RIAA: ISP Profited From Keeping Pirating Customers Aboard


Last year several major record labels, represented by the RIAA, filed a lawsuit against ISP Grande Communications accusing it of turning a blind eye to pirating subscribers.

According to the RIAA, the Internet provider knew that some of its subscribers were frequently distributing copyrighted material, but failed to take any meaningful action in response.

Grande refuted the accusations and filed a motion to dismiss the case. The ISP partially succeeded as the claims against its management company Patriot were dropped. The same was true for the vicarious infringement allegations, as the court saw no evidence that the ISP had a direct financial interest in the infringing activity.

While the RIAA could still go after the ISP for contributory copyright infringement, it wants more. A few days ago, the music group submitted a motion for leave to file an amended complaint including new evidence obtained during discovery.

Among other things, the RIAA argues in more detail that Grande willingly kept pirating subscribers abroad, to generate more revenue. According to the complaint, Grande terminated accounts of pirating subscribers in the past, but stopped doing so in 2010.

“The evidence in this case reveals that, until 2010, Grande actually suspended and may even have terminated known repeat infringing customers,” reads the amended complaint, filed at a Texas federal court.

“But then, from 2011 to 2016, Defendants made the conscious decision not to terminate a single Grande subscriber for copyright infringement, regardless of how much proof they received, from any source, of those subscribers blatant, repeat infringement.”

After the RIAA filed its lawsuit, Grande allegedly started terminating subscribers again, According to the music group, the ISP hereby implicitly acknowledged that it acted unlawfully during the period in between.

The new complaint claims that Grande profited from the repeat infringers. They were also the most profitable customers by profit margin, as many had a more lucrative “a la carte” subscription.

“Defendants’ policy of refusing to take meaningful action against repeat infringers protects a significant revenue stream that Grande receives every month from its many infringing subscribers,” RIAA writes.

These allegations, including the claim that RIAA members’ sound recordings acted as a draw, are backed up by evidence filed under seal.

According to the record labels, however, it’s clear that Grande failed to adopt and reasonably implement a policy to stop repeat infringers. As such, it should have no DMCA safe harbor defense and be held liable for both vicarious and contributory copyright infringement.

In addition, the RIAA stated that newly discovered evidence also shows that the ISPs’ management company Patriot should not escape liability.

If the court accepts the amended complaint, Grande will have to respond to the new evidence and additional allegations.

As in the original complaint, the RIAA seeks statutory damages, which could go up to $150,000 per infringed work, actual damages, plus profits generated by Grande as a result of the infringement. The music group also asks for preliminary and permanent injunctions preventing Grande from further infringement.

—

A copy of the amended complaint 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

/0 Comments/by

Judges Refuse to Unmask Alleged Pirates, Citing Privacy Concerns


Since the turn of the last decade, numerous people have been sued for illegal file-sharing in US courts.

These cases are generally filed by a small group of rightsholders and this year “Strike 3 Holdings” has proven itself to be one of the most active litigants.

The company, which distributes its works through various adult websites, has filed cases against hundreds of alleged defendants over the past several months.

As is common in these cases, the copyright holder only knows the defendant by an IP-address. It then asks the courts to grant a subpoena, allowing it to ask Internet providers for the personal details of the alleged offenders, so it can send a settlement request.

In most district courts this established process is usually just a matter of filing boilerplate paperwork but in Minnesota, this didn’t go as easily as Strike 3 had expected.

Late last month, Magistrate Judge Franklin Noel denied such a discovery motion. As a result, Strike 3 is not allowed to ask the ISP, Comcast in this case, for the personal details of the account holder associated with the IP-address.

According to Judge Noel, these cases present a conflict between the copyright protections of the DMCA on the one hand and the privacy rights of the public as set out in the Communications Act. Here, the scale tips in the favour of the latter.

“This Court concludes that the conflict between the statutes, DMCA and the Communications Act, compels it to deny Plaintiff’s instant ex parte motion,” Judge Noel wrote.

This order didn’t go unnoticed. Last week Magistrate Judge David Schultz cited the ruling in two similar cases, also filed by Strike 3. Again, the subpoena requests were denied to secure the privacy of the alleged BitTorrent pirates.

“From this Court’s perspective there are obvious tensions between DMCA, the Communications Act, and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45,” Schultz’s orders read.

“The Court is not unsympathetic to Plaintiff’s need to discover the actual identity of the infringer of its copyright; however, the discovery sought by Plaintiff through a Rule 45 subpoena directly collides with federal privacy protections.”

In the orders, which are all nearly identical, the magistrate judges note that unless there’s a binding precedent from the Eighth Circuit or further guidance from Congress, they have no other option than to deny these discovery requests.

While this is good news for the defendants in these cases, copyright troll watcher ‘FCT’ notes that it’s too early to celebrate. Since issuing these subpoenas is a well-established procedure, the district judge or an appeal court may reverse the denials.

This lack of agreement is also apparent from another ruling that came in right before the weekend, where another Minnesota Magistrate Judge granted a similar subpoena request from Strike 3, witch the caveat that the defendant should be able to proceed anonymously.

That said, if the orders from Magistrate Judges Noel and Schultz stand, it’s a clear win for the defendants in these cases. While it won’t stop Strike 3 from continuing it’s business, at least a few people are spared from receiving settlement demands in the mail.

—

The denials are available here (pdf 1,2,3) and the order granting the subpoena 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

/0 Comments/by

Infamous ‘Kodi Box’ Case Sees Man Pay Back Just £1 to the State


In 2015, Middlesbrough-based shopkeeper Brian ‘Tomo’ Thompson shot into the headlines after being raided by police and Trading Standards in the UK.

Thompson had been selling “fully-loaded” piracy-configured Kodi boxes from his shop but didn’t think he’d done anything wrong.

“All I want to know is whether I am doing anything illegal. I know it’s a gray area but I want it in black and white,” he said.

Thompson started out with a particularly brave tone. He insisted he’d take the case to Crown Court and even to the European Court. His mission was show what was legal and what wasn’t, he said.

Very quickly, Thompson’s case took on great importance, with observers everywhere reporting on a potential David versus Goliath copyright battle for the ages. But Thompson’s case wasn’t straightforward.

The shopkeeper wasn’t charged with basic “making available” under the Copyrights, Designs and Patents Acts that would have found him guilty under the earlier BREIN v Filmspeler case. Instead, he stood accused of two offenses under section 296ZB of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, which deals with devices and services designed to “circumvent technological measures”.

In the end it was all moot. After entering his official ‘not guilty’ plea, last year Thompson suddenly changed his tune. He accepted the prosecution’s version of events, throwing himself at the mercy of the court with a guilty plea.

In October 2017, Teeside Crown Court heard that Thompson cost Sky around £200,000 in lost subscriptions while the shopkeeper made around £38,500 from selling the devices. But despite the fairly big numbers, Judge Peter Armstrong decided to go reasonably light on the 55-year-old, handing him an 18-month prison term, suspended for two years.

“I’ve come to the conclusion that in all the circumstances an immediate custodial sentence is not called for. But as a warning to others in future, they may not be so lucky,” the Judge said.

But things wouldn’t end there for Thompson.

In the UK, people who make money or obtain assets from criminal activity can be forced to pay back their profits, which are then confiscated by the state under the Proceeds of Crime Act (pdf). Almost anything can be taken, from straight cash to cars, jewellery and houses.

However, it appears that whatever cash Thompson earned from Kodi Box activities has long since gone.

During a Proceeds of Crime hearing reported on by Gazette Live, the Court heard that Thompson has no assets whatsoever so any confiscation order would have to be a small one.

In the end, Judge Simon Hickey decided that Thompson should forfeit a single pound, an amount that could increase if the businessman got lucky moving forward.

“If anything changes in the future, for instance if you win the lottery, it might come back,” the Judge said.

With that seeming particularly unlikely, perhaps this will be the end for Thompson. Considering the gravity and importance placed on his case, zero jail time and just a £1 to pay back will probably be acceptable to the 55-year-old and also a lesson to the authorities, who have gotten very little out of this expensive case.

Who knows, perhaps they might sum up the outcome using the same eight-letter word that Thompson can be seen half-covering in this photograph.

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

/0 Comments/by

Do You Take Your VPN Security Seriously?


In recent years there has been a massive boom in VPN usage, spurred on by security breaches and privacy leaks.

While prospective VPN users pay a lot of attention to the various policies VPN providers have when it comes to logging or leak protection, the user’s own responsibility is often entirely ignored.

When there’s a leak of sorts, such as the common WebRTC, Ipv6, DNS or torrent client leaks, people are quick to point their finger at the VPN provider, even though they could have easily prevented issues themselves.

It’s clear that a good VPN provider should do everything in its power to prevent leaks. At the very minimum, they should inform users about possible risks. Better yet, they should regularly test for vulnerabilities.

Still, VPN users themselves can also take a more proactive approach. The problem is that many people don’t take their own VPN security very seriously.

After signing up at a VPN service, many assume that they are perfectly protected. Aside from checking whether their IP-address has changed, they expend very little effort to make sure that this is the case.

What new VPN users should do instead is a series of VPN leak tests. Not just one, but at least a couple. Also, this should be repeated on all devices and in all browsers that are used, just to make sure.

It would also be smart to redo these tests on a regular basis, as devices and applications change. If there are any problems, fix them, with or without help from the VPN provider.

Aside from testing how leak-safe the setup is, VPN users might want to read the documentation and setup guides their VPN service provides. What is the most secure protocol? Does the software have built-in leak protection? What about a kill-switch?

If you use a custom VPN application offered by the provider it may come in with built-in leak protection, but that’s not always the case.

Also, some providers offer these features but don’t have them enabled by default, as it may lead to various connectivity issues. Others leave it up to the user to secure their browsers and apps. These are all things that should be taken into account.

If there are any leaks, let your VPN provider know. They should fix them if they can, after all.

Similarly, torrent users should not forget to test if their torrent client is setup correctly, and test for leaks there as well. This is easily overlooked by many.

While checking for leaks is crucial, things get even complicated when it comes to anonymity.

Some people are extremely focused on choosing a “zero log” VPN to maintain their privacy, but then use the same VPN to log in to Google, Twitter, Facebook and other services. This links the VPN address to their personal account, creating extensive logs there. And that without mentioning the other privacy-sensitive and tracking data these services collect and store.

While most are not too worried about that, it shows that full privacy or anonymity is hard to accomplish, even if a VPN is secure.

The bottom line is, however, that both VPNs and their users should be vigilant. VPN providers should take responsibility to prevent or warn against possible leaks, but people should remember that a “zero-log” VPN really is worthless if the user hasn’t set it up correctly, or uses it the wrong way.

—

Do I leak offers a comprehensive and independent VPN leak test, but Google should be able to find dozens more.

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

/0 Comments/by

YouTube Won’t Put Up With Blatant Piracy Tutorials Forever


Once upon a time, Internet users’ voices would be heard in limited circles, on platforms such as Usenet or other niche platforms.

Then, with the rise of forum platforms such as phpBB in 2000 and Invision Power Board in 2002, thriving communities could gather in public to discuss endless specialist topics, including file-sharing of course.

When dedicated piracy forums began to gain traction, it was pretty much a free-for-all. People discussed obtaining free content absolutely openly. Nothing was taboo and no one considered that there would be any repercussions. As such, moderation was limited to keeping troublemakers in check.

As the years progressed and lawsuits against both sites and services became more commonplace, most sites that weren’t actually serving illegal content began to consider their positions. Run by hobbyists, most didn’t want the hassle of a multi-million dollar lawsuit, so links to pirate content began to diminish and the more overt piracy tutorials began to disappear underground.

Those that remained in plain sight became much more considered. Tutorials on how to pirate specific Hollywood blockbusters were no longer needed, a plain general tutorial would suffice. And, as communities matured and took time to understand the implications of their actions, those without political motivations realized that drawing attention to potential criminality was neither required nor necessary.

Then YouTube and social media happened and almost overnight, no one was in charge and anyone could say whatever they liked.

In this new reality, there were no irritating moderator-type figures removing links to this and that, and nobody warning people against breaking rules that suddenly didn’t exist anymore. In essence, previously tight-knit and street-wise file-sharing and piracy communities not only became fragmented, but also chaotic.

This meant that anyone could become a leader and in some cases, this was the utopia that many had hoped for. Not only couldn’t the record labels or Hollywood tell people what to do anymore, discussion site operators couldn’t either. For those who didn’t abuse the power and for those who knew no better, this was a much-needed breath of fresh air. But, like all good things, it was unlikely to last forever.

Where most file-sharing of yesterday was carried out by hobbyist enthusiasts, many of today’s pirates are far more casual. They’re just as thirsty for content, but they don’t want to spend hours hunting for it. They want it all on a plate, at the flick of a switch, delivered to their TV with a minimum of hassle.

With online discussions increasingly seen as laborious and old-fashioned, many mainstream pirates have turned to easy-to-consume videos. In support of their Kodi media player habits, YouTube has become the educational platform of choice for millions.

As a result, there is now a long line of self-declared Kodi piracy specialists scooping up millions of views on YouTube. Their videos – which in many cases are thinly veiled advertisements for third party addons, Kodi ‘builds’, illegal IPTV services, and obscure Android APKs – are now the main way for a new generation to obtain direct advice on pirating.

Many of the videos are incredibly blatant, like the past 15 years of litigation never happened. All the lessons learned by the phpBB board operators of yesteryear, of how to achieve their goals of sharing information without getting shut down, have been long forgotten. In their place, a barrage of daily videos designed to generate clicks and affiliate revenue, no matter what the cost, no matter what the risk.

It’s pretty clear that these videos are at least partly responsible for the phenomenal uptick in Kodi and Android-based piracy over the past few years. In that respect, many lovers of free content will be eternally grateful for the service they’ve provided. But like many piracy movements over the years, people shouldn’t get too attached to them, at least in their current form.

Thanks to the devil-may-care approach of many influential YouTubers, it won’t be long before a whole new set of moderators begin flexing their muscles. While your average phpBB moderator could be reasoned with in order to get a second chance, a determined and largely faceless YouTube will eject offenders without so much as a clear explanation.

When this happens (and it’s only a question of time given the growing blatancy of many tutorials) YouTubers will not only lose their voices but their revenue streams too. While YouTube’s partner programs bring in some welcome cash, the profitable affiliate schemes touted on these channels for external products will also be under threat.

Perhaps the most surprising thing in this drama-waiting-to-happen is that many of the most popular YouTubers can hardly be considered young and naive. While some are of more tender years, most – with their undoubted skill, knowledge and work ethic – should know better for their 30 or 40 years on this planet. Yet not only do they make their names public, they feature their faces heavily in their videos too.

Still, it’s likely that it will take some big YouTube accounts to fall before YouTubers respond by shaving the sharp edges off their blatant promotion of illegal activity. And there’s little doubt that those advertising products (which is most of them) will have to do so sooner rather than later.

Just this week, YouTube made it clear that it won’t tolerate people making money from the promotion of illegal activities.

“YouTube creators may include paid endorsements as part of their content only if the product or service they are endorsing complies with our advertising policies,” YouTube told the BBC.

“We will be working with creators going forward so they better understand that in video promotions [they] must not promote dishonest activity.”

That being said, like many other players in the piracy and file-sharing space over the past 18 years, YouTubers will eventually begin to learn that not only can the smart survive, they can flourish too.

Sure, there will be people out there who’ll protest that free speech allows citizens to express themselves in a manner of their choosing. But try PM’ing that to YouTube in response to a strike, and see how that fares.

When they say you’re done, the road back is a long one.

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

/1 Comment/by

Video Deters People From Pirate Sites…Or Encourages Them to Start One?


There are almost as many anti-piracy strategies as there are techniques for downloading.

Litigation and education are probably the two most likely to be seen by the public, who are often directly targeted by the entertainment industries.

Over the years this has led to many campaigns, one of which famously stated that piracy is a crime while equating it to the physical theft of a car, a handbag, a television, or a regular movie DVD. It’s debatable whether these campaigns have made much difference but they have raised awareness and some of the responses have been hilarious.

While success remains hard to measure, it hasn’t stopped these PSAs from being made. The latest efforts come out of Sweden, where the country’s Patent and Registration Office (PRV) was commissioned by the government to increase public awareness of copyright and help change attitudes surrounding streaming and illegal downloading.

“The purpose is, among other things, to reduce the use of illegal streaming sites and make it easier and safer to find and choose legal options,” PRV says.

“Every year, criminal networks earn millions of dollars from illegal streaming. This money comes from advertising on illegal sites and is used for other criminal activities. The purpose of our film is to inform about this.”

The series of videos show pirates in their supposed natural habitats of beautiful mansions, packed with luxurious items such as indoor pools, fancy staircases, and stacks of money. For some reason (perhaps to depict anonymity, perhaps to suggest something more sinister) the pirates are all dressed in animal masks, such as this one enjoying his Dodge Viper.

The clear suggestion here is that people who visit pirate sites and stream unlicensed content are helping to pay for this guy’s bright green car. The same holds true for his indoor swimming pool, jet bike, and gold chains in the next clip.

While some might have a problem with pirates getting rich from their clicks, it can’t have escaped the targets of these videos that they too are benefiting from the scheme. Granted, hyena-man gets the pool and the Viper, but they get the latest movies. It seems unlikely that pirate streamers refused to watch the copy of Black Panther that leaked onto the web this week (a month before its retail release) on the basis that someone else was getting rich from it.

That being said, most people will probably balk at elements of the full PSA, which suggests that revenue from illegal streaming goes on to fuel other crimes, such as prescription drug offenses.

After reporting piracy cases for more than twelve years, no one at TF has ever seen evidence of this happening with any torrent or streaming site operators. Still, it makes good drama for the full video, embedded below.

“In the film we follow a fictional occupational criminal who gives us a tour of his beautiful villa. He proudly shows up his multi-criminal activity, which was made possible by means of advertising money from his illegal streaming services,” PRV explains.

The dark tone and creepy masks are bound to put some people off but one has to question the effect this kind of video could have on younger people. Do pirates really make mountains of money so huge that they can only be counted by machine? If they do, then it’s a lot less risky than almost any other crime that yields this claimed level of profit.

With that in mind, will this video deter the public or simply encourage people to get involved for some of that big money? We sent a link to the operator of a large pirate site for his considered opinion.

“WTF,” he responded.

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

/0 Comments/by

Cloudflare Fails to Exclude Daily Stormer Evidence From Piracy Trial


Last summer Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince decided to terminate the account of controversial neo-Nazi site Daily Stormer.

“I woke up this morning in a bad mood and decided to kick them off the Internet,” he announced.

The company’s lawyers later explained that the move was meant as an “intellectual exercise” to start a conversation regarding censorship and free speech on the internet. However, this discussion went much further than Prince had planned.

For years, Cloudflare had a policy not to remove any accounts without a court order, so when this was exceeded, eyebrows were raised. In particular, copyright holders wondered why the company could terminate this account but not those of the most notorious pirate sites.

This is also why The Daily Stormer removal became an issue in the piracy liability case previously filed by adult entertainment publisher ALS Scan. After Cloudflare’s CEO was questioned on the matter, it could be raised before a jury during the trial as well.

Cloudflare didn’t fancy this prospect. In March, the company asked the court to preclude any evidence related to Daily Stormer or other hate groups from the upcoming trial, fearing that it would lead to “guilt by association.”

“The apparent reason that ALS seeks to offer is not for its probative value but rather for its distracting emotional impact,” Cloudflare argued.

“Given the strong feelings such evidence would almost certainly arouse among members of the jury, this evidence creates an unwarranted and impermissible risk of unfair prejudice to Cloudflare.”

However, California District Court Judge George Wu was not receptive to this argument. Following a hearing on the matter last week the Judge denied the motion, which means that ALS is allowed to use the Daily Stormer case at trial.

“[Cloudflare’s motion] to Exclude Evidence Relating to Provision or Termination of Services to Hate Groups is DENIED.”

Motion denied

In hindsight, Cloudflare’s decision to disconnect Daily Stormer the way it did might not have been the best option, but t’s too late now.

According to recent court filings AS and Cloudflare have tried to reach a settlement but thus far that hasn’t happened. This means that the case will move to the scheduled trial, unless both sides can make peace beforehand.

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

/0 Comments/by

Russia Blocks 50 VPNs & Anonymizers in Telegram Crackdown, Viber Next


Any entity operating an encrypted messaging service in Russia needs to register with local authorities. They must also hand over their encryption keys when requested to do so, so that users can be monitored.

Messaging giant Telegram refused to give in to Russian pressure. Founder Pavel Durov said that he would not compromise the privacy of Telegram’s 200m monthly users, despite losing a lawsuit against the Federal Security Service which compelled him to do so. In response, telecoms watchdog Roscomnadzor filed a lawsuit to degrade Telegram via web-blocking.

After a Moscow court gave the go-ahead for Telegram to be banned in Russia last month, chaos broke out. ISPs around the country tried to block the service, which was using Amazon and Google to provide connectivity. Millions of IP addresses belonging to both companies were blocked and countless other companies and individuals had their services blocked too.

But despite the Russian carpet-bombing of Telegram, the service steadfastly remained online. People had problems accessing the service at times, of course, but their determination coupled with that of Telegram and other facilitators largely kept communications flowing.

Part of the huge counter-offensive was mounted by various VPN and anonymizer services that allowed people to bypass ISP blocks. However, they too have found themselves in trouble, with Russian authorities blocking them for facilitating access to Telegram. In an announcement Thursday, the telecoms watchdog revealed the scale of the crackdown.

Deputy Head of Roskomnadzor told TASS that dozens of VPNs and similar services had been blocked while hinting at yet more to come.

“Fifty for the time being,” Subbotin said.

With VPN providers taking a hit on behalf of Telegram, there could be yet more chaos looming on the horizon. It’s feared that other encrypted services, which have also failed to hand over their keys to the FSB, could be targeted next.

Ministry of Communications chief Nikolai Nikiforov told reporters this week that if Viber doesn’t fall into line, it could suffer the same fate as Telegram.

“This is a matter for the Federal Security Service, because the authority with regard to such specific issues in the execution of the order for the provision of encryption keys is the authority of the FSB,” Nikiforov said.

“If they have problems with the provision of encryption keys, they can also apply to the court and obtain a similar court decision,” the minister said, responding to questions about the Japanese-owned, Luxembourg-based communications app.

With plenty of chaos apparent online, there are also reports of problems from within Roscomnadzor itself. For the past several days, rumors have been circulating in Russian media that Roskomnadzor chief Alexander Zharov has resigned, perhaps in response to the huge over-blocking that took place when Telegram was targeted.

When questioned by reporters this week, Ministry of Communications chief Nikolai Nikiforov refused to provide any further information, stating that such a matter would be for the prime minister to handle.

“I would not like to comment on this. If the chairman of the government takes this decision, I recall that the heads of services are appointed by the decision of the prime minister and personnel decisions are never commented on,” he said.

Whether Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev will make a statement is yet to be seen, but this week his office has been dealing with a blocking – or rather unblocking – controversy of its own.

In a public post on Facebook May 1, Duma deputy Natalya Kostenko revealed that she was having problems due to the Telegram blockades.

“Dear friends, do not write to me on Telegram, I’m not getting your messages. Use other channels to contact me,” Kostenko wrote.

In response, Dmitry Medvedev’s press secretary, Natalia Timakova, told her colleague to circumvent the blockade so that she could access Telegram once again.

“Use a VPN! It’s simple. And it works almost all the time,” Timakov wrote.

Until those get blocked too, of course…..

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

/0 Comments/by

MPAA-Seized Popcorn Time Domain Now Redirects to Pirate Site


Four years ago Popcorn Time took the Internet by storm.

The software amassed millions of users by offering BitTorrent-powered streaming in an easy-to-use Netflix-style interface.

While the original developers shut down their project after a few months, following pressure from Hollywood, others forked the application and took over.

PopcornTime.io swiftly became the main Popcorn Time fork. The spin-off soon had millions of users and updates were pushed out on a regular basis. At the end of 2015, however, this fork also disappeared from the web.

The MPAA took credit for the fall announcing that it had filed a lawsuit against several people in Canada. In response to these legal threats, several key developers backed out.

Soon after, the MPAA also assumed control of the main domain name, ensuring that it could not fall into the wrong hands.

This worked well, initially, but this week we noticed that PopcornTime.io is active again. The domain now links to the pirate streaming site Stream.cr, which welcomes its new visitors with a special message.

Redirection landing page

“Notice: If you’re looking for Popcorn Time(App) for it’s P2P torrent streaming, it’s over at popcorntime.sh. Otherwise, if you’re looking for streaming. Welcome to StreamCR!” a message on the site reads.

This is odd, considering that the PopcornTime.io domain name is still registered to the MPAA.

Popcorntime.io Whois

Adding to the intrigue is the fact that the PopcornTime.io domain registrar is listed as MarkMonitor, which is a well-known brand protection company, often used to prevent domain troubles.

“Protect your critical assets by partnering with a corporate-only domain registrar who has a strong security culture and is committed to providing the most secure and reliable solution in the industry,” MarkMonitor writes

However, since PopcornTime.io now links to a pirate site, something clearly went wrong.

It’s hard to say with certainty what happened. A likely option is that the domain’s nameservers, which point to DNS Made Easy, were not configured properly and that the people behind Stream.cr used that oversight to redirect the domain to their own site.

TorrentFreak spoke to a source unrelated to this case who says he was previously able to redirect traffic from a domain that was seized by the MPAA, simply by adding it to his own DNS Made Easy account. That worked, until the nameservers were updated to MarkMonitor’s DNS servers.

Whether the fault, in this instance, lies with the MPAA, MarkMonitor, or another party is hard to say without further details.

In any case, the MPAA is not going to be happy with the end result, and neither is MarkMonitor. The Stream.cr operators, meanwhile, are probably celebrating and they can enjoy the free traffic while it lasts.

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

/0 Comments/by

Epic Settles With Copyright Infringing Fortnight Cheater, PUBG Cheaters Arrested


Last year, Epic Games released Fortnite’s free-to-play “Battle Royale” game mode, generating massive interest among gamers.

Unfortunately, not all players stick to the rules. Thousands of people are trying to gain an advantage through cheats, ruining the game for those who play fair.

The same is true for PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG), which predates Fortnite and shares many of the same characteristics. While the games are very much alike, the same can’t be said for the way cheaters are treated.

Over the past month, Epic Games has filed lawsuits against several people who violated the company’s copyrights, by creating, promoting – and in some cases – selling cheats. While copyright infringement cases can easily bankrupt defendants, that’s not what Epic is after.

This week the company signed another ‘settlement.’ This time with Joseph Sperry, a.k.a. “Spoezy,” in a North Carolina federal court. Sperry, who stood accused of creating and selling cheats, admitted to the copyright infringement allegations and signed a consent judgment.

“Defendant directly infringed Epic’s copyrights in Fortnite. Defendant used the cheats. His use of the cheats created unauthorized derivative works of Epic’s copyright protected Fortnite code that are substantially similar to Epic’s copyrighted work,” the judgment reads.

“In addition to creating and using the cheats, Defendant promoted, marketed, and sold these cheats to third parties, and actively encouraged and induced these other cheaters to purchase and use the cheats to gain an unfair advantage in Fortnite.”

The order includes an injunction which bars Sperry from cheating or promoting cheats in the future, but it doesn’t list any damages. Only if Sperry breaks the agreement will he be required to pay $5,000.

From the various Fortnite settlements we’ve seen to date, it’s clear that Epic Games is not after money. Its main goal is to stop the cheating and to hold cheaters accountable, but the company doesn’t go any further, for now.

This is quite a large contrast between several enforcement actions that were taken against alleged PUBG cheaters in China a few days ago.

Although there were no specific copyright infringement charges mentioned, Chinese authorities reported that fifteen people were arrested in connection with PUBG cheating.

“15 major suspects including ‘OMG’, ‘FL’, ‘火狐’, ‘须弥’ and ‘炎黄’ were arrested for developing hack programs, hosting marketplaces for hack programs, and brokering transactions. Currently the suspects have been fined approximately 30mil RNB ($5.1mil USD),” a statement reads.

PlayerUnknown shared the developments late last week and added that it will continue to crack down on those who continue to cheat.

“We take cheating extremely seriously. Developing, selling, promoting, or using unauthorized hacking/cheating programs isn’t just unfair for others playing PUBG—in many places, it’s also against the law,” the company said, commenting on the news.

Without further details, it’s hard to compare the Chinese cheating ‘operations’ to the Fortnite cases. However, Epic’s moderate approach clearly differs from the Chinese crackdown against PUBG cheaters.

—

A copy of the consent judgment against Sperry 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

/0 Comments/by