Last month, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) asked the public for input for its International Internet Policy Priorities.
The NTIA has an important role in President Trump’s administration, acting as a principal adviser on telecommunications policies.
In recent weeks various stakeholders submitted their input. Yesterday, for example, we highlighted the MPAA’s submission which argued that action is required as the current “lawless” Internet chills free speech.
However, not everyone agrees with this stance. Mozilla, the creators of the Firefox browser, sees regulation and copyright legislation in particular, as one of the largest threats to an open Internet.
In its submission, Mozilla’s Senior Policy Manager Heather West asks the NTIA to help preserve the Internet’s openness.
“One of the key elements that makes the internet an incredible global resource is its openness. ‘Open’ means that anyone can publish or invent online without asking for permission, and that the technologies used to run the Web are transparent and understandable.”
More restrictions are a threat to the open Internet, Mozilla argues. It specifically highlights intellectual property laws, which include copyright, as one of the dangers.
These laws restrict people from using the full potential of the Internet. Instead of more restrictions, Mozilla promotes the idea of a more flexible approach, such as Creative Commons licenses.
“Intellectual property laws stifle creativity and innovation if they are too restrictive about sharing and remixing – particularly for educational and non-profit use, which would be permitted under ‘fair use’.”
“We need to reform laws that are outdated, and support the growth of licensing alternatives like the Creative Commons,” Mozilla adds.
Mozilla agrees with the MPAA that copyright legislation in the US and abroad hasn’t kept up with the pace with the Internet. However, both groups clearly have different ideas on how to move forward.
Where MPAA and other pro-copyright groups want stricter copyright regulation, Mozilla wants fewer restrictions, and both ask the Government for support.
“Internationally, the NTIA and Department of Commerce should support efforts to keep the internet open. Open innovation on the internet is threatened by bad policies, the devaluation of common standards, and the fragmentation of the global internet.”
As an example of present threats, Mozilla mentions the EU’s copyright modernization proposals, which would increase liability for online services and introduce a so-called ‘link tax’.
“It is clear that leadership is necessary; the EU is currently in the final stages of negotiation on a copyright proposal that would threaten the future of the internet,” Mozilla warns.
Mozilla notes that the challenges ‘we’ face are complicated, but that they can be tackled if all stakeholders collaborate to find the right solutions. However, if the NTIA submissions show anything, it’s that this will be nearly impossible.
On one side there are groups such as Mozilla, EFF, Public Knowledge, Center for Democracy & Technology, the Internet Association, Cloudflare, and Google, warning against the adverse effects of restrictive regulation.
On the other, there are copyright holder groups such as the MPAA, RIAA, The Software Alliance, the Copyright Alliance, and others, urging for better protection for creators.
Both argue that they want to protect freedom of expression and the free flow of information, but they differ greatly in how this goal should be achieved.
Late last week, the now-infamous cracker known as Voksi hit the headlines once again after defeating the latest variant of the Denuvo anti-tamper technology.
The 21-year-old Bulgarian has made it a personal mission to bring down the world’s most hated anti-piracy system and regularly sets to work when a protected game is released. Last week’s successful attack on Sonic Mania Plus was an important step but those who know Voksi best understand the guy rarely rests.
Soon after he cracked the Denuvo protection on Total War Saga: Thrones of Britannia, the latest updates of Tekken 7 and Injustice 2, and delivered a new crack for Prey and its latest DLC.
“There is no point of using Denuvo anymore,” he told us late last week.
This unprecedented level of activity has led some to joke that Voksi’s not a human but some kind of robot that’s around all the time and doesn’t need to sleep. However, throughout the course of yesterday concerns have been mounting that all is not well in Bulgaria.
Voksi was last seen online very early yesterday morning. He’s not been seen in any of his usual hangouts since and no one we’ve spoken to has heard or seen any news. While this isn’t alarming in itself, other developments seem more serious.
Voksi is the leader of cracking group REVOLT which has its home at the Revolt.group forum. Yesterday and seemingly coinciding with Voksi’s disappearance, the REVOLT forum disappeared without warning. Again, this isn’t extraordinary when taken on its own but real concern is building over what appears to have replaced it.
Instead of being greeted by the familiar forum, visitors to Revolt.group (RVT) are now being redirected to mvr.bg, the domain that identifies the website of Bulgaria’s Ministry of the Interior. Obviously, this link with the authorities is not what most people hope to see when they try to visit Voksi’s home.
Definitely not the Revolt forum
While domain redirects in the case of coordinated anti-piracy busts are fairly common, they are usually more informative than simply linking to the homepage of a government site. They tend to point to a specific message which can be both informative and a means to inform visitors that the game is up.
The way things stand, that doesn’t appear to be the case here. As far as we can see, the Ministry of the Interior site doesn’t carry any message or announcement that can be in anyway connected with some kind of raid or bust so it’s possible that something else is going on.
Previously, the Revolt.group domain pointed to an IP address in Sofia, Bulgaria. Now, however, it redirects to an IP address/server registered to SoftLayer in the United States which appears to be responsible for the redirect to the Ministry of the Interior. When taken together, none of this fits any expected patterns.
TorrentFreak has spoken with individuals concerned about Voksi’s whereabouts but all say (including some close to him) that they have no idea what has happened to him or the Revolt forum. Directly, we have two key ways of contacting the cracker and thus far, neither has been met with any success.
So, for now at least, it looks like a waiting game. We can confirm that Voksi is a real person so it’s possible he’s taken a break from his 24/7 cracking activities to recharge his batteries. Sadly, that doesn’t explain the issue with the forum. Other possibilities are also under consideration, including some kind of hack, hoax, or pending surprise reveal. Only time will tell.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/shadow-large.jpg2761200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2018-07-25 13:57:522018-07-25 13:57:52Infamous Denuvo Cracker Disappears, Site Diverts to Government Portal
Early June, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the agency that acts as the President’s principal adviser on telecommunications policies, requested comments for its Inquiry on International Internet Policy Priorities.
“Recognizing the vital importance of the Internet and digital communications to U.S. innovation, prosperity, education, and civic and cultural life, NTIA has made it a top priority to encourage growth and innovation for the Internet and Internet-enabled economy,” NTIA wrote.
“Towards that end, NTIA is seeking comments and recommendations from all interested stakeholders on its international Internet policy priorities for 2018 and beyond. These comments will help inform NTIA to identify priority issues and help NTIA effectively leverage its resources and expertise to address those issues.”
The MPAA has responded with a 38-page document detailing what it believes to be key issues facing the Internet and its users. It makes for interesting reading.
Increased cooperation from online platforms
The first issue, to which the movie group dedicates close to half of its response, centers on online platforms being shielded from responsibility for harms stemming from use of their services “even though most other businesses can be held culpable for such harms in similar circumstances.”
The MPAA doesn’t mention any particular platforms by name but it can be safely assumed that Google, YouTube, Facebook and similar services are in the crosshairs when it says that positive aspects of these sites are “increasingly clouded” by bad actors using them as “powerful tools for harmful and illicit ends.”
So what can be done? The MPAA says it’s not advocating for any particular solution but notes that it could be as simple as platforms agreeing to become more accountable while dealing with abuse on a voluntary basis.
Claiming that dominant online platforms are facilitating everything from intellectual property theft to malware propagation, cyberespionage, sales of drugs and trafficking of minors, the MPAA says that platforms themselves are best placed to get their own houses in order.
“The rationale is that the responsibility for harm prevention is more appropriately borne by the businesses than the customers who might be harmed, or that the businesses should at least take a prominent role in mitigating risk,” the MPAA notes.
“Often, businesses that serve as ‘platforms’ for illegal activity are better situated — and have more expertise and resources — to identify potential problems and take precautionary or remedial measures.
“They can more readily avoid what could be catastrophic consequences for the individuals, as well as help absorb what could also be catastrophic costs. And since the businesses are profiting from the public marketing of goods and services, there is an equity in expecting them to take on certain responsibilities and act with a requisite amount of care.”
Given past criticisms, the MPAA’s submission seems keen to dispel what it sees as the misconception that online enforcement is incompatible with free speech and the free flow of information.
Tackling the illegal activities detailed above is no more a violation of free expression online as it is in the physical world, the group notes, adding that platforms that refuse to deal with these problems are actually operating counter to these ideals.
“In fact, curbing such illicit activity promotes free expression by creating a safer, virtual forum where individuals feel comfortable to engage and communicate. In this sense, it is leaving lawlessness and bullying unchecked that is chilling free speech,” the MPAA adds.
Restrictions on domain name use for illegal sites, better WHOIS access
Most websites benefit from having a memorable domain name and pirate sites are no different. The MPAA believes that illegal sites shouldn’t have access to domain names and asks the NTIA to do whatever it can to prevent that from happening in future.
“[W]e hope the NTIA will help ensure ICANN, registries, and registrars are enforcing obligations that prohibit domain holders from using domain names in connection with illicit conduct. Doing so is critical to ensuring the multistakeholder model maintains the security, stability, and resiliency of the internet domain name system,” the MPAA writes.
The Hollywood group says that the contractual obligations for this to happen already exist, created through the multistakeholder process, in some cases as far back as 2001. Mechanisms are in place to prohibit domain name holders from using domains for unlawful activity, including via suspensions after a review process.
“Failing to enforce these provisions jeopardizes the credibility and accountability of ICANN and the multistakeholder governance model, and invites government intervention,” the MPAA warns.
Another thorn in the side of the MPAA is the current state of access to WHOIS data. The group urges the NTIA to advise Congress on legislation that will ensure the collection of accurate WHOIS data while providing access to such information in appropriate circumstances. The MPAA says that WHOIS data is a “cornerstone of online accountability”, one which assists with public safety, consumer protection, dispute resolution, and enforcement of rights.
Access to this data is currently under threat, not least due to the requirements of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The MPAA reports that its inquiries into 30 pirate site related domains in June yielded WHOIS data for just one, with all others denied, refused without a court order, or hindered by a domain privacy service.
“Except for the data behind privacy proxies, this information would ordinarily have been public, and even in privacy proxy cases, we sometimes had agreements in place to gain access to the underlying information to address piracy issues,” the MPAA says.
In conclusion, the Hollywood group is calling for a GDPR-compliant framework that allows access to WHOIS records for legitimate purposes such as intellectual property rights enforcement.
Criminal enforcement actions to deter the distribution of illicit streaming devices
The rise of illicit online streaming is showing few signs of slowing down so it’s no surprise that the MPAA is seeking assistance from the NTIA on this front. Specifically, the MPAA wants to see strong measures taken against those who promote and/or distribute so-called “fully loaded” set-top devices that are pre-configured for infringing purposes.
Given its track record of equating online piracy with other crime, it’s no surprise that the MPAA leads with the claim that pirate sites help to spread malware “into living rooms” due to the prevalence of streaming piracy devices.
“The issues relating to illegal streaming sites, devices, and applications — as well as the surrounding piracy ecosystem more generally — are thus closely linked to broader issues of cybersecurity. Combatting the former may well make significant contributions toward the latter,” the MPAA advises.
Highlighting the only major security event in recent memory (which was quickly fixed, incidentally), the MPAA makes much of an exploit that targeted how some media players handled subtitles. Last month the MPAA’s affiliates promised to detail more security issues but thus far has failed to deliver.
But aside from the somewhat transparent effort to paint pirate consumers as vulnerable victims, it’s clear that the main aim of the MPAA is to starve pirate operations of both cash and exposure by targeting everyone from sellers, payment processors and advertisers, to domain and hosting providers.
On top, it also wants some heavy-duty action by the authorities. The suggested targets are likely to send a shiver down the spines of many involved in the third-party Kodi addon community.
“Combatting the growth of streaming piracy requires coordination among all parties in a position to make a difference, including civil and criminal actions against creators of pirate add-on software and the repository websites that host them, against distributors of the preloaded devices, and against the entities streaming the content.”
As part of the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, the MPAA is already undertaking civil action against various pirate box vendors. However, what it really wants is for the government to bring deterrent criminal prosecutions in order to shock some offenders away from the market.
Citing the shutdown of Megaupload and a reported 6.5 to 8.5 percent increase in digital sales for three major studios in its wake, the MPAA says that similar results could be achieved if the government took a more active role against players in the streaming market.
“We would welcome the NTIA’s voice in urging its sister agencies to bring criminal actions, as well as its consulting with the Customs and Border Patrol about the possibility of interdiction of illicit streaming devices entering the country from abroad,” the MPAA concludes.
The MPAA’s submission to the NTIA can be found here (pdf)
With YouTube now a major force when it comes to online music distribution, recording labels and artists are striving for a better deal.
While YouTube compensates labels for views of authorized content, the labels say the existence of unlicensed content uploaded by users means that the Google-owned video giant gains an unfair negotiating position.
In an effort to tighten the noose on YouTube and owners Google, the music industry lobbied hard for new EU legislation (Article 13) that would see user-uploaded content platforms compelled to install filters to detect infringing content before it gets made available to the public.
The debate leading up to the vote was messy, with extremist claims on both sides doing little for the quality of the discussion, particularly on social media. As the vote neared, however, claims that somehow the campaign wasn’t being fought fairly came to the fore.
Two days before the vote, UK Music CEO Michael Dugher launched a scathing attack, describing Google as a “corporate vulture feeding off the creators and investors” while claiming the search giant had pumped €31 million into lobbying against the legislation.
“These new figures expose the fact that Google is acting like a monolithic mega-corp trying to submerge the truth under a tsunami of misinformation and scare stories pedaled by its multi-million propaganda machine,” Dugher said.
“Instead of mounting a cynical campaign, motivated entirely out of its self-interested desire to protect its huge profits, Google should be making a positive contribution to those who create and invest in the music. MEPs should ignore the big money lobbying from big tech and back fair rewards for creators.”
Whether Google’s lobbying efforts amounted to unfair practice will be for history to decide but if music industry veteran Chris Castle has his way, no stone should be left unturned in establishing the facts.
Castle is probably best known online for editing the MusicTechPolicy blog but he’s also the founder of his own law firm and has held lofty positions at Sony and A&M. This busy industry man has little time for Google and its practices.
“[T]here have been incredible and probably illegal uses of the Internet to overwhelm elected officials with faux communications that reek of Google-style misinformation and central planning in the hive mind of the Googleplex,” he writes.
“We saw this again with the Article 13 vote in Europe last week with what clearly seems to be a Google-backed attack on the European Parliament for the purpose of policy intimidation.
“That’s right – an American-based multinational corporation is trying to intimidate the very same European government that is currently investigating them for anticompetitive behavior and is staring down a multi-billion dollar fine. Vindictive much?”
Last week the EU Commission did indeed fine Google €4.34 billion regarding the use of Android mobile devices to strengthen dominance of its search engine (a matter it reportedly tried to settle), but what about this attack on the EU Parliament?
Castle doesn’t go into much detail on the precise mechanics of what Google is supposed to have done but he describes the company as engineering “DDOS-type stunts capitalizing on what seems to be the element of surprise.”
This appears to be a reference to the numerous automated web-based forms that were made available online by various organizations, which enabled the public to make their voices heard by the decision makers about to tackle Article 13.
The forms were used, apparently a lot, to send messages to MEPs but whether this was simply a passionate and genuine response or more cynical organized chaos will be a matter for the parties to argue over.
In the meantime, Castle strongly feels there is a case to answer. The lawyer believes that Google is using its dominant position online to gain an unfair advantage in what should be a democratic process.
“[T]he most important thing for the European Commission to take into account is that a company that is the target of multiple investigations is using the very market place monopoly that caused the competition investigations to intimidate the European government into bending to its will on Article 13,” he writes.
“The European Commission needs to launch a full-blown criminal investigation into exactly what happened on Article 13, particularly since there is another vote on the same subject coming in September. Properly authorized law enforcement acting swiftly can set sufficient digital snares to track the next attack which surely is coming while they forensically try to figure out what happened.”
It remains to be seen whether these strong words from Chris Castle and those who share his sentiments will have any effect on the ground but the fact that these accusations are now being made openly is likely to throw more fuel on an already super-heated debate.
Finally, it’s perhaps worth noting that the companies and groups in the image below, which together claim to “represent 4.5% of EU GDP and 12 million European jobs” (and were in favor of Article 13), were apparently outgunned by Google.
Or, perhaps they were simply outgunned by people who just didn’t like the idea of Article 13? Only a couple of months left for round two – it could be a bumpy ride.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/europe-featured.jpg2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2018-07-24 07:55:522018-07-24 07:55:52Music Industry Lawyer Calls For Criminal Investigation Over Article 13 Vote
Playing games through browser-based emulators is a niche pastime of some of the most dedicated gamers.
For Game Boy Advance fans there are a few websites that offer this option, albeit without permission.
Nintendo is not pleased with these unsanctioned projects which they see as clear copyright infringement. A few days ago, the company took action against a popular JavaScript-based Game Boy Advance emulator that was hosted on the developer platform GitHub.
“The files located at the repository link https://jsemu3.github.io/gba/ contain unauthorized copies of Nintendo’s video game software in violation of the law and GitHub’s Terms of Service,” Nintendo writes.
The repository in question offered JavaScript-powered versions of many popular titles including Advance Wars, Dragon Ball Z, Super Mario Advance, Pokémon Mystery Dungeon, and Legend of Zelda.
The DMCA notice was filed late last week and GitHub removed the allegedly infringing files soon after.
Repository offline
The request came around the same time as the lawsuit that was filed against the LoveROMS and LoveRETRO emulator sites. While we can’t see an apparent connection between the two cases, Nintendo says that it is also considering legal action against the owner of the infringing GitHub repository.
“We are considering action regarding those matters but are not including them in this notice,” Nintendo writes.
Interestingly, this isn’t the first time that Nintendo has gone after an infringing Game Boy emulator. A few years ago the company targeted a similar repository, with a similar name. And it may have more work on its hands, as there are several similar emulators still hosted on GitHub.
One thing is quite clear though. Sites that offer emulators and ROMs are not welcomed by Nintendo, even those that don’t have a clear profit motive.
As for the two sites that were sued last week. LoveRETRO took its site down “until further notice” over the weekend, while its partner site LoveROMS removed all Nintendo titles.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/mario-featured.jpg2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2018-07-23 16:54:532018-07-23 16:54:53Nintendo Asks GitHub to Shut Down Game Boy Emulator
Founded in 2009, LimeTorrents has been a familiar name in the torrent ecosystem for nearly a decade.
The site is regularly listed as one of the ten most-visited torrent sites on the Internet. However, as a prime source of pirated content, it has also seen plenty of trouble over the years.
During the site’s early days, music group IFPI seized its servers, for example, and a few years later the site’s operator got dragged into a lawsuit by Lionsgate over the Expendables 3 leak.
Despite these issues, the site remains alive and well. That said, running a torrent site isn’t exactly getting any easier.
Earlier this week LimeTorrents switched to a new domain, limetorrents.io, with a new homepage. This is a direct response to the ISP blocking efforts around the world. In addition, the new domain should also get the site’s homepage back in Google’s search index.
“We changed our domain to .io because [the site is] blocked in many countries like India, UK, Australia, and also because our old homepage was removed from Google’s search index,” LimeTorrents’ operator tells TF.
The new version of the homepage no longer lists direct links to pirated material. This means that copyright holders have no reason to ask Google to remove it from the search index, as previously happened with the old version.
The new homepage
With this new look and domain, LimeTorrent hopes to set itself apart from the many copycats that have appeared. According to the operator, there are several “fake” LimeTorrents copies trying to steal traffic, only to generate revenue for themselves.
People who can’t use the official domains can use the official proxies Limetorrents.info, Limetorrents.asia, Limetorrents.zone, the site’s operator says, but he cautions users who choose other sites.
In addition to the torrent index, the operator also runs the torrent cache itorrents.org, which many other sites rely on. ITorrents hosts torrents without a search interface and is used by other torrent sites such as 1337x.to and the mobile version of The Pirate Bay.
LimeTorrents’ operator tells us that iTorrents currently stores over 20 million unique torrents and many more are added every day.
While this may sound positive, operating a torrent site certainly hasn’t become any easier. It gets harder and harder to make revenue, and income has dropped drastically since the early years.
“Earnings dropped around 60 to 70% because affiliate sites are no longer paying webmasters well. Popups and ads are not working either because of ad-blockers,” LimeTorrents’ operator says.
“We keep the sites running because we have some traffic. It’s covering the hosting costs and brings in some extra bucks for other expenses.”
It’s also become harder to find stable hosting, which is likely the result of increased enforcement. However, there is a threat from within the piracy ecosystem as well.
Ten years ago torrent sites were dominating the piracy landscape but today more and more traffic is flowing to streaming sites.
That being said, LimeTorrents’ operator says that people know where to come when they want to get content first, noting that many streaming sites use torrent portals as their source.
“People who know how to find things know where it comes first. If torrent sites die, streaming sites will also be hit hard because they can’t find content to upload to their sites, as torrent sites are their source,” the operator tells us.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/limefea.jpg2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2018-07-23 01:53:532018-07-23 01:53:53LimeTorrents Fights Blocking Efforts With New Domain and Homepage
Anti-piracy firms often portray copyright infringers as thieves that must be stopped or eradicated.
However, the people at UK firm MUSO have a different take on the piracy problem. With funding from the local Government, they’re offering classic takedown tools, but the company prefers to frame piracy as an opportunity rather than a threat.
This became apparent once again when UK telecoms regulator OFCOM released new figures this week. According to the agency, online subscription services including Netflix and Amazon Prime have, for the first time, overtaken satellite and cable TV.
This shows once again that the Internet is transforming the way people consume media. Moving from linear viewing to an on-demand model is something many ‘torrenters’ already envisioned more than a decade ago.
It’s a landmark change that certainly shouldn’t be ignored. This is something Chris Anderson, MUSO’s Head of Film & TV, wholeheartedly agrees with, albeit with a major footnote.
“Technology has completely transformed the way people are able to watch TV and the days of being tied to a TV schedule are well and truly behind us, with streaming services now officially the preference for the majority of viewers,” he says.
“The word ‘officially’ is key – because what these figures from Ofcom don’t take into account is the many hundreds of thousands of people who are streaming TV in the UK through unlicensed services and sites.”
When piracy is taken into account, online streaming overtook traditional TV viewing a long time ago.
There’s a general idea that legitimate streaming services are driving people away from pirate sites. However, that’s a misperception. While more and more pirates have a Netflix subscription, piracy remains alive and well.
“The idea that services such as Netflix and Amazon Prime have eradicated piracy is a fallacy. Our figures show that global piracy has increased year-on-year, in spite of the rise of streaming services. The UK had 4,776,616,717 total visits to film and TV piracy sites in 2017 alone,” Anderson says.
MUSO encourages UK broadcasters not to fixate on the competition from legitimate streaming services alone, but to consider the potential pirate audience as well.
“Piracy audiences are one of the great untapped pools of wealth – they have extremely high intent to access content but are often simply unable to. Finding ways to access this audience could be the secret bringing higher profits back to broadcasting,” the company adds.
Of course, MUSO doesn’t make these comments without having a stake in the matter. The company previously launched a piracy marketing platform, which helps content creators to connect with and convert pirates.
That said, it’s a refreshing message compared to the usual stream of legal threats, crime reports and malware warnings.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/uk-money-feat.jpg2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2018-07-22 10:52:542018-07-22 10:52:54‘Piracy Audiences Are Untapped Pools of Wealth’
So-called copyright trolling in the file-sharing space involves copyright holders claiming their rights have been infringed before heading to court to demand the identities of subscribers behind IP addresses.
Once these identities have been obtained, law firms affiliated with trolls write to the person whose name appears on the ISP bill in order to demand cash settlements to make supposed lawsuits go away. It’s a lucrative but extremely controversial practice.
This type of activity got underway in Finland during 2013, taking hold during 2014, with a notable escalation in 2015 and 2016.
Early 2017, local media sources reported that up to 60,000 people could be in line to receive cash demands from Helsinki-based law firm Hedman Partners, something which prompted the government to conduct an investigation(pdf) with help from the authorities.
Now, however, Hedman Partners have a related matter to deal with, one that’s seen a lawyer at the firm accused of misconduct due to the way some private Internet subscriber data was obtained from ISPs and subsequently handled.
According to the Finnish Bar Association, lawyer Joni Hatanmaa and Hedman Partners applied to the Market Court for access to data held by ISPs, to enable it to send settlement letters to Internet users. The Copyright Act allows rightsholders and their representatives to apply for this right on a case-by-case basis.
However, it appears that after applying to obtain personal information on behalf of one client, Hatanmaa and Hedman Partners then used that same information to identify subscribers who had allegedly infringed the rights of other clients also managed by the law firm.
This means that when an IP address appeared on lists of those sharing multiple clients’ copyright works, the law firm made only one application to obtain the alleged infringer’s personal details instead of starting a new disclosure process for each client.
When ISP subscriber data is handed over to a third-party, it is delivered on the basis that it will be used in a very narrow set of circumstances and certainly not for the benefit of many entertainment industry groups scouring the web for infringement.
This breach of copyright law, the Board found, was not in keeping with the standards expected by the Bar. But, according to Joni Hatanmaa himself, the problems actually arose due to different interpretations of the law.
“In this case, the Board of Supervisors considered that the application process should have been handled in a different way under copyright law,” he told Helsingin Sanomat.
“The decision has made it clear that the law has the potential for a wide range of interpretations.”
In any event, the lawyer says, the cases against infringers will continue. Plenty are still underway and the project continues to expand.
“If copyright infringement has been violated in peer-to-peer networks, those responsible are still liable. The remark was purely a matter of interpreting the law in the application process as to how the application should be made in order to give people full responsibility,” he said.
A second complaint against the law firm, in respect of wording in letters sent to alleged infringers, was also considered by the Board but was deemed to be low priority.
The decision of the Disciplinary Board is not yet final and can be taken to the Helsinki Court of Appeal. Meanwhile, it seems that the threat-letter model will continue. Ahto Apajalahti, a board member at digital rights group Electronic Frontier Finland, informs TF that a change in the law is required to bring ‘trolling’ to an end.
“The Ministry of Education and Culture doesn’t want to change the law. However, both the Ministry and the Market Court are uneasy about the vast scope of these activities. The peak year so far for these letters was 2016, when letters were sent to tens of thousands of people,” Apajalahti explains.
“This unease has been reflected in the decisions by the Market Court in 2017 and 2018 which established some limits. Basically it is now more difficult for Hedman Partners and others to get people’s contact information. They have to show more evidence than before and as a result they get far fewer contact details than they apply for.”
In a recent case, Hedman requested the identities behind 1,860 IP addresses but got only 30. Still, the company continues to send letters to those whose details were obtained in 2017 and 2016 so the company still has plenty to go at, regardless of the negative ruling from the Finnish Bar Association.
“This violation case where Hedman was reprimanded is mostly a technical matter and I don’t think it changes the situation at all. Hedman just have to change their working procedures a bit,” Apajalahti concludes.
Emulators are handy tools for people who want to play games on platforms other than the usual console they’re intended for.
These are particularly useful for retro games and consoles, which are no longer sold, allowing users to enjoy the games they were hooked on decades ago.
However, many game publishers are less content with this practice. Nintendo, in particular, has repeatedly called out ROMS and emulator sites, both in and outside the United States.
This week, Nintendo took two of these sites to court. In a complaint filed at a federal court in Arizona, the game publisher sues LoveROMS.com and LoveRETRO.co for copyright and trademark infringement.
Both sites are believed to be operated by Jacob Mathias and his Arizona company Mathias Designs LLC. They offer access to a wide variety of ROMs, including many Nintendo games.
“The LoveROMs and LoveRETRO websites are among the most open and notorious online hubs for pirated video games,” Nintendo writes in the complaint.
“Through the LoveROMs and LoveRETRO websites, Defendants reproduce, distribute, publicly perform and display a staggering number of unauthorized copies of Nintendo’s video games, all without Nintendo’s permission.”
In addition to the copyrighted games, the sites also distribute proprietary BIOS software, while using trademarked logos and characters, Nintendo notes.
While some ROMs sites may be hobby projects, Nintendo sees these two sites as professional operations that profit from its works.
“Defendants are not casual gamers but are instead sophisticated parties with extensive knowledge of Nintendo’s intellectual property and the video game industry more generally,” the company notes.
LoveROMS complaint
Through the lawsuit, which also lists a count of unfair competition, Nintendo hopes to shut both sites down. The company requests statutory damages of $150,000 per infringing Nintendo game and up to $2,000,000 for each trademark infringement.
This means that, with more than 140 copyrighted titles and 40 trademarks on the record, theoretical damages could go up to a staggering $100 million.
Nintendo further requests a permanent injunction ordering the sites to stop their infringing activities while handing over domain names to the game publisher. At the same time, Nintendo wants the operator of the sites to reveal the sources for the infringing ROMs.
The defendant has yet to respond publicly to the allegations and at the time of writing and both LoveROMS.com and LoveRETRO.co remain online.
—
A copy of Nintendo’s complaint, obtained by TorrentFreak, is available here (pdf).
Since their aim is to prevent people from copying titles and playing them for free, no anti-piracy technologies are popular with pirates.
Underlying this emotion is a kind of unofficial ‘hate-scale,’ in which the level of a dislike for a particular system increases proportionately to its success on the ground. Denuvo, one of the most prominent and difficult to crack anti-piracy technologies, is hated most of all.
Denuvo isn’t undefeatable, various groups and individuals have proven that. However, there are persistent claims, denied by its makers, that the technology not only slows down pirates but can also negatively affect the gaming experience of people who actually buy protected games.
The latest accusations come from Voksi, a cracker in his early twenties, who recently cracked the latest variant of the anti-tamper technology. Yesterday he released a cracked version of Sonic Mania Plus just a day after release and says SEGA did a poor job of implementing the system.
“SEGA rushed to implement the newest Denuvo in the new update of Sonic Mania and did a poor job of it, causing many issues and game slowdowns for legit users,” he informs TF while accusing SEGA of being “anti-consumer”.
Voksi describes the release as having “an insane amount of bloated Denuvo code,” compared to the previous version, “which can cause all kinds of issues if not handled properly.”
Those issues, Voksi says, are being reported by users on Steam’s Community forum, who bought the game yet are still experiencing problems. One report, in particular, caught Voksi’s eye.
“My game runs slow whenever I enter the Replays menu in time attack mode, and the time attack level select too for some reason, and it continues even after leaving both,” user ‘Crashed’ reports.
This problem with Sonic Mania Plus running slowly at this point in the game rang a bell with Voksi. TF asked him to explain what causes the problem and why it’s so serious.
“The issue is serious because it directly impacts legit users,” he says.
“This particular issue is that the game triggers Denuvo, but it doesn’t close the trigger properly. Denuvo keeps writing and writing into the game’s memory, causing additional stress to the game, which might be handled by a stronger CPU, but those who have a weaker CPU can experience massive slowdowns.”
Another Steam user, who complained that he couldn’t get past the game’s menu screen, also sounded familiar to Voksi. He says that he found Denuvo code affecting that part of the game when working on his crack.
“One person even couldn’t load the game. It stuck for him in the loading screen right before the menu, which is an anti-tamper trigger I’ve encountered while I was cracking the game, which did exactly the same thing as described. I don’t know what is the reason to trigger for this person on a legit copy, but nothing can surprise me anymore,” he says.
While Voksi isn’t sure why Denuvo is acting this way, the solution to the menu screen issue published on Stream forums points the finger at the anti-tamper technology. In a post by Aemony, people with the issue are advised to “remove the offline token for Denuvo”, something that reportedly worked for previous iterations of the game.
For both Denuvo and SEGA, the situation isn’t particularly good. Eight days ago and just two days after SEGA released Shining Resonance Refrain (also Denuvo-protected), Voksi released a cracked version of the game. He believes the quick turnaround on his part prompted SEGA to rush in to further protect Sonic Mania Plus but without doing the job properly.
“The truth is after my Shining Resonance Refrain crack that I did on day 1 (which also had the latest Denuvo), it seems that SEGA got scared. It tried to rush the implementation of an even more bloated variant of the latest Denuvo with all protection features and this is the result,” he says.
In common with all previous instances of claims that Denuvo affects legitimate players, it’s likely that those behind the technology will stay silent or insist there isn’t an issue. Nevertheless, long discussions on Steam not only suggest that Denuvo isn’t liked, but is also failing in its mission to protect games for even a short period of time.
Earlier this week new research revealed that due to their dislike of Denuvo, pirates are sabotaging reviews of Denuvo-protected games. While this could have some effect on sales, it will take legitimate buyers to vote with their wallets before anything is done about the problem.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/crack-feat.jpg2821200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2018-07-20 13:50:042018-07-20 13:50:04SEGA Accused of “Anti-Consumer” Behavior With “Rushed” Sonic Mania Plus Protection
Last month, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) asked the public for input for its International Internet Policy Priorities.
Playing games through browser-based emulators is a niche pastime of some of the most dedicated gamers.
Founded in 2009, LimeTorrents has been a familiar name in the torrent ecosystem for nearly a decade. 
Anti-piracy firms often portray copyright infringers as thieves that must be stopped or eradicated. 
Emulators are handy tools for people who want to play games on platforms other than the usual console they’re intended for. 
