Many moons ago, people started file-sharing sites for the simple purpose of sharing files with friends and other like-minded people. By volume, it was relatively rare for commercial interests to come first.

While a considerable number of smaller platforms will still fiercely protest their non-profit status if challenged, in 2018 there can be little doubt that generating revenue is the motivation behind the majority of public sites. The prevalence of ads and affiliate schemes is a testament to that.

Of course, sites don’t always start out this way. Many private torrent trackers, for example, were created with the intention of providing free, no-strings content for all. Some still achieve that today but the rising costs of running a site (including servers for hosting, proxying, seeding etc) can’t be ignored, not least since the rich benefactors of yesterday have mostly moved on.

To this end, most sites these days generate money in a number of visible ways, from ever-present ads and product affiliate schemes to ‘donation’ models that are little more than disguised subscriptions. Others accept donations in the traditional sense, with a begging bowl handed round each time a server bill is due.

But what happens when the ends no longer meet? The users of two formerly ‘free’ sites have been finding out recently. In a pair of monster discussion threads on Reddit (1,2), users of pirate anime site ‘Kissanime’ complain that they’ve been completely banned from the video platform.

Their unforgivable crime? Ad-blocking.

Users say that all they did was visit the site with Adblock Plus or uBlock Origin enabled in their browser and the next thing they were given a ban. We jumped aboard and found ourselves greeted by the notice creating all the fuss.

No ad-blocking allowed…

It’s not as if users weren’t warned though. A notice published on the site’s main page informs members that running any kind of browser addon could mean ejection from video platform.

“Using any extensions/plugins on KissAnime could lead to errors/suspension,” it reads.

Nevertheless, plenty of people appear to have ignored the advice and have suffered the consequences as a result. For their part, the operators of the site seem completely unrepentant.

“There is no way to lift the ban at the moment, if you got banned, please disable those adblockers on kissanime, never turn it on kissanime again and wait. Or you could use other anime sites,” an admin announced on Discord.

The situation is an interesting one. Like most pirate sites, KissAnime has costs that have to be met by those visiting the site. Short of asking for a “donation”, these costs are currently met by advertising revenue. However, many users don’t want to be bombarded by advertising so they block the ads.

This means that all adblocking users become freeloaders and therefore a drain on the site. As far as the site’s health goes, there’s literally no point in them being there so they’re best removed from the community. It’s an ironic situation best appreciated by the anime producers themselves who are also trying to make a living.

That being said, not all people block ads out of malice towards the site. Some users complain about porn ads corrupting their experience, so in response they block them all. Being selective is too laborious, they say.

For the site, a solution could be to remove the surprise porn ads. However, a source who asked to stay anonymous told TF that these sometimes offensive ads can be quite lucrative, hence the desire for them to stay visible.

But while one site decides to kick all of its adblocking users out for being a drain on resources, another has taken an even more radical approach to its making available of other people’s content.

FreeTutorials.us is a site that offers premium tutorials and other learning materials without permission from copyright holders. As its name suggests, it originally offered content for free.

Earlier this year, FreeTutorials.us made the headlines after being targeted in the courts by online learning platform Udemy, which took exception to its content appearing on the site for nothing.

In a subsequent interview with TF, the pirate site’s operator explained the motivation behind FreeTutorials (FTU) and affiliated site FreeCoursesOnline (FCO).

“We have been through that phase of life when we didn’t have enough money to buy books and get tuition or even apply for a good course that we always wanted to have, so FTU & FCO are just our vision to provide Free Education For Everyone,” he explained.

While having the ability to learn for free is appreciated by millions the world over, for users of FreeTutorials the dream is now over. Last month and with little fanfare, free download buttons were replaced with something else entirely.

Subscribe for free stuff

There’s little doubt that the prices being charged are much lower than those officially available, something which probably prompted FreeTutorials to change its tagline to the current ‘Affordable Education For Everyone’.

On this basis alone they’re likely to retain visitors. Indeed, a look at their traffic stats for the past few weeks suggests that visitor numbers have remained stable. If this translates to sales, no one should expect ‘free tutorials’ to return. Like free content, few people are turning down ‘free’ money.

FreeTutorials’ email addresses bounce so we can’t ask them why they shifted over to the pay model. However, one doesn’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to deduce that in one way or another, a desire to make money is at the root of the change. Whether that’s simply to pay for hosting costs or to help cover living expenses is unknown and probably irrelevant.

The important thing is that whether it’s an enforced advertising model, donations, or a flat-out desire to charge money, pirate sites face similar commercial difficulties to those experienced by their legal counterparts. Everything costs money and needs to be paid for, and if the books don’t balance, that’s the end of the show.

Despite their differences, perhaps they’re quite similar after all.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link

Wow, just wow! You guys rock… 111.000 of you – 111.000 thank you! I think it is time to give back something as well so stay tuned. Another giveaway is coming.

I have been actively making content on YouTube for the past 2 and a half years but honestly, never thought it would go this far. And I mean it’s kind of crazy how many subscribers trusted me with their vote of confidence, by following me daily on this adventure over on YouTube and lately also on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit and Instagram. I love you guys so much for all the help and support you have given me on these past years. When not only happy moments but also sad and stressful events happened. It may sound a little cheesy but I feel you like a part of my family. A huge family but full with mutual love and respect.

Having such a big family – or audience if you prefer – brings also responsibilities. I know some people hate it that I do not always answer to emails, comments and messages. But please try to understand that even if I want to, it is really hard for me to keep up with everyone. I am just one person that creates videos, does research for new content, tests at least 5 devices a week, designs and maintains a website and all my social media accounts as well. I receive more than 50 emails a day. At days these are so much more that I can’t keep up with everyone. I hope you really understand, it never means that I do not care, just that I didn’t make it because of the limited time.

Also with a big following I try to produce content that you all would like. My main objective of course has always been making videos that I would watch as well. But at times I can’t please everyone with every single video. I really hope that you guys will continue to give me feedback so I can better understand your needs and likes and bring you even better content. And even if I do not reply to every single comment under my videos, I always read them. All of them.

Lately my editing skills have also improved, I hope you guys noticed it. I do not want to just hit record, save and upload. I try to keep the juicy part of each video, improving the video and audio quality and deliver the message of each video with a pleasant, funny way. I found out that being myself, my silly self, is better not just for you that watch it but for me too. Some people may do not get it, other may hate it or insult me but, oh well, it is what it is. The guy you see on video is the guy I really am and I feel that being myself is the only way to have a sincere, healthy relationship.

I also need your help, I need some YouTube channel moderators. I will only start with a few, most trusted circle of people so you know who you are, just let me know if you want to be actively part of this community. Moderators would help a lot keeping the comment section clean by removing spam content or hateful, irrelevant content in our discussion. And to broaden things up, I also will need some moderators for my website and Facebook group. So also please let me know if you are interested.

Next up is the upcoming giveaway. I will also make it as crystal-clear as possible. I will have it on the Gleam.io website so no-one can be suspicious about it’s legitimacy. But more on that on the following days where I will also announce the prizes that I will include.

Thank you once again for all the love and support and BOOM SHAKALAKA BABY!!!

 


For the past several years, Twitter has been the platform most used by Kim Dotcom to get his messages out to the public.

Whenever there’s been a development in his long-running case, Twitter is usually the first place to find up-to-date information.

With his larger-than-life persona, Kim has developed a huge following. He currently has more than 732,000 followers on his official account, something that hasn’t gone unnoticed by those looking to generate profit from his significant profile.

Kim’s tweets are regularly piggybacked by criminals seeking to trick the public into handing over cash. Exploiting a weakness in the way Twitter displays tweets and replies, they’re able to use fake accounts that look like his in order to promote their agenda.

It begins with the real Kim but goes somewhere dark

As the image above shows, a genuine Tweet by Kim to his followers is followed by others which claim to be him giving away cryptocurrency. Upon closer inspection, however, it’s clear that while the names and images match, the underlying Twitter usernames are quite different.

This particular scam leads to a Tumblr blog which has Kim’s name in the URL. For added credibility, it also adds a ‘Medium’ logo at the top and a faked “13.2K” claps at the bottom. In the middle, the offer is made clear.

“It has been an exciting past year. Thanks to your support, I am giving away 10,000 Ethereum!” the fake Kim Dotcom writes.

“To identify your address, please send .5-10 ETH to the payment address and I will immediately send you 5-100 ETH back to the address you sent it from. If you are late, your ETH will be instantly returned.

“I know it has been a rough past few months for Cryptocurrency hodlers, but maybe this gift will cheer you up!”

Needless to say, the offer of free cryptocurrency is completely fake, with the scam designed to part Kim Dotcom fans from their money. For added effect, the blog post has plenty of comments (all fake of course) which falsely claim that ETH has been sent to “Kim’s account” and he has been kind enough to send plenty back for free.

With some fake users claiming to have received as much as 55 ETH from Kim (1 ETH is currently around $460.00) the temptation must be high to get involved. Rest (un)assured, there’s only one person getting rich from this scam.

Unfortunately, several groups have jumped aboard the gravy train. As can be seen from the image below, scammers are jumping on Kim’s recent tweets to promote their criminal activity in the hope that people hand over their hard-earned cash.

Same scam, different presentation

These attempted scams aren’t new and have been going on for some time now. However, on the back of the news this week that Kim’s latest effort to avoid extradition to the United States has failed, the scammers are jumping onto Kim’s posts and exposing thousands more visitors to fraud on a larger scale.

Thankfully, there’s some advice from the genuine Kim Dotcom on how to easily avoid online criminals exploiting his name.

“Unfortunately there are many fake Kim Dotcom accounts on Twitter offering free gifts and free crypto. Don’t fall for those scams. The only real Kim Dotcom account on Twitter is the one with the blue verification tick next to my name,” he previously explained.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link


American satellite and broadcast provider Dish Network is continuing its legal battles against alleged pirate streaming services.

The company previously filed a lawsuit against the people behind TVAddons and the ZemTV Kodi addon, but it’s fighting on more fronts too.

The largest success thus far was its case against “Shava TV,” which was filed back in 2015. Last year this resulted in a $25,650,000 judgment in favor of Dish, but that didn’t mean that the problems were over.

Shava TV reportedly continued its business and despite a contempt order against the operators, as well as several domain seizures, the boxes are still widely available. Not just on the Internet, but also in bricks-and-mortar stores.

This prompted Dish to file a new lawsuit at a federal court in New York this week. This time, the company is targeting several dealers located in New York, as well as a distributor.

The complaint lists the New York stores “ABC Wireless NYC,” and “ Family Phone” and accuses these of selling infringing Shava TV boxes. Goyal Group is accused of selling and distributing the boxes to various dealers.

“DISH sues for contributory copyright infringement because Defendants knew that Shava TV set-top boxes and service plans were providing access to television channels exclusively licensed to DISH and materially contributed to direct copyright infringement by Shava and persons purchasing Shava TV set-top boxes and services from Defendants,” the filing reads.

According to Dish, the defendants continued to sell and promote Shava TV despite multiple demands to cease the activity. This, despite the fact that a contempt order issued in the original Shava TV case specifically forbids them from doing so.

The contempt order, issued in February by US District Court Judge Thomas Ellis, enjoined several US dealers of Shava TV from engaging in infringing activities.

Dish notified the defendants

“Defendants actually know that the retransmission of the Protected Channels on the Shava TV service infringes DISH’s copyrights. Defendants disregarded DISH’s written demands […] and the Contempt Order, and are continuing to distribute, sell, and promote Shava TV set-top boxes and services,” the complaint reads.

“Defendants did not acknowledge or respond to any of these written demands or the court orders, nor did they take any action to comply.”

The broadcast provider argues that the stores and the distributor are liable for contributory copyright infringement. Dish asks the court to issue an injunction to stop the infringing activity and requests statutory damages to compensate its losses.

A copy of Dish Network’s complaint against Goyal Group, Family Phone, ABC 1 NYC and ABC Wireless is available here (pdf).

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link


After protecting Assassins Creed Origin for the previous several months, earlier this year version 4.9 of the infamous Denuvo anti-tamper system was defeated by Italian cracking group CPY.

While all cracks of the tough and continuously developing Denuvo system are welcomed by pirate consumers, this one was particularly sweet, having also defeated Ubisoft’s decision to use VMProtect technology on top. Soon after, Bulgarian cracker Voksi, who previously defeated version 4, released a video showing how things were done.

Unlike CPY, Voksi is a rather more high-profile individual. While his true identity is known only to those closest to him, he has become somewhat of a folk hero on various cracking-focused forums, engaging in conversation with fans and discussing the latest developments.

This week, Voksi announced the passing of yet another milestone, one that’s bound to disappoint the people at Denuvo. After sinking endless hours into what he openly admits is a personal grudge against the company’s technology, Voksi revealed that its latest v4.9++ protection had fallen.

Speaking with TorrentFreak, Voksi says that after tackling previous versions, a little while back he began dissecting the newer 4.7/4.8 builds (not official Denuvo versions but a numbering system used by the cracking scene).

“Man, it seemed impossible back then. The obfuscation was insane, I had no idea what to do. So, over the next two months, with little breaks from time to time, I was analyzing exactly how [Denuvo] does those hardware checks,” he notes.

“Then I tried my tricks for 4.7 on 4.8, but something wasn’t quite right. It was way more obfusticated and had some strange patterns and I couldn’t figure out why it was like that. Soon enough though in June things started to change.”

Voksi says that he tackled several games with test cracks, with variants working on older and newer CPU generations for most people. He then came up with a new theory but needed a game to test it on.

“So I downloaded Puyo Puyo Tetris. I thought ‘it’s small game, it’d be easier to analyze’, but oh no no,” he said.

“The game executable is 128MB big, of which just 5-6MB is the real game code. The rest of it is Denuvo. It’s the most bloated Denuvo I’ve ever seen.”

Nevertheless, Voksi got to work and built a crack and implemented patches (including his new code) based on the new theory. Twelve hours later there was something to celebrate, with a crack working for the vast majority (around 99%) of users. But that wouldn’t be the end of it, he promised.

True to his word, this week Voksi announced that he’d defeated the Denuvo protection on Injustice 2, something that was met with jubilation on Reddit’s /r/crackwatch sub. He informs TF that his new techniques delivered the goods once again.

“I cracked it the same way I cracked Puyo Puyo Tetris. I don’t want to get too technical, because I don’t want to give away my techniques, but I can say it’s not an easy task,” he says.

“I cracked Injustice 2 in 10 hours. The game has custom protection on top of Denuvo and some nice anti-debug features.”

What comes next for 21-year-old Voksi remains to be seen but given his determination, other games are probably being worked on right how. He says that several other titles use 4.9 or 4.9++ protection so it’s possible he’ll have more surprises in the days and weeks to come.

“In the end, it might take some more testing and test cracks, but I’m very happy to announce that I won’t stop until we are Denuvo Cancer Free from all games,” he concludes.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link


Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom has suffered a major setback in his long-running battle with United States authorities over defunct file-sharing site Megaupload.

In a decision handed down this morning, New Zealand’s Court of Appeal ruled that he and three former colleagues – Matthias Ortmann, Bram van der Kolk and Finn Batato – are eligible for extradition to the United States to face a raft of charges including copyright infringement, money laundering, and racketeering.

“We are satisfied that New Zealand law permits extradition for copyright infringement in the circumstances of this case. That is so although we have held, contrary to previous authority, that double criminality is required in extradition between New Zealand and the United States. The appellants are accused of conduct that, if proved, would establish extradition offences in New Zealand law,” the ruling reads.

“Parliament has made a policy decision to protect copyright owners, conferring upon them the exclusive right to copy their works. A criminal offence is committed by anyone who knowingly possesses an infringing digital copy of a protected work in the course of business with a view to committing any act, such as online dissemination, that infringes the copyright.”

Megaupload was raided and shut down in 2012 following a joint operation between New Zealand and United States authorities. For the past six years, Dotcom has fought every detail of his case. With today’s ruling, the extradition process itself has already been analyzed and ruled upon by three different courts.

In a statement issued by Dotcom this morning, the entrepreneur expressed disappointment but again insisted that the fight is far from over.

“In its written judgment, the Court has decided not to record or engage with, our primary and strong submissions on why there was no criminal copyright infringement. At the hearing it did. This is obviously extremely disappointing,” he wrote.

Previously, the High Court agreed with the defense that Dotcom could not be extradited to the U.S. on copyright infringement offenses alone, as communication of copyrighted content to the public is not a criminal offense in New Zealand. However, in a ruling handed down last year, the judge framed the matter as fraud, an extraditable offense.

“If the Court of Appeal did accept we were right, as the High Court did, then the Court would need to find that the United States’ case to extradite me fails. Our submissions on why that must follow are very strong and rely on international authority,” Dotcom said this morning.

The Megaupload founder has long insisted that a negative decision in his case would have wider implications than simply his extradition to the United States. He says that the Court’s ruling exposes local ISPs to criminal liability for the misuse of their services by users, something that was never intended under local law. But he warns that the battle will not end here.

“As people know, I am prepared to fight to get justice, whether it is for me or others. I will appeal to the Supreme Court. Just yesterday, the United States accepted that right exists,” he said.

“My legal team are confident that the Supreme Court will hear the appeal given there are such significant legal issues at stake. Many important cases in New Zealand are not won in the Court of Appeal, or in the Courts below, but are won when they reach the Supreme Court. My case will be one of those.”

Dotcom lawyer Ira Rothken took to Twitter to echo the words of his client.

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The decision handed down today does not attempt to determine the guilt of Dotcom and his co-defendants, simply that there is a “prima facie case to support the allegations that the appellants conspired to, and did, breach copyright wilfully and on a massive scale for commercial gain”.

If extradited to the United States, the quartet faces charges including copyright infringement, racketeering, and money laundering, which carry jail terms of up to 20 years.

The full decision can be found here (pdf)

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link


When the European Commission announced its plans to modernize EU copyright law two years ago, the public barely paid attention. This changed significantly in recent months.

Hundreds of thousands of people spoke out against Article 13, which imposes new restrictions on online service providers. At the same time, many people in creative industries stressed the importance of the plans.

After the Legal Affairs Committee of the Parliament (JURI) adopted the proposals last month the campaigns continued, targeting today’s plenary vote in the European Parliament.

Opponents pressed their representatives to open up the proposal for debate, so significant changes can be made. Supporters, for their part, urged Members of Parliament to keep things the way they are now.

This afternoon the plenary voted in opposition of the mandate, with 278 votes in favor and 318 against.

The result

This means that the proposals, which were agreed on in the JURI committee, will be debated and voted on in Parliament next September where changes can be made to the current text.

“Great success: Your protests have worked! The European Parliament has sent the copyright law back to the drawing board,” Pirate Party MEP Julia Reda commented on the outcome.

“Rather than proceeding directly to negotiations with the Council, the law will be re-opened for amendments and scheduled for a vote in the September plenary session,” she added.

It is worth noting that, while Article 13 is widely referred to as the “upload filter” plan, the word filter doesn’t appear anywhere in the full text of the proposal.

In short, the relevant text states that online services are liable for any uploaded content unless they take “effective and proportionate” action to prevent copyright infringements, identified by copyright holders. That also includes preventing these files from being reuploaded.

The latter implies some form of hash filtering and continuous monitoring of all user uploads. Several companies, including Google Drive, Dropbox, and YouTube already have these types of filters, but many others don’t.

Now that the plenary has voted against the mandate, the proposal and possible alternatives will be discussed in the European Parliament this coming September.

In addition to Article 13, there was also considerable pushback against Article 11, which is regularly referred to as the “link tax.” This article will be debated in Parliament.

Today’s vote follows aggressive lobbying efforts from both sides. While the door to changes has been opened, copyright reform plans to bridge the ‘value gap’ are still on the table, so we can expect more campaigning during the weeks to come.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link


For the past several years, the UK government has published findings from its Online Copyright Infringement (OCI) tracker, which measures the level of online copyright infringement carried out by people 12 years or older.

This morning the UK Intellectual Property Office published the eighth wave of research.

Infringement levels

The study found that 15% of UK Internet users aged 12+ (around 6.5 million people) consumed at least one item of online content illegally in the three month period to March 2018.

In common with previous years, the main content areas covered were music, film, TV, software, eBooks and video games. An additional category of ‘sports content’ was added this time around, something which increased overall infringement by 0.9%.

First up, good news for the movie industry, with infringement levels among movie consumers down from 21% in 2017 to 19% in 2018. Software enjoyed an even more impressive drop, from 26% last year to 20% in 2018. But for other sectors, the news isn’t so good.

Music, for example, is up one point in 2018 to 19%. TV shows increased by the same margin to 23%. Ebooks increased from 11% last year to 13% in 2018 with only videogames remaining static at 16%. New entrant ‘sports content’ got its first reading, pegged at 21%

There was also a reported decline in the use of BitTorrent by infringers (from 11% of infringers in 2017 to 7% this year), while the use of Kodi remained relatively unchanged at around 12% of infringers.

Who are the infringers?

“Looking at infringers of any of the six key content types, those who downloaded or streamed/accessed content illegally were skewed towards those aged under 35 (making up 66% of all infringers). It was also slightly skewed towards men (58%),” the IPO reports.

In terms of movement, there is again good news and bad news.

In the younger age category spanning 12 to 15-year-olds, infringement was down from 25% in 2017 to 22% in 2018. Among 16 to 24-year-olds, there was also a decline, from 27% to 25%. However, letting the side down were those in the older group, whose infringing increased from 9% in 2017 to 12% in 2018.

Reasons for infringement and deterrance

“Reasons for infringing remained largely similar to those given in 2017. ‘Convenience’ (41%) drops slightly and is overtaken once again by ‘it is free’ (44%),” the IPO reports.

“‘It means I can try something before I buy it’ and ‘because I can’ see a further significant decline to 15% and 13% respectively.”

The top reasons cited by respondents for not infringing in future were “if legal services were cheaper” (22%) and, somewhat surprisingly, “if it was clearer what is legal and what isn’t” (21%). These were followed up with better legal availability of content (18%) and more timely delivery (16%).

Supporting similar conclusions in research elsewhere, the study found increasing use of premium legal services among infringers and non-infringers alike.

65% of those who consumed any of the six content types during the three-month sampling period paid for at least some of it, up from 60% in 2017. Contributing to that figure is the proportion of infringers who also use Netflix, for example, which increased from 29% in 2017 to 33% in 2018.

In common with previous years, only a small number of people declared that piracy is the only option for them. These ‘hardcore pirates’ made up just one in ten of infringers.

Overall digital content consumption

When looking at all types of content consumption the survey found no significant shift, with 58% of respondents claiming to have done so in the sampling period, down slightly on 2017 levels.

“Despite no changes in the overall consumption level within the ‘past three months’, differences across content types can be seen,” the IPO notes.

“Looking at the proportion of individuals consuming within our categories the streaming of films continues to rise significantly (from 26% to 28% in 2018). TV programmes, on the other hand saw a significant decrease in both downloading and streaming, leading to an overall decline in consumption.”

Also of interest is the shift towards premium services and how that has affected those available for free.

“Although usage of premium services like Netflix and Now TV have increased significantly, free services like BBC iPlayer, ITV Hub and All 4 have all declined, leading to a net reduction. YouTube continues to see increased usage overall with over half now using the service,” the report notes.

“The proportion of people who only consume free content continues to fall as more services move to premium models. This is an indication that people are chasing the best content and are willing to pay for ease of access to it.”

When looking at spending per consumer, the figures are largely the same, with £74 in 2018, down £1 on 2017’s level. This, the IPO concludes, could be down to the decline in physical content purchases and flat-rate subscription service use.

The report’s findings were cautiously welcomed by Sam Gyimah, Minister for IP.

“The variety of legitimate services now available to consumers is extraordinary and our world-leading creative industries have made great strides in meeting the demands of viewers and fans, so there really is no excuse for the ongoing use of illegal services,” Gyimah said.

“Today’s findings are a positive step forward in stamping out online copyright infringement, but we cannot afford to be complacent. We are committed to tackling piracy and helping this vibrant sector go from strength to strength through our Creative Industries Sector Deal, a major part of our modern Industrial Strategy.”

The survey, funded by the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) and undertaken by Kantar Media, can be found here.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link


Streaming set-top boxes have been selling like hot cakes over the past several years.

While these devices can be used to consume content legally, the entertainment industry also sees them as a potential threat.

For many copyright holders, the threat is viewed as a top enforcement priority, one that has already led to several arrests and lawsuits. Dragon Box is one of the devices that got into legal trouble recently.

Dragon Media and two of its resellers in Hawaii were added to a lawsuit by the rightsholders of the films “Mechanic: Resurrection” (ME2) and “Once Upon a Time in Venice.” This case started out as a ‘classic’ BitTorrent piracy case but switched focus to the streaming box.

The complaint describes how the Dragon Box can be used to access copyrighted material, including the works of ME2 and Venice. The defendants were well aware of this, it argues, adding that the defendants promoted the box with terms hinting at infringing uses.

“Simply put, Dragon Box is intentionally inducing infringement. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court enter a preliminary injunction that requires the Dragon Box Defendants to halt their flagrantly illegal conduct immediately,” ME2 and Venice stated.

Dragon Box and its owner Paul Christoforo, as well as the resellers Naino Bettencourt and Jason Barnhart, who run “The Dragon Box Hawaii” and “JB Dragon Box-Hawaii Kai” respectively, all stood accused of contributory copyright infringement.

While copyright infringement cases can drag on for years, this lawsuit was resolved rather swiftly.

Yesterday, ME2 and Venice dismissed their claims against Dragon Media and its owner Paul Christoforo. The dismissal follows a settlement agreement by the parties involved, the terms of which have not been publicly released.

The two resellers also resolved their dispute with the filmmakers. Both Naino Bettencourt and Jason Barnhart reached a settlement and signed a consent judgment. The latter includes an injunction, preventing both from infringing any of ME2 and Venice’s works going forward.

Since the settlement agreements have not been published, we don’t know whether any compensation was paid. The injunction issued against defendant Barnhart does suggest, however, that the Dragon Boxes he sells will be ‘modified.’

“Defendant is ORDERED to refrain from directly or indirectly selling any of said streaming devices made by Defendant Dragon Media, Inc. including but not limited to the Dragon Box DB4 and the Dragon Box DB5 until notified by Plaintiffs’ counsel that a software modification has been performed to said streaming devices.”

While this matter is now resolved, the trouble for Dragon Box is not over yet. After all, this isn’t the first lawsuit the company and its owner have been dragged into this year.

The company was previously sued by the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), which represents several Hollywood studios, Netflix, and Amazon. That case is still ongoing.

The stipulation for dismissal against Dragon Media and Paul Christoforo is available here (pdf). And here are the consent judgments of Naino Bettencourt (pdf) and Jason Barnhart (pdf).

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link


Due to unlicensed copyrighted content being made available on YouTube and similar platforms, millions of citizens around the world are able to consume the same at rates close to free.

This, of course, is a situation that’s completely unacceptable to the content industries, the record labels in particular. While sites like YouTube compensate them for views of authorized content, the existence of unlicensed content uploaded by users means that the Google-owned video giant gains an unfair negotiating position, or so the claims go.

Soon, however, the labels hope that the free content ride will be over. In an attempt to plug the so-called “Value Gap”, they have lobbied strongly for new legislation (Article 13) that would see user-uploaded content platforms compelled to install filters to detect infringing content before it’s even made available to the public.

Two weeks ago, the Legal Affairs Committee of the Parliament (JURI) voted on Article 13. With a 15 to 10 majority, the proposal of Rapporteur Voss was adopted. This means that the plans move ahead in their current form, despite massive and persistent public outcry.

This Thursday, a plenary vote on the JURI mandate will take place, so it’s no surprise that both sides of the debate are rallying to ensure that their voices are heard. In recent days, more than 80 creative sector groups and companies called on MEPs to support their position, that “playing fair” is the only way forward.

Billions and billions at stake…

“We represent 4.5% of EU GDP and 12 million European jobs. We are the heart and soul of Europe’s plurality and rich identities. On July 5 we ask for you to back the mandate adopted by JURI on 20 June which is the result of long and intense negotiations,” they wrote.

“There is a cynical campaign from tech companies flooding the inboxes of MEPs with scaremongering that the copyright directive would be the end of the internet. Please note that this is the 20th anniversary of their first claim that copyright provisions would break the internet. This has never happened. We need an Internet that is fair and sustainable for all.”

The signatories to the appeal represent countless multi-billion dollar companies whose interests will no doubt cause MEPs to sit up and listen. However, opponents of Article 13 are not sitting idly and hoping for the best. In an open letter published this week by Copybuzz, more than 145 organizations hit back, warning MEPs that Article 13 represents a serious threat to online freedom.

Supported by groups including EFF, Creative Commons, COMMUNIA Association, Public Knowledge and Wikimedia, the letter highlights objections that the proposed legislation threatens innovation by making it more difficult for startups to go about their business without fear of litigation.

“We represent startups which generate 9.5% of total European GDP and 2.5% of the labour market. We are the innovators that have chosen to embrace the future digital enables rather than grasp at the past. We are the believers of healthy competition, where barriers to entry should not be raised by poorly thought through regulation, to the detriment of millions of European innovators,” they write.

“We represent human rights and digital rights who defend the core values of what has made the European Union’s democratic model thrive. We believe that our fundamental rights are priceless and we advocate for strong safeguards when fundamental rights are at risk, as in this case.

“By defending a democratic and open internet, we defend the same internet that allows human rights defenders to expose actions from oppressive governments and monopolies, while allowing a wide range of business models to enjoy their fundamental freedom to conduct a business.”

The groups warn that Article 13 poses a threat to education and access to information and will seriously damage the capacity to improve software via hubs that develop connected products.

“Because of all of the above, we urge you to vote for a public debate on the Directive and, therefore, against the negotiating mandate,” they conclude.

With the vote just two days away the pressure is likely to continue, with both sides digging in. At this stage there’s only one thing they can agree on – that the imposition of upload filters will change everything.

Who that will positively and negatively affect will be for history to decide.

The full letter can be found here (pdf)

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link