<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>News: File Sharing News</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/page/118/?d=2</link><description>News: File Sharing News</description><language>en</language><item><title>FindAnyFilm Adds Disney+ To Deter Piracy But Falls Short Without Netflix</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/findanyfilm-adds-disney-to-deter-piracy-but-falls-short-without-netflix-r272/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	FindAnyFilm Adds Disney+ To Deter Piracy But Falls Short Without Netflix
</h1>

<p>
	<img alt="findanyfilm.png" class="ipsImage" data-ratio="36.94" height="116" width="314" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/findanyfilm.png">
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		FindAnyFilm was launched more than a decade ago to act as a search engine to deter people from pirating movies. Today the service took a significant step forward by adding Disney+ titles to its indexes but there are still major shortcomings. Despite being the leading streaming movie platform with more than 200 million subscribers, Netflix content is still inexplicably absent.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Once upon a time, anyone wanting to watch a recent movie would have a straightforward choice – go to the cinema or don’t watch it at all. Nowadays there are many more options but that hasn’t necessarily made things easier – at least for those who want to go legal.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In contrast to pirate site users who can access all of the latest films without paywalls and with just a few clicks, those who want to access movies from official sources are confronted with a bewildering number of services, none of which will provide everything the average consumer wants.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As a result, millions of people now subscribe to multiple legal streaming services with no easy way of searching across all of them. Add to that the need to pay for downloads of movies considered to be of a more premium nature and consumers can quickly find themselves down a rabbit hole with no straightforward way to find the content they want.
	</p>

	<h2>
		FindAnyFilm.com – The Legal Movie Search Engine
	</h2>

	<p>
		Founded way back in 2009 and currently operated by the Industry Trust for IP Awareness, <a href="https://www.findanyfilm.com/" rel="external nofollow">FindAnyFilm</a> hoped to become a valuable service to entice users away from the simplicity of pirate sites by providing a search engine to quite literally “find any film”.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In practice, FindAnyFilm is useful for finding content available to watch in cinemas or buy on services such as iTunes, Prime Video, Amazon, and Sky Store. But it comes up short when the wider streaming landscape is considered. Today, however, the platform added a significant new string to its bow by incorporating Disney+ titles into its databases.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Industry Trust works to keep consumers safe with education about the risks of infringing content, and FindAnyFilm acts as the ideal call to action for all anti-piracy outreach,” says Liz Bales, Chief Executive of The Industry Trust.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Building on the collaborative relationship between The Walt Disney Company and the Industry Trust, Disney+ is a vital addition to the site’s SVOD offerings, which serves our shared goal of ensuring that FindAnyFilm.com is the ultimate destination for consumers to search, find and watch content safely.”
	</p>

	<h2>
		Discovering Content is Only Part of the Problem
	</h2>

	<p>
		While finding great content is now easier than ever with the enhanced FindAnyFilm, the same old frustrations – which are nothing to do with the platform – soon raise their heads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For example, UK viewers desperate to watch the new Disney movie Cruella will indeed find it <a href="https://www.disneyplus.com/en-gb/movies/cruella/2GJTZuO8I01c?pid=AssistantSearch" rel="external nofollow">comprehensively listed</a> on FindAnyFilm. Unfortunately, they will also learn that in addition to paying for a monthly Disney+ subscription, they will need to fork out an additional £19.99 to watch the movie.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		They could wait until August 27 when it appears in the Disney standard library but those with a penchant for pirate sites can watch it right now without paying a dime. Of course, that isn’t the spirit of FindAnyFilm, but it is difficult to ignore the competition when trying to recapture a pirate audience. But there is a bigger problem too.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The Glaring Ommission That Doesn’t Get Talked About
	</h2>

	<p>
		The Industry Trust for IP Awareness says that using FindAnyFilm.com ensures that consumers in the UK “can be certain that the content they love comes from a legitimate source, avoiding the personal risks inherent in accessing pirated content.” What it doesn’t mention is the massive hole in its ability to point people to the content they want.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With more than 200 million subscribers worldwide, Netflix is not only the largest streaming service in business today but also one of the best piracy deterrents to date. By offering huge volumes of content at a fair price, Netflix has done more than any other platform to turn pirates into paying customers. Unfortunately, users of FindAnyFilm won’t be directed to any titles on Netflix.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In 2016, FindAnyFilm <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/netflix-disappears-from-mpaas-legal-movie-search-engine-160410/" rel="external nofollow">told us</a> that there was no working relationship between the platform and Netflix and five years on it appears that hasn’t changed.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Anyone searching for ‘Army of the Dead’, for example, should pay close attention since instead of Zack Snyder’s latest horror offering, they could end up buying a <a href="https://www.findanyfilm.com/film/army-of-the-dead~21263/digital" rel="external nofollow">movie of the same name</a> from 2008. Anyone looking for the hit movie ‘Extraction’ should also keep their wits about them since the two titles offered do not star Chris Hemsworth.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Adding Netflix Would Help Both Platforms
	</h2>

	<p>
		Whether FindAnyFilm and Netflix will eventually team up is unclear but at the moment the lack of a partnership means that people are finding less legal content than they should, despite showing clear purchasing signals. FindAnyFilm does work pretty well generally but when it fails to come up with content when it really should, it leads to frustration and as we’ve seen time and again, frustration leads to piracy.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The final issue is one of poor exposure to the internet-based audience where pirates can be found. FindAnyFilm.com is by most standards a poorly-trafficked site. Indeed, the numbers are so low that SimilarWeb doesn’t carry any visitor data and Alexa currently ranks the site #1,763,978 in user engagement.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Even small pirate sites with the lowest visitor numbers have more reach, so this is something that will need to be addressed in order to transform the portal into a service that can make a big difference when helping people to part with their money.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/findanyfilm-adds-disney-to-deter-piracy-but-falls-short-without-netflix-210601/" rel="external nofollow">FindAnyFilm Adds Disney+ To Deter Piracy But Falls Short Without Netflix</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">272</guid><pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2021 21:57:00 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Movie Studios Broaden Scope and Sue VPN Hosting Companies in Piracy Lawsuits</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/movie-studios-broaden-scope-and-sue-vpn-hosting-companies-in-piracy-lawsuits-r271/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Movie Studios Broaden Scope and Sue VPN Hosting Companies in Piracy Lawsuits
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		The makers of movies such as “Dallas Buyers Club,” “Rambo V: Last Blood,” and “The Hitman’s Bodyguard” are putting hosting companies that work with VPN services under pressure. In two separate lawsuits, Leaseweb and Sharktech stand accused of failing to terminate customers that have repeatedly been linked to copyright infringement.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A few years ago piracy-related lawsuits were pretty straightforward. Copyright holders would either sue alleged file-sharers or the operators of pirate sites.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In recent months, we have seen a new breed of lawsuits, filed on behalf of the makers of movies such as “Dallas Buyers Club,” “Rambo V: Last Blood,” and “The Hitman’s Bodyguard.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Early last year these companies scored a big win when they convinced the operator of YTS, one of the largest torrent sites, <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/yts-settles-another-movie-piracy-lawsuit-while-more-users-get-sued-200127/" rel="external nofollow">to settle</a> for more than a million dollars in damages.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The echoes of those settlements are still heard in current lawsuits. As part of the agreement, the YTS operator <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/yts-operator-helped-movie-companies-catch-a-pirating-user-200817/" rel="external nofollow">shared information</a> from the site’s database, which provided fuel for many follow-up cases against alleged pirates.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The database also showed that several YTS users were using VPNs, which led to another attack vector. In several lawsuits filed over the past few weeks, the movie companies sued VPN providers for facilitating piracy. These cases are ongoing, but already another target group has been identified.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Movie Companies sue Leaseweb
	</h2>

	<p>
		Last week, Dallas Buyers Club LLC, Rambo V Productions, and various other companies filed a lawsuit against the U.S. branch of hosting provider Leaseweb. The complaint also lists various Doe defendants, which are unnamed VPN companies and their allegedly pirating users.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The complaint, filed at a federal court in Virginia, is riddled with allegations. While Leaseweb doesn’t infringe any content directly, it is accused of knowingly providing services to VPNs that have pirating subscribers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For the movie companies, it’s not clear which VPN providers are linked to the IP addresses. They note that Leaseweb doesn’t always update the ARIN IP address assignments, which makes it hard to pinpoint the VPN services in question.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Nonetheless, the complaint lists LiquidVPN, NordVPN, and ExpressVPN as potential Leaseweb customers, and Zenmate certainly uses Leaseweb’s services, they write. However, none of these companies are named as defendants. In addition, these VPN services don’t keep logs that can identify alleged pirates.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		One of the main allegations against Leaseweb is that it failed to terminate the accounts of these unknown VPN companies. The movie companies write that they sent over 32,000 notices but that Leaseweb did little more than forwarding these to its subscribers.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Repeat Infringers
	</h2>

	<p>
		The alleged lack of a reasonably implemented “repeat infringer” policy, as required under the DMCA, means that Leaseweb can be held liable for these subscribers, the complaint argues. They also claim that this draws other bad actors to the service.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Leaseweb’s subscribers are motivated to become customers from the knowledge of Leaseweb’s practice of ignoring notices of infringements or failing to take any meaningful action in response to said notices,” they write.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The complaint argues that the unnamed VPN services and their pirating users engaged in direct copyright infringement, among other things. Leaseweb, for its part, is accused of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With this lawsuit the movie companies hope to recoup damages. In addition, they request a broad permanent injunction that requires Leaseweb to block common BitTorrent ports (6881-6889) and terminate repeat copyright infringers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Leaseweb isn’t the only hosting company that’s targeted. The complaint is similar to one that was filed a few weeks earlier against Sharktech. That case is ongoing and the hosting company has yet to file a response.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Applying Pressure
	</h2>

	<p>
		It’s safe to say that many of the characterizations will be disputed by the defendants. None of the claims have been proven yet, but that may not be the end goal. Looking at the legal history of the movie companies, they often apply pressure to then ‘settle’ these matters behind closed doors.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In addition to going after hosting providers, the movie companies also sued VPN providers <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/movie-companies-sue-popcorn-time-vpn-and-hosting-provider-in-piracy-lawsuit-210308/" rel="external nofollow">VPN.ht</a> and <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/movie-companies-sue-vpn-provider-for-encouraging-and-facilitating-piracy-210304/" rel="external nofollow">LiquidVPN</a> directly. VPN.ht responded to this lawsuit by filing a motion to dismiss, which is pending at the court.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Meanwhile, the former operator of LiquidVPN signed a consent judgment with the movie companies. The agreement stresses that the man still has outstanding claims against the new LiquidVPN owners, which he has now assigned to the movie companies. These new owners were sued separately at a federal court in Florida.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of the complaint against Leaseweb is available <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/leaseweb.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here (pdf)</a> and the Sharktech lawsuit can be <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/sharktech.pdf" rel="external nofollow">found here (pdf)</a>
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/movie-studios-broaden-scope-and-sue-vpn-hosting-companies-in-piracy-lawsuits-210601/" rel="external nofollow">Movie Studios Broaden Scope and Sue VPN Hosting Companies in Piracy Lawsuits</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">271</guid><pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2021 21:54:09 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Watch Tower & BMG Quietly Settle Christmas Album Copyright Lawsuit]]></title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/watch-tower-bmg-quietly-settle-christmas-album-copyright-lawsuit-r265/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1 class="hero__title">
	Watch Tower &amp; BMG Quietly Settle Christmas Album Copyright Lawsuit
</h1>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/pray.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="pray" data-ratio="66.67" style="height: auto;" width="270" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/pray.png"></a>
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Last December music publisher BMG found itself at the center of a major copyright dispute after offending the entire Jehovah's Witness religion. According to the lawsuit, BMG illegally used a song owned by the group in a for-profit Christmas album, featuring songs from other faiths, which were set to be sung in cathedrals. Five months later, the warring parties have agreed to stand down.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society is the supervising body and publisher for the Jehovah’s Witness religious group. As such, it is building quite a reputation for targeting those that infringe its copyrights.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Watch Tower’s targets are often <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/watch-tower-ups-pressure-on-youtube-facebook-to-hand-over-infringers-details-210523/" rel="external nofollow">smaller players</a> who publish its songs and videos on platforms such as YouTube and Facebook without permission, sometimes when the stated aim is criticism or <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/watch-tower-copyright-lawsuit-targets-creator-of-dubtown-lego-animations-210514/" rel="external nofollow">parody</a>. However, last December the powerful organization took on a more heavyweight adversary.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Target: Music Publishing Giant BMG
	</h2>

	<p>
		Music publisher BMG is also well known for its litigious nature, having aggressively pursued ISP Cox Communications through the legal system after the ISP allegedly failed to disconnect so-called repeat infringers. That matter ended with Cox paying an undisclosed but <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/cox-pays-substantial-settlement-to-end-repeat-infringer-piracy-lawsuit-180827/" rel="external nofollow">substantial settlement</a> to BMG.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Last December, however, the hunter became the hunted after BMG took the decision to release a Christmas album featuring Welsh singer Aled Jones. The album (titled “Blessings”) aimed to be religiously inclusive by bundling songs associated with Christians, Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, Quakers and Jehovah’s Witnesses into one package. Unfortunately for BMG, Watch Tower didn’t appreciate being included.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The problem was the addition of the song “Listen, Obey and Be Blessed” and it wasn’t particularly difficult to see why. Jehovah’s Witnesses do not celebrate Christmas and don’t allow their copyrighted works to be exploited commercially. They also reject all other religions, quite the problem in an all-inclusive religious Christmas album that they played no part in.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Watch Tower subsequently filed a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/jehovahs-witnesses-file-copyright-lawsuit-in-response-to-blundering-christmas-album-201225/" rel="external nofollow">copyright infringement lawsuit</a> in a New York district court, noting that they had contacted Aled Jones’ manager to say no permission had been granted to use the song. BMG UK said that it had been given permission to use the song by German rights society GEMA, itself known for copyright infringement lawsuits.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		But Watch Tower rejected any use of its song, demanded an injunction, and sought statutory damages for BMG’s infringement.
	</p>

	<h2>
		This Battle Won’t Take Place in Court
	</h2>

	<p>
		After being filed on December 22, 2020, the lawsuit proceeded largely as expected but then, on January 19, 2021 – the date by which BMG was required to enter a response – the publisher wrote to the Court seeking more time.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The parties are engaged in ongoing good-faith settlement discussions, and extending the deadline to respond to the Complaint will allow the parties to focus on settlement efforts,” BMG wrote.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“BMG makes this request without waiver of and specifically preserving BMG’s right to assert any and all defenses in this matter, including but not limited to lack of personal jurisdiction and other jurisdictional defenses.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The next day the Court granted an extension but in March BMG was back again, asking for more time, a request that was repeated again in April. The Court granted another 30 days on April 21 but told the parties there would be no more extensions. Right on the button, on May 20, 2021, the parties informed the Court that a settlement had been reached.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“We write to inform the Court that the parties have entered into a confidential settlement agreement resolving the claims set forth in the Complaint,” the letter reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“In light of the parties’ settlement, Defendants would like to avoid the cost associated with responding to the Complaint, and request (with the consent of counsel for Plaintiff) that no default be entered prior to June 4, 2021.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With no answer to the complaint set to be presented to the court, it’s impossible to know how BMG would’ve structured its defense but with a settlement having been reached, the matter is already over. That was finally confirmed last week when Watch Tower filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with the Court.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Please take notice that, pursuant to <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_41" rel="external nofollow">Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i)</a> of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania hereby voluntarily dismisses this action against all Defendants with prejudice,” the notice reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The argument in the case could have proven of interest to observers but perhaps wisely, both parties have agreed to settle their differences in private. There are, however, some public signs of concession by BMG.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The song “Listen, Obey and Be Blessed” has now been removed from the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Blessings-Aled-Jones/dp/B08SQWM7VM/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&amp;keywords=aled+jones+blessings" rel="external nofollow">digital download version</a> of the album available on Amazon, reducing the available tracks from 14 to 13. How one also makes right any offense caused to a religion’s standards is unclear but since Watch Tower previously demanded damages, money may also be part of the deal.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The settlement letter and notice of voluntary dismissal can be found <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/1-20-cv-10844-watchtower-v-BMG-settlement-letter-210520.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> and <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/1-20-cv-10844-watchtower-v-BMG-voluntary-dismissal-210526.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> (pdf)
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/watch-tower-bmg-quietly-settle-christmas-album-copyright-lawsuit-210531/" rel="external nofollow">Watch Tower &amp; BMG Quietly Settle Christmas Album Copyright Lawsuit</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">265</guid><pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2021 23:07:32 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>DMCA Notice Targets TorrentFreak, Netflix, and Reddit&#x2019;s Wikipedia Pages</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/dmca-notice-targets-torrentfreak-netflix-and-reddit%E2%80%99s-wikipedia-pages-r264/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1 class="hero__title">
	DMCA Notice Targets TorrentFreak, Netflix, and Reddit’s Wikipedia Pages
</h1>

<p>
	<img alt="wikipedia erase" data-ratio="66.67" style="height: auto;" width="450" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/wikipedia-logo-1.jpg">
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Adult entertainment company The Score Group has asked Google to remove dozens of Wikipedia entries from its search results. Some of these pages document the history of popular pirate sites. However, the DMCA notice also targets Wikipedia's own Wikipedia entry, as well as those of TorrentFreak, Netflix, Reddit, The Gutenberg Project, and many others.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Over the past several years, copyright holders have asked Google to remove billions of links to allegedly pirated content.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Most of these DMCA notices are pretty accurate. However, we keep stumbling on glaring errors, which are often hard to explain.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The Score Group Misses
	</h2>

	<p>
		Today we have another example. Late last month, adult entertainment distributor <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Score_Group" rel="external nofollow">The Score Group</a> sent Google a takedown notice identifying more than 300 copyright infringing URLs.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A quick glance at the <a href="https://lumendatabase.org/notices/23627164?access_token=xORCHHpDCHYo3iIGHs09Wg" rel="external nofollow">request</a> indeed shows that the notice includes several problematic links. However, it also lists more than two dozen Wikipedia pages. This includes the Wikipedia entries of well-known pirate brands such as YIFY, BTDigg, and KickassTorrents.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These Wikipedia pages don’t list or link to any infringing material. They clearly shouldn’t be removed but, in a way, it’s understandable since these URLs were probably caught up in an automated keyword filter.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="wikipedia takedowns" data-ratio="75.10" style="height: auto;" width="719" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/wiki-takedowns.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Unfortunately, however, it doesn’t stop there. For reasons unknown, the list of ‘copyright infringing’ Wikipedia entries also includes TorrentFreak and other news sites such as The Verge and The Financial Times. The same is true for the movie review sites IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Targeting Wikipedia’s Wikipedia Entry…
	</h2>

	<p>
		And it goes on. The Wikipedia entries for Domino’s Pizza and Project Gutenberg were also marked, and just when we thought we’d seen it all, we spotted the Wikipedia entry for Wikipedia itself.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		It remains a mystery how these links ended up in the takedown notice. None of these sites or their Wikipedia entries have a clear connection to the adult entertainment company and they are perfectly legal.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Good and Bad News
	</h2>

	<p>
		The good news is that Google spotted all of these errors. This means that the links haven’t been removed from its search results.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The same is true for the IMDb pages for “Iron Man 2,” “Elmo’s World: Reach for the Sky,” and “Ernest Scared Stupid” which The Score Group tried to take offline with a <a href="https://lumendatabase.org/notices/23627140?access_token=Pu_zeEfxNyhVEHQBKoBYTg" rel="external nofollow">separate DMCA notice</a>. The company even went after the American Bar Association, which should be able to confirm that this isn’t how the DMCA law is supposed to work.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		It is worth keeping an eye on these types of mistakes. While Google is great at spotting overbroad takedown notices, it occasionally misses some as well, which results in <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/reckless-dmca-takedown-purges-legitimate-websites-from-google-search-210417/" rel="external nofollow">perfectly legal URLs being removed</a>.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/dmca-notice-targets-torrentfreak-netflix-and-reddits-wikipedia-pages-210531/" rel="external nofollow">DMCA Notice Targets TorrentFreak, Netflix, and Reddit’s Wikipedia Pages</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">264</guid><pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2021 23:05:26 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week &#x2013; May 31, 2021</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/top-10-most-pirated-movies-of-the-week-%E2%80%93-may-31-2021-r263/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – May 31, 2021
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		<img alt="wrath" data-ratio="56.33" data-sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" data-srcset="https://torrentfreak.com/images/wrath-1.jpg 1600w, https://torrentfreak.com/images/wrath-1-1536x864.jpg 1536w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" srcset="https://torrentfreak.com/images/wrath-1.jpg 1600w, https://torrentfreak.com/images/wrath-1-1536x864.jpg 1536w" style="height: auto;" width="300" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/wrath-1.jpg">
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Every week we take a close look at the most pirated movies on torrent sites. What are pirates downloading? 'Wrath of Man' tops the chart, followed by ‘Cruella'. 'Army Of The Dead' completes the top three.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<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. “Wrath of Man” is the most downloaded title.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The most torrented movies for the week ending on May 31 are:
	</h2>

	<table>
		<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>
						Most downloaded movies via torrent sites
					</p>

					<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" id="ips_uid_8992_3" src="https://nsaneforums.com/applications/core/interface/index.html" width="200" data-embed-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EFYEni2gsK0?feature=oembed"></iframe>
						</div>
					</div>

					<p>
						 
					</p>
				</td>
			</tr>
		</tfoot>
		<tbody>
			<tr>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					1
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</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>
					2
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</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>
					3
				</td>
				<td>
					(1)
				</td>
				<td>
					Army Of The Dead
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993840/" rel="external nofollow">6.0</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI1JGPhYBS8" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					4
				</td>
				<td>
					(3)
				</td>
				<td>
					Mortal Kombat
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0293429/" rel="external nofollow">6.4</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BQPKD7eozY" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					5
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Unholy
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9419056/" rel="external nofollow">5.0</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zne4Rb37Ns" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					6
				</td>
				<td>
					(4)
				</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>
			<tr>
				<td>
					7
				</td>
				<td>
					(6)
				</td>
				<td>
					Zack Snyder’s Justice League
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12361974/" rel="external nofollow">8.4</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM-Bja2Gy04" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					8
				</td>
				<td>
					(2)
				</td>
				<td>
					Those Who Wish Me Dead
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3215824/" rel="external nofollow">6.1</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV6VNNjBkcE" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					9
				</td>
				<td>
					(5)
				</td>
				<td>
					Nobody
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7888964/" rel="external nofollow">7.5</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZti8QKBWPo" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					10
				</td>
				<td>
					(7)
				</td>
				<td>
					Tom Clancy’s Without Remorse
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499097/" rel="external nofollow">5.8</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-rw2cxFVLg" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
		</tbody>
	</table>

	<div>
		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>.
	</div>
</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 – 05/31/2021</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">263</guid><pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2021 23:02:04 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>The Pirate Bay Remains Resilient, 15 Years After The Raid</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/the-pirate-bay-remains-resilient-15-years-after-the-raid-r252/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	The Pirate Bay Remains Resilient, 15 Years After The Raid
</h1>

<p>
	Fifteen years ago today The Pirate Bay was raided by dozens of Swedish police officers. The entertainment industries hoped that this would permanently shut down the site, but that was not the case. Instead, the police action inadvertently helped to create one of the most resilient and iconic websites on the Internet.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p style="text-align:center;">
	<img alt="thepirate-e1470829181981.jpg" class="ipsImage" data-ratio="93.64" height="206" width="220" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/thepirate-e1470829181981.jpg" />
</p>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		There are a handful of traditions we have at TorrentFreak, and remembering the first raid on The Pirate Bay is one of them.
	</p>

	<p>
		Not only was it the first major story we covered, it also had a significant impact on how the piracy ecosystem evolved over the years. It also changed the lives of the site’s co-founders, who were eventually convicted.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		While a lot has changed over the years, The Pirate Bay is still around and there are no signs that this will change anytime soon. What many people may not realize, however, is that without a few essential keystrokes in the site’s early years, the site would be a distant memory today.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This is what happened.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		May 31, 2006, less than three years after The Pirate Bay was founded, 65 Swedish police officers <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/the-piratebay-is-down-raided-by-the-swedish-police/" rel="external nofollow">entered a datacenter</a> in Stockholm. The Swedish police had instructions to shut down the Pirate Bay’s servers as part of a criminal probe, following pressure from the US Government.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As the police were about to enter the datacenter, Pirate Bay co-founders Gottfrid Svartholm and Fredrik Neij knew that something wasn’t quite right. In the months prior, both men noticed they were being tailed by private investigators, but this time their servers were the target.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		At around 10:00 in the morning, Gottfrid told Fredrik that there were police officers at their office. He asked his colleague to get down to the co-location facility and get rid of the ‘incriminating evidence’ although none of it – whatever it was – was related to The Pirate Bay.
	</p>

	<h3>
		A Crucial Backup
	</h3>

	<p>
		As Fredrik was leaving, he suddenly realized that the problems might be linked to their torrent tracker. Just in case, he decided to make a full backup of the site.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		When he later arrived at the co-location facility, those concerns turned out to be justified. There were dozens of police officers floating around taking away dozens of servers, most of which belonged to clients unrelated to The Pirate Bay.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center>
		<strong>Footage from The Pirate Bay raid</strong>
	</center>

	<center>
		 
	</center>

	<div class="ipsEmbeddedVideo">
		<div>
			<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="150" width="200" data-embed-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/30HF-m_I6yY?feature=oembed"></iframe>
		</div>
	</div>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In the days that followed, it became clear that Fredrik’s decision to create a backup of the site was probably the most pivotal moment in the site’s history. Because of this backup, Fredrik and the rest of the Pirate Bay team managed to resurrect the site within three days.
	</p>

	<h3>
		“The Police Bay”
	</h3>

	<p>
		Of course, the entire situation was handled with the mockery TPB had become known for.
	</p>

	<p>
		Unimpressed, the site’s operators renamed the site “The Police Bay”, complete with a new logo shooting cannonballs at Hollywood. A few days later this logo was replaced by a Phoenix, a reference to the site rising from its digital ashes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center>
		<strong>Logos after the raid</strong>
	</center>

	<center>
		<img alt="tpb-logos.jpg" class="ipsImage" data-ratio="43.43" height="228" width="525" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/tpb-logos.jpg" />
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Instead of shutting it down, the raid propelled The Pirate Bay into the mainstream press, not least due to its swift resurrection. The publicity also triggered a huge traffic spike for TPB, exactly the opposite effect Hollywood had hoped for.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The US Pushed Sweden
	</h2>

	<p>
		Although the raid and the subsequent criminal investigation were carried out in Sweden, the US Government played a major role behind the scenes. For many years the scale of that involvement was unknown. However, information obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request in 2017 <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/how-the-us-pushed-sweden-to-take-down-the-pirate-bay-171212/" rel="external nofollow">helped to fill in some blanks</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The trail started with a cable sent from the US Embassy in Sweden to Washington in November 2005, roughly six months before the Pirate Bay raid. The Embassy wrote that Hollywood’s MPA met with US Ambassador Bivins and, separately, with the Swedish State Secretary of Justice. The Pirate Bay was one of the top agenda items.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The MPA is particularly concerned about PirateBay, the world‘s largest Torrent file-sharing tracker. According to the MPA and based on Embassy’s follow-up discussions, the Justice Ministry is very interested in a constructive dialogue with the US. on these concerns,” the cable read.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center>
		<strong>From the US Embassy Cable</strong>
	</center>

	<center>
		<img alt="foiatpb1.png" class="ipsImage" data-ratio="64.40" height="322" width="500" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/foiatpb1.png" />
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Embassy explained that Hollywood would like Sweden to take action against a big player such as The Pirate Bay.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“We have yet to see a ‘big fish’ tried – something the MPA badly wants to see, particularly in light of the fact that Sweden hosts the largest Bit Torrent file-sharing tracker in the world, ‘Pirate-Bay’, which openly flaunts IPR,” the cable writer commented.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Fast forward half a year and indeed, 65 police officers were ready to take The Pirate Bay’s servers offline. While there is no written evidence that the US officials were actively involved in planning the investigation or raid, indirectly they played a major role.
	</p>

	<h3>
		TPB Takedown Award
	</h3>

	<p>
		This is also backed up by further evidence. In a cable sent in April 2007, the Embassy nominated one of its employees, whose name is redacted, for the State Department’s Foreign Service National (FSN) of the year award. Again, The Pirate Bay case was cited.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“REDACTED skillful outreach directly led to a bold decision by Swedish law enforcement authorities to raid Pirate Bay and shut it down. This was recognized as a major achievement in Washington in furthering U.S. efforts to combat Internet piracy worldwide.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		We don’t know if the employee in question received his or her award. In hindsight, however, the raid did very little to deter piracy.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The Aftermath
	</h2>

	<p>
		The swift and deviant comeback turned the site’s founders into heroes for many. The site made headline news around the world and in Stockholm, people were waving pirate flags in the streets, a sentiment that benefited the newly founded Pirate Party as well.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The raid eventually resulted in negative consequences for the site’s founders. It was the start of a criminal investigation, which led to a trial, and <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-founders-prison-sentences-final-supreme-court-appeal-rejected-120201/" rel="external nofollow">prison sentences</a> for several of the site’s key players.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This became another turning point. Many of the people who were involved from the early days decided to cut their ties with the site, which was handed over to a more anonymous group.
	</p>

	<p>
		The outspokenness of the early years is gone today and it’s a mystery who currently pulls the strings. What we do know is that The Pirate Bay is still seen as a piracy icon by many. And the current operator will probably do everything he can to keep the site online, just like on May 31, 2006.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-remains-resilient-15-years-after-the-raid-210531/" rel="external nofollow">Source</a>
	</p>
</div>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">252</guid><pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2021 13:41:08 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>ACE/MPA Ask Cloudflare To Unmask Operators of Two Dozen Pirate Sites</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/acempa-ask-cloudflare-to-unmask-operators-of-two-dozen-pirate-sites-r247/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	ACE/MPA Ask Cloudflare To Unmask Operators of Two Dozen Pirate Sites
</h1>

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

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The MPA, acting on behalf of the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, has obtained DMCA subpoenas to unmask the operators of more than two dozen pirate sites. The platforms, all of which use Cloudflare, stand accused of offering major movies including Tenet, Godzilla vs Kong, and Mortal Kombat. Included is IPTorrents, a private tracker that has proven elusive for a number of years.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		The Alliance For Creativity and Entertainment (ACE) is now unquestionably the most powerful anti-piracy coalition on the planet.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Focused on the protection of movies and TV shows, it is perpetually engaged in investigations aimed at taking down sites, services, and apps dedicated to infringement. With a focus on illegal streaming, the group – which has many major victories under its belt – now appears to have a new set of targets in its crosshairs.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Applications For DMCA Subpoenas
	</h2>

	<p>
		This week the MPA, whose members form the backbone of ACE, went to court in the United States aiming to discover the identities of the operators of more than two dozen pirate sites. In common with previous efforts, MPA/ACE ascertained that all of the sites use the services of Cloudflare, meaning that with the correct pressure it can force the CDN company to hand over information.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The list of streaming domains targeted is as follows:
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Uvod.tv, We-play.tv, Bilutvs.net, Moviesrulz.net, Watchserieshd.tv, Tamilblasters.me, Isaidubb.co, goojara.to, onionflix.me, onionplay.co, ecouchtuner.club, teforo.com, kremok.com, afzor.com, Verpeliculasultra.com, pelismart.com, repelisplus.vip, kerob.xyz, pobreflix.com, Vizer.tv, Filmesonlinegratisbr.com, futemax.gratis and multicanais.com.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These domains (which according to SimilarWeb stats have combined monthly visits of around 75-80 million) suggest an ACE focus on platforms operating in the international space outside the US, including those targeted at Asia and South America. All of the above appear to be streaming platforms, some of them requiring payment, but torrent sites also make an appearance.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In addition to Comandotorrents.org, which is accused of illegally distributing the Warner movie Joker, private torrent site IPTorrents.com also makes the list for offering Mulan and Mortal Kombat. The addition of the tracker is notable since IPTorrents and its sister sites have managed to operate pretty much unhindered for well over a decade and have sizeable user bases.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		IPTorrents was blocked by <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/uk-piracy-blocklist-expands-with-demonoid-isohunt-iptorrents-and-more-141127/" rel="external nofollow">UK ISPs in 2014</a>, by <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/australian-court-orders-isps-to-block-181-pirate-domains-including-subtitle-sites-181220/" rel="external nofollow">Australian ISPs in 2018</a>, and <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/disney-obtains-new-dynamic-court-order-to-block-118-pirate-domains-200729/" rel="external nofollow">Indian ISPs in 2020</a>, yet has continued regardless.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Personal Identifying Information Sought
	</h2>

	<p>
		“The ACE Members (via the Motion Picture Association, Inc.) are requesting issuance of the attached proposed subpoena that would order Cloudflare, Inc. to disclose the identities, including names, physical addresses, IP addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, payment information, account updates and account histories of the users operating the websites listed,” both DMCA subpoenas read.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The purpose for which this subpoena is sought is to obtain the identities of the individuals assigned to these websites who have exploited ACE Members’ exclusive rights in their copyrighted motion pictures without their authorization. This information will only be used for the purposes of protecting the rights granted to ACE Members, the motion picture copyright owners, under Title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The court was satisfied with the applications and both were signed off this week, meaning that Cloudflare will be required to comply by handing over the requested information. Whether Cloudflare has any meaningful or useful personal data to hand over remains a question but the subpoena requests represent a canary in the coalmine for the sites listed.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The ACE/MPA subpoena applications and documents can be found here <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-00962-ACE-v-Cloudflare-DMCA-Subpoena-1-210524.pdf" rel="external nofollow">1</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-00962-ACE-v-Cloudflare-DMCA-Subpoena-2-210524.pdf" rel="external nofollow">2</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-00962-ACE-v-Cloudflare-DMCA-Subpoena-3-210524.pdf" rel="external nofollow">3</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-mc-00961-ACE-v-Cloudflare-DMCA-Subpoena-sites-210524.pdf" rel="external nofollow">4</a> (pdf)
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/ace-mpa-ask-cloudflare-to-unmask-operators-of-two-dozen-pirate-sites-210530/" rel="external nofollow">ACE/MPA Ask Cloudflare To Unmask Operators of Two Dozen Pirate Sites</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">247</guid><pubDate>Sun, 30 May 2021 21:35:55 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Nintendo Wins $2.1 Million Judgment Against Pirate Site Operator</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/nintendo-wins-21-million-judgment-against-pirate-site-operator-r226/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Nintendo Wins $2.1 Million Judgment Against Pirate Site Operator
</h1>

<p>
	<img alt="wario nintendo" data-ratio="65.83" style="height: auto; width: 720px;" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/wario.jpg">
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<article>
	<header>
		<p>
			Nintendo has won a $2.1 million summary judgment against the owner and operator of the now-defunct pirate site RomUniverse. A California federal court ruled that the man, a Los Angeles resident, uploaded and distributed pirated Nintendo games. In addition, he profited from mass-scale copyright infringement by charging paid subscriptions.
		</p>
	</header>

	<div>
		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			In September 2019, gaming giant Nintendo <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/nintendo-sues-romuniverse-for-mass-copyright-infringement/" rel="external nofollow">filed a lawsuit</a> against the game download portal RomUniverse.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			The website facilitated massive online copyright infringement of many popular Nintendo titles, according to the complaint filed at a California district court.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			Nintendo said that RomUniverse made things worse by profiting from these copyright infringements by selling paid premium accounts that allowed users to download as many games as they wanted.
		</p>

		<h2>
			RomUniverse Fought Back
		</h2>

		<p>
			The site’s operator, Los Angeles resident Matthew Storman, clearly disagreed with these allegations. Without an attorney, he decided to defend himself in court. In his view, the site wasn’t breaking any laws and 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 charges, as well as millions of dollars in potential damages.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

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

		<h2>
			Nintendo Requests Summary Judgment
		</h2>

		<p>
			After investing a substantial amount in legal fees, the gaming giant moved for a summary judgment and $15 million in damages.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			“This is a straightforward video game piracy case, and the material facts are undisputed,” Nintendo informed the court.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			“For over a decade, defendant Matthew Storman owned and operated the website RomUniverse.com. He populated the website with pirated copies of thousands of different Nintendo games and distributed hundreds of thousands of copies of those pirated games.”
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			Storman, who continued in court without a lawyer, clearly disagreed. In his opposition brief, he denied that RomUniverse offered for download and distributed pirated ROMs of thousands of Nintendo games. Storman also argued that he never uploaded any games himself.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			Earlier this week, US District Court Judge Consuelo Marshall ruled on the matter, largely siding with Nintendo.
		</p>

		<h2>
			Court Sides With Nintendo
		</h2>

		<p>
			According to the court, Nintendo provided sufficient evidence to show that Storman is liable for direct, contributory, and vicarious copyright infringement. In addition, trademark infringement claims were also accepted.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			Storman’s denials failed to convince the court as he admitted to uploading content to the site in a previous deposition.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			“Defendant filed a declaration in opposition to the Motion wherein he declares that he ‘denies and disputes that he uploaded any files to said website and at no time did he verify the content of said ROM file’, which is directly contradictory to his sworn deposition testimony wherein he testified that he uploaded the ROM files onto his website,” Judge Marshall notes.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			“Furthermore, Defendant testified at his deposition that his website ‘indicated’ that copies of Nintendo’s copyrighted video games were available for download on the website.”
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			Storman also profited from the infringements of users by charging for premium access to the site. He testified that, during 2019, the site generated between $30,000-36,000 in revenue, which was his main source of income at the time.
		</p>

		<h2>
			Substantially Lower Damages
		</h2>

		<p>
			Nintendo requested more than $15 million in copyright and trademark infringement damages, but the court doesn’t want to go this far.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			Judge Marshall believes that $35,000 statutory damages for each of the 49 copyrighted works is sufficient. This adds up to $1.7 million, which is substantially lower than the $90,000 per work requested by Nintendo.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			“Considering Defendant’s willful infringement, the Court finds $35,000 statutory damages for each infringed copyright […] would compensate Plaintiff for its lost revenue and deter Defendant who is currently unemployed and has already shut down the website,” Judge Marshall writes.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			The trademark damages are also much lower than requested. Nintendo’s original motion asks for $400,000 for each of the 29 trademarks, but the court awarded $400,000 for all combined, which could be an oversight.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			“The Court finds the requested $400,000 in statutory damages, which equals approximately $14,286 in statutory damages for each of the 28 counterfeit marks, is appropriate,” the order reads.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			Finally, Judge Marshall decided not to issue a permanent injunction against Storman. Nintendo failed to show that it suffered irreparable harm, and the fact that Storman already shut down the site shows that there’s no imminent threat of further infringements.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			All in all, the court <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/storman-judgment.pdf" rel="external nofollow">orders (pdf)</a> the former RomUniverse operator to pay a total of $2,115,000 in damages.
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<p>
			“The Court Grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiff’s copyright infringement, unfair competition and Lanham Act claims, and awards Plaintiff $1,715,000 in statutory damages under the Copyright Act and $400,000 in statutory damages under the Lanham Act for a total of $2,115,000 in statutory damages.”
		</p>

		<p>
			 
		</p>

		<center style="text-align: left;">
			<img alt="storman romuniverse order" data-ratio="39.58" style="width: 720px; height: 284px;" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/court-order-storman.jpg">
		</center>

		<p>
			 
		</p>
	</div>
</article>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/nintendo-wins-2-1-million-judgment-against-pirate-site-operator-210529/" rel="external nofollow">Nintendo Wins $2.1 Million Judgment Against Pirate Site Operator</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">226</guid><pubDate>Sat, 29 May 2021 22:30:45 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Triller Files Three New Lawsuits Against Jake Paul Boxing Match Pirates</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/triller-files-three-new-lawsuits-against-jake-paul-boxing-match-pirates-r218/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Triller Files Three New Lawsuits Against Jake Paul Boxing Match Pirates
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/triller.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="Triller" data-ratio="99.37" style="height: auto;" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/triller.png"></a>
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Triller's legal campaign against entities that allegedly streamed the Jake Paul boxing match is on the move again after three new lawsuits were filed in a California court on Thursday. The suits target several companies and individuals behind a Canada-based streaming platform, a YouTuber, and the alleged operator of an online streaming portal.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		After the Jake Paul vs. Ben Askren fight was streamed illegally online, Triller filed a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/pirates-who-illegally-streamed-jake-paul-v-ben-askren-targeted-in-100m-lawsuit-210427/" rel="external nofollow">$100m complaint</a> against several domains and individuals, describing them as “business entities” that breached its copyrights.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This was supported by an <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/triller-offers-amnesty-to-pirates-claims-vpns-users-arent-protected-210504/" rel="external nofollow">amnesty program</a>, advising people who watched the fight illegally to pay $49.99 to avoid being sucked into Triller’s litigation drive.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The early steps didn’t go smoothly. Judge Percy Anderson wasn’t happy that Triller had bundled several entities (FilmDaily.com, AccessTVPro.co, Online2LiveStream.us, CrackStreamsLive.com, Sports-Today.club, My-Sports.club, BilaSport.com, Trendy Clips, Mike, Your Extra, Eclipt Gaming, ItsLilBrandon, and H3 Podcast) into one lawsuit.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Judge said that joining them all in the same action as cooperating parties raised the possibility that the illegal conduct of one defendant could be wrongly attributed to another independent defendant.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As a result, the Court ordered all defendants other than FilmDaily.com to be dismissed. Triller responded by filing a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/triller-hits-h3-podcast-with-50m-jake-paul-piracy-lawsuit-judge-guts-original-complaint-210511/" rel="external nofollow">separate lawsuit</a> against the H3 Podcast has now followed up with separate lawsuits against three of the original defendants. This time around, Triller is being rather more specific.
	</p>

	<h2>
		First Triller Lawsuit Targets Online2LiveStream.us
	</h2>

	<p>
		In a lawsuit filed in a California court Thursday, Triller names Robiul Awal, Robiul Islam, Online2LiveStream.us and Does 1 to 10 as defendants. The complaint begins by following the format of the original lawsuit and names Awal and Islam as the alleged owners and/or operators of Online2LiveStream.us.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The lawsuit alleges that all defendants operated as part of a conspiracy, with Awal and Islam operating their site as a device to avoid liability.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Defendant Online2LiveStream are, and at all times herein mentioned were, controlled, dominated, and operated by Defendants Awal and Islam as their alter ego, in that the activities and business of Defendant Online2LiveStream were carried out without annual meetings, and without keeping records or minutes of any proceedings, or maintaining written resolutions,” the complaint reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/online2livestream.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="Online2LiveStream" data-ratio="75.10" style="width: 720px; height: auto;" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/online2livestream.png"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In common with the original lawsuit, Triller is suing Online2LiveStream for copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement, violations of the Federal Communications Act, conversion, and violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Interestingly, this suit also adds a claim of false advertising after Online2LiveStream recently changed its business model.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Visitors to the site who want to watch boxing are now presented with a splash screen suggesting they can watch the Paul vs. Askren fight but like many sites that attempt to cash in while cashing out, this now leads to nowhere good. Indeed, the site now links to a scam site that is happy to take people’s credit card details but doesn’t offer what it claims to provide.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Defendants misleading the public as to the lawful way to obtain Plaintiff’s service has injured Plaintiff,” Triller writes.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Second Triller Lawsuit Targets YouTuber ItsLilBrandon
	</h2>

	<p>
		In a second lawsuit filed in the same US court, Triller targets Brandon T. Williams, the person who allegedly operates online using the ItsLilBrandon “business entity”, plus Does 1 to 10.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In what appears to be an effort to cover all bases, Triller alleges that the defendants are not only the operators of the ItsLilBrandon YouTube channel but also the owners and operators of various torrent and streaming websites. Triller doesn’t name any of them but says that the defendants solicited payments in exchange for uploading the Jake Paul event to YouTube.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“[D]efendants, and each of them, solicited payments in exchange for their unlawful uploading, distribution, and public display of the Broadcast to users of the YouTube Channel by, among other things, asking users to ‘please help me out’ and providing information for an account with Cash App, a mobile payment processing service,” the complaint notes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In common with the suit against Online2LiveStream, Triller describes the ItsLilBrandon ‘branding’ as a shell to avoid liability. The company claims that this “business entity” was operated without annual meetings, without keeping records or minutes of any proceedings, or maintaining written resolutions.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Triller is suing the ItsLilBrandon defendants for copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement, violations of the Federal Communications Act, conversion, and violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Third Triller Lawsuit Targets My-Sports.club Defendants
	</h2>

	<p>
		The final lawsuit in this batch targets several business entities and individuals with a focus on Canada – <a href="https://opencorporates.com/companies/ca/8100462" rel="external nofollow">8100462 Canada Inc.</a> (doing business as MediaHub aka Performance Marketers), <a href="https://opencorporates.com/companies/ca_qc/1167992370" rel="external nofollow">8099316 Canada Inc.</a>, <a href="https://opencorporates.com/companies/ca_qc/1168682202" rel="external nofollow">Diglo Inc.</a>, an individual named as Nicolas Klivokiotis, plus Does 1 to 10.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to Triller, the defendants are the owners and operators of various torrent and streaming websites including Sports-Today.club and My-Sports.club.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“[O]n or about April 17, 2021, Defendants created and published on the Websites a post titled ‘ACCESS BOXING WITHOUT CABLE! YOUR SCREEN. YOUR TERMS’,” Triller writes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The aforementioned post also contained a clickable link to permit users of the Websites to unlawfully view the Broadcast. Defendants did not have authorization to upload, distribute, or publicly display the Broadcast to the users of the Websites.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Triller says this was a for-profit operation, with visitors directed to external and/or shareable payment links (including PayPal) to fund the defendants’ breaches of the company’s rights.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/my-sports-club-triller.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="my-sports-club-triller" data-ratio="75.10" style="width: 720px; height: 540px;" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/my-sports-club-triller.png"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“[D]efendant Klivokiotis is an individual who serves as the Director, President, Secretary, and Treasurer of Defendant MediaHub and the Director of Defendant 8099316, and served as the Director of Defendant Diglo,” Triller claims.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Upon information and belief, Defendant Klivokiotis owns, operates, or otherwise controls the Websites for the purpose of permitting, encouraging, facilitating, and inducing the sharing of videos and live programing of audiovisual materials between users of the Websites.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Similar allegations to those made against Online2LiveStream and ItsLilBrandon suggest that the companies named in the suit acted as “shells” to shield Klivokiotis from liability. Most other claims are broadly the same as those made in the other two lawsuits, demanding relief for copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement, violations of the Federal Communications Act, conversion, and violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Claims For Relief (All Lawsuits)
	</h2>

	<p>
		Triller is demanding an injunction to prevent ongoing infringement, plus an order awarding it all of the profits made by the defendants and damages to cover its losses.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The company also demands statutory damages of up to $110,000 for each violation of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/605" rel="external nofollow">47 U.S.C. § 605(a)</a> and up to $60,000 for each violation of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/553" rel="external nofollow">47 U.S.C. § 553</a>, plus attorney’s fees, interest and costs. Additional damages, including for two types of copyright infringement (which could be even more substantial) should be determined at trial.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Finally, and on a less serious note, poor old Ben Askren simply can’t catch a break. In addition to being knocked out by Jake Paul, before the fight he was inexplicably announced as ‘Ben Askew’ by veteran ring announcer Michael Buffer, much to his disbelief and the amusement of Jake Paul.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In Triller’s lawsuits, ‘Funky Ben’ is also referred to by the surnames ARKSEN and ARSKEN.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Triller’s three new lawsuits can be found <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-cv-04442-Triller-v-8100462-DBA-MediaHub-complaint-210527.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a>, <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-cv-04432-2-21-cv-04442-Triller-v-Brandon-Williams-LILBRANDON-complaint-210527.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> and <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/2-21-cv-04428-Triller-v-Robiul-Awal-Online2LiveStream.us-Does-1-10-Complaint-210527.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> (pdf)
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/triller-files-three-new-lawsuits-against-jake-paul-boxing-match-pirates-210528/" rel="external nofollow">Triller Files Three New Lawsuits Against Jake Paul Boxing Match Pirates</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">218</guid><pubDate>Sat, 29 May 2021 03:15:01 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>ISPs Must Unblock Stream-Ripping Sites After Yout.com Intervenes in Brazil</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/isps-must-unblock-stream-ripping-sites-after-youtcom-intervenes-in-brazil-r217/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	ISPs Must Unblock Stream-Ripping Sites After Yout.com Intervenes in Brazil
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		<img alt="yout-logo.jpg" class="ipsImage" data-ratio="57.32" height="360" width="628" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/yout-logo.jpg">
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Last fall, Brazilian ISPs began blocking several popular stream-ripping sites. Most simply took their losses and moved on, but Yout.com hired legal experts to find out more. As it turned out, the temporary blocking measure was part of a criminal investigation. Yout's lawyers intervened and, since there's no official indictment, the Criminal Court has now ordered that the blockades to be lifted.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Website blocking is without a doubt one of the favorite anti-piracy tools of the entertainment industries.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Alleged ‘pirate’ sites have been blocked by ISPs in every continent except Antarctica and more countries are added to the list every year.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A relatively recent trend is to block so-called stream-ripping sites. These sites don’t necessarily store or link to any infringing material. Instead, they allow users to download audio and video from YouTube and other public streaming services.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The legality of these sites open to debate but several courts have already approved various blocking requests. Last fall, this also happened in Brazil, where ISPs were ordered to block over a dozen sites including Yout.com, Flvto.biz, Y2mate.com, and H2converter.net.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Yout.com Lawyers Up
	</h2>

	<p>
		Most sites simply took their losses and moved on, but <a href="https://yout.com/" rel="external nofollow">Yout.com</a> operator Johnathan Nader took is not one of them. Nader <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/youtube-ripper-yout-com-loses-site-blocking-case-despite-putting-up-a-defense-200423/" rel="external nofollow">previously appealed</a> a site-blocking order in Denmark and in the US he <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-sued-by-youtube-ripping-site-over-dmca-anti-circumvention-notices-201027/" rel="external nofollow">sued the RIAA</a> to clarify that his website is legal.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		After discovering the Brazilian blockade Yout.com’s operator hired the law firm <a href="https://www.demarest.com.br/" rel="external nofollow">Demarest</a> to help him find what’s going on. Initially, it wasn’t clear who was behind the blocking efforts. The lawyers reached out to the ISPs in question to find out more, without result.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Months went by without any progress and eventually it was the RIAA that helped to connect the dots. The music group referred to the Brazilian blocking order in the US lawsuit, which helped track down the case that was initially kept out of the public eye.
	</p>

	<h2>
		‘Secret’ Criminal Investigation
	</h2>

	<p>
		The information collected by the lawyers revealed that the Brazilian music group APDIF submitted a request for a criminal investigation last year. This was followed up by the Public Prosecutor’s Office which requested a 180-day block of Yout.com and the other sites while the matter was being investigated.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		When Yout.com’s lawyers found out they prepared to file a defense arguing that the company’s activities are not breaking any laws. Around the same time the 180-day window ended, so a request to lift the blockade was made as well.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Public Prosecutors Office’s replied to Yout’s arguments and argued that it was clear that the site is facilitating copyright infringement by circumventing DRM protections. The authorities informed the court that they were still investigating the matter, and requested a 180-day extension of the blocking efforts.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Court Lifts Blockades
	</h2>

	<p>
		This week week, the São Paulo Criminal Court ruled on the matter, deciding that the ISP blockades should end. Another extension is not warranted, the Court argued, as the Public Prosecutor’s Office didn’t file any criminal charges against Yout or the other sites.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Public Prosecutor’s Office was ordered to notify the ISPs about this decision within 48 hours, which will effectively end the blocking efforts. Soon after, the Public Prosecutor’s Office informed the court that it complied with the order.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For now, this means that all popular stream-rippers will be openly accessible again in Brazil. This isn’t just good news for Yout.com but also for its competitors, which are unblocked as well.
	</p>

	<h2>
		One Major Caveat
	</h2>

	<p>
		This is good news for the site operators, but there is a major caveat. The Public Prosecutor’s Office may very well continue its investigation, so there is a possibility that criminal charges will be announced in the future.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Yout’s law firm Demarest confirms that the criminal threat isn’t over yet. However, the firm is confident that its client is acting within the boundaries of the law.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“We are confident that Yout’s activities cannot be included in the same category of conduct attributed to other website owners, as its tool is lawful and its usage falls within the very exceptions provided by copyright law,” Yout’s legal team inform us.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of the São Paulo Criminal Court’s order is <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/Decision-Blockage-Lifted.pdf" rel="external nofollow">available here (pdf)</a>
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/isps-must-unblock-stream-ripping-sites-after-yout-com-intervenes-in-brazil-210528/" rel="external nofollow">ISPs Must Unblock Stream-Ripping Sites After Yout.com Intervenes in Brazil</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">217</guid><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Cox Appeals $1B Piracy Liability Verdict to &#x2018;Save the Internet&#x2019;</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/cox-appeals-1b-piracy-liability-verdict-to-%E2%80%98save-the-internet%E2%80%99-r212/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Cox Appeals $1B Piracy Liability Verdict to ‘Save the Internet’
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Cox Communications has submitted its appeal brief, asking the court to reverse the $1 billion jury verdict handed down following a piracy liability lawsuit filed by several major record labels. The Internet provider argues that it's being incorrectly held liable for pirating subscribers. Cox says that the music industry is waging war on the internet, which will never be the same again if the verdict is upheld.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Late 2019, Internet provider Cox Communications lost its legal battle against a group of major record labels.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Following a two-week trial, a Virginia jury held Cox liable for its pirating subscribers. The ISP failed to disconnect repeat infringers and was ordered to pay <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/cox-is-liable-for-pirating-subscribers-hit-with-1-billion-damages-verdict-191220/" rel="external nofollow">$1 billion in damages</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Heavily disappointed by the decision, Cox later asked the court to set the jury verdict aside and decide the issue directly. In addition, the company argued that the “shockingly excessive” damages should be lowered. Both requests were denied by the court, <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/court-confirms-1-billion-piracy-damages-verdict-against-cox-210113/" rel="external nofollow">which upheld the original damages award</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Despite the setbacks, Cox isn’t giving up. The company believes that the district court’s ruling isn’t just a disaster for Internet providers. If it stands, the verdict will have dramatic consequences for the general public as well.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Cox Files Appeal Brief
	</h2>

	<p>
		This week the ISP submitted its opening brief at the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, hoping to reverse the lower court’s judgment. The filing begins by placing the lawsuit in a historical context.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The music industry is waging war on the internet,” Cox’s lawyers write. First, the music companies went after thousands of file-sharers and software companies such as Napster. When those tactics didn’t deliver the desired result, Internet providers became a target.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“So, 15 years after Napster, the music industry launched an aggressive new strategy: Attack the internet itself, suing the internet service providers — the cable and phone companies, like Defendant Cox Communications, that deliver the internet.”
	</p>

	<h2>
		How to Handle Repeat Infringers
	</h2>

	<p>
		The entire dispute revolves around the legal obligations Internet providers have when it comes to pirating subscribers. According to the law, ISPs must adopt and reasonably implement a policy that allows them to terminate the accounts of repeat infringers in appropriate circumstances.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to the music companies, this means that ISPs should terminate accounts after rightsholders send several infringement notices, regardless of the circumstances.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		However, Cox and other ISPs have historically been very hesitant to disconnect subscribers, in part because they believe it’s ‘not appropriate’ to disconnect entire companies or households from the Internet. Cox reiterates this stance in its appeal brief.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Impossible Spot
	</h2>

	<p>
		“The legal rules Plaintiffs advocate put ISPs in an impossible spot. ISPs will have to boot entire households or businesses off the internet— cutting their lifelines, their livelihoods, and their social connections— based on a few isolated and potentially inaccurate allegations.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Or they will have to invade our privacy by developing new capabilities to monitor our internet usage 24/7 to ferret out illegal activity. The internet will never be the same,” Cox adds.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This doesn’t mean that Cox simply ignored piracy. The company was actually one of the first US ISPs to implement its own ‘graduated response’ system to address copyright infringers. According to the music companies, however, these warnings and temporary disconnections were not good enough.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to Cox, the district court and the jury were wrong to side with the record labels for a variety of reasons.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Vicarious Infringement
	</h2>

	<p>
		The first argument is that an ISP should not be held vicariously liable for pirating subscribers when it doesn’t directly profit from this activity.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Cox receives no ‘direct financial benefit’ from infringement. Its subscribers pay the same flat fee for internet services whether they infringe or not. Subscribers are in no sense acting in Cox’s financial interest by downloading songs,” Cox writes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Adding to that, the ISP stresses that it can’t control or supervise its six million subscribers. Blocking or policing infringing activity is impossible, which also weighs against vicarious liability.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Contributory Infringement
	</h2>

	<p>
		The contributory liability verdict should be overturned as well, according to Cox. The district court was wrong to conclude that past infringement notices gave Cox enough reason to believe that subscribers would pirate again in the future.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Separately, Cox argues that the district court was wrong to conclude that the ISP ‘materially contributed’ to pirating activities simply because people can use Internet access that way.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“That means Cox cannot be liable based on ‘generalized knowledge’ that people infringe on its network; instead, Plaintiffs had to prove Cox knew of the ‘specific instances of infringement’ for which it was being held liable.”
	</p>

	<h2>
		Excessive Damages
	</h2>

	<p>
		In addition to overturning the vicarious and contributory liability verdicts, Cox also argues that the $1 billion damages award was wrong. This figure covers thousands of works that should not have been counted and is many times higher than the actual harm.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The district court’s errors have resulted in an award of historic proportions. The $1 billion judgment is entirely untethered from both the harm it caused —$692,000 in displaced downloads — and Cox’s culpability.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Cox says it didn’t directly infringe any of the music tracks, nor did it encourage anyone to infringe. Its liability rests on the decision to keep subscribers connected longer than the music companies liked.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The ISP hopes that the Court of Appeals will reverse or vacate the district court ruling. If not, the consequences will be devastating.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“If sustained, this judgment would elevate the interests of the music industry over those of ordinary, and often blameless, people who depend on the internet. The consequences will be devastating,” Cox concludes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		—-
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		A copy of Cox’s opening brief, filed at the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/coxapp.pdf" rel="external nofollow">is available here (pdf)</a>.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/cox-appeals-1b-piracy-liability-verdict-to-save-the-internet-210527/" rel="external nofollow">Cox Appeals $1B Piracy Liability Verdict to ‘Save the Internet’</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">212</guid><pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2021 19:29:43 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Federal Court of Appeal Court Upholds Canadian Pirate Site Blocking Order</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/federal-court-of-appeal-court-upholds-canadian-pirate-site-blocking-order-r201/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Federal Court of Appeal Court Upholds Canadian Pirate Site Blocking Order
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Canada's Federal Court of Appeal concluded today that the country's first pirate site blocking order can stay in place. The Court dismissed the appeal from Internet provider TekSavvy. According to the Court, site-blocking injunctions don't violate the Copyright Act, freedom of speech, or net neutrality. While it's not a perfect remedy, it trumps other available options.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In 2018, Canada’s Federal Court approved the country’s <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/federal-court-approves-first-pirate-site-blockade-in-canada-191118/" rel="external nofollow">first pirate site-blocking order</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

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

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		There was little opposition from Internet providers, except for TekSavvy, which quickly announced that it would <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/teksavvy-appeals-first-canadian-pirate-site-blockade-191126/" rel="external nofollow">appeal the ruling</a>. The blocking injunction threatens the open Internet to advance the interests of a few powerful media conglomerates, the company said.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Soon after, the landmark case also drew the interest of several third parties. There were copyright holder groups that argued in favor of site blocking, but also the Canadian domain registry (CIRA) and the University of Ottowa’s legal clinic CIPPIC, which both oppose the blocking order.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Appeal Dismissed
	</h2>

	<p>
		In March the Federal Court of Appeal <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/court-hears-arguments-in-canadian-pirate-site-blocking-appeal-210325/" rel="external nofollow">heard arguments from both sides</a> and today Justice George R. Locke issued the final judgment, which dismisses the appeal.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In a 42-page reasoning, Justice Locke considers whether the Federal Court has the power to grant a blocking order, if that order violates freedom of expression, and whether it is just and equitable. On all issues the Court sides with the copyright holders.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Copyright Act
	</h2>

	<p>
		TekSavvy argued that site-blocking shouldn’t be used as a remedy because it isn’t specifically mentioned in the Copyright Act carefully constructed in Parliament. Copyright holders should rely on the notice-and-notice system instead. However, Justice Locke disagrees.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The fact that Parliament has put in place a regime to notify an alleged copyright infringer that its activities have come to the attention of the copyright owner does not suggest that this represents a limit on the remedies to which the copyright owner is entitled,” the reasoning reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to the Court, there is no doubt that the GoldTV Service infringes the plaintiffs’ copyrights. And after an injunction against the service itself failed to have any effect, a site-blocking injunction is warranted.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Net Neutrality
	</h2>

	<p>
		TekSavvy also argued that site-blocking would violate net neutrality. According to the Telecommunications Act, ISPs are not allowed to control or influence the content on their network without approval from the CRTC. Again, the Federal Court of Appeal sees things differently.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“In my view, the general wording of section 36 of the Telecommunications Act does not displace the Federal Court’s equitable powers of injunction, including the power to impose a site-blocking order,” Justice Locke writes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The reasoning clarifies that TekSavvy isn’t “controlling or influencing” anything when it complies with a court order. On the contrary, it is being controlled or influenced by the order.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Freedom of Expression
	</h2>

	<p>
		The freedom of expression defenses didn’t fare much better. The Court of Appeal sees no errors in the original verdict and concludes that this factor was sufficiently considered. This includes any potential over-blocking problems that may occur.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		TekSavvy’s arguments that the blocking order not ‘just and equitable’ were dismissed as well. This includes the burden that a constant stream of blocking amendments and dozens of new blocking cases will cause.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Justice Locke agrees that problems may eventually arise in the future, but these will be dealt with then. They are no reason to deny the blocking order.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Finally, the Federal Court of Appeal wasn’t receptive to the suggestion that copyright holders should consider other non-blocking options first, such as seeking help from Cloudflare or payment providers. There is no basis to conclude that these options would be effective, according to the Court.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		All in all, Justice Locke concludes that the appeal should be <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/teksavvy-dismiss-appeal.jpg" rel="external nofollow">dismissed</a> and Justices Nadon and LeBlanc concur.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Having found no error in the Judge’s conclusion that the Federal Court has the power to grant a site-blocking order, and having likewise found no error in his analysis of the applicable legal test, I conclude that this Court should not interfere with the Judge’s decision,” Justice Locke writes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="canada blocking appeal" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/teksavvy-dismiss-appeal-1.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		<span style="font-size:18px;"><strong>Update: Responses</strong></span>
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Canadian domain registry CIRA, which intervened in this case, is <a href="https://www.cira.ca/newsroom/state-internet/federal-court-appeal-upholds-canadas-first-ever-website-blocking-framework" rel="external nofollow">disappointed with the outcome</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Many Canadians will be disappointed by today’s ruling,” CIRA president and CEO, Byron Holland says. “While it is important to underline that the court did not open the door for ISPs to block of their own volition, we believe fundamentally that there are more proportionate responses to copyright infringement than the GoldTV precedent prescribes.”
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/federal-court-of-appeal-court-upholds-canadian-pirate-site-blocking-order-210526/" rel="external nofollow">Federal Court of Appeal Court Upholds Canadian Pirate Site Blocking Order</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">201</guid><pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2021 05:58:01 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Comcast Subscriber Receives DMCA Notice for Downloading Ubuntu</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/comcast-subscriber-receives-dmca-notice-for-downloading-ubuntu-r195/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Comcast Subscriber Receives DMCA Notice for Downloading Ubuntu
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		Every day, people who download and share pirated content receive DMCA notices via their ISPs, warning them to cease and desist their infringing behavior. While the majority of these notices are accurate, one Ubuntu user says he has just been targeted by an anti-piracy company alleging that by torrenting an OS ISO released by Ubuntu itself, he breached copyright law.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Two decades ago, the BitTorrent protocol revolutionized peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing. The content-agnostic system allowed people to efficiently share and download even the largest files and soon grew to become the dominant method of transfer for millions of file-sharers.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Over the years, people have shared all kinds of content using torrents and it quickly became associated with mass copyright infringement of movies, TV shows, music and everything in between. However, BitTorrent is also used to distribute large volumes of data with the blessing of rightsholders, with the sharing of Linux distros a prime example.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Indeed, large companies such as Ubuntu owner Canonical actively encourage the distribution of their packages via BitTorrent, even going as far as operating their own tracker. This is effectively a green light for users to obtain Ubuntu using BitTorrent and is universally considered to be entirely safe. However, a development yesterday caused mass confusion when a user was accused of copyright infringement via a notice from his ISP.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Anti-Piracy Firm Sends DMCA Notice Against Comcast User
	</h2>

	<p>
		Posting to Reddit’s /r/linux sub-Reddit, a forum with more than 656K subscribers, ‘NateNate60’ reported the unthinkable. After downloading an official Ubuntu ISO package (filename ubuntu-20.04.2.0-desktop-amd64.iso) he <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/nkztyv/copyright_notice_from_isp_for_pirating_linux_is/" rel="external nofollow">says</a> he received a notice from Comcast’s Infinity claiming that he’d been reported for copyright infringement.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“We have received a notification by a copyright owner, or its authorized agent, reporting an alleged infringement of one or more copyrighted works made on or over your Xfinity Internet service,” the posted notice reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		NateNate60 wisely redacted the notice to remove the ‘Incident Number’ and the precise time of the alleged infringement to protect his privacy but the clam was reported filed with Comcast on May 24, 2021.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The copyright owner has identified the IP address associated with your Xfinity Internet account at the time as the source of the infringing works,” it continues, adding that NateNate60 should search all of his devices connected to his network and delete the files mentioned in the complaint.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/ubuntu-dmca-comcast.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="ubuntu dmca comcast" data-ratio="143.62" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/ubuntu-dmca-comcast.png"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<h2>
		Detail of the Allegedly-Infringing Content and DMCA Notice
	</h2>

	<p>
		The allegedly infringing content is the 64-bit Ubuntu 20.04.2.0 LTS release but the first big question is whether the file is actually the official release from Canonical. Given that the listed hash value is 4ba4fbf7231a3a660e86892707d25c135533a16a and that matches the hash of the official release, mislabeled or misidentified content (wrong hash, mislabeled file etc) appears to be ruled out.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Indeed, <a href="https://torrent.ubuntu.com/tracker_index" rel="external nofollow">the same hash value is listed</a> on Ubuntu’s very own BitTorrent tracker and <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/nkztyv/copyright_notice_from_isp_for_pirating_linux_is/gzfuep3/" rel="external nofollow">according</a> to NateNate60, this is where he downloaded the torrent that led to the DMCA notice. It doesn’t get much more official than that.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		According to the DMCA notice sent by Comcast, the complainant wasn’t Ubuntu/Canonical but an anti-piracy company called <a href="https://www.opsecsecurity.com/contact-us" rel="external nofollow">OpSec Security</a>, which according to its imprint is based in Germany. TorrentFreak has contacted OpSec for a comment on the DMCA notice but at the time of writing the company is yet to respond.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Implications of the DMCA Notice
	</h2>

	<p>
		It is certainly possible for someone to fake a DMCA notice (and also cause outrage by choosing controversial content such as Ubuntu) so we have also contacted Canonical for its take on the claims being made. While we wait for the company to weigh in, it seems possible that this is some kind of error, one that could be easily triggered by someone cutting-and-pasting the wrong hash value into a BitTorrent monitoring system.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		That being said, there can be consequences even when erroneous DMCA notices aren’t properly handled. Presuming the notice is genuine (albeit sent in error), Comcast needs to be informed that mistakes have been made. The ISP has a repeat infringer policy and given the current hostile environment, terminating users is certainly on the agenda. Indeed, the notice states just that.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“We remind you that use of our service in any manner that constitutes an infringement of any copyrighted work is a violation of Comcast’s DMCA Policy and may result in the suspension or termination of your service and account,” it warns.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Arguably unwisely, however, NateNate60 says he isn’t going to take the matter up with Comcast.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“I really don’t want to risk them shutting off my Internet access over this stupid thing so I’m probably just going to ignore it,” he <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/nkztyv/copyright_notice_from_isp_for_pirating_linux_is/gzfsi7s/" rel="external nofollow">wrote</a> on Reddit.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Again, we need to wait for responses from OpSec and Ubuntu explaining why this notice was sent but not contesting an erroneous DMCA notice has implications.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For example, should NateNate60 suddenly get another couple of similar notices (regardless of whether they are genuine or sent in error), Comcast may feel that in order to retain its safe harbor under the DMCA, terminating the account might be its only option. At that point the damage has been done and it could prove even more difficult to get the account reinstated.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Also, if this notice is indicative of a broader issue, it seems unlikely that NateNate60 will be the only recipient of a ‘strike’ against his account for downloading/sharing official Ubuntu torrents. Raising the issue quickly will allow the parties to see what went wrong here (if that’s indeed the case) and prevent it from happening again.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		We’ll update this post when Canonical and OpSec Security respond to our requests for comment.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/comcast-subscriber-receives-dmca-notice-for-downloading-ubuntu-210526/" rel="external nofollow">Comcast Subscriber Receives DMCA Notice for Downloading Ubuntu</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">195</guid><pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2021 17:44:20 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Sale of Pirate Streaming Devices Declared Illegal By Malaysia IP High Court</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/sale-of-pirate-streaming-devices-declared-illegal-by-malaysia-ip-high-court-r180/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Sale of Pirate Streaming Devices Declared Illegal By Malaysia IP High Court
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		Malaysia's Intellectual Property High Court has ruled that the sale and distribution of streaming devices configured for piracy purposes constitutes infringement under the Copyright Act. The decision comes a year after Malaysia informed the United States Patent and Trademark Office that pirate set-top devices were a "serious problem" in the country.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Hoping to reduced the online availability of pirated content in the country, in 2019 the Malaysian Communica­tions and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) and Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Ministry said they had blocked 246 sites.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The aim of the blocking was to reduce the usefulness of set-top boxes that are configured to provide access to copyrighted material. Running parallel, Malaysia deployed a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/malaysia-blocks-246-sites-to-tackle-pirate-box-epidemic-190205/" rel="external nofollow">secondary tactic</a> to prevent the spread of Android-based devices by demanding that importers and distributors submit samples to ensure they meet quality assurance standards.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		What Malaysia really needed, however, was a legal basis to declare all pirate devices illegal to sell or distribute. This week that was achieved.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Ruling From The Malaysia IP High Court
	</h2>

	<p>
		Previously, Measat Broadcast Networks Sdn. Bhd., the service provider for Astro (All-Asian Satellite Television and Radio Operator), brought a case against a seller of set-top boxes that acted as gateways to websites and servers providing access to infringing content.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In a landmark decision handed down yesterday in the matter, the Intellectual Property High Court in Kuala Lumpur declared the sale, distribution, and supply of devices configured to provide unauthorized access to copyrighted content a breach of the <a href="https://www.myipo.gov.my/en/copyright-act-1987/" rel="external nofollow">Copyright Act 1987</a>.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Rightsholders &amp; Broadcasters Welcome Ruling
	</h2>

	<p>
		The decision was welcomed by Laila Saat, Director, Regulatory of Astro, who noted that it would now be easier to pursue cases in civil courts.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The declaration by the High Court that sale of ISD [Illicit Streaming Devices] which allow access to unauthorized copyright content amounts to copyright infringement sets a precedent for future civil claims on copyright infringement against ISD sellers in the market, including those on e-commerce platforms,” Saat said.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In addition to local support from the Asia Video Industry Association (AVIA), the decision was also welcomed by the Premier League, which together with Astro has been running the “Boot Out Piracy” campaign in Asia.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“This is an important and welcome declaration by the Intellectual Property High Court, and sends a clear message that the sale of ISDs that provide unauthorized access to copyrighted works constitutes copyright infringement,” said Premier League Director of Legal Services, Kevin Plumb.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Premier League is committed to pursuing all those involved with providing illegal access to Premier League content as well as working to raise awareness of the risks fans face when watching via unauthorized sources. We will continue to work with Astro and local authorities as part of our ongoing anti-piracy program in Malaysia.”
	</p>

	<h2>
		Malaysia Previously Achieved Success in Criminal Cases
	</h2>

	<p>
		While the decision from the IP High Court will prove beneficial in future civil cases, Malaysia has already booked recent successes in criminal proceedings.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In February, the director of an IT company was charged under Section 41 of the Copyright Act with promoting Android boxes that circumvented technical protection measures on a copyrighted broadcast. Later that same month, a director of a mobile accessory company pleaded guilty to possessing TV boxes configured to illegally stream Astro content in breach of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Malaysia Warned United States of “Serious Problem”
	</h2>

	<p>
		In March 2020, during the 50th Meeting of the Intellectual Property Rights Experts Group (IPEG) of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) held in Malaysia, the United States presented a proposal to survey members on the domestic treatment of illicit streaming devices.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		During the months that followed, the United States Patent and Trademark Office collated the responses and presented the results during the 51st Meeting of IPEG in October 2020.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Malaysia told USPTO that the economic harm being caused to broadcasters and rightsholders in the country was a “serious problem” but noted that the Copyright Act 1987 allowed for action when devices are imported or sold for the purposes of circumventing technological protection measures.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Interestingly, Malaysia also told the US that the law would need to be revised to allow for more efficient action against the sale and distribution of pirate devices.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Proposed amendment focused on the act of uploading, providing, sharing access to illegal copyright works instead of focusing on fighting the technologies itself,” Malaysia’s representatives <a href="https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/APEC-DomesticTreatmentofISDs.pdf" rel="external nofollow">wrote</a> (pdf).
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Malaysia also reported that just three law enforcement investigations had been launched at the time of the survey, all of them in relation to the sale of set-top devices. In an unspecified number of cases, Malaysia noted that some investigations had been dropped either due to insufficient evidence or a lack of technical expertise to prosecute.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Several Other Countries Reported ISDs as a Minor Problem
	</h2>

	<p>
		While Malaysia was clearly concerned about the pirate set-top box problem, not all countries considered the devices as a particular threat.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Australia, New Zealand and South Korea, for example, reported that they present only a “minor problem” to local broadcasters and rightsholders while Russia and Brunei said there was no problem at all.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		China, on the other hand, said it had insufficient information to determine the scale of the threat.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/sale-of-pirate-streaming-devices-declared-illegal-by-malaysia-ip-high-court-210525/" rel="external nofollow">Sale of Pirate Streaming Devices Declared Illegal By Malaysia IP High Court</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">180</guid><pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2021 22:15:21 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Scammers Use European Union Website to Promote Pirate Streaming Portals</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/scammers-use-european-union-website-to-promote-pirate-streaming-portals-r179/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Scammers Use European Union Website to Promote Pirate Streaming Portals
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		Scammers are using the website of the European Banking Authority to trick people into signing up for dubious pirate streaming subscriptions. The 'hacking' scam, which also affected the Mississippi Department of Public Safety, has gained more popularity after search engines started to downrank regular pirate sites.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In recent years, Google and other search engines have worked hard to <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/googles-new-downranking-hits-pirate-sites-hard-141023/" rel="external nofollow">demote pirate sites</a> in their search results.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In part motivated by complaints from copyright holders, these efforts have started to pay off. Search traffic to pirate sites is <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-site-search-traffic-tanked-following-google-updates-210101/" rel="external nofollow">clearly dropping</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		At the same time, however, the downranking of pirate sites created a new problem. Prospective pirates don’t stop searching for leaked content. This means that search engines have to show something else instead, which isn’t always the best content.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In some cases, small pirate sites are elevated to the top results but scammers are taking advantage of the situation as well. And these scammers are increasingly abusing legitimate sites to do so, finding loopholes to publish pirate scam ads on well-respected domains.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This week we noticed a series of these promotions on the official site of the <a href="https://www.eba.europa.eu/" rel="external nofollow">European Banking Authority</a> (EBA). The EBA is the European Union’s official regulatory agency overseeing the local banking industry. However, its website also promotes scammy pirate sites.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Since regular pirate sites are downranked in search results, the EBA’s domain now appears as the top result for many questionable searches. This includes variations with “<a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aeuropa.eu+123movies+online" rel="external nofollow">123movies online</a>,” as can be seen below.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/army-dead-watch-online.jpg" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="dead google" data-ratio="77.30" style="width: 696px; height: auto;" width="696" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/army-dead-watch-online.jpg"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The scammers abuse the European Union website to upload PDFs that are stuffed with piracy-related terms, hoping to capture as much search traffic as possible. This works well because the EBA website has a good reputation and is not downranked in search results.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		There are several PDFs circulating which mostly target new films such as ‘Army of the Dead’ and Godzilla vs. Kong. We’ve also seen promotions for films that are not yet available on pirate sites in the ‘HD quality’ that’s promised, including Fast and Furious 9.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/eu-army-pdf.jpg" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="eu arky" data-ratio="93.59" style="width: 577px; height: auto;" width="577" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/eu-army-pdf.jpg"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		All PDFs link visitors to scammy streaming portals where people have to pay a subscription to gain access. Needless to say, this isn’t a smart idea. These portals are illegal and probably don’t even provide access to the advertised films. They will gladly accept your credit card, however.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The scammers appear to have found a backdoor into the EBA site, which allows them to upload files. Some of these PDFs have been removed over the past few days, but new ones keep appearing.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<img alt="eba pirate scam" data-ratio="79.26" style="width: 680px; height: auto;" width="680" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/europe-new.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The European Banking Authority is not the only reputable organization to be compromised by these scammers. The same advertisements appear on many other legitimate sites as well, including <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/watchonlinedps.jpg" rel="external nofollow">Mississippi’s Department of Public Safety</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		TorrentFreak contacted both organizations to alert them about the scammy content appearing on their sites. At the time of publication, we have yet to hear back.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/scammers-use-european-union-website-to-promote-pirate-streaming-210525/" rel="external nofollow">Scammers Use European Union Website to Promote Pirate Streaming Portals</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">179</guid><pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2021 22:13:04 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week &#x2013; May 24, 2021</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/top-10-most-pirated-movies-of-the-week-%E2%80%93-may-24-2021-r147/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – May 24, 2021
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		Every week we take a close look at the most pirated movies on torrent sites. What are pirates downloading? 'Army Of The Dead' tops the chart, followed by ‘Those Who Wish Me Dead'. 'Mortal Kombat' completes the top three.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<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 two new entries in the list. “Mortal Combat” is the most downloaded title. The film can be watched online legally on HBO Max, but that’s not yet available around the world.
	</p>

	<h2>
		The most torrented movies for the week ending on May 24 are:
	</h2>

	<table>
		<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>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					1
				</td>
				<td>
					(…)
				</td>
				<td>
					Army Of The Dead
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993840/" rel="external nofollow">6.0</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI1JGPhYBS8" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					2
				</td>
				<td>
					(4)
				</td>
				<td>
					Those Who Wish Me Dead
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3215824/" rel="external nofollow">6.1</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV6VNNjBkcE" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					3
				</td>
				<td>
					(1)
				</td>
				<td>
					Mortal Kombat
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0293429/" rel="external nofollow">6.4</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BQPKD7eozY" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					4
				</td>
				<td>
					(3)
				</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>
			<tr>
				<td>
					5
				</td>
				<td>
					(2)
				</td>
				<td>
					Nobody
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7888964/" rel="external nofollow">7.5</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZti8QKBWPo" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					6
				</td>
				<td>
					(6)
				</td>
				<td>
					Zack Snyder’s Justice League
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12361974/" rel="external nofollow">8.4</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM-Bja2Gy04" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					7
				</td>
				<td>
					(5)
				</td>
				<td>
					Tom Clancy’s Without Remorse
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499097/" rel="external nofollow">5.8</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-rw2cxFVLg" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					8
				</td>
				<td>
					(7)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Woman in The Window
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6111574/" rel="external nofollow">5.8</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_0GJg_Jnlo" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					9
				</td>
				<td>
					(back)
				</td>
				<td>
					Raya And The Last Dragon
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5109280" rel="external nofollow">7.4</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VIZ89FEjYI" rel="external nofollow">trailer</a>
				</td>
			</tr>
			<tr>
				<td>
					10
				</td>
				<td>
					(8)
				</td>
				<td>
					The Marksman
				</td>
				<td>
					<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6902332/" rel="external nofollow">5.6</a> / <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEBPNi4bEbc" 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/tI1JGPhYBS8?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 – 05/24/2021</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">147</guid><pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2021 19:27:14 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Court Orders WhatsApp to Suspend Users Sharing Pirated Movie</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/court-orders-whatsapp-to-suspend-users-sharing-pirated-movie-r146/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Court Orders WhatsApp to Suspend Users Sharing Pirated Movie
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		The High Court in Delhi has handed down an interesting order aimed at preventing piracy of the new action movie 'Radhe'. Following an application from Zee Entertainment and parallel criminal referrals, a judge has ordered WhatsApp to suspend allegedly infringing user accounts and take similar action against all other accounts subsequently reported for piracy.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Radhe: Your Most Wanted Bhai’ is a new action film directed by Prabhu Deva. Originally scheduled for a May 2020 release, like many others it was delayed due to the coronavirus pandemic.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With no clear end to the virus in sight, the decision was made to release ‘Radhe’ in India via premium VOD on Zee Plex and digitally through ZEE5 on May 13, 2021. It was immediately pirated.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Last week, Zee Entertainment Enterprises revealed that it had found copies of the movie being circulated online, including via WhatsApp and Telegram.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Officials are actively tracking down phone numbers involved in the act of piracy and taking required legal action,” the Zee statement read.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Zee has also appealed to the public at large, seeking their support in bringing an end to piracy, not just for the film ‘Radhe’, but for any kind of content.”
	</p>

	<h2>
		Zee Entertainment Files Complaints
	</h2>

	<p>
		Describing piracy as bad for everyone, Zee reported that it had filed official complaints with cybercrime police in India, one with the Inspector General of Police at the Maharashtra Cyber Digital Crime Unit and another with the Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Region, Cyber Cell.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		‘Radhe’ producer Salman Khan also took to Twitter, complaining that despite offering the movie at a reasonable price, it was still being distributed illegally online using various platforms.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Cyber Cell is taking action against all these illegal pirated sites,” he <a href="https://twitter.com/BeingSalmanKhan/status/1393634137144131586/photo/1" rel="external nofollow">wrote</a>. “Please don’t participate in piracy or the cyber cell will take action against you as well.”
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Zee Entertainment also took its battle to the Delhi High Court, filing an application for interim relief against a number of defendants who either distributed the movie online, including via social media platforms, or helped to facilitate such transfers by providing the means to do so.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		One of those defendants is WhatsApp. According to Zee, the pay-TV platform reached out to the Facebook-owned company and provided the telephone numbers of at least eight individuals who allegedly viewed, downloaded and stored the movie on the platform without permission. No response was received.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Citing the terms and conditions of WhatsApp, Zee’s counsel told the court copyright infringement is expressly forbidden and the platform has policies in place to disable and/or terminate infringing accounts. On the basis that the eight users are clearly infringing, WhatsApp should take action against their accounts, Zee argued.
	</p>

	<h2>
		High Court Judge Finds In Favor of Zee
	</h2>

	<p>
		In an order handed down by Justice Sanjeev Narula, the Court found that Zee had established a prima facie case in its favor. The Judge awarded an ex-parte injunction against the eight defendants restraining them from storing, reproducing, communicating, disseminating, circulating, copying, selling, or offering for sale any copies of the film, via WhatsApp or any other means.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Turning to WhatsApp itself, Justice Narula directed the company to suspend the accounts of two of the yet-to-be personally identified users. It also told WhatsApp that when provided with evidence showing that any other WhatsApp user is infringing Zee’s copyrights by selling copies of its film, WhatsApp must suspend the corresponding accounts within 24 hours.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Furthermore, three service providers were also ordered to disclose the contact details of the eight alleged movie pirates to Zee, within 72 hours. The case is scheduled to resume on June 1, 2021.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		At this stage it’s unknown whether piracy will be blamed for any future commercial disappointments related to ‘Radhe’. However, with a current rating of just 1.8 following 151,000 reviews on the Internet Movie Database, it’s clear that more fundamental barriers to success are already baked into the product.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Justice Narula’s order can be viewed <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/CS-COMM-231-2021-Zee-Entertainment-v-Tejendra-Modi-Order-210520.pdf" rel="external nofollow">here</a> (pdf)
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/court-orders-whatsapp-to-suspend-users-sharing-pirated-movie-210524/" rel="external nofollow">Court Orders WhatsApp to Suspend Users Sharing Pirated Movie</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">146</guid><pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2021 19:24:43 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>German &#x2018;Upload Filter&#x2019; Law Sets Standards to Prevent Overblocking</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/german-%E2%80%98upload-filter%E2%80%99-law-sets-standards-to-prevent-overblocking-r145/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	German ‘Upload Filter’ Law Sets Standards to Prevent Overblocking
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		The German Parliament has adopted new legislation that will implement the EU Copyright Directive into local law. This includes the controversial Article 17 that, according to some, would lead to overbroad upload filters. To deal with these concerns, the German law prevents 'minor' and limited use of copyrighted content from being blocked automatically.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In 2019 the European Parliament <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/eu-parliament-adopts-copyright-directive-including-article-13-190326/" rel="external nofollow">adopted the new Copyright Directive</a> that aims to modernize how copyright is protected in the online environment.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		After the directive passed, individual EU member states began working on implementing the text into local law, which has to be finalized next month
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		This includes the controversial Article 17, which requires online services to license content from copyright holders. If that is not possible, these companies should ensure that infringing content is taken down and not re-uploaded to their services.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Many opponents fear that this language will effectively lead to broad ‘upload filters’ that will take down more content than needed. This worry has been reiterated <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/eu-academics-publish-recommendations-to-limit-negative-impact-of-article-17-191113/" rel="external nofollow">reiterated by several experts</a> over the years.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Germany Tames Upload Filters
	</h2>

	<p>
		One option to limit the damage would be to implement the requirement into local law with several precautions. This is the direction Germany being taken by Germany.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Last week, the German Parliament adopted <a href="https://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/298/1929894.pdf" rel="external nofollow">its version of Article 17</a>, which includes various measures to prevent over-blocking. Once signed into law, online services will have to ensure that copyright-infringing content is not re-uploaded, but not without keeping potential legal uses in mind.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As pointed out by <a href="https://www.communia-association.org/2021/05/20/german-article-17-implementation-law-sets-the-standard-for-protecting-user-rights-against-overblocking/" rel="external nofollow">Communia</a>, Germany introduced the concept that some uploads can be “presumably authorized by law.” This refers to uploads that qualify for a combination of fair use elements.
	</p>

	<h2>
		‘Presumably Authorized’
	</h2>

	<p>
		These “presumably authorized” uploads should not be blocked automatically if they qualify for all of the selection criteria below.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		– The upload should use less than 50% of the original copyrighted work<br>
		– The upload must use the copyrighted work in combination with other content<br>
		– The use should be ‘minor’
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The term ‘minor’ applies to non-commercial uses of fewer than 15 seconds of video or audio, 160 characters of text, or 125 kB of graphics. If the use of a copyrighted work exceeds these ‘minor’ thresholds, it can still qualify as ‘presumably authorized’ when the uploader flags it as an exception.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Rightsholders Can Object
	</h2>

	<p>
		If all conditions are met an upload can’t be blocked automatically. However, copyright holders still have the right to object and request a further review from the online platform.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Additionally, the “presumably authorized” classification doesn’t apply to content that’s still being broadcasted. This is in part to protect sports rights holders, who don’t want short clips of live events being made available, while a game is ongoing.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The German Article 17 proposal has yet to be signed into law by the President but that is expected to happen soon. It will then become the first Article 17 implementation with over-blocking protections built-in, which could set an example for other EU countries that have yet to implement the text into law.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/german-upload-filter-proposal-sets-standards-to-prevent-overblocking-210524/" rel="external nofollow">German ‘Upload Filter’ Law Sets Standards to Prevent Overblocking</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">145</guid><pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2021 19:22:29 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Watch Tower Ups Pressure on YouTube & Facebook To Hand Over Infringers’ Details]]></title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/watch-tower-ups-pressure-on-youtube-facebook-to-hand-over-infringers%E2%80%99-details-r128/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Watch Tower Ups Pressure on YouTube &amp; Facebook To Hand Over Infringers’ Details
</h1>

<p>
	 
</p>

<header>
	<p>
		After filing a lawsuit against the creator of the 'DubTown' Lego stop motion series, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, the supervising body and publisher for the Jehovah’s Witness religious group, has yet more alleged infringers in its sights. In addition to targeting more YouTube users, Watch Tower is attempting to find out the identities of people posting its songs to Facebook.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Like any creator of owner of original content, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, the supervising body and publisher for the Jehovah’s Witness religious group, enjoys protections under law to prevent infringement.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		As the owner of various copyright-protected works, including many registered at the US Copyright Office, the group is allowed to send DMCA takedown notices to have content removed from online platforms. As the law requires, platforms like YouTube comply with these requests but it appears that is just not enough for Watch Tower.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Ongoing Campaign to Identify Alleged Infringers
	</h2>

	<p>
		As reported last weekend, an individual who created a series of stop-motion Lego animations <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/watch-tower-copyright-lawsuit-targets-creator-of-dubtown-lego-animations-210514/" rel="external nofollow">is currently being sued</a> by Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. ‘Kevin McFree’ was first targeted in 2018 via a DMCA subpoena but with that legal process stalled, Watch Tower filed a full-blown copyright infringement lawsuit.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		McFree (not his/her real name) is currently proceeding as a John Doe, since the earlier DMCA subpoena failed to uncover the animator’s real identity after Watch Tower met resistance from McFree’s lawyer. However, DMCA subpoenas – which do not necessarily require oversight from a judge – can prove a useful tool in obtaining people’s real names and addresses.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		While this is a problem for alleged copyright infringers in any matter (such as those that involve copyright trolls), in Watch Tower related cases there is a chance that once identified, people who are current members (or have family members still in the church) could face much broader social consequences. As a result, staying anonymous carries additional importance.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Watch Tower Files a New Wave of DMCA Subpoenas
	</h2>

	<p>
		Watch Tower is no stranger to filing for <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/jehovahs-witness-body-uses-dmca-to-subpoena-youtube-for-apostates-identity-200308/" rel="external nofollow">DMCA subpoenas</a> to compel YouTube to hand over the details of alleged infringers, and these can <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/watch-tower-dmca-subpoena-row-settled-after-judge-hands-out-vulgarity-warning-200530/" rel="external nofollow">sometimes get quite messy</a>. This week, however, Watch Tower appears to be increasing the pressure significantly.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In a wave of DMCA subpoenas targeting YouTube and also Facebook, the religious group is hoping to find out the real identities of people who uploaded Jehovah’s Witness content to the platforms. At least as far as the evidence provided reveals, none are serial infringers or mass uploaders.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In all cases, Watch Tower appears to have identified either a single upload on YouTube or Facebook, which were previously tackled by sending DMCA notices to the relevant platforms, targeting the specific content, which was removed.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		All DMCA subpoenas reference a single song titled “With Eyes of Faith” which, interestingly, is <a href="https://www.jw.org/en/library/music-songs/original-songs/with-eyes-of-faith/" rel="external nofollow">publicly avabailble</a> on the JW.org portal for streaming and also free MP3 download, no registration or login required.
	</p>

	<h2>
		YouTube and Facebook Accounts Affected
	</h2>

	<p>
		In the first subpoena application against YouTube, Watch Tower seeks the identity of the person behind the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7Xc_vly1vZTinKXzXBCfOg/about" rel="external nofollow">JW Music account</a>, which currently has no videos listed and has just 116 subscribers. The account was only opened on May 5, 2021, so has had little opportunity to gain any traction.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Watch Tower conducted a good-faith fair use analysis of the infringing posts on the account at issue. This content infringes copyrights held by Watch Tower,” the application reads.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The second application lists the PODEROSOS PELA FÉ (Powerful by Faith) channel which isn’t directly linked but also posted the same song, “With Eyes of Faith”, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxMBa91ag3M" rel="external nofollow">which has since been removed</a>. The application does not state that a fair use analysis has been carried out, instead concluding that the video simply infringes copyright.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center style="text-align: left;">
		<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/jw-dmca-youtube.png" rel="external nofollow"><img alt="JW DMCA YouTube" data-ratio="52.92" style="width: 720px; height: 381px;" width="720" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/jw-dmca-youtube.png"></a>
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The third application, which like the others was filed this week, targets a Facebook user, also posting under the name PODEROSOS PELA FÉ. Since this a widely used Jehovah’s Witness term, it’s unclear whether this is the same user as targeted in the YouTube takedown.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The fourth DMCA subpoena request targets an individual, again on Facebook, operating under the name Adriana Lima. Both stand accused of ‘pirating’ the song “With Eyes of Faith”.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Demands for All Subscriber Information
	</h2>

	<p>
		In all four cases, either YouTube or Facebook are asked to hand over “all identifying information, including subscriber registration information” including their “name(s), address(es), telephone number(s), [and] any electronic mail addresses” associated with the allegedly infringing accounts.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Each application comes with an assurance that Watch Tower will only use the subpoenas (if they are granted) to obtain the identity of an alleged infringer or infringers, and that such information will only be used for the purpose of protecting Watch Tower’s rights under the Copyright Act. The big question, however, is what that will entail.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Since the content has already been subjected to takedown requests, preventing ongoing infringement doesn’t appear to be a key issue. However, since Watch Tower wants to personally identify the people in question, it is possible that it will seek to communicate with them directly. What shape those conversations will take is unknown but there could be additional consequences if the group can link the alleged infringers or their family members directly to the church.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		And of course, as the lawsuit against Kevin McFree shows, there is also the possibility of a full-blown copyright infringement lawsuit, which at least carries the potential for up to $150,000 in statutory damages, if guilt is proven. Either way, if the people can be identified there is no good outcome.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The DMCA subpoena applications and supporting documents can be found below:
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		1. YouTube (Subpoena 1) (<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/7-21-mc-00446-Watch-Tower-DMCA-subpoena-YouTube-210518.pdf" rel="external nofollow">1</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/7-21-mc-00446-Watch-Tower-DMCA-subpoena-YouTube-Takedown-210518.pdf" rel="external nofollow">2</a>)<br>
		2. YouTube (Subpoena 2) (<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/7-21-mc-00451-Watch-Tower-DMCA-subpoena-Google-YouTube-210519.pdf" rel="external nofollow">1</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/7-21-mc-00451-Watch-Tower-DMCA-takedown-Google-YouTube-210519.pdf" rel="external nofollow">2</a>)<br>
		3. Facebook (Subpoena 1) (<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/7-21-mc-00450-Watch-Tower-DMCA-subpoena-Facebook-210519.pdf" rel="external nofollow">1</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/7-21-mc-00450-Watch-Tower-DMCA-takedown-Facebook-210519.pdf" rel="external nofollow">2</a>)<br>
		4. Facebook (Subpoena 2) (<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/7-21-mc-00447-Watch-Tower-v-Facebook-DMCA-subpoena-210519.pdf" rel="external nofollow">1</a>,<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/images/7-21-mc-00447-Watch-Tower-v-Facebook-Facebook-Takedown-210519.pdf" rel="external nofollow">2</a>)
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/watch-tower-ups-pressure-on-youtube-facebook-to-hand-over-infringers-details-210523/" rel="external nofollow">Watch Tower Ups Pressure on YouTube &amp; Facebook To Hand Over Infringers’ Details</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">128</guid><pubDate>Sun, 23 May 2021 20:20:56 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[BREIN Obtains Injunction Against Admin & Uploaders of Pirate Site]]></title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/brein-obtains-injunction-against-admin-uploaders-of-pirate-site-r94/</link><description><![CDATA[<header>
	<p>
		Anti-piracy group BREIN has shut down Discoverthisplace, a pirate site offering tens of thousands of movies, TV shows, music albums, eBooks and magazines. Homing in on an administrator and two major uploaders, BREIN went to court and convinced a judge that the matter was significantly urgent to warrant an ex parte injunction. Following service from a bailiff, the site was taken offline.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		Acting on behalf of a wide range of copyright holders and entertainment companies, BREIN is the most prominent anti-piracy group in the Netherlands.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Over the years BREIN has shut down thousands of platforms, the majority of which aren’t detailed outside its <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/brein-shut-down-564-pirate-sites-blocked-258-pirate-bay-proxies-in-2019-200602/" rel="external nofollow">annual report</a>. On occasion, however, BREIN highlights the processes that led to a specific shutdown and today it details the demise of pirate platform Discoverthisplace.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Strict Admissions Policy No Barrier To BREIN
	</h2>

	<p>
		According to BREIN, Discovethisplace provided links to tens of thousands of films, TV shows, music, eBooks, comics and magazines. The pirated content was stored on cyberlockers, with around 3,800 audiovisual files, 3,300 music files and 24,000 pieces of literary content uploaded by the administrator of the site and two major uploaders.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		BREIN said that the site made efforts to stay under its radar by maintaining a strict admissions policy but that doesn’t appear to have presented a barrier for long. The anti-piracy group said that it discovered that some users were paying five euros per month to gain swift access to the latest files, with cyberlockers paying the uploaders of the most popular files.
	</p>

	<h2>
		BREIN Goes To Court
	</h2>

	<p>
		In order to pressure Discoverthisplace to shut down, BREIN went to court in the Netherlands back in February. Documents filed with the District Court of the Hague are redacted but it appears that at some point, the anti-piracy group did manage to identify the three people on its radar.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		BREIN told the Court that it had been researching Discoverthisplace in recent weeks and had established that the three individuals were not only site managers but also large-scale distributors of copyrighted content, otherwise made available on legal platforms such as Netflix and Spotify. BREIN said this illegal distribution breaches its clients’ rights, including those of the Motion Picture Association and FPN (Filmproducenten Nederland).
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In respect of the first respondent, BREIN told the Court that he or she is not only the creator of Discoverthisplace but also uploads films on a daily basis, amounting to thousands of titles in recent months. These include movies such as Wonder Woman 1984 and Trolls, made available on the site in breach of BREIN’s clients’ rights.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Respondent two was described as a person who had uploaded thousands of music albums and magazines in recent months and respondent three was said to be uploading pirated eBooks on a daily basis.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		None of the respondents has permission to distribute the content in question, BREIN explained, and by posting the links to the site, this constitutes an illegal communication to the public. As a result, BREIN said its clients were suffering financial damage and were likely to continue doing so, if the Court did not restrain the three individuals from similar future conduct.
	</p>

	<h2>
		BREIN Sought Remedy Without Involving the Respondents
	</h2>

	<p>
		BREIN told the Court that it had not summoned the respondents so any defense to its allegations were unknown. However, given that commercial-scale infringement was underway on Discoverthisplace, the awarding of an ex parte injunction would have a much greater effect on compliance than correspondence from BREIN.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In addition, it would prevent the trio from continuing their activities through another website where it would be more difficult for BREIN to track them down.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The Court was convinced that urgent action was required without the respondents being present. The judge <a href="https://www.ie-forum.nl/artikelen/forum-met-auteursrechtelijk-beschermde-werken-moet-inbreuk-staken" rel="external nofollow">handed down an order</a> requiring the respondents to cease-and-desist on pain of a 2,400 euros penalty for every day (or part thereof) that they are in breach of the court’s orders, up to a maximum of 50,000 euros. This had the desired effect.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“After service by the bailiff, the site was immediately taken offline. Those involved have pledged to cease the infringement and have reached a settlement of 20,000 euros,” BREIN <a href="https://stichtingbrein.nl/illegale-site-met-leden-ontdekt-en-opgerold/" rel="external nofollow">reports</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		<strong><a href="https://torrentfreak.com/brein-obtains-injunction-against-admin-uploaders-of-pirate-site-210522/" rel="external nofollow">Source</a></strong>
	</p>
</div>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">94</guid><pubDate>Sat, 22 May 2021 11:44:15 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Facebook and Instagram Reveal How Much &#x2018;Pirated&#x2019; Content is Removed Proactively</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/facebook-and-instagram-reveal-how-much-%E2%80%98pirated%E2%80%99-content-is-removed-proactively-r90/</link><description><![CDATA[<header>
	<p>
		Facebook and Instagram have published new data that reveal for the first time how many pieces of 'pirated' content are removed proactively. The new and updated transparency report shows that these automated removals run in the millions, exceeding the number of DMCA takedown notices copyright holders send.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		Similar to other social media platforms, Facebook and Instagram have to battle a constant stream of unauthorized copyright material.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		To facilitate this process, parent company Facebook has rolled out several anti-piracy initiatives in recent years.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Automated Piracy Takedowns
	</h2>

	<p>
		Both Facebook and Instagram use a “Rights Manager” tool that automatically detects infringing material and allows owners to take down or monetize this content. In addition, Facebook also uses the third-party service Audible Magic to spot and remove pirated music tracks.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		With these proactive tools, the social media giants hope to help copyright holders protect their rights. At the same time, it also keeps the takedown notice volume low, which saves resources.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Thus far not much information has been made available to show the scope of these proactive removal tools. This is also true for other platforms, including YouTube’s Content-ID system, which we <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/youtubes-takedown-numbers-are-a-mystery-but-content-id-is-a-cash-cow-210516/" rel="external nofollow">highlighted in an article</a> last week.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		In Facebook’s latest transparency report this changes. For the first time, the company shares detailed data on its provocative takedown measures, that take place without intervention from copyright holders.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Facebook Reveals Proactive Takedown Stats
	</h2>

	<p>
		The reported data cover the second half of 2020 and Facebook writes that, in the period, “the vast majority” of potential copyright-infringing content was removed proactively. This amounts to millions of automated removals.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“On Facebook, 77.9% of all copyright-related removals were done proactively, accounting for 9,822,070 pieces of content. On Instagram, 59% of all copyright-related removals were done proactively, accounting for 2,170,529 pieces of content,” the company writes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		These numbers include a variety of items, including posts, photos, videos, and advertisements. On Facebook, pages, groups, and events are counted as well.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Although there are currently more proactive takedowns on Facebook – a little over 1.5 million per month – Instagram is starting to catch up. In July 2020 there were 255,000 proactive removals, which had increased to 447,000 in December the same year.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<center>
		<img alt="insta" data-ratio="75.10" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/instaproactive.jpg">
	</center>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Although most pirated content is removed automatically by Facebook and Instagram, both companies still receive plenty of regular takedown requests from rightsholders.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Traditional Takedown Notices
	</h2>

	<p>
		During the second half of 2020, Facebook removed 2.8 million pieces of pirated content. Instagram, for its part, took down 1.5 million copyright infringing items. For both platforms, this is an increase compared to the first half of the year.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Facebook realizes that it plays an important role in combating piracy and that robust and proactive enforcement systems will help to guarantee the best results.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Improving Automated Systems
	</h2>

	<p>
		In recent years the company has made several improvements to its anti-piracy systems. These can detect copyrighted media but are also able to spot links to pirate sites and advertisements for pirate streaming devices.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“To better detect and remove potential counterfeiting and piracy, we use a combination of machine learning, suspicious signals such as prior IP violations and keywords commonly associated with infringement, as well as direct insights from rights holders, among other things,” Facebook notes.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“Similarly, we’ve also taken steps to proactively stop the spread of links dedicated to copyright infringement and to remove content related to devices that facilitate illicit streaming of copyrighted material”.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		More information on Facebook’s updated transparency report, which includes all the data referenced above, is available on the <a href="https://transparency.fb.com/data/intellectual-property" rel="external nofollow">official website</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		<strong><a href="https://torrentfreak.com/facebook-and-instagram-reveal-how-much-pirated-content-is-removed-proactively-210521/" rel="external nofollow">Source</a></strong>
	</p>
</div>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">90</guid><pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2021 22:29:18 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Njalla Takes &#x2018;Pirate&#x2019; Site Domains Offline Following Legal Pressure</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/njalla-takes-%E2%80%98pirate%E2%80%99-site-domains-offline-following-legal-pressure-r53/</link><description><![CDATA[<p>
	Njalla is a privacy-focused domain name service founded by Pirate Bay founder Peter Sunde. The company helps to keep domain name owners anonymous and is generally skeptical of legal threats. Over the past weeks, however, Njalla found itself in a position where it had to take several accused 'pirate' sites offline, to keep other customers safe.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Four years ago Pirate Bay founder Peter Sunde helped to launch <a href="https://njal.la/" rel="external nofollow">Njalla</a>, a privacy-oriented domain registration startup.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	The company offers a proxy for domain name registrars who don’t want their personal details listed in Whois records. As such, it’s effectively operating as a privacy shield.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Njalla is needed because we’re going the wrong way in society regarding people’s right to be anonymous. With social media pressuring us to be less anonymous and services being centralized, we need alternatives,” Sunde <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-founder-launches-anonymous-domain-registration-service-170419/" rel="external nofollow">told us</a> at the time.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	This approach has attracted thousands of customers who, for various reasons, choose to hide their identities. While these website operators are happy, copyright holders have criticized Njalla for protecting pirate sites.
</p>

<h2>
	Copyright Holders are Not Happy
</h2>

<p>
	Last fall the <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-and-mpa-want-domain-registries-and-njalla-on-us-piracy-watchlist-201110/" rel="external nofollow">RIAA and MPAA reported</a> the company to the US Trade Representative, characterizing it as a notorious market that aids pirate sites.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	While <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-and-mpa-want-domain-registries-and-njalla-on-us-piracy-watchlist-201110/" rel="external nofollow">Njalla disagrees</a> with this characterization, the company is known for digging its heels in the sand when it comes to legal pressure. Njalla complies with ‘appropriate’ court orders but it has also <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-founders-domain-service-mocks-ny-times-legal-threats-180125/" rel="external nofollow">brushed off</a> several legal complaints and requests, even <a href="https://njal.la/blog/iceicebaby/" rel="external nofollow">from the US Government</a>. Recently, however, the pressure became too large for Njalla to ignore.
</p>

<h2>
	‘Pirate’ Domains Go Offline
</h2>

<p>
	Over the past week, TorrentFreak noticed that several domain names registered by Njalla had become unavailable. This includes 1337x.is, Flixtor.is, Getpopcorntime.is, and stream2watch.is. The domains were updated to Njalla-owned nameservers and simply stopped resolving.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<center>
	Ceci n’est pas
</center>

<p>
	 
</p>

<center>
	<img alt="njalla dns" data-ratio="45.43" src="https://torrentfreak.com/images/njalla-down.jpg">
</center>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	As it turns out, Njalla took this action in response to legal pressure from Iceland. Local copyright holders went after the .is domain registry (ISNIC), which received several abuse complaints and legal threats over Njalla-registered domains.
</p>

<h2>
	Take Action Or Lose All .is Domains
</h2>

<p>
	ISNIC then referred the matter to Njalla, urging the company to take action. If not, Iceland’s registry would have the right to suspend Njalla’s NIC-handle, and all domains connected to it.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	A Njalla spokesperson informs TorrentFreak the company’s hand was forced, and it saw no other option than to take the domains ‘offline’. If Njalla had decided to ignore the request, all other .is domains under their control would have been at risk. That includes the domains of many other customers.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	In an ideal situation, Njalla would fight this type of pressure tooth and nail but in this case, it would’ve done more harm than good.
</p>

<h2>
	Flixtor Understands
</h2>

<p>
	At the time of writing, all of the affected sites using .is domains have continued doing business under new domains. The operator of Flixtor told us that he is happy with how Njalla handled the matter, as there was clearly no other option.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	The only downside for Flixtor is a significant loss of Google traffic. As a result, many users now end up at fake sites, filled with malware and phishing scams.
</p>

<h2>
	ISNIC Takes Stand Against Abuse
</h2>

<p>
	When we asked ISNIC about the matter, the registry said that it has seen a rise in abuse complaints, which it has to address properly and swiftly.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	“An increasing number of what is called ‘abusive domain registrations’ is a real problem/concern for all serious domain name Registries. For us at ISNIC, the integrity of the .is domain as such plays an important role in our day-to-day work,” ISNIC CEO Jens Pétur Jensen says.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	ISNIC confirmed that if Njalla had not have taken action, it would’ve suspended the company’s NIC-handle based on Article 12 of the <a href="https://www.isnic.is/en/domain/rules" rel="external nofollow">.is domain rules</a>. As mentioned earlier, that would mean that all Njalla-registered .is domains would’ve gone offline.
</p>

<h2>
	Pressure
</h2>

<p>
	After talking to various parties it is clear that a lot of legal pressure is being applied in the background. Copyright holders are pressuring ISNIC which in turn has been pressuring Njalla.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Ultimately, copyright holders are trying to find out the identities of those who operate these alleged pirate domains. However, since Njalla is the official owner according to Whois data, ISNIC can’t help with this. Unless they change the rules to prohibit proxy registrations, perhaps.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	According to Njalla, there is also an ongoing court case in Iceland to find out who the end-users of these domains are, so it’s likely that we haven’t heard the last of this.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<strong><a href="https://torrentfreak.com/njalla-takes-pirate-site-domains-offline-following-legal-pressure-210521/" rel="external nofollow">Source</a></strong>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">53</guid><pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2021 10:44:02 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[When Aussies Face a Blocked Pirate Site, 59% Simply Give Up & Don’t Try Legal Options]]></title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/when-aussies-face-a-blocked-pirate-site-59-simply-give-up-don%E2%80%99t-try-legal-options-r52/</link><description><![CDATA[<p>
	According to research commissioned by the Australian government, 59% of people faced with a blocked pirate site are more likely to simply give up than try other means to get content. However, VPN knowledge is already entrenched in Australian society, with almost half of Internet users aware of what they can do and what advantages they can bring to the table.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	After years of work and changes to the law, in 2016 an Australian court agreed to <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-and-other-pirate-sites-will-be-blocked-in-australia-161215/" rel="external nofollow">order the blocking</a> of several pirate sites headed up by the infamous The Pirate Bay.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Since then, movie companies including Roadshow Films, Foxtel, Disney, Paramount, Columbia, and 20th Century Fox have returned to court many times to have more and more sites blocked. The strategy is also being deployed by the music industry, targeting regular streaming and download platforms as well as <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/aussie-music-industry-wins-first-ever-stream-ripping-site-blocks-190516/" rel="external nofollow">stream-ripping portals</a>.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	There has always been a question mark over how consumers will respond to blocking. The entertainment industries believe that it can only lead to more sales but hardcore pirates are less convinced. A new survey published by the Australian government now sheds a little more light on what happens when people are presented with “access denied” messages.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<h2>
	2020 Consumer Copyright Infringement Survey
</h2>

<p>
	Since 2015, the Australian Government Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications has commissioned annual surveys into users’ Internet activities. This includes the consumption of music, movies and TV shows, video games, and more recently, live sport. The latest Consumer Copyright Infringement Survey 2020 also provides detail on what happens when blocks are encountered.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	The survey covers the habits of 2,421 Australian Internet users (aged 12+) in the three months preceding June 2020. During the period, the vast majority (76%) reported that no blocked sites had been encountered while 12% were unsure. The remaining 12% said that they had indeed faced ISP blocks and responded in various ways.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<h2>
	Responses to Facing an ISP Block of a Pirate Site
</h2>

<p>
	Interestingly, 59% said that rather than take any other action, they simply gave up trying to access the site/content they were looking for. Just over one in five (21%) said they sought alternative lawful access to content while 6% and 2% admitted to looking for free and paid pirate content respectively. Around 12% admitted to taking action to bypass the blockade.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	However, when seeking to evade a website block, 47% of bypass-inclined users said they turned to VPNs, with just over a third (34%) turning to a proxy website. Just over a quarter (27%) said they utilized a search engine to find an alternative site, with 14% changing the network proxy in their browsers. The responses add up to more than 100% since some users utilized multiple techniques.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Those who had not faced a block in the previous three months were asked what they would do if they encountered one. A significant number (71%) said they would simply give up and 20% reported they would seek lawful access. Just 7% said they would attempt to bypass the block, with the majority (53%) suggesting search engines as a solution and 31% indicating they would use a VPN.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	When comparing those who had sourced unlawful content in the previous three months to those who hadn’t, infringers were more likely than non-infringers to have encountered a block (21% versus 8%). However, infringers were much less likely to give up than their non-pirating counterparts (47% versus 71%). Interestingly, pirates were much less likely to turn to search engines to find alternatives to bypass blockades (44%) versus 68% of non-infringers.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<h2>
	50% of Aussies Know What a VPN Service Can Do
</h2>

<p>
	That half of all respondents are aware of VPNs is interesting in itself but the finding that almost a quarter (23%) have actively used one is perhaps more so. Overall, however, just 12% of respondents said they were currently using a VPN but the majority were not using them for infringing purposes.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Almost half (48%) said they were using a VPN to add security to their communications and Internet browsing. Over a third (37%) said they were using them for work. Given the numbers, however, it’s clear that many users have multiple uses for their VPN.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	More than a quarter (27%) said they use VPNs to access content from other countries that is unavailable in Australia or otherwise geo-blocked. A similar number (26%) said they use their VPN to access content for free while just under one in ten (9%) said they utilize one to gain access to content for a reasonable price.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Again, there are differences between consumers who pirate content and those who don’t. Those who had obtained content unlawfully in the previous three months (infringers) were more likely to have ever used a VPN service (40% versus 22%) and more likely to be using a VPN service now (20% versus 11%).
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	That more people overall are using VPNs to access paid legal content from overseas (or to obtain content at fairer prices) than pirating is a reasonably clear signal to entertainment companies that problems still exist and need to be addressed.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Indeed, if this gap in supply had been addressed earlier, it’s certainly possible that much less than half of all respondents would have been aware of VPNs in the first place and might not be using them today in other scenarios, including bypassing pirate site blockades.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Published by the Australian government, the full report can be found <a href="https://www.communications.gov.au/documents/2020-consumer-copyright-infringement-survey" rel="external nofollow">here</a>
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<strong><a href="https://torrentfreak.com/when-aussies-face-a-blocked-pirate-site-59-simply-give-up-dont-try-legal-options-210520/" rel="external nofollow">Source</a></strong>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">52</guid><pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2021 10:13:10 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Twitch suspends advertising on popular hot tub streamer's channel</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/twitch-suspends-advertising-on-popular-hot-tub-streamers-channel-r46/</link><description><![CDATA[<p id="why-it-matters">
	<strong><span style="color:#3498db;">A hot potato:</span></strong> It appears Twitch has decided that hot tub meta streams are just a bit too steamy for the platform. One of its famous female stars and someone who has embraced the phenomenon of streaming in a bikini, Kaitlyn “Amouranth” Siragusa, can no longer run ads on her videos—despite not technically breaking any of Twitch's rules.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Hot tub streams, which started gaining popularity last year, really took off in March, leading to people declaring them the new "meta." Many of these broadcasts follow much of the same formula as regular streams—playing games, talking to viewers, and so on—except the presenters are in hot tubs wearing swimsuits.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Siragusa is well known for her hot tub streams. With 20,000 subscribers, she's currently ranked the 22nd <a href="https://twitchtracker.com/subscribers" rel="external nofollow">most popular streamer</a> on Twitch. But her success hasn't come without controversy. Much like those female streamers that face criticism over their revealing costumes, streaming from a hot tub attracts plenty of detractors who claim presenters are using their bodies to attract views and subs. Felix' xQc' Lengyel, Twitch's second most popular streamer, branded it "pathetic."
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<div class="ipsEmbeddedOther" contenteditable="false">
	<iframe __idm_frm__="50" __idm_id__="667512833" allowfullscreen="" class="ipsEmbed_finishedLoading" data-controller="core.front.core.autosizeiframe" data-embedid="embed5760604675" scrolling="no" src="https://nsaneforums.com/index.php?app=core&amp;module=system&amp;controller=embed&amp;url=https://twitter.com/xQc/status/1384097608684109828?ref_src=twsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1384097608684109828%257Ctwgr%255E%257Ctwcon%255Es1_c10%26ref_url=https://www.techspot.com/news/89735-twitch-suspends-advertising-top-hot-tub-streamer-channel.html" style="overflow: hidden; height: 257px;"></iframe>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Twitch does allow streamers to appear on camera in their swimsuits if the context (i.e. in a hot tub) allows, but the Amazon-owned company said it was "monitoring" the situation. Now, it appears to have made a decision.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<div class="ipsEmbeddedOther" contenteditable="false">
	<iframe __idm_frm__="51" __idm_id__="667512834" allowfullscreen="" class="ipsEmbed_finishedLoading" data-controller="core.front.core.autosizeiframe" data-embedid="embed5072226067" scrolling="no" src="https://nsaneforums.com/index.php?app=core&amp;module=system&amp;controller=embed&amp;url=https://twitter.com/Amouranth/status/1394699454654124033?ref_src=twsrc%255Etfw%257Ctwcamp%255Etweetembed%257Ctwterm%255E1394699454654124033%257Ctwgr%255E%257Ctwcon%255Es1_c10%26ref_url=https://www.techspot.com/news/89735-twitch-suspends-advertising-top-hot-tub-streamer-channel.html" style="overflow: hidden; height: 438px;"></iframe>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	"Yesterday I was informed that Twitch has indefinitely suspended advertising on my channel," Siragusa tweeted. "Twitch didn't reach out in any way whatsoever. I had to initiate the conversation after noticing, without any prior warning, all the ads revenue had disappeared from my channel analytics."
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	Siragusa believes her demonetization is due to hot tub streams being "not advertiser friendly."
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	"Many people complain about [Twitch's terms of service] being 'unclear,' but at least there's something to go by," she wrote. "There is no known policy for what results in a streamer being put on this blacklist. With characteristic opacity, the only thing Twitch made clear is that it is unclear whether or when my account can be reinstated."
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://kotaku.com/twitch-takes-away-most-popular-hot-tub-streamers-abilit-1846919420" rel="external nofollow">Kotaku</a> notes that Siragusa makes money from Instagram, OnlyFans, YouTube, and brand sponsors, among others, but she said that some other streamers, and not just those in hot tubs, who rely on Twitch revenue could suffer if the company keeps clamping down content it deems inappropriate.
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<strong><a href="https://www.techspot.com/news/89735-twitch-suspends-advertising-top-hot-tub-streamer-channel.html" rel="external nofollow">Source</a></strong>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">46</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2021 23:41:41 +0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Member of Busted Scene Piracy Group SPARKS Avoids Prison Sentence</title><link>https://nsaneforums.com/news/file-sharing-news/member-of-busted-scene-piracy-group-sparks-avoids-prison-sentence-r39/</link><description><![CDATA[<h1>
	Member of Busted Scene Piracy Group SPARKS Avoids Prison Sentence
</h1>

<header>
	<p>
		One of the key members of Scene piracy group SPARKS has been sentenced to 27 months supervised release. Jonatan Correa, who previously admitted being part of the notorious Scene group, received a relatively mild sentence due to his limited involvement and cooperative stance. In addition to serving jail time, Correa was also ordered to pay $54,000 in damages to the Motion Picture Association.
	</p>
</header>

<div>
	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		For several decades, The Scene has been the main source of all pirated content made available on the Internet.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Technically, release groups operate in a closed ecosystem, but the reality is different. The vast majority of the files published on private Scene servers eventually find their way to public pirate sites.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Feds Bust SPARKS Group
	</h2>

	<p>
		The secretive nature of the Scene has been a major challenge for law enforcement but last summer the US Department of Justice had a <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/sparks-piracy-busts-facts-rumors-fear-point-to-something-huge-200827/" rel="external nofollow">major breakthrough</a>. Following a thorough investigation, three members of the illustrious SPARKS group <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/us-indictments-and-raids-of-piracy-group-members-in-the-scene-throw-top-tier-piracy-world-into-chaos-200826/" rel="external nofollow">were indicted</a>.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		One of the defendants, Kansas resident Jonatan Correa (aka ‘Raid’), immediately confessed. In January he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit copyright infringement, a serious crime punishable by up to five years imprisonment and a hefty fine.
	</p>

	<h2>
		No Prison Sentence
	</h2>

	<p>
		Yesterday, Correa received his sentence from a federal court in New York. After reviewing the positions of the prosecution and defense, US District Court Judge Richard M. Berman sentenced the former Scene member to time served and 27 months of supervised release.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Initially, Judge Berman proposed a three-month prison sentence followed by two years of supervised release. However, defense lawyer David Wikstrom tabled a proposal for Correa to serve the first three months in a Community Confinement facility instead.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		The fact that Correa owns a business that employs dozens of people was the main reason for the defense to request detainment in a Community Confinement facility. This will allow the former Scene member to continue working while being in custody.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Judge Berman further noted that the purpose of the supervised release it to integrate Mr. Correa back into society. If it is shown that this goes well, the court is happy to grant an early termination.
	</p>

	<h2>
		Substantially Lower Sentence
	</h2>

	<p>
		The sentence is substantially lower than the maximum 18 months in prison prescribed by the guidelines, but that doesn’t come as a surprise. Previously, the U.S. probation service advised a six-month prison sentence and the prosecution was also in favor of relatively mild punishment.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		U.S. Attorney Strauss previously asked the court for <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-requests-lower-sentence-for-cooperative-member-of-scene-piracy-group-210503/" rel="external nofollow">a lower sentence</a> because Correa didn’t join the Scene for financial gain and because his role in the SPARKS group was relatively small.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“The Government believes that the defendant is substantially less culpable than the leaders of the Sparks Group who had more insight into the inner workings of the organization and oversaw its operations on a day-to-day basis,” Strauss wrote.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Correa’s own attorney also stressed the lack of a financial incentive and asked the court to <a href="https://torrentfreak.com/member-of-busted-scene-piracy-group-hopes-to-avoid-prison-210426/" rel="external nofollow">forego a prison sentence</a> entirely.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		“[H]e didn’t do it for the money. This was his hobby, his compulsion. He worked all day, spent time at home in the evenings with his wife, and then after she went to bed, spent hours in front of the computer competing to be the fastest to upload a copy of a DVD to an FTP server,” the defense argued.
	</p>

	<h2>
		$54,000 Restitution
	</h2>

	<p>
		In addition to the supervised release sentence, Correa was also ordered to pay $54,000 to the Motion Picture Association. This is the damages amount that was attributed to his role in the SPARKS conspiracy.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		During the proceeding, defense attorney Wistrom told the court that he has the full amount in escrow, adding that it would be paid immediately after the hearing.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Yesterday’s sentencing effectively closes this case. Two other defendants, George Bridi from Great Britain and Norway resident Umar Ahmad, have yet to appear in a US court. According to the US prosecution, their roles were more substantial, which would likely result in harsher sentences if they are found guilty.
	</p>

	<p>
		 
	</p>

	<p>
		Based on the information we have available, Bridi has yet to be extradited from Cyprus where he was previously detained while Ahmad is still at large.
	</p>
</div>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	 
</p>

<p>
	<a href="https://torrentfreak.com/member-of-busted-scene-piracy-group-sparks-avoids-prison-sentence-210520/" rel="external nofollow">Member of Busted Scene Piracy Group SPARKS Avoids Prison Sentence</a>
</p>
]]></description><guid isPermaLink="false">39</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 May 2021 21:09:23 +0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
