Mindgeek Asks Cloudflare to Unmask Tube Site Uploaders


Mindgeek owns some of the most popular porn brands on the Internet. ‘Tube’ sites Pornhub, RedTube, and YouPorn are all company-owned, as are adult production companies Brazzers and Digital Playground, to name just two.

One of its subsidiaries, MG Premium Ltd, operates the latter two brands and many more like them. As content producers, they also get involved in sending takedown requests to Google. In fact, MG Premium is one of the most prolific senders of DMCA notices on the Internet today, after sending notices targeting more than 215 million URLs on Google search alone.

MG Premium – currently the 5th most active sender of notices to Google

Despite all the takedowns targeting various domains, MG Premium appears particularly interested in the activities of several adult-focused ‘tube’ sites.

Via applications filed in a federal court in Washington last week, the company says it is attempting to obtain the identities of people who illegally uploaded its content to Waxtube.com, Vivud.com, Veporns.com, Tubezx.com, Siska.tv, Redwap.me, and Pornbraze.com. It says it can do this by issuing a subpoena to Cloudflare, which all of the sites use.

“MG is the owner of numerous copyrighted audiovisual works. In the course of protecting its works, MG has determined that infringing copies of these works, posted at the direction of individual users and without authorization from MG, appear on Cloudflare’s website, Waxtube.com,” the subpoenas read, substituting the site name at the end as appropriate.

“Such infringements have been ongoing and MG has issued DMCA notifications to Clouflare’s DMCA Agent. All notifications have met the requirements of 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(3)(A) by setting forth, inter alia, a representative list of the copyrighted works that have been infringed and the identification and location on Cloudflare’s website of the infringing material. MG now seeks to obtain a DMCA Subpoena to learn the identity of the individuals who are posting the infringing content.”

The list and descriptions of allegedly-infringing URLs on Waxtube (which are detailed at the rate of roughly five per page in Waxtube’s case) run to six pages. The second site, Vivud.com, is backed up with more than 580 pages of URLs, with Tubezx.com and Redwap.com weighing in at close to 400 pages and 190 respectively.

The existence of the subpoenas raises a number of questions, not least how useful Cloudflare can be in these cases. The subpoenas specifically state that MG Premium wants to “identify alleged infringers who, without authorization from MG, posted material to..” the sites in question.

It’s not clear whether Cloudflare will be in a position to do that but it should be able to provide the details of the operators of the various sites, which may or may not provide a useful stepping stone for MG Premium to achieve its stated aim. Whether the adult company has further but as yet unstated plans will remain to be seen.

All of the Waxtube subpoena documents can be found here 1,2,3,4 (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

Retired Police Officer Wants $48,773 from Copyright Troll


Every year so-called copyright trolls sue thousands of BitTorrent users in the US. While most cases don’t make the news, every now and then one stands out.

This is true for the lawsuit adult content producer ‘Strike 3 Holdings’ filed against a John Doe, known by the IP-address 73.225.38.130, two years ago.

Strike 3 is the most active copyright litigant in the US at the moment. While the company has managed to obtain many settlements against accused pirates, this case was different. The defendant, a retired police officer in his 70s, decided to fight back.

The defendant submitted a counterclaim accusing Strike 3 of abuse of process and “extortion through sham litigation.” The man accused the rightsholder of going on a “fishing expedition,” while knowing that it couldn’t link the subscriber of the IP-address to any specific infringement.

While this counterclaim was denied by the Court, Strike 3 previously said that it was willing to declare that the defendant didn’t infringe its works. As such, the Court encouraged both parties to file a proposed judgment, which would also cover what costs and fees the copyright holder must pay, if any.

Over the past weeks, the parties tried to reach an agreement, but they failed to do so. As a result, this week the accused pirate submitted a motion for summary judgment to set in stone that he’s not a copyright infringer and to have his costs compensated.

The defendant’s attorney, J. Curtis Edmondson, notes that this case made his client potentially liable for an astronomical figure of $13,050,000.00, the maximum statutory damages for the 87 works his client supposedly shared.

However, the attorney points out that there is no evidence that this is the case. On the contrary, the defense argued that the tracking software used by Strike 3 is clearly flawed, as an expert report shows.

“This is the first case that has investigated the technical underpinnings of Strike 3’s dubious claims of infringement that have been replicated nationwide,” Edmondson writes.

“Strike 3 may have an interest in protecting its copyrights, but that interest should be counterweighed against the high false positive rate and the fact the software used to detect the infringements is not ‘forensic software’,” the attorney adds.

Apparently, one of Strike 3’s own experts, Patrick Paige, stated in a deposition that Strike 3 has no actual knowledge that the evidence tracking software (IPP) ‘works’. On top of that, an expert who analyzed the hard drive of the defendant found no evidence that any of the pirated files were stored on his computer.

Based on this, and various other arguments, the defendant asks the Court to grant summary judgment, confirming that he didn’t infringe any copyrights. In addition, the retired police officer asks the Court to award attorney fees and costs, totaling $48,773.13.

In summary, the defendant’s attorney equates the current case to the controversial dealings of Elizabeth Holmes and her now-defunct company Theranos. The young entrepreneur, a Stanford dropout, was lauded as the next Steve Jobs for inventing a revolutionary blood testing machine.

However, after several years of convincing many Silicon Valley investors, as well as the public at large, it turned out that there was no evidence that her machines actually worked.

“This is the first case where a ‘John Doe’ has had to expose the Potemkin village known as the ‘IPP Software.’. Like Theranos, there has been no independent validation studies and no evidence that the IPP Software is ‘forensic software’,” Edmondson writes.

The case is now back in the hands of the Court which will determine whether the defendant is indeed entitled to summary judgment and the requested compensation.

—

A copy of the motion for summary judgment of noninfringement of copyrights and award attorney fees and costs 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

DISH Sues ‘Pirate’ IPTV Providers Including Two Already ‘Seized’ By ACE


Threats of legal action backed up by litigation was once regular news in the torrent site arena but as streaming has begun to take over, particularly among more casual pirates, it’s IPTV grabbing most of the headlines.

DISH Networks is rapidly becoming one of the most litigious companies around and this week, in collaboration with partner NagraStar – a joint venture between Dish Network and Kudelski – it added yet another anti-IPTV lawsuit to its growing roster.

Filed in a New Jersey federal court, the suit targets individuals and companies said to be behind what appears to be at least six IPTV providers and/or brands.

“Defendant [Wilmey] Jimenez created and operates and/or operated unauthorized pirate television streaming services under various brand names including BimoTV, TVStreamsNow, OneStepTV, IbexTV, and MagnumStreams,” the complaint reads.

“Defendant [Fernandez Manuel] DaRocha created and operates and/or operated unauthorized pirate television streaming services under the brand name SolTV, and Defendant DaRocha also uses SoITV to provide unauthorized and pirated programming content to Defendant Jimenez, which Defendant Jimenez then retransmits.”

The heart of the complaint centers around the unlicensed distribution of DISH’s programming. The company says that it believes that the defendants worked in concert with others with similar aims and this is where things begin to get a little tangled.

DISH claims that Jimenez and DaRocha “have a history in trafficking in similar piracy streaming services”, claiming that they sold access to the now-defunct SetTV, the IPTV provider that was ordered to settle with DISH for an eye-watering $90 million.

Previously, SetTV was also sued by the Alliance For Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), a case that ended in a $7.6m default judgment just this week. There are some interesting ACE cross-overs in this case too.

While the domain of BimoTV appears to have disappeared out of use, the same cannot be said about those previously linked to TVStreamsNow and OneStepTV. As reported here in May and July, those domains are already in the hands of the MPAA. They display a copyright infringement warning before diverting to ACE’s website, which is also operated by the MPAA.

While unconfirmed by any official sources, this type of domain ‘seizure’ behavior usually points to some kind of settlement, in this case potentially with ACE and/or the MPAA. DISH is not a member of ACE, however, which suggests that settling with one group doesn’t grant immunity from another.

Unlike other cases involving IPTV providers, the DISH lawsuit isn’t based in copyright law. The company alleges violations of the Federal Communications Act (FCA) while demanding a permanent injunction to prevent the defendants from receiving and redistributing DISH content, and selling/distributing subscriptions and any associated reception devices.

DISH also requests an order to have the defendants’ social media pages removed, along with any advertising for the ‘pirate’ IPTV services. DISH further demands that their websites are handed over to the broadcaster. Of course, the company wants damages on top, which could reach $100,000 for each violation of the FCA. Very big numbers indeed.

The complaint can be obtained 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

‘Hosting Providers Who Turn a Blind Eye to IPTV Pirates Should Be Prosecuted’


Increasingly, people are canceling their expensive cable subscriptions, opting to use cheaper or niche-based Internet TV instead.

While there are plenty of legal options available, there’s also a broad offer of easy-to-use set-top boxes which are specifically configured to receive pirated content.

These pirate IPTV boxes are often sold bundled with a monthly or yearly subscription. This created an industry that’s worth billions of dollars worldwide and may grow even bigger.

It is safe to conclude that IPTV piracy makes up a large part of the pirate ecosystem. This hasn’t gone unnoticed to copyright holders of course. Over the past year, we have seen enforcement actions against hundreds of sellers and more are likely to follow.

Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN is one of the outfits that have IPTV-pirates high on their agenda. This was highlighted in an interview with local radio station BNR in which director Tim Kuik referred to the criminal nature of this problem.

While IPTV sellers come in all shapes and sizes, the true masterminds behind the pirated signals often remain unseen. According to BREIN, many resellers are actually afraid to identify their sources.

“The signals are stolen by criminal organizations. These set up the infrastructure and provide vendors with the codes. Sellers are afraid to name their suppliers out of fear of retaliation. ‘That would put my life at risk,’ we regularly hear.”

The Hollywood-backed anti-piracy group mostly takes action against public sellers. It tracks down these companies and successfully demands hefty settlements. However, in order to tackle the problem properly, more resources are needed.

“We target sellers and take their money. A settlement costs them tens of thousands of euros, but to tackle the infrastructure you need better resources and a criminal investigation,” BREIN notes.

Potential investigations should target the criminal masterminds behind the scenes but BREIN says that Dutch hosting providers should remain alert as well. Also, providers who willingly host illegal IPTV services should face charges themselves.

“Providers who shelter such illegal services and willingly turn a blind eye should be prosecuted,” the anti-piracy group argues.

Because of its good Internet infrastructure, the Netherlands is typically a popular location for IPTV vendors to host their services. These ISPs generally claim that they are not aware of the criminal nature of their clients. However, many rightsholders have their doubts about that.

According to BREIN, there is a small number of Dutch hosting providers that frequently does business with these IPTV services. These companies don’t get actively involved when complaints come in but forward them to their customers instead.

“Reports of rightsholders are only forwarded to the criminals who obviously do nothing with it. If the provider has to take action, it gives the illegal customer plenty of time to keep his service online,” BREIN adds.

Whether the hosting companies are required to do more under Dutch law remains the question. However, BREIN would clearly like these companies to take more responsibility. Or, alternatively, have a proper criminal investigation where the role of a hosting provider is seriously considered.

In the past, we have already reported on large Europol raids where servers in the Netherlands were targeted. However, as far as we know, Dutch hosting providers were never accused or criminally charged as part of these operations.

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

IPTV Service SET TV Must Pay $7.6 Million in Piracy Damages


Last year the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), an anti-piracy partnership forged between Hollywood studios, Netflix, Amazon, and others, sued Florida-based SET Broadcast, LLC.

At the time, the company offered a popular software-based IPTV service and also sold pre-loaded set-top boxes.

While it was marketed as a legal service, according to ACE members SET TV’s software was little more than a pirate tool, allowing buyers to stream copyright-infringing content.

“Defendants market and sell subscriptions to ‘Setvnow,’ a software application that Defendants urge their customers to use as a tool for the mass infringement of Plaintiffs’ copyrighted motion pictures and television shows,” the complaint read.

Initially, SET TV hired an attorney who informed the court that it had stopped offering its service and subscriptions. At the same time, it denied the copyright infringement allegations. After this initial response, however, things went quiet.

SET TV stopped responding, even to requests for payments from its own lawyer, who eventually withdrew from the case. This lack of progress eventually prompted the copyright holders to request a default judgment.

According to Netflix, Amazon and the Hollywood studios, SET TV is guilty of willful copyright infringement. The service caused their entire business model “immense damage” and to compensate these losses, they requested the maximum statutory damages for a total of 51 works.

After a careful review of the paperwork, US District Judge Michael Fitzgerald sided with the copyright holders.

In a default judgment released this week, the court orders SET TV to pay $7,650,000. This reflects the maximum statutory damages of $150,000 for each of the 51 works that were infringed by the defunct IPTV provider.

from the judgment

The Judge notes that awarding the maximum amount of damages is appropriate in this case, as the 51 works are just a small fraction of the actual number works that were infringed.

“Thus, the actual damages in this case would likely be astronomically higher than the measure provided by the maximum statutory damages for the furnished representative works,” Judge Fitzgerald writes.

In addition to the damages, the Court also issued a permanent injunction to prevent any future copyright infringement. Among other things, SET TV is prohibited from operating its Settv now service, as well as any website, system, software, or service that is substantially similar.

Karen Thorland, Senior Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at the MPAA, which is also part of ACE, is happy with the outcome.

“SetTVNow and other piracy outfits threaten millions of creators, damage economic growth, and hurt consumers,” Thorland says.

“The victory over SetTVNow is a great step forward to reducing the piracy of movies and television shows, including the theft of live TV. It also continues ACE’s legal and operational victories, which continue to protect the legitimate market for creative content,” she adds.

Whether SET TV, which is incorporated as Set Broadcast LLC, can pay the full damages is unknown. The company previously reached a settlement with Dish last November, agreeing to pay more than $90 million in damages. Considering this, it’s doubtful that there is much money left.

—

A copy of the default judgment against Set Broadcast LLC 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

Home Owners to Be Held Liable For Pirate Boxes, Malaysia Says


Many governments around the world regularly complain that their countries are negatively affected by piracy. The only thing that differs is how seriously the problem is treated on the ground and how far they’re prepared to go in order to deal with unlicensed consumption.

There are many strategies available but the government in Malaysia is currently considering something unheard of anywhere on the planet. While it hasn’t shied away from ordering ISPs to block pirate sites, it now wants to hit consumers of content too, specifically those using Android-style set-top boxes.

Malaysia already has legislation in place which typically requires such devices to comply with national standards, with the Standard and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia (SIRIM) responsible for product quality assurance and subsequent certification.

Without certification from SIRIM, devices are considered illegal and those found in breach of the rules could be fined or handed up to six months in prison. This is a big deal because many imported devices, which are often used for piracy purposes, do not have the necessary certification. But Malaysia is now planning to step things up another notch.

The mission of the National Film Development Corporation Malaysia (FINAS) is sometimes compared to that of the MPAA in the US. Unlike the MPAA, however, FINAS is a government department within the Ministry of Communications and Multimedia. Its chairman, Datuk Hans Isaac, says that it’s time to hold the public accountable for piracy.

“I’m putting a paper together to propose that the owner of the house is responsible for the use of illegal Android TV boxes,” he said at the Fast Track 2019 Creative Digital Economy Forum in Cyberjaya.

In the United States, Europe and elsewhere it’s not uncommon for copyright trolls to blame Internet subscribers (often the homeowner) for Internet piracy. However, it seems that FINAS wants to take things a whole lot further by placing the responsibility for piracy on those who may be innocent and/or completely absent.

“It doesn’t matter if the person is renting the house to another person who bought the device,” the FINAS chairman clarified.

According to The Star, FINAS is planning to set up a “war room” at its offices to deal with online piracy. It’s unclear how the department will obtain the ability to determine whether citizens are using pirate boxes in their homes (or indeed someone else’s home) but the department is certainly talking tough.

“[The war room is] where we will discuss what to do when we receive reports about digital piracy so we can take action immediately,” Hans said. “A day of the content being illegally streamed online is a loss of income for the investors or stakeholders.”

Media and entertainment company KRU Studios is a supporter of government proposals to target consumers who support online piracy.

“What the industry expects of the government now is to address the real problem, not just the pirates online. It is high time that the users are also punished. What is illegal offline, should be illegal online too,” says executive president Datuk Norman Abdul Halim.

Norman believes that when tackling the problem, the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) should consider restricting Internet access to those who utilize pirate services.

Again, it remains unclear how the government could determine who these people are. The main problem cited isn’t easily-trackable BitTorrent users but those who frequent streaming sites, portals, and other services.

The MCMC, which earlier this year claimed to have blocked 246 sites supplying pirate boxes, also supports a change in the law, noting that it has already expended a lot of its resources dealing with piracy.

However, according to recent reports, the MCMC has also been spending its money where it shouldn’t, including “donating” around US$24,000 to buy 50,000 copies of former prime minister Najib Razak’s books.

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

“Hellboy” Sues Torrent Site YTS and Several Users


YTS is the most-visited torrent site on the Internet. It specializes in uploading movies, which are widely shared online.

The site ‘unofficially’ took over the YTS brand after the original group quit four years ago. Since then, it has amassed a rather impressive user base of millions of daily visitors.

The site is a major source of frustration for the movie industry but, thus far, copyright holders haven’t been able to do much about it. Recently, however, pressure has been mounting.

A few weeks ago trouble started when a group of movie companies sued the site’s operator, who they accused of inducing massive copyright infringement. Following this lawsuit, the site moved to a new domain name, YTS.lt, but that didn’t end the problems.

In a new lawsuit filed at a Hawaiian Federal Court, the site is now being targeted by HB Productions. The company, which is an affiliate of Millennium Media, owns the copyright to the popular movie “Hellboy“. Among other things, it accuses the site and several of its users of copyright infringement.

“Plaintiff brings this action to stop the massive piracy of its motion picture Hellboy brought on by websites under the collective names YTS and their users,” the complaint reads.

“Defendant JOHN DOE promotes its website for overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, infringing purposes, and that is how the users use the websites,” it adds.

According to the movie company, YTS.lt has sufficient ties to the US and Hawaii to warrant jurisdiction. Among other things, it uses or used services of US-based companies, including Cloudflare, Level 3 Communications, Inc., and QuadraNet, the complaint clarifies.

To conceal its identity, the site operator allegedly used the American VPN provider London Trust Media, which owns Private Internet Access. For the same purpose, it also used the tunneling service from Hurricane Electric and the TOR service.

Despite the attempts to conceal, the Hellboy rightsholders managed to find some breadcrumbs. For example, the WHOIS details list “TechModo Limited” as the registrant of the YTS.lt domain. Whether this will lead anywhere is unknown, as that UK-company was dissolved late April.

Another lead comes from Hurricane Electric. After Cloudflare revealed that the YTS operator used Hurricane’s tunneling service to login, the movie company sent a subpoena to Hurricane, which revealed that the person in question used a Hotmail account and an IP-address from the Canadian ISP Cogeco.

“Hurricane has indicated that an individual who identified himself by a verified Hotmail email address from a location in Ontario, Canada subscribed for the so-called tunneling service with Hurricane to tunnel its true IPv4 address to the IPv6 address of Hurricane,” HB Productions notes.

The movie company plans to use this information to find the YTS operator. At this point, it’s unclear if it actually belongs to the person who runs the site, but the rightsholder believes that it points to at least one of the operators.

The complaint further alleges that the defendant created the “Hellboy (2019) [WEBRip] [1080p] [YTS.LT]” torrent, which was made available through YTS.lt and other torrent sites. The other defendants, who are all Hawaiian subscribers of ISP Spectrum, then downloaded and shared this file.

While the mastermind behind the site might not be easy to track down, the 19 “John Doe” users being sued might be easier to find. They are all known by Spectrum IP-addresses. While the account holders are not necessarily the people who shared “Hellboy,” it’s certainly a more concrete lead.

That said, these individual downloaders are small fish compared to the YTS operator.

The movie company hopes that, through this lawsuit, it will be able to recoup some of its alleged losses. It accuses the YTS operator and its users of contributory and direct copyright infringement, while tagging on a claim of intentional inducement against the former.

HB Productions also requests an injunction to stop the defendants’ infringing activities and to prevent third-party intermediaries such as hosting companies, domain registrars, and search engines, form facilitating access to the YTS domains.

Whether the court will grant these requests remains to be seen. In the other lawsuit against YTS we mentioned earlier, the Hawaiian Federal Court wasn’t convinced that it has personal jurisdiction over the alleged operator of the site.

—

A copy of the complaint filed by HB Productions 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

Legal Movie Sites Could Get Special ‘Tag’ in Search Results to Deter Piracy


While many pirate site users already know the direct URLs of their favorite free movie resources, entertainment industry groups feel that search engines still play a key role in unlicensed content discovery.

As a result, anti-piracy companies are continuously tasked with having allegedly-infringing results removed from search results offered by companies such as Google, in an effort to minimize traffic to pirate sites.

In Russia, which is rapidly emerging as world-leader in anti-piracy strategies, the government now wants to take things a step further by modifying search results to include a ‘tag’ or marker that clearly identifies legal video platforms.

According to local news outlet Vedomosti, the proposal forms part of an amendment to copyright law penned by Russia’s Ministry of Culture.

“We expect that in this way users will make a more informed choice not in favor of pirates, but in favor of legal platforms,” says Olga Lyubimova, director of the cinematography department of the Ministry of Culture.

While having a gold star or similar marker next to a site’s listing may help users to better identify legal offerings, the government isn’t planning to hand out endorsements on a whim. Movie and TV companies want to get a better idea of what content is being viewed and in what volumes. As a result, sites to be considered for preferential marking will have to give something back.

Russian cinemas are already required to report data on all tickets sold but there is no equivalent for online viewing resources, leaving production companies to complain that they need more information. The current proposals would require legal online providers to provide such data to content companies and the government.

If they do not, it’s suggested they could be declared illegal with various repercussions, not least the inability to be highlighted in search results as a legitimate provider.

The proposal to highlight legal platforms in search results is in addition to a ground-breaking agreement reached in Moscow last year. Signed by major rightsholders, Internet companies, and search providers, the pact sees Internet platforms query a centralized database of infringing content to ensure that none of it is presented on their platforms.

It’s expected to be written into law but in common with the search tagging proposal, the precise details are still being hammered out.

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

RIAA Targets Picosong Over Leaked Kanye West Track


In theory at least, running a content upload site should be relatively straightforward. Put the necessary infrastructure in place, wait for users to upload files, then make those files available for download or streaming.

This works extremely well for sites like YouTube, for example, because they have teams of lawyers in place that ensure that the company operates to the letter of the law while standing by to swat away any irritating lawsuits over allegedly-infringing content.

Smaller sites tend not to have these luxuries, so there’s always the chance that groups like the RIAA will come knocking, threatening legal action for copyright infringement failings. This appears to be part of the puzzle facing popular upload site Picosong.

Picosong has been around for more than ten years. Its Twitter account dates back to May 2009, a lifetime for many similar sites operating in the same niche. For much of that time, the platform has provided a simple solution for users to host music files. Soon, however, that will come to an end.

A notice currently displayed on the site’s homepage says that Picosong has reached the end of the road. There are better alternatives for hosting musicians’ content, the announcement reads, so as a result, Picosong will close in October.

While the stated aim was to assist musicians to host (presumably) their own content, it’s clear that many uploaders to the site have been sharing content that doesn’t belong to them. A cursory skim around the web reveals plenty of links to content that is almost certainly copyrighted, a situation that affects Picosong and YouTube alike.

Whether Picosong’s impending shutdown was prompted by anything other than a lack of desire to compete with Soundcloud and Bandcamp is unclear. However, a filing at a federal court in Columbia reveals that the site is firmly on the radar of the RIAA after a leaked Kanye West track was uploaded to the site.

In common with similar efforts in 2019, the RIAA applied for and obtained a DMCA subpoena compelling domain registrar Namecheap to hand over the personal details of the site’s operator. Dated July 23, the application lists three infringing tracks;

  • Ed Sheeran & Travis Scott – Antisocial
  • Tyler, the Creator – 435
  • Kanye West feat. XXXTentacion, Ty Dolla Sign – The Storm

While the first two songs are already widely available, the latter appears to be an unreleased Kanye West track that hit the web earlier this month as part of a batch of similarly-leaked titles.

Pre-release content appearing online is a particularly sensitive matter for the labels. According to a contributor on Genius.com, the leak may even put the track’s album release at risk.

“‘The Storm’ is a leaked collaboration between Kanye West, Ty Dolla $ign and the late XXXTENTACION. On the track, Ty and Kanye encourage a female listener to take control of their life. X’s rowdy verse, which was picked from his unreleased ‘Yes Indeed Remix,’ features him boasting about fighting, his sex life, and his expensive taste,” the review reads.

“‘The Storm’ is believed to be a cut from West’s upcoming album, Yandhi. However, since the track leaked online on July 12, 2019, its standing on the album is unsure.”

The Storm was previously uploaded to many hosting sites, including YouTube (where it remains at the time of writing) and Soundcloud, which appears to have responded to a takedown notice.

TorrentFreak requested comment from the operator of Picosong but at the time of publication, we were yet to receive a response.

The RIAA’s demand for a DMCA 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

File-hoster ‘Instaudio’ Announces Shutdown Citing Legal Pressure


In the spring of 2013, more than six years ago, a new niche hosting service called Instaudio saw the light.

The site, operated by an anonymous musician, offered anyone a quick and easy way to upload music files. Before the launch, it was used as a private service, but the operator eventually made it available to the public at large.

Despite attracting a healthy user-base, the site always remained a side-project. The operator, who works at a music-related company, didn’t promote it either. People simply found their way to the site through word-of-mouth promotion.

This went well, but as time went by, more and more problems arose. As with any hosting service, some people started to use the site to share pirated files. On popular forums and leak-sharing sites, links to Instaudio were no exception either.

This meant that the operator had to worry about removing content from his platform. While the site accepts and honors takedown requests, it was never meant to be a platform for leaks, something that was communicated loud and clear on Twitter and elsewhere.

Despite this call, the abuse didn’t stop. This led to the frustrating situation that a site, which aimed to help musicians share files, was increasingly seen as a threat by music industry outfits. As a result, the operator has now decided to put an end to it himself.

A few days ago, Instaudio stopped accepting new uploads and signups. Previously uploaded files will remain available for now, but they will be made unavailable to the public at the end of August. Four weeks later, all files and user accounts will be purged.

In a public announcement, the Instaudio operator cites the “abuse” as one of the reasons for his decision.

“The abuse situation has gotten to the point where I’m being threatened with ‘legal consequences’ and other such things because, in those organizations’ judgment, I am ineffective at preventing infringing content from being distributed through Instaudio.”

To stop widespread uploading of pirated material Instaudio could implement an upload filter, but the operator is not a fan of these types of measures, as they can lead to false positives.

The old Instaudio

In addition to sharing pirated content, people were also abusing the site by hotlinking to files and bulk-downloading content. This significantly increased costs.

“Other forms of abuse also occurred, such as automated bulk-downloading, or hot-linking to Instaudio-hosted files on webpages with high traffic. Both of these result in high bandwidth, and therefore high cost for me,” the operator notes.

The growing costs are cited as another reason for the shutdown. As Instaudio was a personal project, all costs were paid out of the pockets of the operator. While he did have a sponsor, it has now reached the point where the costs are no longer justified.

All in all, the negatives outweigh the positives, and shutting Instaudio down is the logical conclusion.

“As time went on I had to put more and more effort into the ugly side of keeping Instaudio running, which left no energy to work on cool new features. Coupled with the cost and the stress, it became an overall negative for me,” Instaudion’s operator writes.

“I have other, more fulfilling hobbies that I’d much rather spend the time and money on,” he adds.

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