applanetAssisted by police in France and the Netherlands, the FBI took down the “pirate” Android stores Appbucket, Applanet, and SnappzMarket during the summer of 2012.

During the years that followed several people connected to the Android app sites were arrested and indicted, resulting in prison sentences for some.

SnappzMarket’s Scott Walton was handed a 46-month prison sentence for conspiracy to commit copyright infringement, and his colleague Joshua Taylor was sentenced to a 16-month term.

While some defendants pleaded guilty in order to get a reduced sentence, not all did. David Lee, a California man linked to Applanet, decided to fight the case instead, and not without success.

The US Government had charged Lee with aiding and abetting criminal copyright infringement (pdf). In addition, he was charged with conspiring to infringe copyrights and violating the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision.

As the case progressed, it became clear that the U.S. Government’s evidence wasn’t as strong as initially thought. Before the trial even started, the prosecution voluntarily dropped the criminal copyright infringement charge.

What remained was the conspiracy charge, but after hearing evidence and testimony from both sides of the case, the jury was unable to issue a unanimous decision. As a result, the case ended in a mistrial two years ago.

The Department of Justice did not let the case go though. Soon after the mistrial, it informed the court that it would re-try Lee. This second trial was delayed a few times but never took place.

Instead, the US Government asked the court to dismiss the indictment against the alleged pirate app store operator, without providing any context. This request was granted earlier this week, which means that Lee is relieved of all charges.

It is not clear what moved the US to dismiss the case. TorrentFreak contacted both Lee’s lawyers and the US Department of Justice for comment, but at the time of publication, we have yet to hear back.

However, with the indictment dismissed, Lee can close this chapter of his life after nearly six years.

Indictment dismissed

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


With the online piracy wars about to enter their third decade, there’s an increasing emphasis on pressurizing influential third-parties to tackle the problem.

As a result, much blame is laid at the feet of companies like Google, who are regularly blamed for not doing more to tackle infringements carried out by individuals and entities outside of their control.

Search results are a particularly sticky subject. Google, Bing, and Yahoo, for example, wish to provide the most comprehensive indexes possible. On the flip side, entertainment industry companies insist that those indexes shouldn’t help people find pirated content. If they do, it’s argued that these companies act as piracy facilitators.

This familiar battle is now underway in Russia, where Yandex is in receipt of a strongly-worded letter which accuses the search giant of being a big part of the piracy problem.

According to local publication Vedomosti, the letter is signed by Leonid Agronov, general director of the National Federation of the Music Industry, Alexei Byrdin, general director of the Internet Video Association, Sergei Selyanov, director of the Association of Film and Television Producers, and Pavel Stepanov, president of the Media Communication Union.

The entertainment giants explain that due to ‘pirate’ search results appearing in its indexes, Yandex is contributing to the growth of online piracy. They want the company to show responsibility by adopting measures to both find and remove infringing links from search and related products.

“We urge Yandex to use all available methods to detect illegal content and eliminate it both from search results and from the applications and services of Yandex,” the letter reads.

It’s suggested that Yandex should take a similar path to that taken by search companies in the UK, via the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding which declares common interests in fighting piracy.

Yandex won’t be alone, however.

A spokesman for the Media and Communications Union, which is one of the groups behind the letter, told Vedomosti that a similar letter would be sent to Google in the near future. Needless to say, Google is no stranger to these kinds of allegations, whether in Europe or the United States.

In the letter, search engines like Yandex are accused of promoting illegal resources over legal content, resulting in revenue being siphoned away from legitimate players and into the hands of criminals. The search engine is also accused of taking down material in response to demands under the DMCA, but not doing enough in Russia.

“Yandex actively cooperates with copyright holders and is working to improve the culture of legal content consumption,” the company said in a statement, adding that it actually stands to benefit from ads promoting sales of non-infringing content.

“Yandex stands for an honest Internet, in which quality legal content is available to the user and rightsholders earn from that legitimate consumption,” the company said.

Unlike in the United States under the DMCA, content isn’t as readily taken down in Russia. Yandex also opposes filtering search results, warning that the system is easily abused by rightsholders and others looking to stifle competition.

That being said, Yandex says that rightsholders are welcome to take advantage of the local site-blocking mechanism which tackles both source sites and their mirrors. With these inaccessible, ‘pirate’ search results become useless.

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


Founded around the turn of the last century, Soulseek is a small dinosaur in the file-sharing world.

Created by former Napster programmer Nir Arbel, the application swiftly turned into a tight community of music fans, which is still active today.

Over the years Soulseek operators Nir and Roz Arbel have seen other file-sharing tools come and go, but all this time they remained dedicated to their principles. Despite its name, Soulseek had long found its purpose.

While it kept a relatively low profile, Soulseek is not immune to the “stigma” that comes with being a file-sharing tool. In 2015, PayPal cut off its ability to collect donations, claiming that sharing tools required pre-approval, even though that policy didn’t exist when it signed up.

Soulseek is not a profit-oriented platform but donations are welcomed. Without PayPal, this became a challenge, but luckily for the developers, the Electonic Frontier Foundation (EFF) was able to intervene.

February 2016 everything returned to normal when the PayPal account was restored, for a while at least. Earlier his year, PayPal apparently changed its mind and booted the application once again.

Soulseek operator Roz Arbel was told that the application violated the payment service’s acceptable use policy and that ‘pre-approval’ was required for ‘file-sharing’ tools. It was pretty much the same recycled argument from years before.

Faced with this deja-vu, Soulseek turned to EFF for help once again, but this time PayPal wouldn’t budge.

“PayPal made it clear that they’re not willing to offer Soulseek financial services any longer. The company did give the Arbels access to their funds and tax documentation, after a request from EFF,” the digital rights group writes.

EFF asked whether PayPal’s latest ban was linked to a concrete copyright complaint, but the payment processor didn’t provide any further information. It just confirmed that Soulseek was banned, apparently for good.

This stance doesn’t come as a complete surprise. PayPal is widely known for its aggressive stance towards BitTorrent sites, Usenet providers and file-hosting services after all.

While some cases may be clearer than others, EFF sees the Soulseek example as a clear illustration of financial censorship.

“What the Arbels are experiencing is a form of financial censorship that has, unfortunately, become increasingly widespread. Following the law isn’t enough—PayPal apparently expects a small message board service with a file-sharing function to do far more than the law requires.”

“PayPal explained to us that they will cut off sites that ‘allow for the transfer or download of copyrighted material.’ Taken literally, that’s a staggeringly broad claim,” EFF writes.

EFF points out that pretty much all content on the Internet is automatically copyrighted. Still, there are thousands of online services that allow people to share it. Downloading copyrighted material is also possible on Dropbox and Google Drive, for example.

In PayPal’s policy, the company suggests that merchants must have a procedure to both “monitor” the files on their service and “remove or otherwise prevent access” to copyright-infringing work. Perhaps that’s where Soulseek goes wrong, but that wouldn’t be fair according to EFF.

“If payment processors were to cut off Internet services simply because they could be used for copyright infringement, a huge swath of the web would lose the ability to accept payments,” EFF writes.

“As a matter of policy, Soulseek respects its users’ privacy by not surveilling their conversations or file exchanges. Violating users’ privacy shouldn’t be the price of entry for using a payment processor.”

It’s clear that Soulseek and PayPal have parted ways. While EFF may not be able to change that, it encourages PayPal and other Internet companies to be more transparent about when and how often they terminate accounts due to complaints from governments or copyright holders.

PayPal’s file-sharing service policy

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


The UK has some of the toughest intellectual property legislation to be found anywhere in the world and rightsholders have plenty of options available, from civil action through to criminal referrals.

For the past several years the government has also shown a willingness to engage with the private sector in respect of online piracy. It has provided funding and resources to initiatives including the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit and the multi-faceted Operation Creative, a commitment that looks set to continue.

At the heart of many of these matters sits the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), the government department responsible for copyrights, trademarks, patents and designs. This week the IPO published two documents, one detailing its corporate plan for 2018-2019 and the other outlining its overall strategy to 2021. Both contain statements relating to online copyright enforcement.

“IP matters. It touches everything that makes modern life, easier, safer, prosperous and more enjoyable,” the IPO Strategy 2018 report begins.

“Our work gives researchers, inventors and creators, whether as individuals or businesses, the confidence to invest their time, energy and money in doing something new and making life better.”

The IPO says its aim is to help the UK become the most creative and innovative country in the world by providing excellent IP services, a world-leading IP environment, and by making the IPO itself a great place to work. Much of the information in the reports focuses on how that progress will be made in the broader sense, including via the reduction of IP crime and infringement.

The IPO believes this can be achieved in a number of ways, including by investing in enforcement and improving access to enforcement options for rights holders. Investment in intelligence and an increased capacity for strategic leadership are foreseen, in addition to spending boosts to convince everyone that infringement is unacceptable.

“We will work towards a time where infringement is seen as socially unacceptable by all,” the IPO writes.

Periodically over the past couple of years, the government has stepped into the middle of disputes between rightsholders and Internet intermediaries, suggesting that if agreements to curb piracy aren’t reached, legislation could follow.

The IPO sees this kind of work continuing over the next couple of years with an offer to “broker greater engagement from online intermediaries in the fight against infringement and IP crime.”

The IPO Corporate Plan 2018-2019 touches on similar issues, promising to ensure that appropriate resources are available to deliver on promises made as part of the government’s enforcement strategy.

“Reducing IP crime requires a multi-faceted approach. The UK is already a world leader in the enforcement of IP. We want to build upon what we are doing to create a paradigm shift around infringement,” the IPO writes.

“Before we can make this happen we need to improve our knowledge around consumer understanding of IP crime and infringement and what works to change behavior in this space. We need to understand the strengths and challenges of our enforcement approach, continue to invest in education and intelligence, and maintain and increase our capacity to lead.”

The IPO says it will consider if there are ways to reduce the costs of enforcement for rights holders, such as reducing the time taken to bring a matter to court and reducing costs once there.

The Office also wants to consider the possibility of more administrative approaches, including “administrative blocking injunctions”, something which it hopes to understand the “pros and cons” of by March 2019. But the plans don’t stop there.

“We will work with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport [DCMS] and industry to support the proposed program of roundtable discussions outlined in the Creative Industries’ Sector Deal.

“A key aspect will be ensuring they are used effectively to assess the evidence for, and where appropriate, to agree future action to tackle the infringement of IP rights online,” the IPO notes.

In conjunction with industry, the IPO hopes to develop “voluntary measures” to target online marketplaces, social media, and digital advertising, while continuing to co-fund the Creative Content UK (CCUK) educational campaign in conjunction with DCMS.

“To begin the work towards making the infringement of IP socially unacceptable, we need a better view of consumer attitudes to IP crime and what messaging changes behavior.

“We know that behavioral change is long-term and never easy, but we want to secure general cultural change where respecting IP is seen as the right thing to do. This work will link up with the messaging on IP’s economic and career impact,” the IPO concludes.

The IPO Strategy 2018 report can be found here (pdf)
The IPO Corporate Plan 2018-2019 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


The music industry sees stream ripping as one of the largest piracy threats, worse than torrent sites or direct download portals.

The RIAA, IFPI, and BPI showed that they’re serious about the issue when they filed legal action against YouTube-MP3, the largest stream ripping site at the time.

This case eventually resulted in a settlement where the site, once good for over a million daily visitors, agreed to shut down voluntarily last year.

YouTube-MP3’s demise was a clear victory for the music groups, which swiftly identified their next targets, putting them under pressure, both in public and behind the scenes.

This week this appears to have taken its toll on several ‘stream ripping’ sites, which allowed users to download videos from YouTube and other platforms, with the option to convert files to MP3s.

The targets include Pickvideo.net, Video-download.co and Easyload.co, which all inform their users that they’ve thrown in the towel.

With several million visits per month, Pickvideo is the largest of the three. According to the site, they took the drastic measures following a cease -and-desist letter.

“We’re sorry to inform you that all downloading and conversion services have been disabled to comply with a ‘Cease & Desist’ request,” a message on Pickvideo’s homepage reads.

PickVideo

The German-based site Video-download.co doesn’t mention a specific threat. However, it does reference the aforementioned YouTube-MP3 case, which shows that it’s worried about the legal ramifications.

“Bad news… We decided to disable all functionality for video-download forever due to the recent takedown of the bigger site youtube-mp3.org, which was based in Germany (so are we).”

Video-download.co

The same is true for EasyLoad. In a message directed to its users, the site also cites YouTube-MP3’s legal troubles as the reason for shutting down its video downloading and conversion service.

“Due to the recent takedown of the site youtube-mp3.org we are forced to disable the functionality of our site. Sorry and thanks for your feedback and support,” EasyLoad writes.

EasyLoad

TorrentFreak reached out to the three sites, but at the time of publishing, they are yet to respond. It seems likely that they were targeted by music industry representatives recently, but that’s not confirmed.

While the music industry groups can scrap a few targets this week, their ‘stream ripping’ problem isn’t going away. A quick search for terms such as “Youtube download Mp3” reveals dozens of working alternatives.

UK music group BPI informed TorrentFreak today that the YouTube-MP3 case is having an impact on the operations of other ripping sites, but the industry is well-aware that their battle isn’t over yet.

“These sites are making large sums of money from music without paying a penny to those that invest in and create it,” a BPI spokesperson tells TF.

“We continue to pursue our strategy to clear these illegal sites, to prevent music fans from being ripped off and to further encourage the use of legal music sites.”

It is worth noting that the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) previously stressed that not all stream ripping sites are facilitating copyright infringement by definition.

While some people may use these sites to ‘pirate’ tracks there are also legitimate purposes, the digital rights group said. Some creators specifically allow others to download and modify their work, for example, and in other cases ripping can be seen as fair use.

“There exists a vast and growing volume of online video that is licensed for free downloading and modification, or contains audio tracks that are not subject to copyright,” the EFF stressed.

“Moreover, many audio extractions qualify as non-infringing fair uses under copyright. Providing a service that is capable of extracting audio tracks for these lawful purposes is itself lawful, even if some users infringe.”

Despite these arguments, however, the music industry is not going to stop applying pressure against the sites they see as clear infringers. And as today’s examples show, that sometimes pays off.

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


Former Pirate Bay spokesperson Peter Sunde paid the ultimate price for his involvement with the notorious pirate site, by sacrificing his freedom.

Since his release from prison over three years ago he has been busy with several old and new projects, ranging from Flattr to his art projects, and even a TV-show in Finland.

However, even though he hasn’t been involved with TPB for nearly a decade, his past association still haunts him.

Previously, the District Court in Finland ordered him to pay €350,000 for 60 music tracks that were shared illegally by the site’s users, as well as a looming € 1,000,000 fine if he ever operated the site in future.

Sunde appealed this decision with help from his lawyer Herkko Hietanen, and not without success.

This week the Helsinki District Court decided to drop the million euro threat hanging over his head. Also, the record labels voluntarily abandoned their €350,000 damages claim.

The Pirate Bay co-founder doesn’t walk away completely unscathed though. While he doesn’t have to pay the legal fees of the record labels, the Court did order him to pay €7,769 in various costs that arose from the case.

The Court concluded that Sunde was liable for The Pirate Bay during the period 2010 to 2014. The reasoning behind this is that he opposed a request from a company that tried to trademark “The Pirate Bay” and its logo. Also, he used the word “we” and “us” when referring to the site in public.

Sunde doesn’t agree with this conclusion and has already announced an appeal.

The Pirate Bay’s co-founder says he saw it as his public duty to defend The Pirate Bay as a member of the public. And referring to TPB with terms such as “we” or “us” simply refers to his history with the site, he says.

“The ‘trademark’ of TPB belongs to the public, and not any individual or commercial entity. On a moral level, it’s important to oppose when commercial entities are trying to limit anyone from what belongs to the public,” Sunde informs TF.

“It’s like having been part of a rock band, I still care about the band, even if I split because I couldn’t stand the bass player. It’s absurd expecting that person to not use words as ‘us’ or ‘we’ when talking about that group anymore.”

Despite the dropped claims, music industry group IFPI is still happy with the outcome. The lawsuit was primarily needed to declare the Pirate Bay illegal, so it could demand that ISPs should block it. This blockade will remain in place.

“The most important thing was to stop The Pirate Bay’s operations in Finland, thus keeping the service blocked for Finns. It was the copyright owners’ real intention to start the trial in 2011,” Jaana Pihkala, head of the local anti-piracy group TTVK, told Svenska Yle.

Sunde, however, notes that the record labels may want to take a closer look at the people they employ, adding that this whole case was just another effort to censor the Internet.

“It’s time that the record companies start paying for their own injustices. Just two days ago a core member of the Danish anti-piracy organization, Johan Schlüter, got convicted to four years of probation after embezzling 100 Million Danish kroner from his clients.

“The same person has previously claimed that “child porn is great” because it opens up doors for copyright companies to censor the internet,” Sunde adds.

“This is exactly what the current case is about, censoring the internet. By suing an individual with little means to defend himself, the record companies found a backdoor into censoring a website. They don’t care about the damages to the individual, as long as they can get control of the internet.”

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


pirate bayThe Pirate Bay has been hard to reach for nearly 48 hours now.

For most people, the site currently displays a CloudFlare error message across the entire site, with the CDN provider mentioning that a “bad gateway” is causing the issue.

No further details are available to us and there is no known ETA for the site’s full return. However, judging from past experience, it’s likely a small technical issue that needs fixing.

TPB 502 Cloudflare error

The Pirate Bay has had quite a few stints of downtime in recent months. The popular torrent site usually returns after several hours, but an outage of more than a day has happened before as well.

Amid the downtime, there’s still some good news for those who desperately need to access the notorious torrent site.

TPB is still available via its .onion address on the Tor network, accessible using the popular Tor Browser, for example. The site’s Tor traffic goes through a separate server and works just fine.

The Pirate Bay team has a status page in the forums where people can check to see if an outage is affecting everyone or not. This also shows that the Tor version of the site is working fine, although it doesn’t show any new torrents.

The main .org domain will probably be back in action soon enough, but seasoned TPB users will probably know the drill by now…

Update: After nearly 2 days of downtime, TPB now appears to be back.

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


The ongoing battle between copyright holders and pirates is often described as a cat and mouse game, especially when it comes to content protection.

Hollywood studios release their movies with copy protection. Pirates break it. New protection is released. Pirates break it again. And so forth.

With UHD Blu-rays, copyright holders have long had the upper hand in this game. The discs are protected with AACS 2.0 encryption which was long believed to unbreakable.

This changed late last year. While the encryption technically wasn’t ‘cracked,’ at least not publicly, various pirated UHD Blu-ray movies were released. After several years behind, the ‘pirates’ were in front again.

Not much later, another breakthrough came when a Russian company released a Windows tool called DeUHD that could rip UHD Blu-ray discs. While this was initially another win for pirates, bad news was on the horizon.

Last month, the UHD Bluray releases of the movies Fury and The Patriot came out with a new encryption version, labeled AACS 2.1. This addition made it impossible to rip the discs and some feared that bypassing the protection could take a long time.

Yesterday, however, Arusoft released a new version of its DeUHD ripping tool that is now able to rip AACS 2.1 discs.

DeUHD announcement

TorrentFreak reached out to Arusoft who informed us that the AACS 2.1 discs come with a crucial difference. The main file has a fmts extension, an encrypted m2ts format, which contains forensic information.

“[I]t’s extension is fmts instead of m2ts because it contains some extra info used by studios to track the player used for decryption, which is the major difference from aacs2.0 discs,” Arusoft notes.

“It is not too difficult to bypass this protection, just takes some time to do it,” they add.

While Arusoft doesn’t condone piracy, as MyCE notes, the new DeUHD release opens the door for pirates to share releases to a wider audience.

And indeed, a few hours ago several UHD Blu-ray rips of Fury have appeared online.

Interestingly, there is some concern among the broader public whether this would be ‘safe’ or not.

It’s obviously illegal, but the main worry is that AACS 2.1 presumably added forensic watermarks could help to identify the source of a leak. DeUHD’s developers, however, suggest that these data have been stripped.

“All redundant data has been cleared from the disc,” Arusoft tells TorrentFreak.

In a similarly worded statement, MyCE was informed that DeUHD “clears the garbage from the file” but other than that no definite claims were made.

TorrentFreak previously reached out to the licensing outfit AACS LA to find out more about the new encryption. The company said it would review our request but has yet to comment.

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


Last month we were the first to report that Justin Sun, the entrepreneur behind the popular cryptocurrency TRON, was in the process of acquiring BitTorrent Inc.

The San-Francisco based file-sharing company confirmed the interest from Sun but noted that the acquisition was not yet 100% finalized.

This position appears to have shifted in the weeks that followed. Last week Sun’s company Rainberry Aquisition filed paperwork related to a merger at California Secretary of State, Variety reports, and BitTorrent did the same.

BitTorrent changed its name to Rainberry last year, and new information suggests that the acquisition by Sun was recently finalized.

This is further backed up by Variety which learned that BitTorrent management informed employees about the deal last week. The staffers were told not to share any information with the press, but word got out eventually.

It’s unclear how much was paid for the acquisition. Sun’s plans for BitTorrent also remain a mystery.

In the short term, not much is expected to change. However, it could be that Sun will eventually use BitTorrent’s user base of over 100 million users to popularize TRON even further. With the acquisition, Sun will also own several BitTorrent patents, including one for P2P live streaming.

TRON is one of the hottest and most controversial cryptocurrencies. After a successful ICO, it now has a market cap of more than $3 billion, which is surpassed by few others.

The TRON mainnet, which went live two weeks ago, has the ultimate goal to “decentralize the web.” BitTorrent would fit well in this picture, especially since the TRON whitepaper mentions torrents as one of its pillars.

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


Even though sports streaming services are widely available in most countries, people are not always willing to pay for them.

This applies to individuals, who turn to pirate sites or other unauthorized channels, but also to businesses such as bars and restaurants.

The latter group is seen as a thorn in the side by many rightsholders. This includes the Spanish soccer league “La Liga,” which broadcasts some of the most viewed matches in the world.

In an effort to curb this type of piracy, “La Liga” has recently started to use modern technology, and its users, to its advantage. In an unprecedented move, the soccer league has turned its official Android app into a piracy spying machine.

The app in question, which has been installed by millions of users, will use the microphone and GPS readings of the devices its installed on to report possible instances of streaming piracy.

With consent from the user, the app will analyze the audio in its surroundings to check if one of La Liga’s matches is being played. It then pairs that with GPS data to see if that location is an authorized broadcaster.

“Protect your team,” users read when they are prompted to enable this type of data collection.

Protect your team (photo: Jorge Morell Ramos)

The unusual functionality is detailed in the privacy policy which mentions tackling piracy as one of the main purposes.

“The purposes for which this functionality will be used are: (i) to develop statistical patterns on soccer consumption and (ii) to detect fraudulent operations of the retransmissions of LaLiga football matches (piracy).”

The microphone will only be activated when La Liga is broadcasting its football matches, the policy further clarifies.

The spying tool was spotted by Eldiario.es, which reached out to “La Liga” for additional information.

The Spanish soccer league informed the publication that “nobody accesses the audio fragments captured by the microphone” as the audio “automatically becomes a signal, a binary code.” This happens only in Spain and “without storing any recording or content.”

The organization states that it has to resort to these kinds of measures since piracy is resulting in losses of up to 150 million euros. It doesn’t mention how the data will be used, but establishments who broadcast their matches without consent, are warned.

Users who’ve enabled the functionality but no longer want to operate as piracy spies can go into the settings of their phone to disable audio and location sharing.

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