’t understand is why this guy had to rename everything as if they are products that he himself coded - and only someone looking at the fine print would actually notice that they are not his. Even then - he is ripping people off! Charging them $30 to download something they could download for free? It’s abominable…

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:01:33 +0000

They are a post office box:

Luxuriousity, Inc.
pmb#442
Post Office Box 5670
Santa Monica, CA 90409-5670

If you send your money to a post office box so they can send you a CD of stolen software (that you can download for nothing)- you get what you deserve. “Walk away with great bargains” at Luxuriousity . I’m sending them my money:)

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:31:04 +0000

I thought US law forbid selling anything on a web site without a physical mailing address? That is, posting only a post office box is not allowed.

And by the way, the web site is up with no construction notice right now!

Jim

By: scott_R

scott_R — Thu, 19 Jan 2006 22:52:37 +0000

Wow! It’s amazing how audacious people can be. Usually I’m willing to give a company the benefit of the doubt, (maybe they’re just clueless, some manager tried to push the limits or something), but this site is truly a poster child for GPL scammers. For one thing, next to their “great software” they also offer weight loss stuff? You’d pretty much have to be a braindead scammer yourself to buy into their sales pitch, with no real contact information, the interesting variety of products they offer (hypnosis?), and the overly enthusiastic (the the point of funny) “customer praise”. Somebody should archive this site for future reference before this “company” gets shut down…

By: Niels Elgaard Larsen

Niels Elgaard Larsen — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:57:12 +0000

I do not want to defend this guy. But he can certainly sell MySQL if he wants to.
MySQL AB licensed it as GPL and cannot prevent him selling copies for a fee as long as the copies are also GPL and fullfill the requirement of the GPL.

By: tannhaus

tannhaus — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 05:18:27 +0000

They’re back up again…..and it’s as bad as you say.

By: Grogan

Grogan — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 05:56:51 +0000

He’s using PayPal to take money. Just send complaints to paypal… multiple reports that he’s using his paypal service to commit fraud will likely get his account frozen and his money tied up in limbo. Shut him down, it will.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:03:00 +0000

Jim: I’m not too sure about US law (I’m not American ;)) but that sounds about right.
I also think the supplied phone number is fake, so there’s no point trying to call him to tell him what a selfish _ he is.

Niels: I’m pretty sure he cannot sell MySQL - because he isn’t providing the source code (not even on request!) which means that he can’t be using the GPL. Therefore, he must be using the Commercial licence:

The Commercial License, which allows you to provide commercial software licenses to your customers or distribute MySQL-based applications. This is for organizations that do not want to release the source code for their applications as open source / free software; in other words they do not want to comply with the GNU General Public License (GPL). For more detail on the Commercial non-GPL License, click here. Or, if you want more information on pricing, click here.

But I doubt this guy’s actually bought the Commercial License, which means he’s going against MySQL’s policy.

So everyone, shall we target his PayPal account, website’s bandwidth or shall we all email the FSF to complain? One of them’s bound to work!

By: ZaphyR

ZaphyR — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:23:11 +0000

we could /. him, it should make an impact on his bandwith

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:54:03 +0000

Help me figure this out:

1. He’s re-selling rebranded GPL software (allowed under GPL, correct?).
2. However, he’s really not giving the changes made (required under GPL) since he’s changed the name of the software.
3. Right now, there is no link directly to find HIS source code; after all, he did change the name, thus changed the file, thus is required to make the source code reasonably accessible to those who have purchased the software. Does anyone know if you purchase the software if the source or access to the source comes with it?

I’m probably missing something else here as well.

I agree - drop a line to FSF and see what they think about this one.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:24:03 +0000

ZaphyR: Good idea! Or I guess we could all just download the largest file on his site, delete it, and do the same thing again in a constant loop - that’d get it going nice’n’sluggy

Tom: I have asked a guy who bought it, and apparently it does not bring the source code (which violates the GPL). But even if it did, what this guy’s doing is just immoral…. anyhoo, I’ll contact the FSF to see what I can do! Join in if you’d like - the more support we can get, the greater chances we have of taking him out!

By: ZaphyR

ZaphyR — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:51:38 +0000

well, I submitted it to /. now, lets hope it has some effect at least I’ll also contact FSF later on

By: Steven

Steven — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:27:27 +0000

This is insanely unethical. As much as we could talk about the legality of this, it’s not doing any good. Someone from Santa Monica, CA should scope out that post office and wait for that guy. Then; take pictures and put cool text on the photos with “his software,” and post back to us. It’d be nice to put a face on the most hated guy in the OSS community since Darl McBride.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:30:14 +0000

Haha - we overran their bandwidth limit!
I’m in the process of compiling an email to the FSF anyway…

By: Steven

Steven — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:32:22 +0000

Ok, well his name is Mark Terwilliger and there are no people under that name from California. But, I did find a location with that name within reasonable driving distance: Chandler, AZ. But, there is also a guy with that name in Oregon. But, Santa Monica is slightly too far away to be reasonable.

Here we go:
Terwilliger, Mark & Janet
Chandler, AZ 85248

480-883-9317

…and the one from OR….

Terwilliger, Mark
30177 SE Eagle View Dr
Eagle Creek, OR 97022

503-637-6417

By: ZaphyR

ZaphyR — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:15:08 +0000

just call ‘em and ask!
“Bandwidth Limit Exceeded
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to the site owner reaching his/her bandwidth limit. Please try again later.
Apache/1.3.34 Server at www.luxuriousity.com Port 80″

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:27:47 +0000

Good detective work Steven - SamSpade didn’t provide half as much info (even searching different databases!)

“Bandwidth Limit Exceeded
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to the site owner reaching his/her bandwidth limit. Please try again later.
Apache/1.3.34 Server at www.luxuriousity.com Port 80″

Now that’s what I’m talking about! Was it Slashdotted or something? Lol…

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:30:32 +0000

My email to the FSF:

Dear Sir,

I have come across violations of the GPL at Luxuriousity .

Luxuriousity are selling GPL’ed software like OpenOffice.org, The GIMP, MySQL AB, Audacity and a few others under different names, such as “Luxuriousity Office Professional”, “Luxuriousity Media Player”, “Luxuriousity Multi-Track Music Studio Professional” and others. Now, quite a few people who have bought Luxuriousity products have realised that they are actually the same as programs they already had - or which they could download for free, instead of $29.99.

While this is a complete scam, I believe that it is not there where the GPL is violated, but rather the fact that the source is not distributed with the products (I have contacted a few of the disappointed purchasers) and it is not available upon request (I sent an email as if I were a purchaser wishing to view the source code and received no reply). Some details follow:

Precise name of the product: There are several. Luxuriousity: Office Professional, Office Deluxe, Email Document Viewer, Media Player, Multi-Track Music Studio Professional, Karaoke Professional, the list goes on…

Name of organization: Luxuriousity Inc.

Postal address:

Luxuriousity Inc.
P.O. Box 5670
Santa Monica CA 90409
US

More info to be found here: SamSpade

Name of violated package: There are various. OpenOffice.org, VLC, The GIMP, Audacity, MySQL AB, and more.

How the license was violated: The source code is completely missing.

I have posted about this on my blog: here , which may offer some more information.

Thank you,

M. B.

And their reply:

Yep, this is definitely a problem. You should write to the copyright
holders of the software in question to let them know.

–
-Dave “Novalis” Turner
GPL Compliance Engineer
Free Software Foundation

So, I’m beginning those emails as soon as I finish my supper! Hopefully this guy will be stopped permanently.

By: ZaphyR

ZaphyR — Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:41:42 +0000

new message on Luxuriousity.com now:

“System is currently down.”

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Sat, 21 Jan 2006 08:26:44 +0000

Yeh - I wonder what has happened. :S

I guess we’ll just have to wait and see…

By: Erik Jan Tromp

Erik Jan Tromp — Sat, 21 Jan 2006 10:33:51 +0000

Cute trick. Replace the toplevel page with “System is currently down.” & folks might go away.

http://www.luxuriousity.com/support.htm

By: hari

hari — Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:39:37 +0000

I saw that site on LQ a while ago. Somebody should put that guy down. The sheer audacity took my breath away when I first saw that scam!

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Sat, 21 Jan 2006 12:44:10 +0000

Erik: You’re right, the pages have all been put back up except for the index. eg Office Professional for Mac.

Hari: Really? I haven’t had too much time to go on LQ the past few days… Hopefully I’ll be back on soon But yeah, I find it incredible that this guy’s got the nerve to do this!

Anyway, I contacted The GIMP, Audacity, and MySQL. I’ve still got to contact VLC, and I was unable to contact OO.org because they’ve only got mailing lists - although Sun do have a contact form (could someone please do that one for me? I can’t access sites with SSL from here… please just quote the email I sent to the FSF and their reply, with a little note saying that you were asked to inform them - thanks!).

I will try to get in touch with VLC as soon as possible.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Sat, 21 Jan 2006 13:21:16 +0000

Update on the war front: I have contacted VLC.

I have also received a reply from G. Andrews in response to my email to the Audacity mailing list (I have also contacted the project leader):

Thank you for your report, you are quite correct that it is the failure to
distribute the source code that constitutes the violation, see the following
which relates to eBay sales but is applicable generally.

http://audacity.sourceforge.net/help/faq?s=general&i=ebay

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Tue, 24 Jan 2006 07:59:24 +0000

Another update: Response from Dominic (Audacity maintainer):

M.B.,

We’re well aware of Luxuriousity, they’re been doing this for years.
We’ve even emailed them and discussed the matter - obviously they don’t
see things our way.

While I agree that they are violating the GPL, I believe this is a small
infraction relative to their false advertising, which is the real
problem. They are distributing Audacity (and the other programs)
completely unmodified, with the GPL and our original offer for source
code perfectly intact. As the URL where the Audacity source code is
clearly contained in our README, they could make the argument that they
are giving people the source by pointing them to the URL. That does not
excuse them from ignoring an email from someone asking for the source,
and I agree it does not comply with the GPL literally, but I’m just
saying that the argument on our side seems kind of weak.

The false advertising, though, is big. Lots of people are buying
Luxuriousity products having no idea that they could download the same
for free elsewhere.

What do you think we should do about it? Let me know what you hear from
the authors of the GIMP, OpenOffice, etc. and if you are interested in
doing something, what we should do to help.

- Dominic

But that’s the thing - what can we do? Unless we constantly use up their bandwidth (which is only a temporary solution) then we can’t do anything. Letting people know? What’s the point - they’re more likely to find Luxuriousity on Ebay than this site explaining why not to go there. I’m not going to do anything illegal, and legal action is also out of the question….so are we stuck with these guys and their scams?

A blog post by Derk-Jan Hartman of VLC:

From Planet VideoLAN

So after our recent issue with the Sony Rootkit, yet again several things have been reported to us. This time someone is selling our software for $29,99 without informing the user they will simply be getting VLC media player which is free for download. Read the full story on the blog of J_K9 Linux. The other report is about the possibly violation of the Elanvision EV-8000S STB, which firmware includes VLC.

By: ray

ray — Tue, 24 Jan 2006 16:21:15 +0000

I can’t believe that there is nothing we can do.

http://gpl-violations.org/
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-violation.html - says this “Note that the GPL, and other copyleft licenses, are copyright licenses. This means that only the copyright holders are empowered to act against violations. The FSF acts on all GPL violations reported on FSF copyrighted code, and we offer assistance to any other copyright holder who wishes to do the same.”
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html - may also be of help

From http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ReportingViolation

“What should I do if I discover a possible violation of the GPL?
You should report it. First, check the facts as best you can. Then tell the publisher or copyright holder of the specific GPL-covered program. If that is the Free Software Foundation, write to . Otherwise, the program’s maintainer may be the copyright holder, or else could tell you how to contact the copyright holder, so report it to the maintainer.”

There are things that can be done, but it may be better for all the licensees to get together and acto together. Or talk to Sun and get thm to spearhead the whole thing

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:34:35 +0000

Thanks for that info. It looks like we’re going to have to get Sun into this then - shall we send them an email? I can’t because SSL is a no-no in this network, so I can’t access their contact form. Could someone else please do it for the community?

It’s about time Luxuriousity went down - at least we’re steering most people away by forcing them to remove their index page. It’s a step forwards…

By: ray

ray — Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:51:24 +0000

I think it wise to get Sun involved: they have more legal muscle and PR muscle than anyone else affected.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:08:35 +0000

Yup… I think they will pay more attention to us if we email them en masse. If they’re willing to help, we’ll have Luxuriousity out of the picture pretty soon - and stop more people getting robbed of their money.

By: ray

ray — Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:34:05 +0000

If I could find a link, I’d report them. Sun don’t seem to have any links for reporting violations like this.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Wed, 25 Jan 2006 19:57:17 +0000

Yep - I ended up sending mine to users@openoffice.org. I hope it gets the attention it deserves (I’m not even sure if that’s a related address for our problem). Found it here.

By: dan

dan — Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:26:04 +0000

I bought all of his CDs, and guess what? The license and the source code and links to the source code and a source code written offer are included on the CD. It seems to me that this is perfectly legal and, in fact, encouraged by the GPL. I can’t imagine why the opensource community is trying to shut down somebody who is distributing their code to people who haven’t already downloaded it free. I’m not sure what everybody is reporting about them? Sun DID write openoffice, and mySQL doesn’t want people to use their brand name. Developers DO want customers pointed to their websites, whether they downloaded the software free or paid for it. A long time ago Richard Stallman tryed to differenciate “free beer” from “freedom”. GPL software is not free beer; it is being offered to distributors with the freedom to modify or distribute it. This notion that he’s in violation of the GPL is ludicrous.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Tue, 31 Jan 2006 14:28:12 +0000

Dan - Point taken, but you are not taking into account the fact that this guy is ripping people off seriously. They could download all of those programs off the internet legally, and if not they could buy $5 CDs to be shipped. But this guy is selling them for nothing less than $29 under another name, which fools the public and steals their money. And if he is not violating the GPL, he is violating morality.

Trust is one of the most important factors in everybody’s life. I guess I find it hard to believe that so many people lack it.

By: JP

JP — Sun, 05 Feb 2006 03:00:49 +0000

I wish I would of seen this earlier i got sucked into buying the product from Lux…. I can not find how I payed through Paypal they of course have no record of this. Well I guess I learned a lesson. Thanks for this page

By: Dan

Dan — Sun, 05 Feb 2006 11:50:34 +0000

J_K9 - Point taken, but then Novell and RedHat in your opinion are also ripping people off seriously. Red Hat’s stock is 28.32; how dare they make money off opensource! Novell’s is 9.53, damn them! People could download all those programs off the internet legally, and if not they could buy them for $5 CDs to be shipping. But these guys are selling them for lots more and with their own brand names, which, in your opinion, fools the public into thinking they couldn’t download them cheaper off the internet. That must violate “morality”. Plus it really pisses me off! Damn those cell phone companies that use opensource to run their cell phones…Immoral! We should buy the chips and build the phones ourselves and load free software on them. Damn those guys paying for listings on Ebay, they should pay for the listings and tell the people where to download software for free. Did cha ever consider that um…..um…duh…the people need some technical support…or um…duh…they need the paid marketing to even know about these products in the first place? You wanna pay for advertising and give your product away free? Richard Stallman is genius…you on the other hand…well, it’s kinda obvious. Get a life.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Sun, 05 Feb 2006 17:03:18 +0000

JP - No problem. I’m sorry you got caught though…

Dan -

Did cha ever consider that um…..um…duh…the people need some technical support…or um…duh…they need the paid marketing to even know about these products in the first place?

If you’d read my post or even these comments, you would have realised that Luxuriousity are NOT offering support for those products. As for the second part, when they buy Luxuriousity they don’t know and probably never find out that the products sold by Luxuriousity are not proprietary products, but actually software they could have downloaded. Please think before you type.

How did Red Hat and Novell come into this? Distribution vendors are a completely different story - they actually change GNU/Linux to include certain applications and some different tweaks and configurations. Some distros are made for servers, others for home users, other for multimedia specialists, you get the picture.

Once again, please form a coherent argument before you comment.

By: Grogan

Grogan — Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:28:31 +0000

While I’m well aware that the free software licenses allow you to charge money for distribution, what bothers me seemingly more than others is how the products are being misrepresented on the website. Perhaps the licensing info is intact in the packages, but to me you still should not be able to misrepresent things at the front end like that. Most people would not read deep enough to see that it isn’t really “Luxuriosity’s software”. To me that is what should be most fraudulent about this but it seems that it’s the least of the wrongs from a legal standpoint.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Sun, 12 Feb 2006 10:45:12 +0000

Grogan - precisely. He’s tricking hundreds of people into believing that the software he’s selling really is a Luxuriousity product, and that they are paying for what the Luxuriousity team must have spent hours working on.
But, as you said, the GPL doesn’t really mention this, so we cannot hold it against this guy.

By: Kernon

Kernon — Sat, 15 Jul 2006 16:03:05 +0000

Wow…IF (there are many assumptions being made) this guy is doing something wrong then, how come the original software developers aren’t all over this guy? Why is it your duty to defend their hard work if they aren’t doing it themselves? Have they asked for assistance to stop this guy? Why not? Could it be that the guy just might not be violating anything to the degree that everyone seems to be so overjoyed at assuming?

Don’t get me wrong (I’m sure many of you will anyway), I’m not defending the guy. IF what he’s doing is wrong then by all means, bring him down…HARD. But, what if you are wrong in your assumptions? What if this guy is just as decent a guy as you seem to think yourself to be? The only difference is, he made some simple mistakes in interpreting the license. Then again, he could be the jerk everyone is assuming…we don’t know yet.

My point is this, with all the eager-beaver efforts made to get this guy, you place yourselves in the position of being a much bigger a$$hole than you claim he is. Tracking down his home address, phone number, trying to get a photo of the guy, wanting to secretly watch his PO Box, posting any and all personal info about the guy and his family onto the internet…that’s a bit much don’t you think. You’re worse than you claim him to be. Even if he is guilty, that doesn’t give you the right to violate him and his family’s privacy. You should be prosecuted as well. I hope they (the authorities, not you — who made you the authority?) catch him (if he’s guilty) and I hope they catch you as well because you have already crossed the line with your overzealous self-righteousness.

By: J_K9

J_K9 — Sat, 15 Jul 2006 22:19:02 +0000

My point is this, with all the eager-beaver efforts made to get this guy, you place yourselves in the position of being a much bigger a$$hole than you claim he is. Tracking down his home address, phone number, trying to get a photo of the guy, wanting to secretly watch his PO Box, posting any and all personal info about the guy and his family onto the internet…that’s a bit much don’t you think. You’re worse than you claim him to be. Even if he is guilty, that doesn’t give you the right to violate him and his family’s privacy. You should be prosecuted as well. I hope they (the authorities, not you — who made you the authority?) catch him (if he’s guilty) and I hope they catch you as well because you have already crossed the line with your overzealous self-righteousness.

Wow, if you really think I believe and/or said all that, then you are in fact far more fucked up than I am. Take the time to read all of my posts before calling me a bigger asshole than he is, alright? I never said that he’s an asshole - but I do disagree with what he is doing.

If you cannot be bothered to speak to me formally, and instead accuse me of saying (or having the intention of doing) some things to ruin his life, then all I can do is tell you to re-read this page, and go out for a cup of coffee.

And if your comments were directed at a select few of the people who have commented on this post, then please state their names - a generalisation like the one you made is completely unnecessary.

By: Nicole

Nicole — Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:12:30 +0000

I wish I had found this thread ~20 min ago. I just purchased the Karaoke software for a class project and couldn’t believe it’s resemblance to Audacity. I have Audacity already and unless your recording is in stereo it’s very difficult to strip the audio out.
I’m filing a complaint with paypal - I want a refund.

By: Gunny

Gunny — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:04:54 +0000

Back to the Novell/Red Hat complaint: Red Hat + Novell make no secert you can get their products for free: Fedora and OpenSuse, and also CentOS and not bothering to register SLED.

But marketing GPL software as your own work and charging for it is plain immoral.

By: Claudia

Claudia — Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:14:31 +0000

My husband and I paid for by debit card and downloaded the software to remove vocals from music. It says there is a money back guarantee but I have not found a way to contact Luxuriosity. Did I see in one of the posts above that someone has an email from them. I’m sure we have been totally scammed but thought I would try to contact them.

By: Buy oxycodone without prescription.

Buy oxycodone without prescription. — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 07:43:43 +0000

Oxycodone extraction iv….

Oxycodone addiction. Snorting oxycodone. Oxycodone….

By: check tennant credit

check tennant credit — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 18:13:43 +0000

check tennant credit…

borrowing parameterizes Raphael!soiled imports Newton …

By: Auto loans low rates

Auto loans low rates — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 19:31:22 +0000

Auto loans low rates…

Cash personal payday auto loans in arizona. Auto title loans in mesa az. Auto grants no loans. Dallas auto loans…

By: Viagra effects.

Viagra effects. — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 05:38:19 +0000

Uk viagra sales….

Viagra. Viagra canada. Cheap viagra. Generic viagra. Viagra without prescription. Viagra samples….

By: Femdom bdsm femdom.

Femdom bdsm femdom. — Fri, 23 May 2008 05:29:58 +0000

Bdsm stories….

Bdsm. Bdsm drawings. Gay bdsm torture. Bdsm comics. Bdsm torture stories. Black bdsm. Bdsm furniture. Bdsm pussy….

By: jeu streap poker

jeu streap poker — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 14:02:10 +0000

jouer poker omaha gratuit…

En este caso strep poker on line free backgammon download no deposit casino el poker 888 poker…