<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>News: File Sharing News</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/page/115/?d=2</link><description>News: File Sharing News</description><language>en</language><item><title>Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week &#x2013;  July 12, 2021</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/top-10-most-pirated-movies-of-the-week-%E2%80%93-july-12-2021-r1186/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – July 12, 2021
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		Every week we take a close look at the most pirated movies on torrent sites. What are pirates downloading? 'Black Widow' tops the chart, followed by ‘The Tomorrow War'. 'A Quiet Place Part II' completes the top three.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		<img alt="black widow" data-ratio="60.97" style="height: 438px; width: 720px;" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/widow.jpg">
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These torrent download statistics are meant to provide further insight into the piracy trends. All data are gathered from public resources.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This week we have five new entries in the list. “Black Widow” is the most downloaded title.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The most torrented movies for the week ending on July 12 are:
	</h2>

	<table border="1px solid black;">
		<thead>
			<tr>
				<th>
					Movie Rank
				</th>
				<th>
					Rank last week
				</th>
				<th>
					Movie name
				</th>
				<th>
					IMDb Rating / Trailer
				</th>
			</tr>
		</thead>
		<tfoot>
			<tr>
				<td colspan="4">
					<p>
						 
					</p>

					<p>
						Most downloaded movies via torrent sites
					</p>
				</td>
			</tr>
		</tfoot>
		<tbody>
			<tr>
				<td>
					1
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					Black Widow
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3480822/" rel="external nofollow">7.0</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fp9pNPdNwjI" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					2
				</td>
				<td>
					(2)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Tomorrow War
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9777666/" rel="external nofollow">6.7</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQjEbkV-9ZM" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					3
				</td>
				<td>
					(1)
				</td>
				<td>
					A Quiet Place Part II
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8332922/" rel="external nofollow">7.7</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpdDN9d9Jio" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					4
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8385148/" rel="external nofollow">6.3</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9C0l31YcahQ" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					5
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Boss Baby: Family Business
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6932874/" rel="external nofollow">6.0</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPzy8Ckza08" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					6
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					Fear Street: Part One – 1994
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6566576/" rel="external nofollow">6.2</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyUuzCGblqc" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					7
				</td>
				<td>
					(8)
				</td>
				<td>
					Cruella
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3228774/" rel="external nofollow">7.5</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmRKv7n2If8" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					8
				</td>
				<td>
					(3)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Ice Road
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3758814/" rel="external nofollow">5.5</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHEPdMqrWjE" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					9
				</td>
				<td>
					(4)
				</td>
				<td>
					Luca
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12801262/" rel="external nofollow">7.6</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYfJxlgR2jw" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					10
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					Settlers
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9373688/" rel="external nofollow">4.6</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rVrDKLEf64" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
		</tbody>
	</table>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<div class="ipsEmbeddedVideo" contenteditable="false">
		<div>
			<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="113" src="https://nsaneforums.com/applications/core/interface/index.html" width="200" data-embed-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Fp9pNPdNwjI?feature=oembed"></iframe>
		</div>
	</div>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Note: We also publish an updating archive of all the list of <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/most-pirated-movies-of-2021/" rel="external nofollow">weekly most torrented movies lists</a>.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/top-10-most-torrented-pirated-movies/" rel="external nofollow">Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – 07/12/2021</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1186</guid><pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 22:38:51 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Brazil&#x2019;s Anti-Piracy &#x201C;Operation 404&#x201D; Leads to Arrests, Shutdowns, and Site Blocking</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/brazil%E2%80%99s-anti-piracy-%E2%80%9Coperation-404%E2%80%9D-leads-to-arrests-shutdowns-and-site-blocking-r1183/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Brazil’s Anti-Piracy “Operation 404” Leads to Arrests, Shutdowns, and Site Blocking
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<article>
	<header>
		<p>
			Brazilian law enforcement agencies have announced the third wave of anti-piracy "Operation 404." With support from the United States and the UK, the authorities blocked or shut down 334 websites and 94 piracy apps, while making five arrests. The blocking targets include 1337x and The Pirate Bay but those domains were not seized.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>
	</header>

	<div>
		<p>
			<img alt="operation 401" data-ratio="62.12" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/opera-401.jpg">
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			In the fall of 2019, Brazilian law enforcement conducted a large <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/huge-anti-piracy-operation-in-brazil-targets-hundreds-of-websites-apps-191104/" rel="external nofollow">anti-piracy campaign</a> codenamed ‘Operation 404,’ referring to the well-known HTTP error code.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			With help from international law enforcement, the authorities took down hundreds of sites and apps and arrested several suspects.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			A year later a new wave of anti-piracy action followed. Under the banner “Operation 404 #2”, law enforcement authorities blocked or seized the domain names of more than 300 pirate sites and streaming apps.
		</p>

		<h2>
			Operation 404 #3
		</h2>

		<p>
			Last week, Brazil’s Ministry of Justice <a href="https://www.gov.br/mj/pt-br/assuntos/noticias/ministerio-da-justica-e-seguranca-publica-apresenta-resultados-de-operacao-de-combate-a-piraria-em-nove-estados" rel="external nofollow">announced</a> the third wave of Operation 404. With 11 search and seizure warrants in hand, law enforcement officials blocked or seized the domains of 334 websites, 94 piracy apps, and 20 IP addresses.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<center style="text-align: left;">
			<img alt="brazil-404" data-ratio="84.11" style="width: 642px; height: auto;" width="642" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/brazil-404-3.jpg">
		</center>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			In addition to the blocking orders, the warrants also require search engines to deindex several domain names while social media networks are asked to suspend piracy-related accounts.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			The operation was coordinated by Brazil’s Secretariat of Integrated Operations (SEOPI), which is part of the Ministry of Justice and Public Security. Brazil also received support from the United States and the UK.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			The US Department of Justice helped to take down three domains and another 27 were taken offline with help from UK law enforcement.
		</p>

		<h2>
			ISP Blockades and Seizures
		</h2>

		<p>
			The names of the targeted sites and services have not been made public. However, a source informs TorrentFreak that the blocked sites include The Pirate Bay, 1337x, YTS, and EZTV.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			Another high-profile target is Superflix. This pirate streaming site had 22 million monthly visits and was listed among the 120 most visited websites in Brazil. The site was already on the radar of Hollywood’s MPA, which flagged it as a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-and-mpa-want-domain-registries-and-njalla-on-us-piracy-watchlist-201110/" rel="external nofollow">notorious pirate site</a> last year.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<center style="text-align: left;">
			<img alt="superflix" data-ratio="76.67" data-sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" data-srcset="https://torrentfreak.com/images/superflix.jpg 1538w, https://torrentfreak.com/images/superflix-1536x1178.jpg 1536w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" srcset="https://torrentfreak.com/images/superflix.jpg 1538w, https://torrentfreak.com/images/superflix-1536x1178.jpg 1536w" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/superflix.jpg">
		</center>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			At the time of writing, Superflix not responsive at all, suggesting that this is more than a simple block. It’s possible that the site’s servers were seized, or perhaps the operator is among the five people who were arrested.
		</p>

		<h2>
			COVID Accentuated Harm
		</h2>

		<p>
			For now, we can only speculate who the targets of the raids and arrests are but it’s clear that the impact of “Operation 404” is being felt throughout Brazil.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			During a press conference, SEOPI’s general coordinator for Combating Organized Crime, Carlos Bock, stressed that piracy-related crime has increased sharply over the past year. This prompted the authorities to step in once again.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			“Being in the digital world is something natural in modern times, but it was very accentuated during the pandemic. This type of crime, therefore, saw a sharp increase in the last year, and the third edition of Operation 404 is an answer to that.”
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<center style="text-align: left;">
			<img alt="bock" data-ratio="58.89" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/bock.jpeg">
		</center>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			The involvement of US and UK law enforcement is noteworthy. The US started a similar <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-government-seizes-bittorrent-search-engine-domain-and-more-101126/" rel="external nofollow">anti-piracy campaign</a> a decade ago, with <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/feds-drop-case-against-torrent-site-return-domain-after-5-years-151204/" rel="external nofollow">quite a bit of pushback</a>. In recent years the Department of Justice has limited its actions to counterfeiting targets.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			The UK’s City of London Police also has a long track record of targeting piracy-related domains. While most registrars <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/domain-registrars-deny-police-requests-suspend-pirate-sites-140808/" rel="external nofollow">refuse to take voluntary action</a>, compliance is less of an issue when there’s backing from Brazilian courts.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			It’s hard to estimate how large the impact of the most recent anti-piracy crackdown is. Many of the blocked sites are still available through proxies and VPNs. However, it looks like Superflix is not that lucky.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<center style="text-align: left;">
			<a href="https://twitter.com/uvapassanoarroz/status/1413294451200512004" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="rip superflix" data-ratio="93.75" style="width: 577px; height: auto;" width="576" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/ripsuperflix.jpg"></a>
		</center>

		<p>
			 
		</p>
	</div>
</article>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/brazils-anti-piracy-operation-404-leads-to-arrests-shutdowns-and-site-blocking-210712/" rel="external nofollow">Brazil’s Anti-Piracy “Operation 404” Leads to Arrests, Shutdowns, and Site Blocking</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1183</guid><pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 22:25:32 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Man Sentenced to 12 Months Prison For Copyright Infringement & Tax Evasion]]></title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/man-sentenced-to-12-months-prison-for-copyright-infringement-tax-evasion-r1182/</link><description><![CDATA[<header>
	<h1>
		Man Sentenced to 12 Months Prison For Copyright Infringement &amp; Tax Evasion
	</h1>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A man who operated several pirate sites that allowed people to download movies and TV shows has been sentenced in the United States. Talon White, who previously admitted to copyright infringement and tax evasion offenses, was handed 12 months in prison and ordered to pay $4.3 million in restitution to the MPAA and IRS.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Almost eight years ago, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agents received information from PayPal concerning a pair of pirate websites called Noobroom.com and Noobroom7.com.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The platforms allowed subscribers to stream movies and TV shows, something that proved of particular interest to the MPAA. The Hollywood group conducted an investigation and it was determined that the sites were distributing copyrighted works without permission from their owners.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Hollywood Tries To Shut Down The Sites
	</h2>

	<p>
		In the summer of 2014, the MPAA (now MPA) sent a cease-and-desist to Noobroom but within days, the site began sending its users to a new site called SuperChillin.com. According to the MPAA, this site – plus two others called Movietv.co and SitPlay.com – were operated by Oregon resident Talon White.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Court documents reveal that after downloading movies from SuperChillin, the MPAA was able to link an IP address to White. The registrant of Sit2Play (which was a near-identical copy of Movietv.co) was listed as White and an associated email address was also linked to him.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		White was suspected of being involved in mass copyright infringement, not to mention money laundering offenses, so in November 2018 a judge approved a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/us-govt-seizes-millions-in-cash-crypto-in-movie-piracy-case-190514/" rel="external nofollow">search and seizure warrant</a> targeting millions in cash and cryptocurrency assets.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A year later, White <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/movie-pirate-pleads-guilty-faces-five-years-in-jail-forfeits-millions-of-dollars-191126/" rel="external nofollow">pleaded guilty</a> to one count each of criminal copyright infringement and tax evasion which had the potential to result in five years’ imprisonment, a $250,000 fine, and three years supervised release on each of the two charges.
	</p>

	<h2>
		After More Than a Year Delay, White Sentenced to Prison
	</h2>

	<p>
		White was originally set to be sentenced during February 2020 but for reasons that likely include the complications caused by the coronavirus pandemic, that took considerably longer than first anticipated.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Nevertheless, last Friday White was sentenced to prison for illegally distributing thousands of copyright-protected movies and television shows and evading taxes on the profits generated by his various illegal sites.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to the Department of Justice, White profited handsomely from his websites. Between February 2018 and September 2018 alone, he received almost $3m in fees. During the November 2018 search-and-seizure operation, agents seized $3.9 million from his accounts, $35,000 in cash, and more than $1 million in cryptocurrency. White did not properly account for this, however.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Between 2013 and 2017, the now 31-year-old filed false personal income tax returns, underreporting his income by more than $4.4 million and causing a tax loss to the IRS of more than $1.7 million.
	</p>

	<h2>
		One Year in Prison, $4.3m Restitution to the MPAA and IRS
	</h2>

	<p>
		In addition to being sentenced to 12 months and one day in federal prison and three years supervised release, White was ordered to pay $4.3m in restitution to the MPAA and IRS. At White’s plea hearing, it was revealed that the lion’s share of the restitution would be going to the IRS.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		On top, White was told he must forfeit all U.S. currency and cryptocurrency seized from his bank accounts. He will also forfeit a house in Newport that was purchased with revenue generated by his piracy operation.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/man-sentenced-to-12-months-prison-for-copyright-infringement-tax-evasion-210712/" rel="external nofollow">Man Sentenced to 12 Months Prison For Copyright Infringement &amp; Tax Evasion</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1182</guid><pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2021 22:22:29 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Toomics Reports Its Own Website for Copyright Infringements</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/toomics-reports-its-own-website-for-copyright-infringements-r1171/</link><description><![CDATA[<header>
	<h1>
		Toomics Reports Its Own Website for Copyright Infringements
	</h1>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Popular webtoon subscription service Toomics is quite active on the anti-piracy front. Unfortunately, the Korean company is not very accurate as its takedown notices target perfectly legal content on Facebook, Amazon, Pinterest and Netflix. Even more bizarrely, Toomics has repeatedly asked Google to remove 'infringing' URLs on its own website.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Every other week we take a casual look at the various takedown requests companies such as Google and Twitter receive.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The vast majority of the notices are valid and point to pirated material, but mistakes are certainly not hard to find.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These errors come in different shapes and sizes. One wrongly identified URL in a list of thousands is somewhat understandable. However, there are also instances where it’s hard to find legitimate claims to begin with.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Toomics’ Takedown Mess
	</h2>

	<p>
		The latter applies to some of the DMCA notices that webtoon publisher <a href="https://toomics.com/en/" rel="external nofollow">Toomics</a> has sent to Google. The company, which recently <a href="https://www.ajudaily.com/view/20201015144848778" rel="external nofollow">teamed up</a> with other publishers to counter piracy, is building a terrible track record.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		We don’t even have to dive deeply into the individual takedowns to show that’s something’s not quite right. The overview of the domains that are most targeted by the company, which includes Amazon, Facebook, Pinterest and Wikipedia, speaks for itself.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="most targeted" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/toomicstargets.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		There are plenty of errors we can choose from to illustrate that something’s wrong. For example, in <a href="https://lumendatabase.org/notices/24444319?access_token=yNBEP--03kM2vdsic-J1VQ" rel="external nofollow">a notice</a> where Toomics attempts to remove ‘pirated’ copies of the webtoon ‘Sweet Bitter Love,’ it targets <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweet_Love,_Bitter_(film)" rel="external nofollow">a film</a>, a <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00fztbr" rel="external nofollow">BBC series</a>, a <a href="https://www.amazon.in/Sweet-Bitter-Love-Rita-Schiano/dp/1883061156" rel="external nofollow">book</a>, and <a href="https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sweet-Bitter-Love/dp/B006JU2K12" rel="external nofollow">a song</a> which happen to share the same name. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
	</p>

	<h2>
		You Have The Wrong Person…
	</h2>

	<p>
		In another <a href="https://lumendatabase.org/notices/24414701?access_token=iBFbospVox3seeuY4HJLZg" rel="external nofollow">takedown request</a>, Toomics tries to go after pirated copies of the webtoon “You Have The Wrong Person”. Instead, it asks Google to remove unrelated URLs including the Wikipedia entry of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magic_Flute" rel="external nofollow">The Magic Flute</a>, various <a href="https://www.mensxp.com/relationships/relationship-problems/28094-10-signs-you-re-in-love-with-the-wrong-person.html" rel="external nofollow">posts</a> about being <a href="https://www.allforblog.com/signs-that-show-you-may-be-in-love-with-the-wrong-person/" rel="external nofollow">in love</a> or <a href="https://www.crosswalk.com/family/marriage/10-signs-you-married-the-wrong-person.html" rel="external nofollow">married</a> to the wrong person, and dozens of other errors.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		We could go on to highlight hundreds of mistakes, but the data speak for themselves. The same can be said for Google’s response, as the company wisely refused to take <a href="https://transparencyreport.google.com/copyright/request/11801409" rel="external nofollow">any action</a> in response to some of Toomic’s takedown notices.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Toomics Targets Its Own Site Too
	</h2>

	<p>
		There is one other thing that stands out in the notices, which we surely want to highlight. Toomics also asked Google to remove dozens of URLs from its own website, Toomics.com.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For example, in the previously mentioned “You Have The Wrong Person” notice there are 14 Toomics.com links that point to the official cartoon. As a bonus, the companies also tried to have the URLs of their own tweets removed. This pattern reappears in several notices and shows that Toomics hasn’t even whitelisted its own website.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="wrong" data-ratio="63.89" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/toomics-foot.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The good news for the webtoon publisher is that Google is good at spotting mistakes. This means that most legitimate links, including the Toomics.com ones, have not been removed from Google’s search results.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		However, Toomics is not always that lucky. We also spotted instances where Google did remove Toomic.com URLs. This Jeopardy webtoon, for example, <a href="https://lumendatabase.org/notices/22158829?access_token=JlFEZ07IBiDToPe6SvT_5w" rel="external nofollow">was self-flagged</a> and no longer appears in search results. But they had that one coming. Let’s hope it’s a wake-up call.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/toomics-reports-its-own-website-for-copyright-infringements/" rel="external nofollow">Toomics Reports Its Own Website for Copyright Infringements</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1171</guid><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Accused Pirate Asks Court to Freeze Assets of &#x2018;Copyright Troll&#x2019; Malibu Media</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/accused-pirate-asks-court-to-freeze-assets-of-%E2%80%98copyright-troll%E2%80%99-malibu-media-r1167/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1 class="hero__title">
	Accused Pirate Asks Court to Freeze Assets of ‘Copyright Troll’ Malibu Media
</h1>

<p>
	<img alt="x-art.jpg" class="ipsImage" data-ratio="63.06" height="414" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/x-art.jpg">
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Malibu Media, the adult entertainment company that has demanded hefty settlements from thousands of pirates over the years, is sailing rough waters. The company has been suspended over tax troubles and now a wrongfully accused pirate has asked a Texas court to freeze Malibu's assets, to secure potential attorneys' fees.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In recent years, adult entertainment outfit Malibu Media has often been described as a copyright-trolling operation.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The company, known for its popular “X-Art” brand, has gone after <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/us-online-piracy-lawsuits-hit-a-record-high-last-year-190104/" rel="external nofollow">thousands of alleged file-sharers</a> in U.S. courts, collecting millions of dollars in settlements.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Accused Pirate Fight Back
	</h2>

	<p>
		Most accused pirates don’t put up a fight, but occasionally one does. This includes a “John Doe” who filed a countersuit accusing Malibu Media of abuse of process, among other things.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		If the accused pirate wins this case, he hopes to recoup tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. However, whether Malibu is able and willing to pay this is rather uncertain, as it appears to be in trouble.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Up until a year or two ago, the adult content company was one of the most active copyright trolls in the United States. In recent months, however, it hasn’t filed any new cases.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Doe’s attorney previously discovered that Malibu’s corporate status had been suspended over <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/california-has-suspended-copyright-troll-malibu-medias-corporate-status-210330/" rel="external nofollow">tax deficiencies</a>, which is still the case today. To stay ahead of any problems, the attorney then asked if the company’s CEO Colette Pelissier could be added as a defendant as well.
	</p>

	<h2>
		John Doe Wants to Freeze Malibu’s Assets
	</h2>

	<p>
		This week, “John Doe” is back in court looking for more guarantees. The accused pirate and his lawyer fear that Malibu could try to transfer assets elsewhere to avoid paying, and they request a preliminary injunction to prevent this from happening.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Absent injunctive relief, Doe will suffer irreparable harm. He has incurred over $80,000.00 dollars in attorney’s fees and costs defending himself. And the evidence shows Malibu and its single member, Colette Pelissier, have a history of obscuring assets and ignoring judgments,” they write.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to earlier testimony from Malibu’s CEO, the company only serves as a “pass-through” asset. The subscriptions for X-art.com go directly to Brigham Field, the husband of Pelissier, who recently filed for bankruptcy.
	</p>

	<h2>
		‘Flounting Court Orders’
	</h2>

	<p>
		In addition, John Doe’s attorney also highlights the problematic legal history of the adult entertainment company and its CEO.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Pelissier has a history of flouting court orders and rules, spurring one judge to hold her in contempt,” the attorney writes, adding that “Malibu and Pelissier have several other judgments against them.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These accusations are backed up with testimonies and references to other cases where Malibu ran into trouble. And in a separate filing this week, Malibu itself confirms that the tax issues have not yet been resolved.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Imminent Risk
	</h2>

	<p>
		According to the accused pirate, this is sufficient evidence to issue an injunction and temporarily freeze all assets.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“All in all, this evidence reveals a sizeable and imminent risk that Malibu will not pay any fee award to Doe, that Pelissier will conceal or move Malibu’s assets, or both.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This injunction should cover all subscription fees from the x-art.com website, as well as the domain itself. In addition, Malibu should not be allowed to transfer any settlement funds it receives, nor should it transfer any copyrights to other entities.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		At the time of writing, Malibu Media hasn’t responded to this request, but the company will likely object.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of John Doe’s motions for a preliminary injunction to freeze assets is <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/malibu-freeze.pdf" rel="external nofollow">available here (pdf)</a>
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/accused-pirate-asks-court-to-freeze-assets-of-copyright-troll-malibu-media-210710/" rel="external nofollow">Accused Pirate Asks Court to Freeze Assets of ‘Copyright Troll’ Malibu Media</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1167</guid><pubDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2021 22:06:59 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Media Giants Request Dynamic Order to Block Pirated NHL Streams in Canada</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/media-giants-request-dynamic-order-to-block-pirated-nhl-streams-in-canada-r1156/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Media Giants Request Dynamic Order to Block Pirated NHL Streams in Canada
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Several of the largest Canadian media companies, including Bell and Rogers, are asking the Federal Court for a new and broader piracy blocking order. To prevent multi-million dollar losses, the media giants want Internet providers to dynamically block IP-addresses that provide access to pirated NHL streams.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Two months ago, Canada’s Federal Court of Appeal <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/federal-court-of-appeal-court-upholds-canadian-pirate-site-blocking-order-210526/" rel="external nofollow">upheld the first pirate site blocking order</a> in the country.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Following a complaint from major media companies Rogers, Bell and TVA, the Court confirmed that major ISPs must block access to domains and IP addresses of pirate IPTV service GoldTV.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		There was little opposition from Internet providers, except for TekSavvy, which argued that the injunction threatens the open Internet. In addition, the company warned that it could open the floodgates to many other blocking requests.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		TekSavvy’s hunch may not be far off. This week, Rogers, Bell and TVA are back in Canada’s Federal Court, requesting a new and much more advanced piracy blocking order.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Dynamic NHL Piracy Blocking Order
	</h2>

	<p>
		The new request isn’t targeted at a specific site or service. Instead, it aims to shut down any pirated live streams of National Hockey League (NHL) games. This is similar to existing dynamic football blockades, which are <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/high-court-grants-premier-league-iptv-blocking-order-fans-beg-for-more-legal-options-200903/" rel="external nofollow">commonplace in the UK</a> and other European countries.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The media companies, which include Bell’s CTV Television and The Sports Network, note that technology is rapidly evolving. Pirates constantly change the way they offer content which makes ‘static’ site-blocking orders useless in some cases.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This is particularly true for live streaming. The ‘pirates’ who offer these streams anticipate countermeasures and rotate between IP addresses and servers, sometimes even during live broadcasts.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Thousands of Streams
	</h2>

	<p>
		The rightsholders cite data from anti-piracy partner ‘Friend MTS,’ which found that pirates offered 53,443 illegal live streams in a four-month period earlier this year, with a mean of 822 distinct IP addresses per week.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Some of these servers are only active and can only be identified during the live broadcast of a popular event and pirates are even able to adjust their infrastructures during the broadcast to attempt to circumvent enforcement measures,” the media companies write.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Plaintiffs are thus asking this Court to also adapt existing remedies and grant the only effective remedy available in these circumstances to stop such blatant and widespread infringement”
	</p>

	<h2>
		Rolling Updates During Games
	</h2>

	<p>
		Through the Court, the companies request an injunction that requires Canadian ISPs including TekSavvy, Cogeco, Distributel, and Eastlink, to block a constantly updated list of IP addresses. This dynamic blockade should remain active during the live broadcast of NHL games.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The legal paperwork provides several examples for streaming servers located around the world. These are offered through a variety of websites and services, including usagoals.video and livetotal.tv.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="stream" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/streamexamples.png">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The media companies stress that they have already tried other options to address live streaming piracy. For example, Rogers sent notices to hosting providers, and payment providers and advertisers have been alerted to the infringing activities as well.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These anti-piracy measures had some effect, but these efforts didn’t stop pirated live streams from being offered.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Unauthorized Streaming Servers providing access to high quality streams of NHL Live Games in Canada are still widespread and can be accessed easily by consumers with a simple search on a search engine, and in many cases for free,” the rightsholders add.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Bell, Rogers and Groupe TV say they invest hundreds of millions of dollars a year to acquire the rights to broadcast NHL live games. But due to online piracy, between 583,000 and 974,000 subscribers have been lost.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With a dynamic blocking order, the rightsholders hope to tackle this live-streaming problem more effectively and they hope the Court will agree.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Not All ISPs Are Eager to Block
	</h2>

	<p>
		Needless to say, not all ISPs are eager to implement even broader blocking mechanisms. Aside from the costs of maintaining this system, there are concerns that they go far beyond what the law envisioned.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		TekSavvy’s vice-president of regulatory affairs Andy Kaplan-Myrth tells TorrentFreak that the company is very concerned about this motion.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Without any policy oversight by the government, these media incumbents are attempting to springboard from targeted site blocking to active internet filtering,” Kaplan-Myrth says.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Hat tip to <a href="https://www.thewirereport.ca/" rel="external nofollow">The Wire</a>, for putting this case on our radar. A copy of the written representations in support of the dynamic blocking order is <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/Written-Representations-July-7-2021-redacted.pdf" rel="external nofollow">available here (pdf)</a>
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/media-giants-request-dynamic-order-to-block-pirated-nhl-streams-in-canada-210709/" rel="external nofollow">Media Giants Request Dynamic Order to Block Pirated NHL Streams in Canada</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1156</guid><pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2021 22:11:34 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Police Arrest Two More For Uploading 10 Minute Movie Edits to YouTube</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/police-arrest-two-more-for-uploading-10-minute-movie-edits-to-youtube-r1155/</link><description><![CDATA[<header>
	<h1>
		Police Arrest Two More For Uploading 10 Minute Movie Edits to YouTube
	</h1>

	<p>
		Last month, police in Japan arrested three people for uploading so-called "fast movies" to YouTube. These edits reveal entire plotlines of major movies in just a few minutes while breaching copyright law, movie companies claim. Police have now made two more arrests of people alleged to have provided narration for the edits.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Uploading full movies to YouTube is an activity that can lead to takedowns, copyright strikes and even lawsuits. Despite the dangers, some people go ahead nonetheless but even those sharing short clips now have reason for caution.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Movie companies in Japan say they are increasingly worried about the rise of so-called “fast movies”. These are edits of popular movies that take place over the span of about 10 minutes but instead of being uploaded for review or critique, they instead aim to make viewing the original movies unnecessary.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Anti-piracy group Content Overseas Distribution Association (CODA) previously informed TorrentFreak that action would be taken against uploaders and last month that prediction came true when <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/police-arrest-three-for-posting-10-minute-movie-summaries-on-youtube-210623/" rel="external nofollow">three people were targeted in Japan</a>. These people weren’t subjected to a civil lawsuit but instead were arrested by police as part of criminal action based on alleged breaches of the country’s Copyright Act.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Allegations and New Arrests
	</h2>

	<p>
		According to CODA, the Miyagi Prefectural Police Life Safety Division and the Shiogama Police Station made the arrests claiming that the suspects edited and uploaded four movies owned by Toho Co., Ltd and Nikkatsu Corporation.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The edits were approximately 10 minutes in length and due to their popularity generated advertising revenue for the uploaders, making the offenses commercial in nature. The videos also featured added narration, which has now resulted in more arrests this week in Japan.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Miyagi Prefectural Police Headquarters and the Shiogama Police Station arrested two additional suspects who reside in Tokyo and referred them to the Sendai District Public Prosecutors Office for uploading films to YouTube without the right holders’ consent in violation of the Copyright Act,” CODA informs TorrentFreak.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“There were three suspects arrested on 23rd June. The police investigated and found that the two suspects colluded with the three and narrated the unauthorized re-edited versions of the films or otherwise contributed to the crime.”
	</p>

	<h2>
		Police Action Seems to Act as a Deterrent
	</h2>

	<p>
		While copyright complaints can deter some users from uploading or continuing to upload allegedly infringing content, it appears that having the police involved can elicit even more rapid results.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		CODA says that prior to the first set of arrests, it had confirmed the existence of 55 accounts on YouTube offering so-called “fast movies”. With news of that action in the air, people are now taking action to avoid being part of a new sweep.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“After the arrest, many of such accounts have been closed and many of the fast movies have been deleted,” CODA says.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Whether any additional arrests are in the pipeline is currently unknown but the anti-piracy group says it will maintain the pressure to ensure that the prevalence of “fast movies” is kept under control.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“CODA shall continue to take appropriate measures, including international enforcement measures against overseas platformers, to identify such malicious uploaders, so that copyright should be properly protected,” the group concludes.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/police-arrest-two-more-for-uploading-10-minute-movie-edits-to-youtube-210709/" rel="external nofollow">Police Arrest Two More For Uploading 10 Minute Movie Edits to YouTube</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1155</guid><pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2021 22:09:29 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[IPTV Operator Jailed For 16 Months For Selling & Watching Pirate Streams]]></title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/iptv-operator-jailed-for-16-months-for-selling-watching-pirate-streams-r1136/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	IPTV Operator Jailed For 16 Months For Selling &amp; Watching Pirate Streams
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		A UK man has been sentenced to 16 months in prison for operating a pirate IPTV service. Paul Faulkner appeared before Liverpool Crown Court after pleading guilty to multiple copyright infringement and fraud offenses. According to the Premier League, Faulkner was also found guilty of watching his own service, an offense which netted him four months in prison.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Anoyone running a significant pirate IPTV operation in the UK, especially one that supplies sports content, runs the risk of being targeted by the Premier League and anti-piracy partners Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT).
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The pair have been involved in a number of criminal prosecutions of illicit TV suppliers over the years and today brings news of yet another conviction.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Joint Investigation
	</h2>

	<p>
		The target in this matter was a man called Paul Faulkner. He was reportedly the operator of TV Solutions, a pirate streaming service that offered illegal access to sports and entertainment content, including live Premier League matches and Sky channels.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This resulted in a joint investigation by the Premier League and FACT, which determined that Faulkner was selling access to his service on social media platforms and using the money generated as a second source of income. The Premier League then brought a private criminal prosecution to bring Faulkner before the courts.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Faulkner Pleads Guilty and is Sentenced
	</h2>

	<p>
		According to the Premier League, Faulkner pleaded guilty to multiple copyright infringement and fraud offenses and eventually appeared in front of Liverpool Crown Court on Tuesday.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		He was jailed for a total of 16 months, not only for supplying the service to customers but also for watching it himself.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Mr Faulkner pleaded guilty to both the unlawful supply of content and his own use of the service to view content he should have been paying to watch,” the Premier League says.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The judge recognized that Faulkner’s use of the unauthorized service was a distinct crime in itself. This was reflected in him receiving a separate sentence of four months’ imprisonment for using the service.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Also of interest is the Premier League’s reference to VPNs in respect of this case.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Despite the defendant selling access to his service on social media platforms as a secondary source of income, the judge made it clear this case was a sophisticated fraud carried out over a significant period of time, made more serious by the involvement of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs),” the football group notes.
	</p>

	<h2>
		No Surprise That Watching Streams and VPNs Are Highlighted
	</h2>

	<p>
		While tracking down and prosecuting IPTV providers is an important part of the Premier League’s strategy, it also faces problems when it comes to deterring the general public from buying these packages and being able to successfully use them on match days.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Until 2017, it was widely believed that simply watching pirated streams wasn’t an offense in the EU. Indeed, in 2016 the EU Commission claimed that the act <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/watching-pirate-streams-isnt-illegal-eu-commission-argues-161001/" rel="external nofollow">wasn’t illegal</a>, a position <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/streaming-pirate-content-isnt-illegal-uk-trading-standards-says-170306/" rel="external nofollow">supported by Trading Standards</a> in the UK. However, the <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/selling-piracy-configured-media-players-is-illegal-eu-court-rules-170426/" rel="external nofollow">‘Filmspeler’ decision</a> removed all doubt, concluding that selling boxes and streaming pirated content amounted to copyright infringement.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The mention that Faulkner received a four-month sentence for viewing illegal streams on his own service is meant as a clear signal to pirate IPTV buyers that they too could receive a similar sentence. While that could and should act as a deterrent, it should be noted that the Court may have taken Faulkner’s wider offending into consideration when handing down what appears to be a very stiff sentence.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The other issue faced by the Premier League is the effectiveness of its ISP blocking program. Just last month the football group obtained yet another <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/premier-league-wins-enhanced-illegal-streaming-blocking-order-for-2021-22-210623/" rel="external nofollow">blocking injunction in Ireland</a>, one that’s even more stringent than the last. However, this can be circumvented in seconds with the use of a VPN.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The exact circumstances of Faulkner’s use or promotion of VPNs aren’t made clear by the Premier League but by mentioning the technology as an aggravating factor in his case, there’s clearly an effort to portray these circumvention devices as problematic, not only for IPTV providers but users too.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/iptv-operator-jailed-for-16-months-for-selling-and-watching-pirate-streams-210708/" rel="external nofollow">IPTV Operator Jailed For 16 Months For Selling &amp; Watching Pirate Streams</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1136</guid><pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2021 20:47:29 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Fans Donate $110K to Anime Tube But Piracy Alternative is Already On Life Support</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/fans-donate-110k-to-anime-tube-but-piracy-alternative-is-already-on-life-support-r1135/</link><description><![CDATA[<header>
	<h1>
		Fans Donate $110K to Anime Tube But Piracy Alternative is Already On Life Support
	</h1>

	<p>
		Eager anime fans looking for a free alternative to pirate sites have donated more than $110K to Anime Tube, a project that's soaring on Kickstarter. Unfortunately, the fledgling business is already on life support, with at least one major backer withdrawing and offering to personally pay investors any money they can't recover. Apparently, licensing is a major unsolved issue.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As more and more westerners become hooked on Japanese film and television animation, the astronomic rise of anime has been a sight to behold in recent years.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This growth in interest has been mirrored by increased traffic to pirate sites, as fans seek to get their fix without paying for the privilege. But what if there was a way to view anime without paying?
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		That is the promise of <a href="https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/animetubeapp/anime-tube-the-future-of-anime-apps-0" rel="external nofollow">Anime Tube</a>, a brand new Kickstarter project that shares its name with an app that rose in popularity several years ago due to the availability of pirate content in its indexes. That app is also referenced on the Anime Tube Kickstarter with three glowing reviews.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/Anime-Tube-original.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="Anime Tube original" data-ratio="80.72" style="height: auto;" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/Anime-Tube-original.png"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<h2>
		Promotional Material Advertised Piracy Alternative
	</h2>

	<p>
		Earlier this week, Anime Tube posted a cartoon frame to Twitter, part of a collaboration with the respected <a href="https://www.patreon.com/Merryweather" rel="external nofollow">Merryweather Comics</a>. As the image below shows, it was all about promoting the new Anime Tube app as an alternative to pirate downloads while avoiding the claimed dangers of illegal sites.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/anime-tube-twitter-1.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="anime-tube-twitter-1.png" data-ratio="75.10" style="height: auto;" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/anime-tube-twitter-1.png"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Interest was considerable. After Anime Tube posted its Kickstarter, the fund-raising platform <a href="https://twitter.com/AnimeTubeApp/status/1412486552115089411" rel="external nofollow">elevated</a> it to “Project We Love” status.
	</p>

	<p>
		Merryweather Comic’s team also made Anime Tube an advert and uploaded it to YouTube, something that helped Anime Tube <a href="https://twitter.com/AnimeTubeApp/status/1412823339157147653" rel="external nofollow">reach its $50,000 goal</a> in under two hours.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/anime-tube-kickstarter.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="Anime Tube Kickstarter" data-ratio="63.06" style="width: 720px; height: auto;" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/anime-tube-kickstarter.png"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		At the time of writing, Anime Tube has in excess of $111K in pledges but for reasons that are becoming all too painful, the project now appears to be under considerable negative pressure.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Big Promises Undermine The Project
	</h2>

	<p>
		While Anime Tube promises to give fans anime for free, that is only part of the offer. When digging into the Kickstarter it appears they are working towards an ad-supported model, underpinned by users who pay a subscription. While this might be an acceptable proposition for many, the first problem appears to be a distinct lack of content.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Indeed, Anime Tube says it doesn’t know what content it will have available and as such touts different subscription rates based on its licensing successes, none of which are listed. If it manages to get 100 shows, it would charge $0.99 per month, for example.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This lack of content appears to have flown past most of the Kickstarter contributors as a non-issue but those with more experience seem to have recognized that a target of just $50,000 wouldn’t go anywhere near funding the licenses for even a modest range of content.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Another red flag was that Anime Tube said it couldn’t even say which regions it would support due to licensing issues, meaning that contributors could find themselves unable to use the app.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Dissenting Voices Silenced
	</h2>

	<p>
		Unfortunately, Anime Tube then decided that anyone calling them out on social media, where they have the necessary control, wouldn’t be able to voice their opinions over the questionable claims being made. For what appear to be counter-productive reasons, dissenters found themselves blocked, with Anime Tube offering the following explanation:
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Why did you block me on social media?” the project <a href="https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/animetubeapp/anime-tube-the-future-of-anime-apps-0/faqs" rel="external nofollow">wrote</a> on Kickstarter.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Because we do not have time for negativity and trolls. We are here to make the best damn anime app on the planet, trolls and negative people are just trying to get in the way. If you believe in what we are trying to do, then support our campaign, otherwise find someone who wants to listen to you!”
	</p>

	<h2>
		Wheels Start To Fall Off
	</h2>

	<p>
		During the last couple of hours, the advert made by Merryweather Comics to promote the project was suddenly made private on YouTube. The reasons for that are made clear on the Merryweather Twitter account where it is revealed that the artist and his friends have withdrawn their support for the project.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<div class="ipsEmbeddedOther" contenteditable="false">
		<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="ipsEmbed_finishedLoading" data-controller="core.front.core.autosizeiframe" data-embedid="embed7513847912" scrolling="no" src="https://nsaneforums.com/index.php?app=core&amp;module=system&amp;controller=embed&amp;url=https://twitter.com/Merryweatherey/status/1413043502850756613?ref_src=twsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1413043502850756613%257Ctwgr%255E%257Ctwcon%255Es1_%26ref_url=https://torrentfreak.com/fans-donate-110k-to-anime-tube-but-piracy-alternative-is-already-on-life-support-210708/" style="overflow: hidden; height: 462px;"></iframe>
	</div>

	<p>
		“It was our first offer to do a sponsored comic, and the money was honestly pretty good. Our team and I looked into it, and found while we thought it was a very ambitious project, we expected outside investors to cover costs, not just Kickstarter money” Merryweather <a href="https://twitter.com/Merryweatherey/status/1413043501324029952" rel="external nofollow">continues</a>
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“If you have donated money, you should be able to withdraw it before the funding period ends. If you have donated a substantial amount and are not able to withdraw it, please message me below this tweet and I will <a href="https://twitter.com/Merryweatherey/status/1413043504352202759" rel="external nofollow">compensate you personally</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		“In the future we will make sure to research properly the projects we support. We have never done sponsored comics like this in the past, it was very new to us, and I think we should have looked more into it beyond just assuming it’s an ambitious project run by some friendly people. I’m sorry guys,” Merryweather concludes.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Anime Tube Made Questionable Claims Over Licensing Negotiations
	</h2>

	<p>
		While there is no trace of the text on the Kickstarter now, Anime Tube previously published a list of titles that were allegedly part of its licensing discussions. That was news to at least one company that took to Twitter to ask why they knew nothing about such negotiations, nor why the content of many other leading producers’ content was also listed.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<div class="ipsEmbeddedOther" contenteditable="false">
		<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="ipsEmbed_finishedLoading" data-controller="core.front.core.autosizeiframe" data-embedid="embed946485179" scrolling="no" src="https://nsaneforums.com/index.php?app=core&amp;module=system&amp;controller=embed&amp;url=https://twitter.com/shawnekleckner/status/1412963557675831302?ref_src=twsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1412963557675831302%257Ctwgr%255E%257Ctwcon%255Es1_%26ref_url=https://torrentfreak.com/fans-donate-110k-to-anime-tube-but-piracy-alternative-is-already-on-life-support-210708/" style="overflow: hidden; height: 329px;"></iframe>
	</div>

	<center>
		<p style="text-align: left;">
			According to follow-up tweets, Anime Tube responded but then deleted its tweet. A screen capture shows that the threshold for being in “discussions” might be fairly low.
		</p>

		<p style="text-align: left;">
			 
		</p>

		<div class="ipsEmbeddedOther" contenteditable="false">
			<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="ipsEmbed_finishedLoading" data-controller="core.front.core.autosizeiframe" data-embedid="embed1322596892" scrolling="no" src="https://nsaneforums.com/index.php?app=core&amp;module=system&amp;controller=embed&amp;url=https://twitter.com/shawnekleckner/status/1412931637101350915?ref_src=twsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1412989724722085896%257Ctwgr%255E%257Ctwcon%255Es2_%26ref_url=https://torrentfreak.com/fans-donate-110k-to-anime-tube-but-piracy-alternative-is-already-on-life-support-210708/" style="overflow: hidden; height: 257px;"></iframe>
		</div>
	</center>

	<p>
		Where the project will head from here is unclear. However, what the problems above appear to show is that having a cool app is only part of the problem – without content and licensing, providing a legal service is completely impossible.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/fans-donate-110k-to-anime-tube-but-piracy-alternative-is-already-on-life-support-210708/" rel="external nofollow">Fans Donate $110K to Anime Tube But Piracy Alternative is Already On Life Support</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1135</guid><pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2021 20:45:27 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Movie Companies Want U.S. Internet Provider &#x2018;Frontier&#x2019; to Block Pirate Sites</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/movie-companies-want-us-internet-provider-%E2%80%98frontier%E2%80%99-to-block-pirate-sites-r1114/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Movie Companies Want U.S. Internet Provider ‘Frontier’ to Block Pirate Sites
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		A group of independent movie companies want to hold Internet provider Frontier Communications liable for pirating subscribers. In addition to damages, the filmmakers request a site-blocking order, targeting The Pirate Bay, YTS, RARBG, and many others. As a bonus, the movie companies note that the most prolific pirates can be sued directly too.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Over the past two decades, online piracy has proven a massive challenge for the entertainment industries.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		It’s a global issue that’s hard to contain, but Hollywood and the major U.S. record labels are at the forefront of this battle.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		One of the key strategies they’ve employed in recent years is website blocking. US companies have traveled to courts all over the world to have ISP blockades put in place, with quite a bit of success.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Interestingly, however, site blocking is noticeably absent in the United States, which harbors the most pirates of any country in the world. This can, in part, be explained by <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/sopa-ghosts-hinder-u-s-pirate-site-blocking-efforts-171008/" rel="external nofollow">legislative backlashes</a> and <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/motion-picture-association-doubles-down-on-push-for-us-pirate-site-blocking-200425/" rel="external nofollow">legal uncertainty</a>. But it’s noteworthy nonetheless.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In recent years, the tide slowly started to turn, with major copyright groups strengthening their calls for blockades. However, the first move in court now comes from a group of smaller movie companies, including Millenium Media and Voltage Pictures, which have built up an impressive anti-piracy track record in recent years.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Movie Companies Go After Frontier
	</h2>

	<p>
		While most piracy cases are handled by district courts, this case started at a New York bankruptcy court. More than a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/movie-companies-want-u-s-internet-provider-frontier-to-block-pirate-sites-210707/#movies" rel="external nofollow">dozen movie outfits</a> filed claims against Internet provider <a href="https://frontier.com/" rel="external nofollow">Frontier Communications</a>, which was in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontier_Communications#Bankruptcy" rel="external nofollow">financial trouble</a> at the time.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The movie companies argue that the ISP is liable for the copyright infringements of its subscribers and claimed millions in damages. These claims were similar to the ones made by several record labels, which filed a separate <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/record-labels-sue-frontier-for-failing-to-terminate-persistent-pirates-210609/" rel="external nofollow">federal lawsuit a few weeks ago</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		Some of the damages claims
	</center>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="claims" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/claims-frontier.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Thus far the piracy angle of this bankruptcy case has remained under the radar but a recent filing caught our attention.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In a motion submitted last week, the movie companies ask the bankruptcy court to move the matter to the district court, noting that it’s better suited to deal with the “novel copyright issues” at the center of this matter.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These claims are in part similar to the several ‘repeat infringer’ lawsuits against ISPs that are currently handled by district courts around the country. However, the movie companies add a twist, one that could make it much more than a liability issue.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Copyright Holders Want Pirate Sites Blocked
	</h2>

	<p>
		In addition to taking action against pirating subscribers, the movie companies also want Frontier to block pirate sites.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This is technically possible under the DMCA, which provides injunctive relief for copyright holders. Thus far the law has never been used that way, and the rightsholders believe that a bankruptcy court is not the best venue to handle the matter.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Here, to adjudicate the copyright claims, the Bankruptcy Court would be required to [consider claims and issues including] the availability of injunctive relief provided in 17 U.S.C. §§502(a), 512(j) and 1203(b)(1) to order Frontier to block its subscribers from accessing notorious movie piracy websites originating outside of the United States..,” they write.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The YTS Link
	</h2>

	<p>
		The same movie companies, represented by Hawaiian lawyer Kerry Culpepper, previously obtained <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/yts-operator-helped-movie-companies-catch-a-pirating-user-200817/" rel="external nofollow">user data from torrent site YTS</a>. As such, they have evidence that some Frontier subscribers were registered users of the site.
	</p>

	<p>
		“(s)ome of Frontier’s subscribers have registered for accounts with notorious piracy websites such as YTS and RARBG that the United States Trade Representative (‘USTR’) has listed as examples of Notorious Markets engaged in and facilitating substantial piracy.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The motion suggests that the rightsholders want Frontier to block the pirate sites that are listed in the US Trade Representative’s annual <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-governments-list-of-notorious-piracy-markets-is-a-mixed-bag-210119/" rel="external nofollow">list of notorious markets</a>. This would include The Pirate Bay, YTS, RARBG and many others. However, exact details about the scope of the blocking request are not mentioned.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This is the first time that a group of copyright holders has requested a site-blocking order against an ISP. This means that it’s uncharted and precedent-setting territory. With that in mind, it makes sense if the issue is handled by a district court.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Legal Uncertainties?
	</h2>

	<p>
		Whether the DMCA is indeed suited to issue blocking injunctions against ISPs is still an open question. Previously, other copyright holders, including the Motion Picture Association, have pointed out that there are several <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/motion-picture-association-doubles-down-on-push-for-us-pirate-site-blocking-200425/" rel="external nofollow">legal uncertainties</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The MPA said that it’s unclear whether ISPs can be required to block sites without a finding of liability. This typically happens in many other countries with so-called ‘no-fault’ injunctions. In this case, however, the movie companies are claiming that Frontier is liable for copyright infringing subscribers, so that box could be ticked by the court.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The case is still in its first innings but, if it moves ahead, it is bound to attract attention from other copyright holders, Internet providers, and the public at large.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Subscribers Are At Risk Too
	</h2>

	<p>
		Finally, the lawsuit may have more direct consequences for pirating Frontier subscribers too. The movie companies plan to obtain information on a percentage of the 89,000 subscribers who pirated their movies.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The movie claimants will likely assert claims against the more prolific ones of these subscribers that pirated the motion pictures,” Culpepper writes, noting that both Frontier and its subscribers will have a right to trial by jury.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		All in all, the movie companies stress that this case concerns important copyright questions that have nothing to do with bankruptcy. As such, they would like the matter to move to a district court.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of the motion to withdraw reference, filed at the New York Bankruptcy Court, is available <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/frontier-movie.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here (pdf)</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		<a name="movies" rel=""></a>
	</p>

	<p>
		The full list of movie claimants includes Voltage Holdings, LLC; Backmask, LLC; Union Patriot Capital Management, LLC; Venice PI, LLC; Bedeviled, LLC; MON, LLC; Colossal Movie Productions, LLC; TBV Productions, LLC; Definition Delaware LLC; I Am Wrath Productions, Inc.; Hannibal Classics Inc.; Justice Everywhere Productions LLC; Badhouse Studios, LLC; After Productions, LLC; Rise Up, LLC; Status Update LLC; Morgan Creek Productions, Inc.; Shock and Awe, LLC; Fun Mom Dinner, LLC; Dead Trigger Movie, LLC; YAR Productions, Inc.; Gunfighter Productions, LLC; Ace in the Hole Productions, LP; SF Film, LLC; The Rest of Us, Inc.; Killing Link Distribution, LLC; Cell Film Holdings, LLC; Dallas Buyers Club, LLC; Screen Media Ventures, LLC; Rambo V Productions, Inc.; Millennium Funding, Inc.; Millennium IP, Inc.; LHF Productions, Inc.; UN4 Productions, Inc.; Millennium Media, Inc.; Bodyguard Productions, Inc.; Hunter Killer Productions, Inc.; Fallen Productions, Inc.; HB Productions, Inc.; Laundry Productions, Inc.; Black Butterfly Film, LLC; AMBI Distribution Corp.; Dubious Productions, Inc.; Rupture CAL, Inc.; Future World One, LLC; Groove Tails Productions, LLC; Family of the Year Productions, LLC; Eve Nevada, LLC; After II Movie, LLC; Wonder One, LLC; and American Cinema International, Inc.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/movie-companies-want-u-s-internet-provider-frontier-to-block-pirate-sites-210707/" rel="external nofollow">Movie Companies Want U.S. Internet Provider ‘Frontier’ to Block Pirate Sites</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1114</guid><pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2021 21:30:15 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Hollyood & Netflix Sue Repeat Pirate IPTV Operator For Massive Copyright Infringement]]></title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/hollyood-netflix-sue-repeat-pirate-iptv-operator-for-massive-copyright-infringement-r1106/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Hollyood &amp; Netflix Sue Repeat Pirate IPTV Operator For Massive Copyright Infringement
</h1>

<p>
	In 2020, the operator of pirate IPTV service Area 51 shut down under pressure from the Alliance For Creativity and Entertainment. After the service was resurrected several times in breach of a settlement agreement, a coalition of Hollywood studios, with the addition of Amazon and Netflix, have now filed a massive copyright infringement and breach of contract lawsuit.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Last summer, customers of pirate IPTV service Area 51 began receiving emails indicating the service would be shutting down.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	“We have been forced to make this very difficult decision, and close Area 51. We had quite a run, and we wouldn’t have been able to do it without customers like you,” the email began.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	While this initially sounded like bad news for subscribers, customers of the shuttered service soon began receiving emails from a service called Singularity Media informing them that their account had been taken over and all logins would work as before. Soon after, however, Singularity shut down too.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Last August, TorrentFreak revealed that <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/area-51-mystery-solved-pirate-iptv-service-was-shut-down-by-ace-mpa-200819/" rel="external nofollow">Area 51 had been shut down</a> by the Alliance For Creativity and Entertainment. That event was accompanied by a settlement agreement, which included a clause that the operator of Area 51 couldn’t launch any new infringing services.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	That agreement appears not to have been honored, with potentially devastating consequences.
</p>

<h2>
	Hollywood Giants File Massive Copyright Infringement Lawsuit
</h2>

<p>
	In a California court yesterday, Warner Bros., several Universal companies, Amazon, Columbia, Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Sony and other content creators filed a lawsuit against Jason Tusa, the alleged operator of Area 51 and three other pirate IPTV services.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	According to the complaint, the plaintiffs first discovered that Tusa was infringing their rights through Area 51, a service that reportedly received three million visits between June 2019 to June 2020, making it the “then-largest stand-alone” pirate IPTV service by traffic in the United States.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	After identifying Tusa, his sister, and now-deceased wife as Area 51 operators, the plaintiffs issued a cease-and-desist that demanded a halt to their infringing activities. While the settlement was being negotiated via an attorney, it’s alleged that Jason Tusa was already working on a replacement.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	On July 1, 2020, Tusa reportedly registered the Singularitymedia.net domain and created a close mirror of the Area 51 websites. As we reported earlier, Area 51 customers received emails stating that Singularity would be taking over. On July 8, the plaintiffs contacted Tusa again, demanding a halt to Singularity, which later went down.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Months later on October 12, a confidential settlement agreement was reached in respect of the Area 51 and Singularity services which contained promises from Tusa to never run or assist in the running of another infringing service. According to the plaintiffs, that wasn’t honored.
</p>

<h2>
	Tusa Allegedly Launched Two More Services
</h2>

<p>
	Before the agreement was signed, Tusa allegedly launched his third infringing service. Digital UniCorn Media (DUM) offered similar pricing and programming to its predecessors but despite trying to hide his connections to the service, the studios were able to link Tusa to the platform by spotting several of his mistakes.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	A domain for the new service carried an unredacted email linked to Tusa and it was noted that he uploaded a video containing an inflatable unicorn to YouTube and commented to that using his personal and UniCorn Media accounts. The plaintiffs contacted Tusa’s counsel to report a breach of the settlement agreement and while Tusa denied the connection, he also deleted the video. DUM subsequently went offline, with Tusa posting to Instagram that the service was gone forever.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	According to the lawsuit, Tusa then launched a new service called Altered Carbon but despite taking a number of steps to distance himself from the platform, the studios say they were able to link him to it in a number of ways.
</p>

<h2>
	Tusa’s Alleged Links to Altered Carbon
</h2>

<p>
	While one piece of circumstantial evidence wouldn’t be enough to determine that Tusa controls Altered Carbon, the studios reveal a laundry list of points that together appear to do just that.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Altered Carbon uses the same logo as DUM and the plaintiffs have seen him discussing the service on Telegram. The IP addresses used by the service are close to those used by DUM since they use the same host but the complaint goes further still, particularly when it comes to activity and signaling on social media. Some other pieces of evidence are even more problematic.
</p>

<h2>
	Tusa Uses Legitimate Cable Operations to Source Streams
</h2>

<p>
	“Tusa’s public internet postings show him obtaining the streams that power Altered Carbon through a process of redirecting licensed transmissions from legitimate cable services,” the complaint reads.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	“A video posted to Tusa’s social media account shows him stringing together a series of cable boxes, indicating that Tusa is using the signals routed through those cable boxes as the source for his infringing streams.”
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<center>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/altered-carbon-setup.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="Altered Carbon" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/altered-carbon-setup.png"></a>
</center>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	“Altered Carbon is almost identical to DUM, except for its name and superficial design changes. Like DUM, many of Altered Carbon’s American channels contain advertisements localized to Tusa’s home town of Naples, Florida,” the complaint adds, suggesting that the services use the same capture setup.
</p>

<h2>
	Altered Carbon Has an Affiliate Program
</h2>

<p>
	According to the complaint, Tusa runs a program that enables Altered Carbon to reach a wider audience. By selling “bulk credits” to affiliates at a lower-than-retail price, they are then able to sell the service to their own customers at a profit. For example, 70 credits (each worth a month of service) are sold at $6.42 each while 150 credits are sold at $4.66. These are sold on at whatever rate the reseller chooses.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	“Tusa’s Affiliate network increases his customer base and his profits. More Affiliates means more customers buying illegal access to the Copyrighted Works, more money flowing into Tusa’s pockets, and an ever greater number of infringements of the Copyrighted Works,” the studios write.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	“Tusa infringes and profits from exploiting Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works, and he refuses to stop. When Plaintiffs have confronted Tusa with proof that he is operating an infringing service, Tusa just shuts it down and starts another one, leading to repetitive games of cat-and-mouse. Plaintiffs are irreparably harmed by Tusa’s brazen infringement in ways that cannot easily be calculated or remedied by monetary damages.”
</p>

<h2>
	Claims For Copyright Infringement and Breach of Contract
</h2>

<p>
	While the studios are clearly unhappy with the Altered Carbon service, they are also concerned by Tusa’s breaches of his settlement agreement. The plaintiffs say that he has made a “mockery of their rights” and by continuing to start new services, it sends a message to other pirate services that they do not need to take the plaintiffs’ rights seriously. As a result, the lawsuit is already shaping up to be a lesson in compliance.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	The plaintiffs say that Tusa breached their rights by distributing at least 110 copyrighted works including the movies Dunkirk, Harry Potter, Joker, Tenet, The Hulk, plus many other mainstream titles. They also allege breaches related to TV shows including The Office, Law &amp; Order, Friends, and The Big Bang Theory.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Claiming direct and willful copyright infringement, the complaint demands the maximum $150,000 in damages for each title. Claiming contributory copyright infringement in respect of the 24/7 channels offered by the service, the studios demand $150,000 in damages per title. For intentionally inducing infringement of the copyrighted works by customers (and by encouraging affiliates to promote the service for infringement), the complaint also demands $150,000 per work.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	According to the studios, the settlement agreement previously signed by Tusa required him to cease-and-desist and since he has failed to do so, he is in breach of contract. The finer details of the agreement aren’t public but it appears it may have come with a clause for Tusa to pay a settlement sum in the event of a breach.
</p>

<h2>
	Demands For Injunctions, Domain Seizures
</h2>

<p>
	In advance of any trial, the complaint demands preliminary and permanent injunctions to prevent Tusa from continuing his operations. The studios also want his hardware to be impounded along with any and all documents relating to the infringement of their rights.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	There are also demands for the Altered Carbon services domains to be handed over to the studios, a common request in such cases.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	The complaint and list of copyright works can be found <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-cv-05456-Warner-v-Tusa-et-al-complaint-210706.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> and <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-cv-05456-Warner-v-Tusa-et-al-complaint-works-210706.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> (pdf)
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<strong><a href="https://torrentfreak.com/hollyood-netflix-sue-repeat-pirate-iptv-operator-for-massive-copyright-infringement-210707/" rel="external nofollow">Source</a></strong>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1106</guid><pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2021 12:46:39 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>ACE/MPA Seize Dozens Of Pirate Streaming Domains, Demand Data on Dozens More</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/acempa-seize-dozens-of-pirate-streaming-domains-demand-data-on-dozens-more-r1093/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1 class="hero__title">
	ACE/MPA Seize Dozens Of Pirate Streaming Domains, Demand Data on Dozens More
</h1>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/ace-logo.jpg" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="ACE logo" data-ratio="44.76" style="height: auto;" width="315" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/ace-logo.jpg"></a>
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		The Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment and partners the MPA have seized dozens of pirate-streaming related domains. In addition, the anti-piracy giants are demanding information that will allow them to identify the operators of dozens more pirate streaming sites, including the massive Streamtape.com and others involved in the supply of IPTV packages.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		The past decade has seen an explosion of illegal streaming sites offering the latest movies and TV shows but despite enforcement efforts in many shapes and sizes, the flood seems never ending.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		At the forefront of combating this threat is the Alliance For Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), the world’s largest anti-piracy coalition featuring dozens of the planet’s richest and most powerful entertainment industry groups.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Motion Picture Association is deeply embedded within ACE and together these groups have shut down a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/?s=alliance+for+creativity" rel="external nofollow">large number of illegal platforms</a> and <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-release-group-ntg-shut-down-by-alliance-for-creativity-entertainment-210511/" rel="external nofollow">targeted release groups</a> plus other closely aligned entities.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In advance of some of these actions, the MPA seeks to identify the operators of pirate sites. This is often done under the authority of US courts, which regularly grant the MPA and ACE permission to obtain data held at various internet entities including hosting, CDN and domain companies.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Unprecedented Demands For Information on Pirate Domains
	</h2>

	<p>
		Last week ACE/MPA were back in court again, requesting pirate site operators’ details from CDN company Cloudflare via three separate DMCA subpoenas. In the past these have regularly targeted large numbers of pirate domains but when combined, these three subpoenas target four dozen streaming-related domains, quite a surge for a single week.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The first batch targets a number of familiar names but notably includes at least one giant site. Streamtape.com currently receives 33 million monthly visits according to SimilarWeb, drawing most of its traffic from users in the United States. Several other large platforms are also included, with significant traffic stats listed below:
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		abcvideo.cc (3M monthly visits, popular in Poland), cloudvideo.tv (5.5M monthly, popular in US), gamovideo.com (11.3M, popular in Spain), playtube.ws (3.9M, popular in Poland), streamplay.to (3M, popular in US), streamplay.cc, streamsb.net (2.8M, populr in US), sbembed2.com, streamtape.com (33M, popular in US), strcloud.link, streamzz.to, streamz.ws (5.8M, popular in Germany), userload.co (4.3M, popular in US), eplayvid.com
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The second list has a larger spread in that it appears to tackle pirate sites targeted at a broader international audience. It includes the popular Fmovies (around 6 million visits per month) and MyGully, a linking site that was previously <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/operators-of-pirate-site-movie-blog-convicted-ace-seizes-domains-210311/" rel="external nofollow">implicated</a> in the operations of Share-Online.biz, Germany’s largest file-hosting site.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Share-Online.biz was <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/police-raids-shut-down-share-online-biz-germanys-largest-file-hoster-191017/" rel="external nofollow">shut down in 2019</a>, with MyGully and another site called Movie-Blog accused of helping users to find pirated content on the platform.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The domains of Movie-Blog were later seized by ACE/MPA after its operators were <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/operators-of-pirate-site-movie-blog-convicted-ace-seizes-domains-210311/" rel="external nofollow">handed suspended sentences</a> of 22 months in Germany. It appears that ACE/MPA have unfinished business at MyGully that Cloudflare may be able to help with.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Domains in the second request to Cloudflare are listed as follows:
	</p>

	<p>
		cpasfini.com, zonetelechargement.cloud, mygully.com, polishsource.cz, xcine.me, streamingcommunity.co, serieskao.tv, pelishouse.com, peliculaspro.net, openpelis.net, peliculaswarez.net, seriesw.tv, paraveronline.live, dongphym.net, fullphim.net, phephimz.net, 123-hd.com , i-moviehd.com, motphjm.net, 2embed.ru, fmovies.co, 123moviesfree.net, tinyzonetv.to , myflixer.to, bstsrs.one, best-series.me
	</p>

	<h2>
		IPTV Services: Rarely Included in Cloudflare Requests
	</h2>

	<p>
		The vast majority of ACE/MPA requests for Cloudflare to hand over information target web-based streaming platforms that tend to present a Netflix-style interface to users. However, a third request from the MPA and ACE filed last week lists what appears to be a quartet of pirate IPTV services.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		They are hehestreams.com ($100 per year subscription, sports broadcasts), comstarservices.com ($79.99 per year, thousands of assorted channels), mywifi.tv and uzzi.tv (both currently down)
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In common with the other two requests, the subpoena requires Cloudflare to provide information on the operators of the sites in sufficient quantities to identify the infringers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“This would include the individuals’ names, physical addresses, IP addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, payment information, account updates and account history,” the subpoenas read.
	</p>

	<h2>
		ACE/MPA Seize Dozens of Pirate Domains
	</h2>

	<p>
		Two months ago, ACE <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-coalition-shut-down-popular-streaming-site-cuevana-but-its-still-online-210509/" rel="external nofollow">reported</a> that with backing from prominent members including major Hollywood studios, Netflix, Amazon, and other entertainment giants, it had shut down Cuevana, one of the most popular pirate streaming operations in Latin America.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As part of that operation, ACE said it had seized 30 domains. The group did not name them individually but information obtained by TorrentFreak shows that ACE has recently seized dozens of domains that appear to fit the description.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		It’s worth noting that despite claims that Cuevano had been shut down, the most popular Cuevana site, Cuevana3.io, is still online. According to SimilarWeb, Cuevana3 had more than 60 million visitors in January, which is twice as much as the combined traffic of the other domains ACE said it had taken down.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The full list of seized domains (which center around the brands cuvana, replis, and pelis) is as follows:
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		repelisgooo.com, cuevana3.app, repelisgoo.org, repelisgt.com, cuevana.link, pelisplusgo.com, cuevana.wtf, pelisplusgt.com, pelisplus.wtf, cuevana2.app, pelisplus2.live, cuevana.io, pelisplus2.app, repelisgt.net, cuevanaxd.com, cuevanagt.com, repelisgo.net, pelisplushd.app, cuevanaxd.net, pelisplushd.li, repelis2.net, pelisplushd.biz, pelisplusxd.com, cuevana3.li, cuevana.li
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The documentation supporting the ACE/MPA subpoenas can be found here (<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-01008-MPA-v-Cloudflare-DMCA-subpoena1-210702.pdf" rel="external nofollow">1</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-01008-MPA-v-Cloudflare-DMCA-subpoena2-210702.pdf" rel="external nofollow">2</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-01008-MPA-v-Cloudflare-DMCA-subpoena3-210702.pdf" rel="external nofollow">3</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-01007-ACE-MPA-Cloudflare-DMCA-subpoena-210702.pdf" rel="external nofollow">4</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-1006-MPA-ACE-v-Cloudflare-DMCA-subpoena-210702.pdf" rel="external nofollow">5</a> pdf)
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/ace-mpa-seize-dozens-of-pirate-streaming-domains-demand-data-on-dozens-more-210706/" rel="external nofollow">ACE/MPA Seize Dozens Of Pirate Streaming Domains, Demand Data on Dozens More</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1093</guid><pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2021 23:02:43 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Stream-Rippers Fight &#x2018;Dangerous&#x2019; Data Logging Order in Court</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/stream-rippers-fight-%E2%80%98dangerous%E2%80%99-data-logging-order-in-court-r1092/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Stream-Rippers Fight ‘Dangerous’ Data Logging Order in Court
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		The Russian operator of YouTube-rippers FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com has asked a federal court in Virginia to annul a recent data logging order. The magistrate judge required the sites to keep extensive logs of user activity and hand these over to the major record labels. This order was legally incorrect and violates privacy laws in other countries, the defense now argues.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The lawsuit between several <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/major-labels-sue-more-youtube-ripper-sites-180806/" rel="external nofollow">major music companies and YouTube rippers FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com</a>, is heating up.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		After a long battle over jurisdiction, the case is now back at the Virginia District Court, where both parties are gathering relevant evidence.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Music Companies Request User Data
	</h2>

	<p>
		The record labels are particularly interested in how people use the YouTube rippers. Among other things, they want to know what files people download, what source sites they use, and where these users are located.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Russian operator of the YouTube rippers, Tofig Kurbanov, wasn’t able to share this data though. He set up his sites with privacy in mind and none of the requested data is logged. As such, there is nothing to hand over.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The music companies didn’t accept this answer and asked the court to order Mr. Kurbanov to <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/court-orders-youtube-rippers-to-log-and-share-user-data-210629/" rel="external nofollow">start logging the data</a> and hand these over to them. This is exactly what Magistrate Judge Theresa Buchanan did late last month.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The order was a clear setback for the operator of the YouTube rippers, who is now fighting it tooth and nail. In a new filing at the Virginia federal court, his legal team objects to the order, asking the Court to set it aside.
	</p>

	<h2>
		User Privacy and Dissidents At Risk
	</h2>

	<p>
		The data logging requirement will lead to privacy issues in other countries, the defense notes. In Germany, for example, users’ IP addresses are generally considered to be personal information. These can’t simply be shared with third parties without explicit content.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In addition, the Russian site operator fears that the Russian authorities may seize the access and URL logs, which could put dissidents at severe risk.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Mr. Kurbanov reasonably fears that if any of the Websites’ users were to have downloaded what Russia considers to be dissident material, or material that the Russian government otherwise finds objectionable, that the Russian government could locate a Website user and possibly subject that user to an unfavorable and unfair criminal or civil proceeding,” the objection reads.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Impossible Choice
	</h2>

	<p>
		According to the defense, the Magistrate’s order presents Mr. Kurbanov with an impossible ‘choice’ that will end badly, no matter which option he picks.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“[Mr. Kurbanov] can either comply this Court’s order, which would require him to violate the laws of other countries and/or put the Websites’ users at risk or he can defy the Magistrate’s order and risk a finding of contempt.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“It is not a position that this Court should force upon a foreign individual who has to contend with the ramifications of such data collection in other countries,” Mr. Kurbanov’s lawyers add.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The data logging order also goes against established precedents, the defense argues. In the opposition brief, they cite various cases where courts have concluded that a party cannot be required to create data for the purpose of discovery. However, this is what was ordered here.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Logging Zoom Calls Next?
	</h2>

	<p>
		If the order stands then future litigants could be required to record all sorts of privacy-sensitive data, including personal phone calls.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“If the Magistrate’s Order were to stand, there is no practical reason why future litigants can’t be ordered to start recording every digital phone call or Zoom call,” the defense writes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Previously, the music companies cited the Columbia Pictures vs. TorrentSpy case, where the torrent site was also required to log user data. However, according to the defense, this was a clear outlier, that was described as “controversial” and “dangerous” by commentators.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Many of these points and issues were already brought up at an earlier hearing where they were waived by the Magistrate Judge. The defense hopes that the Court will reconsider the order and set it aside.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Finally, it is worth noting that the music companies said that they don’t need the full IP addresses of the sites’ users. They are fine with redacted versions, as long as it’s clear which state users visit the sites from. Based on the opposition filing, this type of redaction was not specified in the Magistrate Judge’s order
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of the objections to the Magistrate Judge’s order is <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/kurbanov-order-memo.pdf" rel="external nofollow">available here (pdf)</a>.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/stream-rippers-fight-dangerous-data-logging-order-in-court-210706/" rel="external nofollow">Stream-Rippers Fight ‘Dangerous’ Data Logging Order in Court</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1092</guid><pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2021 23:00:23 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week &#x2013; July 5, 2021</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/top-10-most-pirated-movies-of-the-week-%E2%80%93-july-5-2021-r1078/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – July 5, 2021
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		<em>Every week we take a close look at the most pirated movies on torrent sites. What are pirates downloading? 'A Quiet Place Part II' tops the chart, followed by ‘The Tomorrow War'. 'Ice Road' completes the top three.</em>
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		<img alt="a quiet place 2" data-ratio="71.67" style="height: auto;" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/quiet.jpg">
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These torrent download statistics are meant to provide further insight into the piracy trends. All data are gathered from public resources.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This week we have three new entries in the list. “A Quiet Place Part II” is the most downloaded title.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The most torrented movies for the week ending on July 05 are:
	</h2>

	<table border="1px solid black;">
		<thead>
			<tr>
				<th>
					Movie Rank
				</th>
				<th>
					Rank last week
				</th>
				<th>
					Movie name
				</th>
				<th>
					IMDb Rating / Trailer
				</th>
			</tr>
		</thead>
		<tfoot>
			<tr>
				<td colspan="4">
					Most downloaded movies via torrent sites
				</td>
			</tr>
		</tfoot>
		<tbody>
			<tr>
				<td>
					1
				</td>
				<td>
					(10)
				</td>
				<td>
					A Quiet Place Part II
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8332922/" rel="external nofollow">7.7</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpdDN9d9Jio" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					2
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Tomorrow War
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9777666/" rel="external nofollow">6.7</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQjEbkV-9ZM" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					3
				</td>
				<td>
					(3)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Ice Road
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3758814/" rel="external nofollow">5.5</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHEPdMqrWjE" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					4
				</td>
				<td>
					(1)
				</td>
				<td>
					Luca
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12801262/" rel="external nofollow">7.6</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYfJxlgR2jw" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					5
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					No Sudden Move
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11525644/" rel="external nofollow">6.6</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GRDLX3a-IE" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					6
				</td>
				<td>
					(4)
				</td>
				<td>
					Wrath of Man
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11083552/" rel="external nofollow">7.3</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFYEni2gsK0" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					7
				</td>
				<td>
					(2)
				</td>
				<td>
					Infinite
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6654210/" rel="external nofollow">5.3</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WWEOCQGxSw" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					8
				</td>
				<td>
					(5)
				</td>
				<td>
					Cruella
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3228774/" rel="external nofollow">7.5</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmRKv7n2If8" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					9
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8376234/" rel="external nofollow">6.2</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWBcqCz7l_c" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					10
				</td>
				<td>
					(6)
				</td>
				<td>
					Godzilla vs. Kong
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5034838/" rel="external nofollow">6.7</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odM92ap8_c0" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
		</tbody>
	</table>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<div class="ipsEmbeddedVideo" contenteditable="false">
		<div>
			<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="113" src="https://nsaneforums.com/applications/core/interface/index.html" width="200" data-embed-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BpdDN9d9Jio?feature=oembed"></iframe>
		</div>
	</div>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Note: We also publish an updating archive of all the list of <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/most-pirated-movies-of-2021/" rel="external nofollow">weekly most torrented movies lists</a>.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/top-10-most-torrented-pirated-movies/" rel="external nofollow">Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – 07/05/2021</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1078</guid><pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 22:26:43 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Copyright Holders: Automatically Deleting Pirated Content From Search Isn&#x2019;t Enough</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/copyright-holders-automatically-deleting-pirated-content-from-search-isn%E2%80%99t-enough-r1075/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Copyright Holders: Automatically Deleting Pirated Content From Search Isn’t Enough
</h1>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/deletemini.jpg" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="delete" data-ratio="60.65" style="height: auto;" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/deletemini.jpg"></a>
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		A draft bill before Russia's State Duma will allow all copyright holders to have links to pirated content automatically removed from search engines within six hours. However, some copyright holders believe the measures don't go far enough since there is no provision to permanently ban persistent pirate sites from search engines.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		A <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/landmark-anti-piracy-database-agreement-signed-in-moscow-181101/" rel="external nofollow">memorandum</a> signed in 2018 by leading Russia-based search engines and major rightsholders targeted the appearance of infringing links in search results.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A centralized database of content is now automatically queried by search engines and when matches are found, corresponding pirate links in indexes are automatically removed within six hours. While welcomed by the rightsholders involved in the memorandum, the system has been criticized for not being inclusive enough. Other rightsholders want in on the action and they may soon get their way.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Last month, the State Duma Committee on Information Policy, Information Technology and Communications, <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/bill-to-automatically-delete-pirated-content-from-search-engines-submitted-in-russia-210617/" rel="external nofollow">submitted</a> a new anti-piracy bill that aims to write today’s voluntary system into law.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The objectives include expanding the program to make it accessible to a wider circle of copyright holders, thereby providing them with equal conditions to protect their rights. However, some copyright holders remain unhappy at the scope of the scheme and are demanding additional penalties for sites that infringe copyrights on a regular basis.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Demands For Wholesale Exclusion From Search Engines
	</h2>

	<p>
		Over the past several years, copyright holders worldwide have sent millions of takedown notices to have infringing content removed from search engines. The majority of these have targeted Google and largely achieve their stated aim. However, rightsholders believe that search companies should go a step further by removing known pirate sites from search engines altogether.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These calls have been largely rejected by Google and indeed most major search platforms but given the advanced automation of the new system in Russia, copyright holders believe there is now an opportunity to lessen the takedown notice burden by being much tougher on domains repeatedly reported for infringement.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		To that end, the powerful Media and Communication Union (MKC) and the Internet Video Association, which represents the rights of numerous legal video portals, are calling for an outright search engine ban on sites deemed to repeat infringers. This was proposed during the preparation of the draft bill but the final version lacks any special penalties for such sites.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Draft Bill Doesn’t Go Far Enough
	</h2>

	<p>
		Speaking with Russian publication <a href="https://www.vedomosti.ru/media/articles/2021/06/17/874429-pravoobladatelei-zakonoproekt" rel="external nofollow">Vedomosti</a>, Internet Video Association CEO Alexey Byrdin says that the draft should be tightened to deal with the most flagrant infringers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The task of the industry is to propose ways to improve the efficiency of the bill, and one of the measures is to apply stricter sanctions to recidivist sites that allow multiple copyright infringements, including the removal of the entire domain from search results, and possibly extrajudicial blocking,” Byrdin says.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		MKS President Mikhail Demin shares Byrdin’s position, noting that exclusion of repeat infringer sites would save rightsholders both time and money.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Extending the mechanism of removal from search results to domains of recidivist sites would help to increase the effectiveness of the fight against pirates, as well as reduce the financial and time costs of copyright holders to protect their rights,” he says.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Opposition To Repeat Infringer Exclusion
	</h2>

	<p>
		While the calls to exclude repeatedly infringing sites are supported by some rightsholders, support is not universal. Vedomosti reports that four sources with knowledge of the draft indicate that search companies and even some copyright holders are against the plan.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		It seems that the problem is being able to differentiate between sites that simply generate lots of copyright infringement reports and others that deliberately and structurally infringe copyright.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For example, it’s entirely possible that a user-generated platform like YouTube could generate as many (if not more) copyright infringement complaints as torrent site The Pirate Bay. While removing the latter from search results would mostly inconvenience pirates, removing YouTube or the many Russian equivalents would be hugely controversial considering the potential for massive collateral damage.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Yandex, an opponent of the broad proposal, says that placing tough sanctions against repeatedly infringing sites is something that needs thorough discussion, especially to ensure that legitimate platforms (that may have infringing users) aren’t affected by any sweeping measures.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/copyright-holders-say-automatically-deleting-pirated-content-from-search-isnt-enough-210705/" rel="external nofollow">Copyright Holders: Automatically Deleting Pirated Content From Search Isn’t Enough</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1075</guid><pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 22:12:59 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Stream-Ripping Can be Perfectly Legal, French Ministry of Culture Says</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/stream-ripping-can-be-perfectly-legal-french-ministry-of-culture-says-r1074/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1 class="hero__title">
	Stream-Ripping Can be Perfectly Legal, French Ministry of Culture Says
</h1>

<p>
	<img alt="record youtube" data-ratio="66.72" style="height: auto; width: 640px;" width="640" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/record-youtube-logo.jpg">
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Downloading music via stream-ripping tools can be perfectly legal, the French Ministry of Culture has confirmed. The resulting copies fall under the private copying exemption. However, this only applies if the stream-ripping service doesn't circumvent technical protection measures, which is a widely contested issue.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		Free music is easy to find nowadays. Just head over to YouTube and you can find millions of tracks including many of the most recent releases.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		While the music industry profits from the advertisements on many of these videos, it doesn’t like the fact that some people use external tools to download music tracks.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Various record labels are countering this threat with DMCA notices, lawsuits, and website blocking requests. YouTube itself is chiming in as well and actively blocks stream-rippers, which is an <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/theres-a-hidden-proxy-war-between-youtube-and-stream-rippers-201020/" rel="external nofollow">ongoing battle</a>.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Legal or Not?
	</h2>

	<p>
		Copyright holders are convinced that stream-ripping sites break the law but, in most countries, legal uncertainties remain. In the US, for example, popular stream-ripper <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-sued-by-youtube-ripping-site-over-dmca-anti-circumvention-notices-201027/" rel="external nofollow">Yout.com has sued the RIAA</a> in an effort to have its site declared legal. This case, which remains ongoing, could set an important precedent.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In France, the Ministry of Culture was recently questioned on the stream-ripping issue. Philippe Latombe, a member of the MoDem party, asked the Government whether copies downloaded through these services are considered illegal.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The question was part of a <a href="https://questions.assemblee-nationale.fr/q15/15-1329QOSD.htm" rel="external nofollow">broader inquiry</a> into the private copying rules and regulations. These allow people to copy music and movies in exchange for a tax that’s paid on storage media and devices including blank CDs, hard disks, and smartphones.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Stream-Ripping is Legal If…
	</h2>

	<p>
		Responding to the question, the Ministry of Culture confirmed that, under the right conditions, it’s <a href="https://www.nextinpact.com/lebrief/47569/pour-ministere-culture-stream-ripping-est-legal" rel="external nofollow">perfectly legal</a> to use stream-ripping services to download music and other media.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“[Stream-ripping] is legal and the resulting copy falls under the exception for private copying as provided by law, if several conditions are met: it must be made from a lawful source at the request of the user, without being stored by the converter, and no circumvention of technical protection measures must be carried out.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		If these three boxes are ticked, stream-ripping is in the same league as ripping or copying an old-fashioned CD or DVD.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Ticking Boxes
	</h2>

	<p>
		The big question, however, is in what situation all these conditions would apply? With regard to YouTube ripping, the “source” could be considered legal, as artists and labels often upload the videos themselves.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The second box is also ticked by many stream-rippers as they don’t permanently store music. The operator of the stream-rippers FLVto and 2Conv recently said that his site doesn’t even store basic logs as that would involve significant costs.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This brings us to the third and final condition; whether the stream-ripper circumvents technical protection measures. This is a crucial question and the answer largely depends on who you ask.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Rolling Cipher…
	</h2>

	<p>
		The major music labels, represented by the RIAA, argue that these download tools circumvent YouTube’s ‘rolling cipher’ technology. This was backed up in at least one lawsuit in Germany. But not everyone agrees.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Backed by the German court ruling, the RIAA asked GitHub to <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-takes-down-popular-open-source-youtube-dl-software-201024/" rel="external nofollow">remove the stream-ripping tool youtube-mp3</a>. This request was initially granted but was later reversed, with GitHub stating that the project <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/github-reinstates-youtube-dl-and-puts-1m-in-takedown-defense-fund-201116/" rel="external nofollow">isn’t circumventing</a> technical protection measures.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The circumvention ‘question’ is also at the heart of the legal battle between Yout.com and the RIAA in US federal court. This is a high-profile case and the outcome is expected to have broad consequences for other stream-ripping tools.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For now, this means that the French Ministry of Culture’s clarification is not very helpful. Most people simply don’t know whether a stream-ripper stores content. And they can’t possibly decide whether any technical protection measures are circumvented if that’s still an open question for legal experts.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/stream-ripping-can-be-perfectly-legal-french-ministry-of-culture-says-210705/" rel="external nofollow">Stream-Ripping Can be Perfectly Legal, French Ministry of Culture Says</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1074</guid><pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 22:10:54 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Should Internet Users Pay a Piracy Levy To Ensure Creators Get Paid?</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/should-internet-users-pay-a-piracy-levy-to-ensure-creators-get-paid-r1050/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Should Internet Users Pay a Piracy Levy To Ensure Creators Get Paid?
</h1>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/smart-fund-e1625134277540.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="The Smart Fund" data-ratio="69.10" style="height: auto;" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/smart-fund-e1625134277540.png"></a>
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Cultural figures including Academy Award winner Olivia Colman are proposing a new initiative to ensure that artists get paid when people download content to devices including mobiles, tablets and PCs without permission. The Smart Fund is proposing a new levy of up to 3% to be paid by all device buyers in the UK but is this a fair solution for the majority who actually pay for content?
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		More than two decades after going mainstream, the problem of illegal downloading is not going to go away overnight. Indeed, it may not go away at all.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Over the years there have been dozens of initiatives to try and reduce the flow but by far the most effective has been to make content available to consumers at a fair price. The success of services like Spotify and Netflix are a testament to that but there are other ideas too, ones that approach things from a different direction.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The Smart Fund
	</h2>

	<p>
		This week “100 leading cultural figures” including Academy Award winner Olivia Colman published an open letter in The Times (<a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tax-smartphones-fund-arts-theatre-appeal-zhf5rplsp" rel="external nofollow">paywall</a>) calling for the creation of a so-called “Smart Fund” to help generate up to £300m per year to support the UK creative sectors.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Smart Fund is proposed as a collaboration between creators and performers, technology companies and the Government. It provides a direct way for tech manufacturers to invest in, grow, empower, and enrich the cultural DNA of our society, by supporting the creativity for which the UK is globally renowned,” The Smart Fund’s proposal reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“It would work by placing a small one-off levy on the sale of mobiles, laptops, PCs and devices that are built to allow people to store and download creative content, solving the problem that creators are not recompensed for the use of their work.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		TorrentFreak contacted The Smart Fund who told us that this “is an entirely separate issue to piracy” but then went on to explain a mechanism that sounds tailor-made to compensate for losses that the creative industries attribute to piracy.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“At the moment the works of thousands of artists, writers, musicians, performers and film-makers, are copied and stored on devices like smartphones, which breaches their copyright. These rights are often not enforced and the creators aren’t remunerated. The Smart Fund provides a mechanism to fix this across the creative sector,” the group explained.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Benefits of the Proposal
	</h2>

	<p>
		If we leave potential problems and criticisms out of the equation for a moment, The Smart Fund does appear to have some admirable goals.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Those who could benefit from the cash injection include performers at festivals and art galleries, <a href="https://thesmartfund.co.uk/case-studies/" rel="external nofollow">for example</a>, with The Smart Fund noting that it would be able to support young people while helping to “<a href="https://thesmartfund.co.uk/what-is-the-smart-fund/" rel="external nofollow">level up</a>” those in disadvantaged areas.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This sounds all very well in theory but in practice, things are unlikely to be so straightforward.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Levy or Just Another Tax?
	</h2>

	<p>
		Given that The Smart Fund is proposing a 1% to 3% levy on sales of all devices that are download-capable, we put it to The Smart Fund that they may have failed to mention the most important people in the equation – the people who will buy those devices, i.e the general public.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Isn’t this just a tax by another name that will eventually have to be paid by consumers?
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Smart Fund is not a tax, as a tax would be paid to government. Instead, The Smart Fund will pay creators and performers directly through transparent and fair means. It is a way for tech to invest in and enable creativity for everyone,” The Smart Fund says.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“There is no reason why the cost of a smartphone, tablet or any other device should increase with the Smart Fund. As set out in the report ‘Private Copying Global Study 2020’ by <a href="https://www.cisac.org/Newsroom/news-releases/new-private-copying-global-study-shows-potential-better-remuneration" rel="external nofollow">CISAC</a>, the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers, schemes like the Smart Fund exist in 44 countries and there is no evidence to show that consumers in these countries pay more for their devices.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Smart Fund’s approach is that manufacturers of download-capable Internet devices will pay the 1% to 3% levy and the cost of the levy won’t be passed on to consumers. Unfortunately, that’s not how businesses tend to work. Everything is passed on to consumers where possible since they are the ones actually buying the devices.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With that usually being the case, there’s the pressing question of whether a levy should be imposed on consumers whether they like it or not and, crucially, whether a levy should be paid by people regardless of their consumption habits.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The fundamental issue is that illegal downloading relates only to a relatively small proportion of device buyers. Unfortunately, there is no practical way to only extract a levy from people who are pirating content, so everyone must foot the bill. That raises more issues.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Per Device Tax is Fundamentally Unfair
	</h2>

	<p>
		The stated aim of the scheme is to place a levy on every mobile phone, tablet and PC sale but it won’t necessarily stop there. Indeed, The Smart Fund wants a surcharge placed on all devices that are able to download and store content from the Internet, which in some households could stretch to a large number of devices.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Then there’s the not-insignificant issue of the majority of homes that already pay for legal services and do not download anything illegally. Not only will they have to pay for Spotify, Netflix, Prime, and Apple Music – all of which necessarily have to pay money to creators – they will be forced to pick up the bill for people who are paying nothing too.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Again, for balance, The Smart Fund says that tech companies won’t have to pass on the cost of the levy to consumers. Make of that what you will but £300m isn’t going to come out of thin air.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Private Copying Freedoms Are Restricted in the UK
	</h2>

	<p>
		The Smart Fund quite rightly points out that there are schemes in dozens of countries that generate funds via blank media, MP3 playing devices, and computers, for example. The funds raised from those levies are pumped back into the creative industries but there is often something for the consumer too – a private copying exception, i.e the freedom to format-shift owned copyrighted works without breaking the law.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In the UK, such an exception was introduced in 2014 but following <a href="https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2015/2041.html" rel="external nofollow">legal action</a> by several music industry groups, which challenged the government’s decision to bring in an exception without a levy, in 2015 the High Court <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/quashing-of-private-copying-exception" rel="external nofollow">quashed</a> the regulations and the exception.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		While illegal downloading was never part of the equation (users must permanently own the content they wish to copy), the end result today is that UK citizens cannot even make MP3 tracks from CDs they actually own without breaking the law. Fast forward six years, and there are now calls for a levy (ostensibly to recoup piracy losses for good causes) but without an accompanying private copying exception being part of the package.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Presuming That a Levy is a Good Idea, Where Does The Money Go?
	</h2>

	<p>
		If we take The Smart Fund at face value, it does seem to want to put its proposed £300 million to good use. Providing funding to disadvantaged areas and those less well off are certainly admirable goals and there’s no doubt that society as a whole could benefit from a well-managed, well-considered scheme. But with £300 million in the pot, how long before big business starts circling?
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		There’s no question that when it comes to illegal downloading, the music and movies sectors are those most affected in terms of volume and value. The big question then is whether the most affected companies will swoop in to claim what is ‘theirs’? In music, just a handful of major labels control more than 90% of the market – will they allow millions of pounds to be distributed to other industries or will they want their ‘fair share’?
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		We put this to The Smart Fund who told us that project is not mainly for music content at all.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Smart Fund will be available for all creators and performers, from artists to actors, to musicians and dancers and more. The people set to benefit from this most are the many creators who struggle to secure fair payment for their work,” the group explains.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The levy schemes in 44 other countries provide a template that the UK can build on to ensure the best outcome for the Smart Fund. Organizations like DACS, PRS for Music, ALCS, BECS and Directors UK already distribute royalties to hundreds of thousands of creators efficiently and transparently. This would be made even easier if technology companies partner with us and utilize their data.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Smart Fund project can be found <a href="https://thesmartfund.co.uk/what-is-the-smart-fund/" rel="external nofollow">here</a>
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/should-internet-users-pay-a-piracy-levy-to-ensure-creators-get-paid-210704/" rel="external nofollow">Should Internet Users Pay a Piracy Levy To Ensure Creators Get Paid?</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1050</guid><pubDate>Sun, 04 Jul 2021 19:45:21 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>OMI IN A HELLCAT: My Pirate IPTV Service Was Legal. US Govt: No Way</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/omi-in-a-hellcat-my-pirate-iptv-service-was-legal-us-govt-no-way-r1038/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	OMI IN A HELLCAT: My Pirate IPTV Service Was Legal. US Govt: No Way
</h1>

<p>
	<img alt="OMI IN A HELLCAT" data-ratio="55.00" style="width: 720px; height: 396px;" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/image-161.png">
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Ever since the US Government shut down his Gears IPTV service and seized millions in cash and a fleet of supercars, YouTuber OMI IN A HELLCAT has insisted his platform was legal. Documents filed as part of a seizure process against his assets indicate that the US Government strongly believes that serious crimes were committed.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		In November 2019, dozens of FBI and IRS agents swooped to shut down a pirate IPTV service operated by YouTuber OMI IN A HELLCAT, real name Bill Omar Carrasquillo.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The operation not only closed the streams but also resulted in the seizure of an entire fleet of supercars, jewelry and in excess of $5.2m in cash. Ever since, Carrasquillo has insisted that his service was entirely legal, operating in a legal gray area that allowed copyrighted content to be streamed, for-profit, to hundreds of thousands of subscribers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Yesterday, Carrasquillo said that despite <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/omi-in-a-hellcat-indictment-for-gears-reloaded-iptv-imminent-210701/" rel="external nofollow">trying to settle with the IRS</a>, the authorities were pressing forward with their plans to indict him for tax evasion and money laundering, much to his confusion. However, it now appears that Carrasquillo knows much more about the legal action against him than he’s revealed in public thus far.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Indeed, a civil forfeiture process initiated by the United States Government against his assets details a broad, criminal, copyright-infringing scheme that netted the YouTuber tens of millions of dollars.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Civil Forfeiture Process
	</h2>

	<p>
		According to the Government, from at least March 2016 through to November 2019, Carrasquillo, business partner Jesse Daniel Gonzales, plus business entities GT Subscriptions and Hosting Bros. Inc, operated IPTV services variously branded as Gears, Reloaded, and Gears Reloaded.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Together they sold access to television, movies and sports content without authorization or license, in violation of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/506" rel="external nofollow">17 U.S.C. § 506(a)</a> and <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2319" rel="external nofollow">U.S.C. § 2319</a> (criminal copyright infringement).
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Documents allege that GT Subscriptions (also known as Gears TV Subscriptions) was a corporation registered in California, owned and/or operated by Gonzales. The entity was the primary company registered with various payment processing services for Carrasquillo and Gonzales’ IPTV services. Another company, Hosting Bros Inc, was owned and/or operated by Carrasquillo for the same purpose.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The Nature of the Gears Services
	</h2>

	<p>
		Contrary to repeated claims by Carrasquillo since 2019, the US Government says that the Gears services not only provided live TV but also had a 24/7 feature that provided access to recordings of copyrighted content. While this service is said to have been shut down in May 2017, filings suggest that it returned and continued to operate until August 2017.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Government stops short of claiming that Carrasquillo or Gonzales operated another on-demand service called Streams R US but states that the service, which was previously linked to Gears, operated until November 2018.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For its part, Reloaded (sometimes referred to as Reloaded TV) is said to have carried the same content as Gears TV. However, it allegedly offered a 24-hour catchup feature too. Gears Reloaded allegedly offered live TV too, augmented with a 48-hour catchup feature and hundreds of local channels.
	</p>

	<h2>
		How Carrasquillo and Gonzales Obtained Content
	</h2>

	<p>
		The Government alleges that between October 2016 and November 2019, Carrasquillo and Gonzales had their companies subscribe to receive TV and video content from cable and satellite TV providers including Comcast, Verizon and other suppliers including NFL Sunday Ticket, NBA League Pass, MLB Extra Innings, and NHL Center Ice. This content was captured and bundled in streaming packages for sale to Gears subscribers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Gears TV and its related entities provided customers and subscribers access to copyrighted content without first obtaining the necessary licenses to distribute such material, which constituted an illegal copyright infringement scheme, in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 506(a)(l) and 18 U.S.C. § 2319,” the complaint reads.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Subscription Payment Processing
	</h2>

	<p>
		It’s alleged that the Gears services received subscription payments from customers via a number of payment processors including Stripe, Bank of America, Nuvei, GreenMoney and Worldpay. Nuvei alone processed more than $500,000 in transactions and on November 20, 2019, federal agents seized $542,529 from the account. Overall, however, much larger sums were involved. Around $17.3m was deposited into GT Subscriptions alone according to the complaint.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Gears TV and its related entities received tens of millions of dollars in revenue, i.e., proceeds, during the period of time in which the enterprise operated the illegal video content service,” the complaint reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“This money then was deposited into business bank accounts in the names of GT Subscriptions, Hosting Bros Inc, Gears Reloaded, ONC Brothers (lesser extent), Reloaded Realty (lesser extent), and an assortment of personal names. Money was then transferred to personal bank accounts of Carrasquillo and Gonzales..”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		On November 20, 2019, the FBI seize3d $5.23m from one of Carrasquillo’s accounts but that wasn’t all. In addition to seizing more than 30 cars, the FBI also found large sums of cash inside some of them including $20,850 hidden inside a 2020 Bentley Continental and $80,000 in a 2018 Mercedes Benz AMG.
	</p>

	<h2>
		No Gray Area for Criminal Copyright Infringement
	</h2>

	<p>
		While the United States recently <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/new-u-s-streaming-piracy-bill-focuses-on-commercial-services-201211/" rel="external nofollow">tightened up the law</a> to ensure that illegal streaming of live content could be prosecuted as a felony rather than just a misdemeanor, direct copyright infringement of a certain scale and nature has always been considered a crime rather than just a civil issue in the US.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Given that the term “copyright infringement scheme” appears no less than 22 times in the complaint and criminal offenses are cited on dozens of occasions – not to mention the not insignificant claims of money laundering – there can be little doubt where this case is going.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to the Government, Carrasquillo had “virtually no legitimate income” prior to the operation of Gears, barring a “limited income” from YouTube revenue. It now wants to keep everything it has seized thus far but with an indictment on the horizon, that could be just the beginning.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The related forfeiture document can be found <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-cv-01755-JHS-United-States-v-5230918-in-United-States-Currency-complaint-210414.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> (pdf)
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/omi-in-a-hellcat-my-pirate-iptv-service-was-legal-us-govt-no-way-210702/" rel="external nofollow">OMI IN A HELLCAT: My Pirate IPTV Service Was Legal. US Govt: No Way</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1038</guid><pubDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2021 21:54:13 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>BitTorrent Turns 20: The File-Sharing Revolution Revisited</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/bittorrent-turns-20-the-file-sharing-revolution-revisited-r1024/</link><description><![CDATA[<header>
	<h1>
		BitTorrent Turns 20: The File-Sharing Revolution Revisited
	</h1>

	<p>
		Twenty years ago a then relatively unknown programmer named Bram Cohen single-handedly sparked a new file-sharing revolution. At the time, social media had yet to be invented, but BitTorrent never needed likes to go viral. The file-sharing protocol sold itself and soon conquered the Internet.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“My new app, BitTorrent, is now in working order, check it out here,” Bram Cohen wrote on a Yahoo! message board on July 2, 2001.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="bram yahoo" data-ratio="32.50" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/file-sharing-bittorrent.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This was probably one of the more underwhelming software launches in history. The official website, consisting of a <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20010812032735/http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/" rel="external nofollow">few lines of HTML code</a> with black text on a white background, didn’t impress either. Nothing hinted at the powerhouse BitTorrent would soon become.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		While BitTorrent lacked a fancy PR channel, its creator made up for that with coding inventiveness. Cohen previously worked for the startup behind the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mnet_(peer-to-peer_network)" rel="external nofollow">MojoNation</a> peer-to-peer network. That project eventually ran out of money so the then 25-year old developer went on to focus on his own file-sharing protocol.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Cohen certainly wasn’t the only programmer in this niche. At the time, file-sharing was booming and dozens of new applications were popping up. <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/filesharing-legend-napster-turns-20-years-old-today-190601/" rel="external nofollow">Napster</a> had already laid the groundwork and, with MP3s getting more popular by the day, sharing was hot.
	</p>

	<h2>
		More People, Faster Downloads
	</h2>

	<p>
		BitTorrent was different though. It clearly set itself apart from competitors by focusing on speed and decentralization. Instead of simply sharing a file with one person at a time, BitTorrent created swarms of sharers, that would see download speeds increase when more people joined.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<ul>
		<li>
			<img alt="bittorrent architecture" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/bittorrent-arch-explain.jpg">
		</li>
	</ul>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The decentralization aspect was pretty novel. Most file-sharing tools used a centralized infrastructure accessed through a single piece of software. BitTorrent launched as an open protocol that integrated well with the web. Perhaps too well.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Just a few months after BitTorrent was publicly released, the first ‘<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/top-torrent-sites-2021-210103/" rel="external nofollow">torrent sites</a>‘ sprung up. These included Suprnova.org, Donkax.com, Bytemonsoon.com, and Torrentse.cx.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These sites allowed users to upload and share music, photos, software, and even movies. Offering these types of (often pirated) files to a mass audience wasn’t an option before, simply because the bandwidth and storage costs were too high.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With BitTorrent, these sites only had to host the small .torrent files, which proved to be a gamechanger.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Embracing The Web
	</h2>

	<p>
		Bram Cohen stayed far away from these controversial sites but clearly embraced the general “media sharing” functionality early on. Late 2001, <a href="http://bt.etree.org/" rel="external nofollow">Etree</a> was announced as one of the first sites to embrace the new BitTorrent protocol.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“BitTorrent’s customer is etree. Etree is a loose-knit community of people who distribute live concert recordings online,” <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20011122030917/http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/architecture.html" rel="external nofollow">Cohen wrote</a>. “Etree suffers from not having nearly as much upload offered as there is download demand, a problem BitTorrent solves.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Today, 20 years later, Etree still offers torrent downloads for thousands of concerts even though bandwidth isn’t nearly as expensive as it once was.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="bt.etree" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/etree.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Part of BitTorrent’s early success was due to the cost savings which made it possible to share large files quickly. This may sound trivial today but in the dial-up age, years before YouTube came around, it was a revolution.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Search Engines
	</h2>

	<p>
		The seamless connection between the web and BitTorrent had other advantages as well. It allowed torrent sites to create searchable indexes, which in turn could be picked up by search engines. <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/why-google-made-bittorrent-a-success-100321/" rel="external nofollow">Google, for example</a>, a toddler itself at the time.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With help from search engines and word of mouth advertising torrent sites grew quickly. This includes <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/tag/the-pirate-bay/" rel="external nofollow">The Pirate Bay</a>, which launched in 2003 and is still around despite criminal prosecutions and two police raids.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="hacked billboard" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/hacked-billboard_auto_x2-1.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This exponential growth of torrent sites wasn’t just limited to public indexes. Meta-search engines and smaller communities started to form as well.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These private trackers, some of which focused on tighter niches, each came with their own sets of sharing rules. The music library <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/oinkcd-servers-raided-admin-arrested/" rel="external nofollow">OiNK</a>, for example, was once hailed as the largest music library ever, before streaming services became a thing. And after OiNK shut down, What.cd took over, until it was <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/what-cd-shuts-down-following-reported-raids-in-france-161117/" rel="external nofollow">taken down as well</a>.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Taming a Torrent of Traffic
	</h2>

	<p>
		Torrents were gaining traction in the early 2000s and that didn’t go unnoticed by Internet providers. At one point, BitTorrent was estimated to account for <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-the-one-third-of-all-internet-traffic-myth/" rel="external nofollow">one-third of all Internet traffic</a> worldwide.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This traffic was a heavy burden on Internet providers’ infrastructures and several large ISPs countered this by actively throttling torrent traffic. This included <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/comcast-throttles-bittorrent-traffic-seeding-impossible/" rel="external nofollow">Comcast in the US</a>, as well as many foreign ISPs.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="future internet" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/future-internet.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The throttling activity caused a media storm that, according to some, marked the start of the public net neutrality debate.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Researchers chimed in <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/test-does-your-isp-slow-down-bittorrent-traffic-080507/" rel="external nofollow">with tests</a> that allowed people to see if their ISPs were restricting traffic, <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/new-data-exposes-bittorrent-throttling-isps-120809/" rel="external nofollow">outing the worst offenders</a>. Meanwhile, the BitTorrent protocol was updated to make throttling harder with <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/encrypting-bittorrent-to-take-out-traffic-shapers/" rel="external nofollow">protocol header encryption</a>, while <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-2-0-to-elimininate-the-need-for-isp-throttling-091031/" rel="external nofollow">uTP support</a> was added to decrease the load on ISPs.
	</p>

	<h2>
		BitTorrent Inc.
	</h2>

	<p>
		The protocol updates were monitored by Cohen who by then had successfully transformed his protocol into a tech startup, BitTorrent Inc, which raised millions of dollars in venture capital.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		BitTorrent Inc had nothing to do with pirate sites and focused on developing BitTorrent while helping artists and other rightsholders to share content.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In 2007 the company launched its own video store, the ‘<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/bittorrentcom-launches-video-store/" rel="external nofollow">Torrent Entertainment Network</a>,’ which partnered with major Hollywood studios such as Warner Bros. The video store never became profitable and eventually <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-shuts-down-video-store-brings-back-search-081207/" rel="external nofollow">closed its doors</a> a year later.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In the years that followed BitTorrent Inc focused on helping artists to promote their content, including via <a href="https://now.bt.co/" rel="external nofollow">BitTorrent Now</a> which is still around, but those weren’t major breakthroughs.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="bittorrent friend" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/bittorrent-friend.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		One of BitTorrent’s best decisions was made in 2006 when it <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-inc-buys-%C2%B5torrent/" rel="external nofollow">bought the uTorrent client</a> from the Swedish developer <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-inventor-wins-prestigious-technology-innovation-award-221114/" rel="external nofollow">Ludvig Strigeus</a>. Today, uTorrent is still the dominant torrent client, while Strigeus went on to make <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/spotify-owned-utorrent-before-bittorrent-acquired-it-180305/" rel="external nofollow">Spotify a success</a>.
	</p>

	<h2>
		BitTorrent Breakup
	</h2>

	<p>
		Some early investors had hoped to cash in big when they put their money into BitTorrent, but the company never really broke through. Revenue from uTorrent helped to keep the company afloat but most new torrent projects were eventually disbanded.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Bram Cohen wasn’t always happy with the company either. In 2018, BitTorrent Inc. was bought <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-inc-confirms-acquisition-by-tron-foundation-180724/" rel="external nofollow">by the TRON Foundation</a> and a month later BitTorrent’s inventor <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-inventor-bram-cohen-leaves-bittorrent-behind-180819/" rel="external nofollow">announced his departure</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In recent years BitTorrent has had a heavy ‘crypto’ focus. Under TRON’s wings the BitTorrent token (BTT) was launched, which can be used by torrent users to <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/utorrent-now-includes-tokenized-bittorrent-speed-190709/" rel="external nofollow">pay for faster download speeds</a>, or earn while seeding.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Aside from designing <a href="https://www.puzzlemaster.ca/browse/inventors/cohen/" rel="external nofollow">complex puzzles</a>, Cohen himself has also developed an interest in cryptocurrency. BitTorrent’s inventor is one of the driving forces behind the ‘greener’ <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chia_(cryptocurrency)" rel="external nofollow">Chia coin</a>, which launched earlier last May.
	</p>

	<h2>
		BitTorrent ≠ Piracy
	</h2>

	<p>
		In the media, and the public eye, torrents are frequently associated with piracy. It’s worth emphasizing that it is much more than that.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="bittorrent not a crime" data-ratio="74.67" data-sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" data-srcset="https://torrentfreak.com/images/bittorrent-not-a-crime.jpg 884w, https://torrentfreak.com/images/bittorrent-not-a-crime-200x150.jpg 200w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" srcset="https://torrentfreak.com/images/bittorrent-not-a-crime.jpg 884w, https://torrentfreak.com/images/bittorrent-not-a-crime-200x150.jpg 200w" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/bittorrent-not-a-crime.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Over the years many reputable companies and organizations, including <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/why-google-made-bittorrent-a-success-100321/" rel="external nofollow">Twitter</a>, Google, <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/facebook-uses-bittorrent-and-they-love-it-100625/" rel="external nofollow">Facebook</a>, NASA, and others, have used BitTorrent technology to their advantage. Simply because it’s great at cheaply and efficiently transferring files.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Many software projects, including iconic Linux distributions, still offer BitTorrent downloads too. Fairly recently, <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Planet.osm#BitTorrent_RSS.2FAtom_feed" rel="external nofollow">OpenStreetMap</a> joined in by offering torrent feeds to download updated versions of its maps.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As bandwidth costs dropped over the years, BitTorrent has lost some of its edge, but it continues to be a superior technology and a source of innovation. Whatever the future holds, it has certainly cemented its place in the Internet’s history books.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		That brings us back to Cohen’s announcement on July 2, 2001. At the time, that post only triggered one response, which was a question. While Bram never replied, we assume that it has since been answered.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“What’s BitTorrent, Bram?…”
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-turns-20-the-file-sharing-revolution-revisited-210702/" rel="external nofollow">BitTorrent Turns 20: The File-Sharing Revolution Revisited</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1024</guid><pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2021 20:57:57 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>ISP Doesn&#x2019;t Have to Expose Alleged Movie Pirates, Dutch Supreme Court Rules</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/isp-doesn%E2%80%99t-have-to-expose-alleged-movie-pirates-dutch-supreme-court-rules-r1017/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	ISP Doesn’t Have to Expose Alleged Movie Pirates, Dutch Supreme Court Rules
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Internet provider Ziggo is not required to hand over the personal details of 377 alleged pirates, the Dutch Supreme Court has ruled. The personal information was requested by movie distributor Dutch FilmWorks. Its goal was to collect settlements from 'pirating' subscribers but instead, the movie company must now pay the ISP's legal fees.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Piracy settlement letters have become a serious threat in countries all round the world.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Thus far, Dutch Internet users have been spared from this practice but local movie distributor Dutch Filmworks planned to change that.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Dutch FilmWorks’ Quest for Piracy Settlements
	</h2>

	<p>
		Four years ago the company <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/dutch-film-distributor-wins-right-to-chase-pirates-store-data-for-5-years-171208/" rel="external nofollow">received permission</a> from the Dutch Data Protection Authority to monitor and store the IP-addresses of BitTorrent users who shared pirated movies.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		However, that was only the first hurdle it had to overcome. The next step was to identify the subscribers behind the IP-addresses and Dutch Internet provider Ziggo didn’t want to share any customer data without a court order.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The case went to court, where the movie company requested the personal details of 377 account holders whose addresses were allegedly used to share a copy of “The Hitman’s Bodyguard”.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Courts Don’t Approve
	</h2>

	<p>
		This didn’t go as planned for Dutch FilmWorks. In the first instance, the Central Netherlands Court <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/dutch-isp-does-not-have-to-expose-alleged-pirates-court-rules-190208/" rel="external nofollow">denied</a> the company’s request for data and, after that, the Court of Appeal <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/dutch-isp-does-not-have-to-identify-alleged-pirates-appeals-court-rules-191105/" rel="external nofollow">reached the same conclusion</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Both courts found that Dutch FilmWorks’ plans lacked transparency as it’s not clear what the movie company intended to do with the personal data. Dutch FilmWorks said that it could either warn subscribers or request damages, but the criteria for each step were unknown.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		It was also unclear how large the proposed settlements would be. The film company mentioned an initial figure of €150 per infringement but this number could also be significantly higher.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Supreme Court Keeps Verdict Intact
	</h2>

	<p>
		In a final bid to expose the alleged pirates, Dutch FilmWorks took the case to the Supreme Court but this effort failed as well. The highest court in the Netherlands sees no reason to reach a different conclusion than that reached by the Court of Appeal.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Supreme Court has assessed the complaints about the Court of Appeal’s order. The outcome of this is that these complaints cannot lead to the annulment of that judgment,” the <a href="https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBMNE:2019:423" rel="external nofollow">decision reads</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Supreme Court’s judgment is brief and doesn’t come with a full opinion. The case didn’t present any questions that are crucial for the development of the law, the order explains, so the Court is not required to motivate its decision.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This means that, after half a decade, Dutch FilmWorks’ effort to identify the names linked to these pirating IP-addresses is now stranded. Instead of earning money through settlements, it’s the movie company that must now pay.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As in the earlier proceedings, Dutch FilmWorks is required to pay the legal fees incurred by Internet provider Ziggo, which adds up to thousands of euros.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/isp-doesnt-have-expose-alleged-movie-pirates-dutch-supreme-court-rules-210702/" rel="external nofollow">ISP Doesn’t Have to Expose Alleged Movie Pirates, Dutch Supreme Court Rules</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1017</guid><pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2021 20:34:56 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>RIAA and Rightscorp Defeat RCN&#x2019;s Claims of &#x201C;Fraudulent&#x201D; Piracy Notices</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/riaa-and-rightscorp-defeat-rcn%E2%80%99s-claims-of-%E2%80%9Cfraudulent%E2%80%9D-piracy-notices-r1004/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	RIAA and Rightscorp Defeat RCN’s Claims of “Fraudulent” Piracy Notices
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The RIAA and its anti-piracy partner Rightscorp have won a legal battle over allegedly 'fraudulent' piracy notices. A New Jersey federal court dismissed the complaint of Internet provider RCN, which failed to show that it was financially hurt as a direct result of any incorrect notices sent. The case is not completely over yet, however.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Spearheaded by the RIAA, several major music industry companies have taken some of the largest U.S. Internet providers to court.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The music companies accuse these providers of failing to terminate the accounts of the most egregious pirates by ignoring millions of copyright infringement notices.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The liability lawsuits are seen as a major threat to the ISP industry, as multiple companies face hundreds of millions of dollars in potential damages. This is not just a hypothetical threat, as the <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/court-confirms-1-billion-piracy-damages-verdict-against-cox-210113/" rel="external nofollow">$1 billion verdict</a> against Cox has shown.
	</p>

	<h2>
		RCN Countersued RIAA and Rightscorp
	</h2>

	<p>
		In response to these lawsuits, several ISPs have submitted counterclaims that scrutinize the copyright infringement notices. Internet provider RCN did the same and also targeted <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/isp-sues-riaa-and-rightscorp-over-unfair-and-fraudulent-anti-piracy-threats-201006/" rel="external nofollow">the RIAA and anti-piracy company Rightscorp</a> in its response.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Rightscorp’s notices, which often included a settlement offer, are used as evidence in several repeat infringer lawsuits. However, RCN believes that some of these notices were fraudulent or lacked crucial information. Making matters worse, Rightscorp allegedly destroyed the evidence supporting its notices.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		RCN’s claims were characterized as violations of the California Unfair Competition Law (UCL). Needless to say, Rightscorp and the music companies vehemently disagreed. They asked the court to dismiss the counterclaim, arguing that the ISP doesn’t have standing.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		To state a proper claim there has to be some form of injury that can be directly linked to the alleged fraud. RCN argued that this is the case here as it incurred significant costs to process the problematic notices, but Rightscorp and the music companies see things differently.
	</p>

	<h2>
		RCN Countersued RIAA and Rightscorp
	</h2>

	<p>
		Yesterday, US District Court Judge Michael A. Shipp ruled on the matter. In a detailed memorandum opinion, the Judge sides with the music companies and Rightscorp, dismissing the counterclaim while leaving the door open for an amended complaint.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Judge Shipp doesn’t refute that Rightscorp may have sent problematic notices but the Court doesn’t see how RCN was injured as a direct result of the alleged fraud.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The ISP argued that it designed and implemented an advanced ‘DMCA system’ to deal with infringement notices. But this system isn’t just for Rightscorp notices, the Court says.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“At no point does RCN allege that it created its DMCA System specifically because of Rightscorp’s infringement notifications or that Rightscorp’s infringement notifications imposed any additional costs on RCN,” Judge Shipp writes.
	</p>

	<h2>
		No Direct injury
	</h2>

	<p>
		The same goes for the ongoing costs that are linked to operating and maintaining the DMCA system. RCN failed to show costs that are directly linked to the problematic notices.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“RCN does not specifically allege, however, that any of these costs are due to Rightscorp’s infringement notifications. Such non-specific allegations are insufficient to confer statutory standing on RCN.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Finally, the ISP argued that it incurred, and continues to incur, costs in evaluating and defending itself against the allegedly fraudulent piracy notices. This includes legal costs that had to be paid.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Again, Judge Shipp is not convinced. These allegations and the details provided in the complaint are not sufficient. They fail to show “cognizable injury” as a direct result of the alleged misconduct.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Without facts showing that RCN suffered a qualifying injury in fact, the Court finds RCN has not established standing under the UCL. Accordingly, Counterclaim Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss RCN’s Counterclaim are granted,” Judge Shipp concludes.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Leave to Amend
	</h2>

	<p>
		Rightcorp and the music companies also brought up other issues in their defense, but these have not been considered yet. This may happen at a later stage if RCN chooses to file amended claims – which the court allowed – showing that fraudulent notices directly resulted in financial injury or other costs.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This isn’t the first counterclaim over problematic copyright infringement notices. Earlier this year <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/record-labels-defeat-false-dmca-takedown-claims-in-court-210102/" rel="external nofollow">ISP Bright House Networks</a> lost a similar case over ‘false’ takedown notices, and last November the court <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/court-dismisses-charters-claims-of-false-riaa-dmca-notices-201109/" rel="external nofollow">dismissed</a> Charter’s takedown abuse claims as well.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of US District Court Judge Michael Shipp’s opinion memorandum is <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/rcn-counter-ruling.pdf" rel="external nofollow">available here (pdf)</a>
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-and-rightscorp-defeat-rcns-claims-of-fraudulent-piracy-notices-210701/" rel="external nofollow">RIAA and Rightscorp Defeat RCN’s Claims of “Fraudulent” Piracy Notices</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">1004</guid><pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2021 04:58:04 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Nintendo Fears Relaunch of Pirate Site So Asks for Legal Protection</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/nintendo-fears-relaunch-of-pirate-site-so-asks-for-legal-protection-r970/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Nintendo Fears Relaunch of Pirate Site So Asks for Legal Protection
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		<img alt="romuniverse" data-ratio="24.82" style="height: auto;" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/romuniverselogo.png">
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Nintendo won a $2.1 million summary judgment against the operator of the pirate site RomUniverse last month. The California federal court denied a permanent injunction, however, noting that the site had already shut down. Nintendo now asks the court to reconsider this decision, as there are signs that RomUniverse may relaunch after all.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		Nintendo regularly takes legal action against pirate sites and services. The gaming company has sued several sites that offer pirated games, including RomUniverse, which it took to court two years ago.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The download portal, which also offered movies and books, was accused of massive online copyright infringement. Even worse, Nintendo’s complaint said that the site also charged users for access to premium features.
	</p>

	<h2>
		RomUniverse Fought Back
	</h2>

	<p>
		The site’s operator, Los Angeles resident Matthew Storman, clearly disagreed with these allegations and without an attorney decided to defend himself in court. In his view, the site wasn’t breaking any laws so he asked <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/romuniverse-admin-asks-court-to-dismiss-nintendos-piracy-lawsuit-191026/" rel="external nofollow">the court to dismiss</a> the case.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Nintendo <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/nintendo-counters-romuniverse-operators-defense-in-piracy-case-191226/" rel="external nofollow">picked this defense apart</a> and found <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/romuniverses-request-to-dismiss-nintendo-piracy-lawsuit-fails200116/" rel="external nofollow">the court on its side</a>. This meant that Storman had to face the copyright infringement charges, as well as millions of dollars in potential damages.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The RomUniverse site initially remained online but last summer, after discussions with Nintendo’s legal team, the operator agreed to shut it down. But that didn’t end the case.
	</p>

	<h2>
		$2.1 Million Judgment
	</h2>

	<p>
		Nintendo was pleased to see RomUniverse offline, but the lawsuit continued. The gaming company moved for summary judgment and demanded millions of dollars in damages.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Last month, US District Court Judge Consuelo Marshall ruled on the matter, largely siding with Nintendo. The court granted a $2.1 million summary judgment against the RomUniverse operator, for infringing the game company’s copyrights and trademarks.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Nintendo didn’t get everything it was after. Judge Marshall denied a permanent injunction against Storman, as Nintendo failed to show that it was suffering irreparable harm. Additionally, the fact that Storman had already shut down the site showed there was no imminent threat of further infringements.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Nintendo Asks Court to Reconsider
	</h2>

	<p>
		New court filings reveal that Nintendo isn’t planning to let the permanent injunction go just yet. The company has filed a motion for reconsideration arguing that, under the recently implemented Trademark Modernization Act, there is a ‘mandatory’ presumption of irreparable harm for trademark infringers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Perhaps just as crucially, Nintendo is worried that RomUniverse hasn’t shut down permanently and could make a comeback in the near future.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In a signed declaration, Nintendo’s lawyer William C. Rava says he spoke with Mr. Storman over the phone earlier this month. At the time, RomUniverse’s operator didn’t rule out a comeback. However, he did offer assurances that this would be without any Nintendo titles.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Nintendo Fears a Comeback
	</h2>

	<p>
		Still, this potential relaunch has the Japanese gaming giant worried and it believes that a permanent injunction preventing such a comeback is warranted.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Defendant’s threat to continue to operate RomUniverse to distribute videogame ROMs, using the same website he used for the past several years to mass-infringe Nintendo’s copyright and trademark rights, necessitates the entry of an injunction,” Nintendo informs the court.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In addition, the motion highlights that Mr. Storman has already disregarded previous legal obligations. The court previously awarded sanctions that required a monthly $50 payment, but this money has yet to come in.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“This failure to make even the modest $50/month payment, an amount that he proposed and agreed to, demonstrates that Nintendo has no adequate remedy at law for Defendant’s past or future infringement and underscores the need for a permanent injunction.”
	</p>

	<h2>
		RomUniverse Wants Damages Scrapped
	</h2>

	<p>
		Nintendo’s concerns are not the only remaining issue, Mr. Storman himself has also filed a motion for reconsideration.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to RomUniverse’s founder, the court erred in awarding $2.1 million in damages. Mr. Storman contests that Nintendo suffered actual damages and also questions whether game copyrights were registered on time.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Both motions are opposed by the other side, so it is ultimately up to the court to decide who’s right and wrong. At the time of writing, however, the RomUniverse website remains offline.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of Nintendo’s follow-up to the motion for reconsideration is available <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/storman-reconsider2-nin.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here (pdf)</a>. We also have a copy of Storman’s motion for <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/storman-reconsider2.pdf" rel="external nofollow">reconsideration (pdf)</a> and Nintendo’s <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/storman-reconsider3-nin.pdf" rel="external nofollow">reply (pdf)</a>
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/nintendo-fears-relaunch-of-pirate-site-so-asks-for-legal-protection-210630/" rel="external nofollow">Nintendo Fears Relaunch of Pirate Site So Asks for Legal Protection</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">970</guid><pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2021 22:03:07 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Comcast Suspends Internet Connection For Downloading Torrents</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/comcast-suspends-internet-connection-for-downloading-torrents-r969/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1 class="hero__title">
	Comcast Suspends Internet Connection For Downloading Torrents
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		According to an alert issued in response to repeated allegations of copyright infringement, Comcast has suspended an Xfinity account for eight hours, warning that a further breach would result in 12 hours of downtime. In response to additional complaints, Comcast warns that the account could be terminated.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Every week, Internet service providers in the United States receive copyright infringement notices from rightsholders.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Sent under the framework of the Digitial Millenium Copyright Act, so-called DMCA notices typically identify the copyright holders, the works allegedly infringed, the infringers’ IP addresses, plus times and dates of the alleged offenses.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		ISPs are required to forward these notices to the allegedly infringing customers so that they can take appropriate action, including stopping any infringement and deleting the content in question. In cases where a single notice has been sent to an infringer, this is usually the end of the matter. However, when the same user receives more than one complaint, further action is required.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Repeat Infringers
	</h2>

	<p>
		Under the DMCA, ISPs are required to implement a policy to deal with frequent copyright infringers. Those policies do not have to be written down, meaning that <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/repeat-infringer-policy-doesnt-have-to-be-spelled-out-appeals-court-rules-180324/" rel="external nofollow">it is acceptable</a> for an ISP to simply inform subscribers that a policy of terminating offenders in ‘appropriate circumstances’ exists. Specifics do not have to be made public.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Of course, this creates uncertainty among users. Even when approached directly, ISPs <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/major-us-isps-refuse-to-discuss-repeat-infringer-policies-190912/" rel="external nofollow">refuse to detail</a> exactly what their processes are, meaning that users simply have to find out as they go along.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In 2020, we revealed how ISP Cox handed down a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/isp-cox-hands-six-month-internet-service-ban-to-alleged-repeat-infringer-200712/" rel="external nofollow">six-month suspension</a> after receiving multiple copyright complaints. Twelve months later it appears that Comcast is handing out suspensions too but following an altogether less punitive model.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Comcast Sends Out Repeat Infringer Alert
	</h2>

	<p>
		Yesterday, a Comcast subscriber revealed that they had received a special notice from Comcast headed “Action is required” and informing the user that the document is an “alert under our DMCA repeat infringer policy.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“This alert is to let you know that this month, we again received notifications of alleged copyright infringement associated with your Xfinity account. That means your Internet service may have been used repeatedly to copy or share a movie, show, song, game, or other content without any required permission,” it reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Comcast notes that the customer should have received separate emails or letters from Xfinity which provided specific details of these claims under the heading ‘Notice of Action under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)’. These will have contained the specifics of the alleged infringement so with those having been sent, Comcast is taking the next step.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Comcast Suspends Alleged Pirate’s Service
	</h2>

	<p>
		Quite how many notices of alleged infringement were previously received against the subscriber’s account remains unclear. Comcast advises that it had “repeatedly received notifications” of alleged copyright infringement “over the past several months” and as a result, action must now be taken.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“[Y]our Xfinity Internet service has been suspended. This suspension will last for up to 8 hours or until you call us,” the alert reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		TorrentFreak has contacted the recipient of the alert for additional information, including precisely how many times they had previously received a DMCA notice and whether the temporary suspension caused any hardship. At the time of writing we have yet to receive a response but Comcast indicates that should any additional complaints come in, action against the account will be escalated.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Your next repeat infringer alert will result in the suspension of your Xfinity Internet service for up to 12 hours. Further notifications may result in your Xfinity Internet account being suspended again or terminated. Your other Xfinity services could be terminated, as well,” the company warns.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/comcast-repeat.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="Comcast Repeat Infringer" data-ratio="76.16" style="height: auto;" width="709" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/comcast-repeat.png"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Perhaps unsurprisingly, it appears the subscriber <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Comcast/comments/o9z2gv/just_got_hit_with_a_dmca_violation_and_an_8_hour/" rel="external nofollow">received</a> the notices after downloading/sharing content using torrents although the details of which content triggered the alerts is unclear. There doesn’t appear to be any suggestion that the notices are inaccurate either, meaning that even more notices and penalties could be on the horizon if action isn’t taken.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Are Hours-Long Suspensions Enough?
	</h2>

	<p>
		The DMCA does not dictate what kind of steps should be taken when multiple copyright complaints are filed against an account. At least in theory, ISPs could turn to their terms of service and terminate accounts pretty quickly. However, it appears that most prefer to take a graduated response by providing several opportunities to correct any issues (such as people stopping the sharing of copyrighted content using BitTorrent) before taking more punitive steps.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Up until now, it was assumed that account suspensions might be measured in days or even weeks but this alert from Comcast indicates that a few hours is currently the company’s preference. The big question is whether that will prove much of a deterrent. That will obviously ride on when the suspension takes effect and whether the subscriber requires Xfinity’s services during that period.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The more important point is the drawing of a line in the sand by Comcast. As the alert clearly lays out, another DMCA notice will result in a longer suspension, which will be placed on record with the other complaints. After that, another DMCA notice could result in account termination, along with the rest of the customer’s Xfinity services.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Effectively, this is what the entertainment industries broadly hoped to achieve with their abandoned ‘<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/six-strikes-anti-piracy-scheme-starts-130225/" rel="external nofollow">six strikes</a>‘ regime but with the addition of punitive measures. That project was <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/the-us-six-strikes-anti-piracy-scheme-is-dead-170128/" rel="external nofollow">shut down</a> in 2017 but subsequent developments, including a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/court-confirms-1-billion-piracy-damages-verdict-against-cox-210113/" rel="external nofollow">$1 billion damages award</a> against ISP Cox, means that ISPs are now effectively forced to take action against repeat infringers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Cox previously handed out a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/isp-cox-hands-six-month-internet-service-ban-to-alleged-repeat-infringer-200712/" rel="external nofollow">six-month Internet ban</a> to one of its subscribers for being a repeat infringer, something that had the potential to cause chaos in that individual’s household. That’s something opponents believe should be avoided.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As highlighted by <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/terminating-internet-access-based-on-piracy-accusations-is-extremely-harmful-210603/" rel="external nofollow">amici curiae</a> briefs in support of Cox’s <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/cox-appeals-1b-piracy-liability-verdict-to-save-the-internet-210527/" rel="external nofollow">appeal</a> against the $1 billion damages award it incurred for not dealing appropriately with repeat infringers, such terminations have the potential to disrupt everything from distance learning to telework and telemedicine.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/comcast-suspends-internet-connection-for-downloading-torrents-210630/" rel="external nofollow">Comcast Suspends Internet Connection For Downloading Torrents</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">969</guid><pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2021 22:01:01 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Court Orders YouTube Rippers to Log and Share Data with Record Labels</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/court-orders-youtube-rippers-to-log-and-share-data-with-record-labels-r961/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Court Orders YouTube Rippers to Log and Share Data with Record Labels
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		A Virginia District Court has ordered the Russian operator of two popular YouTube rippers to keep extensive logs of user activity and hand these over to the major record labels. The order was requested by the labels, which argue that FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com facilitate massive copyright infringement in the United States and abroad.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		<img alt="2conv" data-ratio="61.95" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2conv-logo.jpg">
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The major record labels believe that YouTube rippers are the most significant piracy threat on the Internet.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These sites, which can be used for a variety of purposes, are used by some to convert free YouTube videos into MP3s.
	</p>

	<h2>
		FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com Lawsuit
	</h2>

	<p>
		Three years ago a group of prominent music companies took two of the largest YouTube rippers to court. The labels, including Universal, Warner Bros, and Sony, <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/major-labels-sue-more-youtube-ripper-sites-180806/" rel="external nofollow">accused</a> FLVTO.biz, 2conv.com and their Russian operator Tofig Kurbanov of facilitating copyright infringement.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		While many foreign site operators choose not to fight back, Kurbanov did. With help from a seasoned legal team he filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that US courts don’t have jurisdiction over a Russian site operator who conducts his business from another continent.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Initially, the district court agreed with this defense, dismissing the case. However, the record labels successfully appealed and, after Kurbanov’s petition at the Supreme Court was denied, the case is now back at a Virginia district court where it proceeds on the merits.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Collecting Evidence
	</h2>

	<p>
		Over recent weeks, both parties have used the discovery process to gather relevant evidence. The music companies requested all sorts of information from Mr. Kurbanov, including download statistics and location data, but soon learned that the sites only keep minimal logs.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The site operator informed the labels that he simply has nothing to share. The <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/record-labels-want-youtube-rippers-to-log-and-share-user-data-210620/" rel="external nofollow">requested data do not exist</a>, he replied, noting that it would be ‘unduly burdensome’ to ‘create or produce’ logs.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The labels clearly disagreed and noted that Mr. Kurbanov could enable logging on these servers. As such, they went to court, requesting an order that requires the sites to preserve and share data they deem important.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The problem is that Defendant has configured his server software to turn the logging function off — thus, continually overwriting important data that Plaintiffs explicitly requested in discovery,” the labels wrote.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		After reviewing the arguments from both sides, US District Court Judge Theresa Carroll Buchanan now sides with the music companies. The motion to compel is granted which means that the YouTube rippers must preserve and share server logs.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Identifying User Locations
	</h2>

	<p>
		The order is disappointing news for the operator of the YouTube rippers and may also be a concern for some of the site’s users. Looking at the paperwork in detail, however, there is no indication that the labels are planning to go after individual users.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Mr. Kurbanov opposed the request by arguing, among other things, that logging IP-addresses would put user privacy at risk. However, in response, the labels noted that redacting this information is an option.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Defendant’s only purported privacy concern relates to IP addresses; redactions, combined with identification of the user’s geographical location, can readily address that concern,” they wrote.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The labels specifically request the location of users down to the state level. This will help to identify where most users are coming from, but nothing more.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For all converted files, the labels want to receive “documents concerning each subsequent use, copying, storage, distribution, or other disposition of the audio file, including the date and time of download of the audio file and the geographic location (i.e., state) of the User.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		A Selection of the Requests
	</center>
	 

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="request for production" data-ratio="91.50" style="width: 588px; height: auto;" width="588" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/rfp.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In addition, Mr. Kurbanov is required to produce more general statistics such as the most frequently converted music video streams per month and year. The labels likely expect that their copyrighted works are on these lists.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The court order doesn’t make clear whether the data will be redacted or not. It simply refers to “specific rulings and instructions” that were discussed during the court hearing.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This isn’t the first time that an alleged ‘pirate’ site has been ordered to keep extensive logs. The same happened to the now-defunct torrent site TorrentSpy.com, which decided to close its doors in the US soon after.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Whether the YouTube rippers have anything planned in response is unknown. TorrentFreak reached out to Mr. Kurbanov’s legal team asking for a comment on the ruling but, at the time of writing, we have yet to hear back.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of Judge Buchanan’s order is available <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/kurbanov-granted.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here (pdf)</a>. The record label’s request, which includes the requests for production, can be found <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.393537/gov.uscourts.vaed.393537.99.0.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> (pdf)
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/court-orders-youtube-rippers-to-log-and-share-user-data-210629/" rel="external nofollow">Court Orders YouTube Rippers to Log and Share Data with Record Labels</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">961</guid><pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2021 03:36:50 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>High Court Grants Default Judgment in Bitcoin.org Copyright Infringement Case</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/high-court-grants-default-judgment-in-bitcoinorg-copyright-infringement-case-r952/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	High Court Grants Default Judgment in Bitcoin.org Copyright Infringement Case
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		The High Court in London has issued an injunction in favor of Craig Wright, the self-professed inventor of bitcoin. The Australian computer scientist filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against 'Cøbra', the operator of Bitcoin.org, demanding that they stop making available a copy of the bitcoin white paper published under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto in 2008.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		It is widely accepted that the person (or persons) who developed bitcoin did so under the name Satoshi Nakamoto. The big question is what real-life identity or identities lie behind this presumed pseudonym.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Over the years, several people have been named in the press as likely candidates, either following investigations, apparent confessions, or a combination of both.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In 2015, Australian computer scientist Craig Wright was <a href="https://www.wired.com/2015/12/bitcoins-creator-satoshi-nakamoto-is-probably-this-unknown-australian-genius/" rel="external nofollow">named by Wired</a> as the probable inventor of bitcoin but the publication later backtracked, reporting that evidence it reviewed appeared to be fraudulent.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This apparent setback did not deter Wright from continuing to claim that he is indeed Satoshi. In 2019, Wright increased the pressure by using libel laws in both <a href="https://www.wiggin.co.uk/insight/court-of-appeal-finds-that-parallel-proceedings-for-libel-issued-in-both-norway-and-england-in-relation-to-a-tweet-did-not-share-the-same-cause-of-action-for-the-purposes-of-article-27-of-the-lugano-c/" rel="external nofollow">Norway and England</a> in an attempt to silence people who labeled him as a fraud. Wright also <a href="https://www.bloombergquint.com/bitcoin/bitcoin-s-supposed-inventor-says-he-won-copyright-registration" rel="external nofollow">registered copyrights</a> in the United States for the <a href="https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=TXu002136996&amp;Search_Code=REGS&amp;PID=GX7LOAP9j9pLbmSrhSzQiYUrTBod&amp;SEQ=20190530055949&amp;CNT=25&amp;HIST=1" rel="external nofollow">bitcoin white paper</a> and <a href="https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=TX0008708058+&amp;Search_Code=REGS&amp;PID=XCNKaVr682eSEZH50qsSAxLnZh7_&amp;SEQ=20190530055750&amp;CNT=25&amp;HIST=1" rel="external nofollow">bitcoin’s original code</a>.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Copyright Infringement Allegations
	</h2>

	<p>
		In January 2021, the operator of Bitcoin.org (who operates under the pseudonym ‘Cøbra’) <a href="https://bitcoin.org/en/posts/regarding-csw" rel="external nofollow">reported</a> that lawyers acting for Wright had contacted Bitcoin.org and Bitcoincore.org with allegations of copyright infringement, demanding that they stop distributing the bitcoin white paper from their domains.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Bitcoincore.org complied but Bitcoin.org did not.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Bitcoin whitepaper was included in the original Bitcoin project files with the project clearly published under the MIT license by Satoshi Nakamoto,” Cøbra wrote.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“We believe there is no doubt we have the legal right to host the Bitcoin whitepaper. Furthermore, Satoshi Nakamoto has a known PGP public key, therefore it is cryptographically possible for someone to verify themselves to be Satoshi Nakamoto. Unfortunately, Craig has been unable to do this.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Cøbra signed off defiantly, insisting that he would not be “silenced or intimidated”, but that would not be the end of the matter.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Copyright Infringment Claim in the UK
	</h2>

	<p>
		After Cøbra refused to comply, Wright instructed lawyers at <a href="https://uk.ontier.net/" rel="external nofollow">ONTIER LLP</a> to pursue a copyright infringement claim. Proceedings were issued on February 24, 2021 in the High Court and in April, Wright was granted permission to serve the still anonymous Cøbra via email.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		After being served on April 26, 2021, Cøbra had until May 18, 2021, to file a defense to the proceedings. After that deadline passed, Wright applied to the High Court for a default judgment. In the Chancery Division yesterday, Judge Hodge QC granted a default judgment against Cøbra.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Default Judgment and Injunction
	</h2>

	<p>
		The remote hearing took place without Cøbra in attendance. As a result, the Court ruled entirely in Wright’s favor, handing down an injunction that prohibits the Bitcoin.org operator from making the white paper available for download via their website or by any other means.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In addition, Cøbra was ordered to publish a copy of the High Court’s order on Bitcoin.org for six months. The Court also ordered Cøbra to pay Wright’s costs (around <a href="https://twitter.com/Outputintern/status/1409473846101610500" rel="external nofollow">£35,000 thus far</a>) and ordered an inquiry to establish the level of damages caused by breaches of Wright’s copyrights in the UK.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Simon Cohen, Senior Associate at ONTER LLP, says that the judgment represents another step forward for Wright in his mission to assert his position as author of the bitcoin white paper.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“This is an important development in Dr Wright’s quest to obtain judicial vindication of his copyright in his White Paper. Although he has secured victory today by default because no defense was forthcoming, it is notable that the English court has nevertheless injuncted ‘Cøbra’ from making the White Paper accessible in the UK,” Cohen says.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Dr Wright does not wish to restrict access to his White Paper. However, he does not agree that it should be used by supporters and developers of alternative assets, such as Bitcoin Core, to promote or otherwise misrepresent those assets as being Bitcoin given that they do not support or align with the vision for Bitcoin as he set out in his White Paper.”
	</p>

	<h2>
		Response from Cøbra
	</h2>

	<p>
		At the time of writing the white paper is still being <a href="https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper" rel="external nofollow">made available</a> from Bitcoin.org and there is no copy of the High Court order. However, Cøbra did take to Twitter to criticize Wright and complain about the legal system.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<div class="ipsEmbeddedOther" contenteditable="false">
		<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="ipsEmbed_finishedLoading" data-controller="core.front.core.autosizeiframe" data-embedid="embed9108362591" scrolling="no" src="https://nsaneforums.com/index.php?app=core&amp;module=system&amp;controller=embed&amp;url=https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/1409605494629613571?ref_src=twsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1409605494629613571%257Ctwgr%255E%257Ctwcon%255Es1_%26ref_url=https://torrentfreak.com/high-court-grants-default-judgment-in-bitcoin-org-copyright-infringement-case-210629/" style="overflow: hidden; height: 305px;"></iframe>
	</div>

	<p>
		In an apparent offer to cover Wright’s legal costs, Cøbra offered to pay in bitcoin to <a href="https://www.blockchain.com/btc/block/9" rel="external nofollow">block 9</a>, which was mined by Satoshi Nakamoto in January 2009. If Wright is indeed Satoshi, he would directly receive the funds, Cøbra appears to suggest.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<div class="ipsEmbeddedOther" contenteditable="false">
		<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="ipsEmbed_finishedLoading" data-controller="core.front.core.autosizeiframe" data-embedid="embed5449118726" scrolling="no" src="https://nsaneforums.com/index.php?app=core&amp;module=system&amp;controller=embed&amp;url=https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/1409526673767284736?ref_src=twsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1409526673767284736%257Ctwgr%255E%257Ctwcon%255Es1_%26ref_url=https://torrentfreak.com/high-court-grants-default-judgment-in-bitcoin-org-copyright-infringement-case-210629/" style="overflow: hidden; height: 487px;"></iframe>
	</div>

	<p>
		Whether Cøbra will comply with the High Court’s instructions is currently unknown. Earlier this week in a post to Twitter, Cøbra <a href="https://twitter.com/CobraBitcoin/status/1408762926165594113" rel="external nofollow">said</a> that non-compliance would “probably” mean that ISPs in the UK would be ordered to “block parts or all of bitcoin.org for copyright infringement.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Given the overwhelming non-infringing nature of Bitcoin.org that currently seems unlikely but Wright is clearly a man on a mission, one that isn’t afraid to spend large volumes of cash to achieve his goals.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/high-court-grants-default-judgment-in-bitcoin-org-copyright-infringement-case-210629/" rel="external nofollow">High Court Grants Default Judgment in Bitcoin.org Copyright Infringement Case</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">952</guid><pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2021 18:10:42 +0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
