Once upon a time, telecoms companies, Internet service providers, and content creation companies trod their own path.
Increasingly, however, they are becoming more reliant on each other, with the latter using the formers’ distribution capabilities to present and deliver content to the public. As a result, they are forging mutually beneficial business relationships, ones that will hopefully prove profitable for all.
On Monday, Fox Corporation and Charter Communications announced what they describe as a long-term renewal of a distribution agreement. It will see Charter maintaining access to Fox’s “full portfolio” of news, entertainment, and sports networks. Interestingly, Fox will also get a couple of things in return.
Password sharing has appeared in the news on several occasions in the past couple of years, with some content organizations framing the activity as a type of piracy. The new deal will see Charter, which operates under the Spectrum brand, collaborate with Fox to reduce it.
Additionally, Charter has also signed up to cooperate with Fox to mitigate piracy in general. The information released thus far is lacking in detail but the companies have reportedly agreed to implement “business rules” to address unauthorized access to content.
“This agreement allows continued access to all of the FOX programming for our customers and FOX viewers, but it will also amplify our mutual efforts to address piracy and abusive password sharing issues,” says Tom Montemagno, Executive Vice President, Programming Acquisition for Charter.
“We appreciate FOX’s desire to further collaborate as the video landscape continues to evolve.”
In August, Charter announced a similar-sounding deal with another entertainment industry giant.
“Disney and Charter have also agreed to work together on piracy mitigation,” the statement read. “The two companies will work together to implement business rules and techniques to address such issues as unauthorized access and password sharing.”
Just last week, Comcast became the first Internet service provider to join ACE, the global anti-piracy alliance comprising dozens of the world’s largest entertainment and distribution companies. The way things are moving, it probably won’t be the last.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/handshake-feat.jpg2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-22 18:10:352019-10-22 18:10:35Fox & Charter/Spectrum Agree to Clamp Down on Piracy
The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only. All the movies in the list are Web-DL/Webrip/HDRip/BDrip/DVDrip unless stated otherwise.
RSS feed for the articles of the recent weekly movie download charts.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/threater-feat.png2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-22 08:09:402019-10-22 08:09:40Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week on BitTorrent – 10/21/19
Earlier this year, cyber-security company Group-IB shared an interesting report with TorrentFreak.
The company told us that “large monopolists” were supplying huge amounts of content to thousands of websites via dedicated ‘pirate’ Content Delivery Networks (CDNs).
Group-IB provided specific details on a CDN called ‘Moonwalk’ which reportedly began operating in 2013. According to the company, at the time the system carried 33,490 movies and TV shows, paying out $0.60 per 1000 views.
Group-IB complained that since most of Moonwalk’s servers were outside Russia, the Netherlands in particular, enforcement by local rightsholders was proving difficult. Several months later, it now transpires that Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN has stepped up in an effort to deal with the problem.
BREIN chief Tim Kuik informs TorrentFreak that on Friday, bailiffs acting on its behalf served ex parte court orders on five hosting providers requiring them to disconnect streaming servers and preserve evidence in relation to Moonwalk.
Three court orders targeted Dutch companies and two “ostensibly foreign companies” whose servers are located in the Netherlands. While the action is being headed up by BREIN, the anti-piracy group is working with both the Motion Picture Association and the global Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment.
BREIN describes Moonwalk as a “video load balancer” which provides both the back-end and also huge volumes of pirated content to around 80% of known Russian streaming sites.
“The top 50 of these websites entertain 395 million visits from 89.9 million unique visitors per month causing hundreds of millions of euros/dollars in losses,” BREIN says.
BREIN’s estimates of the amount of content being provided by Moonwalk exceed the figures provided by Group-IB earlier this year. Overall, the Dutch anti-piracy outfit says that the system was recently providing more than 26,000 movies and 10,000 TV shows. That’s around 2,500 additional pieces of video entertainment which suggests growth over recent months.
The ex parte court orders were obtained by BREIN following a joint investigation with ACE, which counts almost three dozen of the world’s leading content and broadcasting companies as members. It’s clear the orders were intended to cause the shutdown of Moonwalk while providing evidence on its operations and presumably, its operators.
“The fight against piracy is global and we are going after operators of these services and their hosting infrastructure as well as other intermediaries supporting these illegal services”, says BREIN chief Tim Kuik.
Jan Van Voorn, Executive Vice President and Chief of Global Content Protection at the Motion Picture Association, stressed that cooperating internationally is crucial to dealing with today’s piracy issues.
“Effectively fighting piracy today requires strong partnerships at global and local level,” he says.
“This action coordinated between BREIN, ACE and the MPA is a significant win and another step towards preserving a healthy and vibrant ecosystem in which the creative community can produce, distribute and protect their content so that audiences can enjoy them.”
What happens next in the investigation isn’t clear but a website associated with Moonwalk currently states that due to this action, the service is not only down, but down for good.
At TorrentFreak, we have covered the latest news surrounding piracy, file-sharing, and copyright, for almost fourteen years.
As a news site, we strive to write as any other professional journalists would. We highlight the latest copyright enforcement efforts and press releases, but also the counteractions that pirates take, as balanced reporting prescribes.
While we understand that some of the topics we cover are controversial, as is often the case with news, we never expected it to be risky. Apparently, however, some companies believe otherwise.
A few months ago we moved our newsletter to Mailchimp, which is widely regarded as one of the best services of its kind. And indeed, setting up the account and configuring our daily mailing was a breeze. As such, we were more than happy to pay the monthly fee.
Although we were pleased with Mailchimp, Mailchimp wasn’t too happy with us. Out of the blue, the company decided to stop sending out the daily email campaign a few days ago. As it turned out, our account had been suspended as the result of an “acceptable use” violation.
Apparently, one of our recent articles triggered MailChimp’s abuse prevention system, Omnivore. Since we’re a legitimate news site we asked for clarification, but we were swiftly informed that it wasn’t a false positive.
“Our automated abuse-prevention system, Omnivore, detected account content that violates our Acceptable Use Policy,” a MailChimp employee replied.
“We have nothing personal against you or your business, but in order to protect all of our users and ensure the deliverability of everyone’s campaigns, we have to ask that you seek a new vendor for your email marketing needs.”
This explanation still didn’t say much about the reason for the suspension, so we asked for further clarification and the possibility of a human review. Specifically, we wanted to know what part of the acceptable use policy was violated and why.
Although MailChimp replied, our questions remained unanswered. What we did learn, however, is that our articles are too risky for a company like MailChimp.
“Unfortunately, the risk associated with your account is too great for us to continue to support,” MailChimp replied.
“To give you some background, internet service providers (ISPs) and spam filters strictly monitor the content and keywords used in bulk email, and can block all mail sent through our servers if they detect a problem,” the email added.
Unsatisfied with this answer, we decided to try again and asked whether the topics we write about are a problem, but that request remained unanswered.
While we are baffled by the entire experience and MailChimp’s lack of specificity, we have some sympathy for their actions. They obviously don’t want to kick out a paying subscriber, unless it indeed poses some kind of threat.
What’s really to blame here are the automated filters from ISPs and anti-spam outfits that wrongly tag certain content as problematic. Too many piracy-related keywords, which is what you would find on a piracy-related news site like ours, can apparently get entire servers blocked.
This is the same reason why many automated filters have our site blocked under the ‘piracy’ category, or even hacking and criminal skills.
Unfortunately, this means that we’re now looking for a good newsletter service, ideally, one that works with RSS feeds. If anybody has a suggestion, feel free to drop us a line. Meanwhile, MailChimp subscribers can use our Feedburner newsletter for now, which is still operational.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/chimpanz.png7211413Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-21 12:08:102019-10-21 12:08:10Mailchimp Kicks Out TorrentFreak Because We’re ‘Too Risky’
In 2012, Microsoft first released its operating system Windows 8, Apple came out with the iPhone 5, and Google’s Sergey Brin showed off a Google Glass prototype in the wild.
It was also the year when armed police officers swarmed Kim Dotcom’s mansion in a military-style-raid while his hosting service Megaupload was being taken down.
It was the beginning of the largest copyright infringement case the U.S. Government had ever launched and one that was far from straightforward.
While the earlier mentioned technology continued to progress, the Megaupload case has barely moved. In New Zealand, lawyers have been very busy with the extradition proceedings against Dotcom, but it could be years before that battle ends. This means that the criminal case against Megaupload and several former employees is in limbo.
The same is true for the civil cases the RIAA and MPAA filed back in 2014. Since the civil cases may influence the criminal proceedings, Megaupload’s legal team previously managed to put these cases on hold, and last week they requested another extension.
In line with other recent requests, the RIAA and MPAA didn’t object to the request. As a result, the court swiftly agreed to issue yet another extension, putting the cases on hold until the spring of next year. However, it would be no surprise if more delays followed in the future.
Earlier this year Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom predicted that he will lose his extradition battle at the Supreme Court. That’s not going to be the end of the line though. Using all legal options available, it might take more than five years before the extradition saga ends.
Meanwhile, copies of Megaupload’s servers, containing vast amounts of data from millions of users, remain locked up as evidence. Initially, there were some attempts to reunite former users with their personal files, but these appeared to have died off.
Interestingly, the most recent mention of any Megaupload ‘data’ came from Kim Dotcom himself. “Still waiting to get access to your Megaupload files?” he wrote, adding that he will email 30 million former US Megaupload users a video link in 2020 explaining how Joe Biden destroyed the site.
Apparently, Dotcom still has access to email and IP-addresses of Megaupload users, which he might put to use.
In recent weeks, the New Zealand entrepreneur shifted his focus to a service that was once billed as Megaupload 2. This project, now known as K.im, will, in fact, be quite different from its predecessor. While Dotcom is the founder, he no longer has an official position, but acts as its evangelist, helping to raise money through a token sale.
When we last covered the project its expected release date was around 2018, but there have been some delays here as well. The latest roadmap indicates that the platform will launch in the third quarter of 2020. By then, we expect that the RIAA and MPAA lawsuits will still be pending.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/kim2-featured.jpg2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-21 02:07:342019-10-21 02:07:34MPAA and RIAA’s Megaupload Lawsuits Remain on Hold, Perhaps For Years
For those old enough to remember, the early days of what would become mainstream Internet piracy were an enlightening time to be around.
With few, if any, legal alternatives available, sharing music and later movies online offered an early and exciting glimpse into the future of media consumption.
The entertainment industries hated all kinds of piracy back then and they still hate it now, that’s not up for debate. But today, almost 20 years after peer-to-peer burst onto the scene, there’s mixed opinion even among pirates as to whether things have changed for the better.
TorrentFreak recently caught up with the former operator of a BitTorrent tracker that launched to the public in 2005. The site itself shut down before 2010, ostensibly after its operators decided family life was more important. Its founder tells us that was only part of the story – money was the real issue.
“When we got into this we started a quiet private club where people could share (and I do mean SHARE) stuff with each other,” he explains.
“The staff and members were squirrels gathering up nuts and whatnot and sharing them on the tracker. All of us could snatch what we wanted and didn’t even feel obliged to return the favor but we all did because we knew each other already and it just worked. Guess giving felt good as getting.”
With a few thousand members at its peak, the site was intentionally never big. Hosted on a free shared server with two other sites thanks to a friendly website designer, the limitations were in place right from the start. Unfortunately, the site’s users became restless. Other trackers were bigger, faster, easier to seed on, but more crucially had a wider range of content.
“Can’t tell you when precisely (a few years later) but we started to tear ourselves apart. Some of the best uploaders found other sites and drifted off which had a big effect on the rest of the site. We managed to find a couple of people who were willing to upload but they wanted new stuff in return and we didn’t have it.
“Someone with access to a pay dump offered to help but they wanted paying as well and I noped right out of paying for warez. Most of our rivals did and it hurt us.”
Even when the site got fresh content, that didn’t really help things either, the former admin says. Users with access to other sites uploaded the content on those immediately and some members didn’t like it and wanted it stopped. That didn’t sit right with the admin because behind the scenes his people were doing exactly the same. What they really needed was money to improve the site to get more people in, who would hopefully bring content with them.
“We stuck out for years not asking for donations but at the end of the day we were in limbo. You build this thing and you’re watching it die. There’s still no question in my mind that we should’ve let it die gracefully in its sleep but hindsight and all that.”
The donations helped for a while but the former admin says that things were never the same. He says that most of the time the amount coming in exceeded the running costs of the site which then made it “morally hard” to keep asking for money. However, he said donations were still requested regularly because when people got out of the habit of giving, they were hard to get back, especially when other sites were offering bang for their buck.
“Pay to leech. That was the beginning of the end for me and I still get emotional about it now. To keep up with [site names redacted] we had to boost [sharing] ratios. It was wrong. We’d gone from a family affair to barely more than a pay site. The older members felt they didn’t know us anymore but the newer ones seemed to want it and cultures clashed and I got the blame.”
So-called ‘pay-to-leech’ is a term most often used to explain how a torrent site can raise revenue by manipulating sharing ratios. If a site has enough seeders and excess upload bandwidth, users can pay to be exempted from strict sharing rules. While rules on various sites differ, in general terms it means that members can download content with relative impunity without giving back, i.e not sharing.
The former admin didn’t want to go into detail about what happened in the wake of the decision to start accepting donations but things didn’t go well. What he did reveal is that it changed the mood on the site. In exchange for their money, people flat-out demanded better service and became more and more vocal when they didn’t get it. They felt they’d paid for a service.
“We had angry posts in the forums with people pasting details of their donations and even private conversations about them with the moderators. I had my wee baby crying downstairs, a pissed-off girlfriend who I never saw and man babies crying on the site over a pittance. I took it and took it and took it and then one day a five minute chat on IRC later with another admin and i’d gone. ‘Here’s the keys to the frontdoor.’ Best thing i’d ever done.”
The striking thing about our discussion with the former admin is that he says that while arguments are commonplace on the Internet these days, they were the exception when his site was first launched. He says there was a sense of belonging to something special and people didn’t want to spoil it because they were not only part of it, they’d helped to create and maintain it too. These days, he complains, things are different because ‘sharing and caring’ have been forgotten.
“Is there a file-sharing family anymore because if there is I don’t know where to find them. People still share alright but it’s pictures of them or their food on Facebook and Instagram. You can’t find people sharing files for fun as we did back in the day because the cat’s out of the bag and it’s an earner and you can’t turn back the clock. Why do you think all the kids dumped torrents for upload sites unless it was about the payback?
“I don’t know if it’s me that’s stuck in the past and this had to happen for piracy to exist as it does now but it’s a shame because all I see now is greed. You tell me, but is sharing out of kindness almost dead?” he asked.
With an entirely different experience, millions of users and uploaders to The Pirate Bay and similar sites would probably beg to differ.
After more than 15 years online, people are still uploading content as they did in the early days, each with their own reason for doing so. The site is still widely accessible and people can take whatever they like for free. The site obviously makes money though, using ads and a crypto-miner, so money remains part of the loop.
More elitist and/or discerning users will always point to professionally organized private trackers as being more community-based, more reliable, much better organized, and with greater emphasis placed on quality control. Old-style sharing can still be found on many but they are certainly not immune to change and the pressures of commerce.
Invites, when they become available, are sometimes handed out for free but in an increasing number of cases, sites charge for the privilege. One can’t make sweeping statements about all of them because there are many and they’re secretive. However, there can be no doubt that a significant number have developed into money-making machines, both for their operators and in some cases their uploaders too.
That raises the question: is there any way to turn back the clock? Is there a way to remove money or other financial incentives out of the equation? With streaming, the most popular form of piracy currently, apparently not.
“You are not realistic,” the operator of a streaming site told TF.
“You write it every day that someone is arrested or blocked or PayPal closed. I can do this for nothing then. Nobody is doing this for nothing. Servers are free so show me where I can buy?”
The owner of a smaller public torrent site (who has operated several other piracy-focused sites in the past) was more talkative.
“My motivation is purely money related. I would not run any piracy related sites if they didn’t earn anything. Just too much risk involved,” he explained.
“Personal issues left me to rely on income from the sites to support my family. I would simply not run the sites if they didn’t make anything. Making money from piracy is so easy so that’s why I think people do it. Rarely you’ll see a site not using any ads. When I was younger things felt a lot different to what they do now. They don’t do it for the love now. But for the money.”
We posed similar questions to a long-standing major site operator – what motivates people to run torrent, hosting and streaming sites these days? He told us that the latter pair make “lots of money” but in respect of torrent sites, he believes there’s no point in running one anymore. The only exception would be for small sites that might still operate for ‘fun’ or on a break-even basis.
“[Some people might run] some small ones [for no profit] – sure – but the user base will be small because the time spent on development will be low,” he said.
For anyone running a bigger site, making nothing or even breaking even isn’t a realistic option, he added. Costs increase every month and if you don’t keep balancing the books, “it won’t work out.”
Ultimately, the operator insisted that going completely back to old-style “sharing is caring” won’t be possible. There’s a new type of demanding consumer out there that is very difficult and increasingly expensive to keep happy.
“That’s never going to happen. The Netflix generation is used to content ready to use, they don’t think about what’s involved in the process of reaching them.”
Tim Kuik of Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN says that he hasn’t seen platforms that aren’t in it for the money for a long time.
“Even if there are uploaders or subtitlers who do it for the kudos, the platforms they post on are making money out of it. We see illegal link aggregators that are supported by platforms that make money off downloaders or streamers by selling them higher download speed,” he says.
But for anti-piracy groups like BREIN, motivation probably doesn’t make much difference to the end result. Piracy is piracy and whatever drives it, it still means illegal content ends up online for free.
“Even if it were for a hobby, would that make it alright to cause damage with it?” Kuik asks.
But ultimately, in the final reckoning, do today’s consumers of pirated content even care what goes on behind the scenes financially, as long as they get it free or at least on the cheap?
One can’t put words into the mouths of millions of individuals but given the popularity of online piracy, especially the astronomic growth of premium IPTV, the suggestion is that largely, people don’t. In fact, for newer entrants to the piracy scene, the fact that people make money is probably the accepted standard.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/love-piracy.jpg2451200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-20 16:06:352019-10-20 16:06:35‘Sharing is Caring’ Once Described Piracy But Things Have Probably Changed
‘Pirate’ IPTV services make the news every week, mostly in connection with streaming movies, TV shows, and sports without obtaining permission from rightsholders.
Enforcement actions against these entities are certainly on the increase and in most instances it’s easy to see why copyright holders have a problem with them. However, it’s clear that some companies either don’t understand what they’re dealing with or simply don’t care.
Case in point, the popular Android app Perfect Player. This software is effectively a network-capable media player that enables users to enter a playlist from an IPTV provider and watch video, no matter what the source. In common with Windows Media Player, it doesn’t involve itself with end-user conduct and can be used to watch legitimate streams.
This week, however, the software – which has in excess of a million downloads from Google Play – was removed by Google because of a copyright complaint. It was filed by a major pay-TV provider, the name of which we’ve agreed not to publish while the complaint is ongoing.
It states that the software allows users to watch channels from unauthorized sources and is therefore illegal. However, there appears to be a considerable flaw in the pay-TV company’s arguments.
In common with the developers behind various torrent clients, Perfect Player’s developer doesn’t dictate how the software is used because no control can be exercised over that. Just like Windows Media Player, uTorrent, or even VLC (which has similar capabilities), it can be used for entirely legal purposes – or not, depending on the choice of the user.
To support its complaint, we understand that the pay-TV provider supplied screenshots showing Perfect Player playing content to which the company holds the rights. This is particularly odd because any content being played is actioned by and is the responsibility of the user.
To have received the content in the first place, the company (or whoever they obtained the app from) must’ve actively configured Perfect Player to infringe by loading it with the playlist from an illicit IPTV provider. Perfect Player contains no playlists when supplied directly from Google Play, it’s content-neutral.
To strike an analogy, you can’t put a bullet in a gun, shoot someone in the head, and then blame the gun manufacturer. Likewise, if you don’t want illicit streams turning up in a software player, don’t have someone load it with infringing playlists from third-parties and then blame a software developer.
“These guys told me that they own ‘Premier’ channels and we should stop transmitting these channels. I answered that the app doesn’t contain any content or channels,” Perfect Player’s developer informs TorrentFreak.
“They then sent another email with a screenshot, showing that they are able to watch their channels in the app.”
TorrentFreak contacted the TV company’s anti-piracy team asking why they chose to target Perfect Player while gently pointing out the playlist issue detailed above. Unfortunately, at the time of publication, the company had not responded to our request for comment.
Giving the TV company the benefit of the doubt for a moment, it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that it acquired a ready-configured copy of Perfect Player from a third-party that already contained a URL for a ‘pirate’ service. That could give the impression it’s a dedicated pirate app.
That being said, downloading a copy from Google Play would’ve highlighted the important differences between a non-configured player and one set up for piracy. That’s impossible now, of course, because Google has taken Perfect Player down.
With the help of a lawyer, the developer is now filing a DMCA counter-notice with Google Play which will require the pay-TV company to either double down or back off. Unless Google chooses to restore Perfect Player in the meantime, of course.
Earlier this month, Google also took down the IPTV Smarters app from its Play Store following a “false complaint”, according to its developer. The company’s lawyers are reportedly working to have the software restored but at the time of writing, it remains unavailable on copyright grounds.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/facepalm-featured.jpg2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-20 06:05:342019-10-20 06:05:34Google Play Removes Perfect Player After “Bogus” Copyright Complaint
Over the past three decades, Guns N’ Roses has been one of the best-known bands in the world.
When it started in the mid-eighties most music was still sold on cassettes, while the World Wide Web has yet to be invented.
Today the web is the major driver of revenue when it comes to recorded music. However, it also poses quite a few challenges, especially when it comes to copyright.
Guns N’ Roses’ entourage appears to be particularly concerned with these rights, up to a point where it has started to annoy fans. Over the past several months, many people have had their bootleg concert recordings removed from YouTube, Instagram and elsewhere.
“My YouTube account I’ve had for 15 years was terminated on Thursday of last week. Roughly 20 GNR videos I’ve filmed from 2011-2016 were flagged and removed,” one fan wrote a few weeks ago.
These copyright takedowns don’t just affect full-length recordings. Smaller clips were apparently removed as well. Interestingly, even Meegan Hodges, the girlfriend of guitarist Slash, had some of her clips removed.
“I’m just putting this up to see if my video is taken down. Noticed that some are just gone. Hello Instagram I took this video. #iamwiththeband no seriously what’s up?” she wrote a few days ago
The band is of course completely within its right to remove unauthorized recordings. Even from Slash’s girlfriend, if she didn’t obtain explicit permission. That said, going after short clips can do more harm than good as it usually only upsets and annoys the fanbase.
In response to the removals, a subgroup of fans appears to have revolted. Some continued to publish concert footage on alternative outlets, such as Pornhub, for example.
While there will always be workarounds, the whole episode clearly signaled that fans shouldn’t post any Guns N’ Roses footage online. Those who do, risk strikes and bans from YouTube, Instagram, or even Twitter.
Just when this idea started to sink in, Guns N’ Roses posted a rather surprising request this week, as highlighted by Guns N’ Roses Central. On Twitter, the band asked fans to share concert footage, which may then be included in the official tour video.
“Tag us in your videos from this tour to be part of the #NotInThisLifetime 2019 final tour video,” the band tweeted.
Needless to say, this request came as a surprise to many fans. First, they were actively hunted down for sharing concert video, and now the band wants them to share footage online?
As a result, fans were quite reserved with their responses. Some indeed posted short clips but many others suggested that this could be some kind of trap. At the very least, it’s not a well thought out plan.
“Yes, this will make it easier for you to demand that your fans remove their videos of you from the internet. Is your assistant getting tired of searching for copyright violations?” Claire replied.
“Is this ‘let s see how stupid our fans are’ contest? We re not making music we’re deleting our fans accounts, we’re @gunsnroses,” Jaro notes.
“So you can block them?? Sort yourselves out and do something for the fans for once,” Jan adds.
While the takedown requests are not being issued by the band directly, it’s clear that some fans are not happy with the request. While it’s most likely not an intentional trap, it could be an inadvertent one when followers get flagged by automated bots or overactive takedown outfits.
Considering the takedown outrage among many dedicated fans over the past few months, this week’s request to share footage certainly wasn’t well thought out.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/roses.jpg2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-19 20:04:332019-10-19 20:04:33Guns N’ Roses Fans ‘Fear’ That the Band is Setting a Piracy Trap
Nvidia Shield TV pro and Shield TV Dongle 2020 model
We all heard rumours, we all saw some leaks but this time is official. We have the first official leaks of the two Nvidia Shield TV 2020 models that were pubblished by mistake on Amazon. And as a matter of fact we will have two different models. The first almost identical to the previous models as far as aesthetics are concerned and the second it is Nvidia’s response to the Amazon Firestick.
Nvidia Shield TV PRO 2020
Starting at $199 the brand new NVIDIA Shield TV Pro 2020 is powered by the Nvidia’s proprietary CPU, the Tegra X1+ processor. NVIDIA claims that it makes the SHIELD TV Pro 25 percent faster than its predecessor. The Tegra X1+ is now paired with 3GB of RAM and 16GB of internal storage as well.
On the back of the New Shield TV Pro 2020 we find 2 X USB 3.0, an HDMI 2.0, a Gigabit Ethernet port and the same power in socket.
In addition to the new Tegra X1+ SoC, the SHIELD TV Pro expands the HDR support of the SHIELD TV with the inclusion of Dolby Vision HDR support along with Dolby Atmos and Dolby Digital Plus. Another interesting feature is the HD to 4K upscaling using Artificial Intelligence. That is something that personally can’t wait to try since it looks very promising and this is Nvidia we are talking about.
Nvidia Shield TV Dongle
And here comes at $179 also the NVIDIA Shield TV Dongle. In a very compact device Nvidia brings the same CPU and same capabilities of the Nvidia Shield TV Pro, a part from the 2 X USB 3.0 and adds also a micro SD. Other than the AC WiFi as the bigger brother, the dongle will also have in the sam super-compact device a built-in power supply so essentialy you just need to attach the power cable to the device. Of course being a powerful device that it is, it will not be powered just by a USB cable as the Amazon Firestick. The perfomance gap is immense amaong the two devices as it is also the price.
New Remote Control
Both devices share the same remote control. I was a huge fan of the first remote control. The device and build quality was top notch (especially the model with the re-chargable battery) and it was only lacking in the volume department. That touch control was cool but in all honesty not so practical. In a bold move, Nvidia decided to rebuild the remote and the design feels strange in some extent. Instead of building on top of the very loved remote they decided to play it safe while adding a lot of buttons and dedicating a button to Netflix too. This time the remote comes with AAA batteries and also supports backlight. Great the addition of a remote finder so you will never lose your remote again. I will not share more on my feelings on the remote until I use it because knowing Nvidia I believe it is better than it looks.
Nvidia Shield TV 2020 Price and Availablity
As metioned before, the two models come at a very interesting price. The Nvidia Shield TV pro sales for $199 which is the same price as the Nvidia Shield TV when it first launched 4 years ago. The Nvidia Shield TV Dongle will beat the price of the predecessor for $179 which is the price that the “old” model costs right now on Amazon. Both devices will launch on October 28th and I can’t wait to test them both. The devices were both list on Amazon but now the listing has been removed.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/nvidia_shield_tv_pro_4.jpg544708Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-19 11:24:272019-10-19 11:24:31Here Is The New Nvidia Shield TV Pro and the Nvidia Shield TV Dongle!
The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only. All the movies in the list are Web-DL/Webrip/HDRip/BDrip/DVDrip unless stated otherwise.
RSS feed for the articles of the recent weekly movie download charts.
https://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/threater-feat.png2501200Dimitrologyhttps://dimitrology.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/WEBSITE-LOGO-2020-SMALL.pngDimitrology2019-10-19 10:03:372019-10-19 10:03:37Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week on BitTorrent – 10/14/19
This week we have one newcomer in our chart.
