Omniverse Wants “Scandalous” Claims Removed From ACE’s Piracy Lawsuit


In February, several major Hollywood studios, Amazon, and Netflix filed a lawsuit against Omniverse One World Television.

Under the flag of anti-piracy group ACE, the companies accused Omniverse and its owner Jason DeMeo of supplying pirate streaming channels to various IPTV services.

Omniverse doesn’t offer any streaming boxes but sells live-streaming services to third-party distributors, such as HDHomerun, Flixon TV, and SkyStream TV, which in turn offer live TV streaming packages to customers.

According to ACE, these channels are offered without permission from its members. As such, the company was branded a pirate streaming TV supplier. However, Omniverse disagrees with this assessment.

In a new court filing, the company requests the California federal court to strike any comparisons to services such as “Dragon Box,” stating that these are “scandalous” and “immaterial.”

Omniverse explains that it’s a technical provider for the licensed cable company Hovsat, which has a long-standing agreement with DirecTV to distribute a broad range of TV-channels with few restrictions.

“The contract between Hovsat and DirecTV has no limitations with regard to geographic markets, nor innovating with regard to delivery method,” Omniverse informs the court.

The streaming service provider believes that the license allows it to offer these channels to third-party companies.  ACE clearly disagrees and has branded the company a pirate service, similar to the streaming box vendor Dragon Box.

This comparison is rejected outright by Omniverse, which stresses that it operates entirely differently from Dragon Box.

“Comparisons between Omniverse and Dragon Box are immaterial because Dragon Box is a hardware device utilizing software to search and link pirated content and Omniverse is a marketing partner of a cable company,” the company writes.

Also, Dragon Box recently admitted that it offered copyright infringing software and settled its lawsuit with ACE for $14.5 million in the same court. Any comparisons may, therefore, be damaging for Omniverse.

“Comparisons between Omniverse and Dragon Box are also scandalous because comparing the two unlike entities damages Omniverse through guilt by (misplaced) association,” Omniverse writes.

The streaming service provider requests the court to strike all comparisons to Dragon Box. In addition, it would like ACE to update its complaint to clarify what the problem is.

If ACE accuses Omniverse of outright piracy, similar to Dragon Box, it should say so in the complaint. However, if it argues that Omniverse went beyond the authority of the Hovsat license, all Dragon Box mentions should be dropped.

This clarification will also help Omniverse to prepare a proper defense, the company argues. A classic piracy lawsuit is different from a lawsuit about a licensing dispute, it says.

“If Plaintiffs’ Complaint is alleging Omniverse is a pirate, Omniverse needs to prepare for an action that covers multiple properties held by multiple plaintiffs. If Plaintiffs’ Complaint is alleging Omniverse does not operate under proper authorization, Omniverse needs to prepare for an action primarily involving the meaning of the Hovsat-DirecTV agreement. Or both.”

The court has yet to respond to the request from Omniverse. It is clear, however, that the Hovsat license will play an important role in this case.

A few days ago the court signed two subpoenas that are directed at Hovsat and DirecTV. The subpoenas were requested by ACE, which is looking for information about agreements between Omniverse, Hovsat, and DirecTV.

—

A copy of Omniverse’s motion to strike the scandalous claims, as well as other requests, 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

TVZion APK v3.6 is now out!

Read more
/0 Comments/by

The Pirate Bay Lives On, A Decade After ‘Guilty’ Verdicts


On the morning of March 3, 2009, Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm, Peter Sunde and Carl Lundström, were all waiting for the final day in the now-infamous trial featuring The Pirate Bay.

The night before the original ‘notorious site’ had gone offline, worrying the masses. But as it had done countless times before, the site reappeared once again after Fredrik (TiAMO) worked his magic – from inside the halls of justice.

“I fixed the Pirate Bay from inside the courtroom just minutes ago. The site is back online,” he said.

This type of defiance, before and after the quartet were eventually sentenced to jail and huge fines a decade ago this week, became a hallmark of the three key defendants. While early financier Lundström quickly fell by the wayside, the trio of Sunde, Neij and Svartholm only appeared to gather energy from the momentous event.

All three expressed surprise at receiving jail sentences but all pledged never to pay a penny to the authorities.

“We can’t pay and we wouldn’t pay if we could,” Sunde said. “If I would have money I would rather burn everything I owned.”

While millions expected The Pirate Bay itself to immediately disappear, Sunde vowed that would never happen. Quite remarkably and against all the odds, his words carry weight today. Anyone can visit ThePirateBay.org and see the same homepage they’ve always seen, as if the trial of the site’s operators never happened.

For them, however, life would prove less than straightforward in the years to come.

On November 26, 2010, following an inevitable appeal, the court decreased the prison sentences for three of the defendants (Sunde, Neij and Lundström) but increased the damages to be paid to the entertainment industry plaintiffs. Svartholm, who was absent from the appeal hearing on medical grounds, would be dealt with later.

In the end, all four men served their sentences but Sunde, Neij and Svartholm did so defiantly. No one expected anything less from the Nordic upstarts, who took on the might of Hollywood and the music industries expecting to win, only to lose in the end.

Or did they?

While no one can claim time in prison as a victory, Sunde, Neij and Svartholm (or brokep, TiAMO, and Anakata, to use their aliases) remained steadfast in their opposition. None went quietly, none caved into enormous pressure, none went back on their word.

These are qualities despised by copyright holders when viewed through the prism of the ‘theft’ of their intellectual property. But for millions of followers in the pirate world, there was a chance to vicariously sail the high seas through the experiences of their heroes, at least for a few years.

All three men have now slipped into the background of Pirate Bay history but it is nothing short of remarkable that the site still exists today. Despite endless enforcement efforts, not to mention widespread blocking around the world, it’s still one of the most visited torrent sites on the planet.

Admittedly, the graphics, search feature, and just about everything else are still stuck in the past. But unlike flashier alternatives such as KickassTorrents and ExtraTorrent, the platform still exists today while serving millions of users with the latest content.

The Pirate Bay has also become the digital embodiment of the fabled hydra. Today the main domain still exists, but so do dozens of other tentacles that replicate the site if not entirely, closely enough. While the body may one day be found and slain, there are no signs that day is near.

The Galaxy’s Most Resilient BitTorrent Site? It’s hard to argue otherwise.

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

EFF Backs Stream Rippers in Legal Battle Against Record Labels


Last year, a group of prominent record labels filed a piracy lawsuit against the Russian operator of YouTube-ripping sites FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com.

The labels hoped to shut the sites down, but this effort backfired.

In January, US District Court Judge Claude M. Hilton dismissed the case due to a lack of jurisdiction. The Court carefully reviewed how the sites operate and found no evidence that they purposefully targeted either Virginia or the United States.

The sites are not seen as highly interactive and their interaction with users could not be classified as commercial, the Court concluded.

The record labels didn’t agree with this conclusion and took the case to the Fourth Circuit appeals court. If the verdict stands, the companies believe that Internet pirates will have “carte blanche” to facilitate copyright infringement, as they would be untouchable by U.S. courts.

Tofig Kurbanov, the Russian operator of the two stream-rippers, argued against this last week, hoping to keep the current dismissal in place. Yesterday he received support from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) which submitted an amicus curiae brief.

The digital rights group takes interest in copyright cases, in particular when they get in the way of people’s ability to freely use technology. In this instance, EFF points out that the stream-rippers provide a neutral technology, that has plenty of legal uses.

“Like a web browser, photocopy machine, or video recorder, the converters at issue in this case are neutral technologies, equally capable of lawful and infringing uses. And lawful uses abound, from saving a copy of a family member’s home video to downloading clips from a TV show as raw material for a critical commentary,” EFF writes.

The digital rights group points out that companies such as the record labels in this suit, seek to control the use and availability of copying. To this end, they file lawsuits against foreign site operators who often don’t put up a defense.

This then allows them to apply for default judgments and broad preliminary injunctions which compel third-party intermediaries such as domain registrars, or CDN providers, to take action. That can be dangerous, EFF notes, as the merits of the case are not thoroughly considered.

“These injunctions, which can be legally problematic, are often granted
without challenge. Through this process, difficult questions about the scope of such injunctions go unanswered,” EFF notes. 

While there have indeed been several default judgments in the past, that was not an issue in the present case. In fact, at this point, it’s irrelevant whether the sites at issue are infringing at all. The case was dismissed based on a lack of jurisdiction, after all.

According to EFF, the District Court made the right choice in doing so and it encourages the Court of Appeals to uphold this decision. Looking at the broader picture, this may act as a safeguard against default judgments in future cases, the group explains.

“Preserving the limits of personal jurisdiction to uphold due process, as the district court did in this case, also avoids default judgments against foreign defendants, and promotes the resolution of complex legal issues on a full record,” EFF writes. 

Focusing on the jurisdiction issue in the case at hand, EFF notes that the court made the right decision. The sites’ terms of use do not constitute a commercial relationship and geo-targeted ads are not enough to establish jurisdiction, the group argues.

On top of that, the websites in question are not “interactive,” as the District Court also pointed out.

“Here, the websites at issue here are semi-interactive; as explained by the
district court, there is no evidence that users exchanged multiple files with the websites, and users do not need to create an account, sign in, or even register in order to use the websites,” EFF writes.

EFF is not the only outside party that has taken an interest in the case. The record labels’ previously attracted support from other major copyright holders. Through amicus briefs,  Hollywood’s MPAA, The Association of American Publishers, and the Copyright Alliance, all argued that the verdict should be overturned.

It is now up to the Fourth Circuit appeals court, to weigh all arguments and ultimately come to a decision.

—

A copy of EFF’s Amicus Curiae brief in support of FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com and its operator 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

Movie Studios Are Suing Canadian BitTorrent Users, But That’s Nothing New


This week Canadian news outlets are reporting about a supposed new legal campaign against people who pirate movies and TV-shows via BitTorrent. 

This includes an article from CBC, which featured a still from Game of Thrones, suggesting that downloaders of the popular HBO series are at risk too. 

The coverage comes a bit as a surprise, because there is nothing new to these lawsuits. “Reverse class-action” suits have been ongoing for a few years in Canada now. Also, HBO or ‘Game of Thrones’ are not part of it. 

The lawsuits in question are a variant of what is commonly known as “copyright trolling.” This practice is limited to a few movie production companies that have targeted hundreds of thousands of alleged pirates all over the world. 

In Canada, we are aware of 18 of these lawsuits which target thousands of alleged pirates in total. These cases were filed by the rightsholders of films such as The Hitman’s Bodyguard, Mechanic: Resurrection, Criminal, London Has Fallen, and Dallas Buyers Club,

The defendants are listed as “John Does,” who are initially only known by their IP-addresses. After the movie companies obtain a Norwich order from the court, they obtain the contact details of these people, who they can then approach with a settlement demand.

This has led to settlements of thousands of dollars in some cases, where the maximum damages for non-commercial infringement is CAD$ 5,000. 

As said before, this isn’t new. However, the news started rolling again following a tweet from Nova Scotia-based lawyer David Fraser, who posted a copy of a “statement of claim” online. The lawyer also pointed to an article, where the law firm offered help, suggesting that this is a ‘novel’ procedure.

“Using a novel legal procedure called a ‘reverse class-action’ Hollywood studios are consolidating what would otherwise be hundreds of lawsuits into just a handful of lawsuits,” the article reads.

This then led to a report on Mobilesyrup, where it was again suggested that this is a new phenomenon.

Interestingly, the date of the statement of claim is almost a year old now, which is a clear hint that this isn’t as fresh as some people think. Indeed, a reverse class-action lawsuit against alleged BitTorrent pirates was already filed in 2016, and many have followed since.

This week’s reporting shows that the cases have progressed quietly in the courts. That’s not a complete surprise, as they generally don’t go to trial. The goal of the movie outfits is to settle the matter out of court. 

That brings us to a final point of confusion. These settlement requests are entirely different from the automated settlements that ISPs forward via email. The latter practice is part of the notice-and-notice system. While these automated settlement requests were outlawed last year, they’re still coming in. 

The letters that are part of a reverse class-action, which are delivered through the postal system, are entirely different. They are part of a legal proceeding and people who receive a statement of claim should not ignore it. Those who do face a default judgment, which is generally higher than a settlement.

Attorney James Plotkin of law firm CazaSaikaley previously informed us that it’s wise to consult an attorney instead.

“Get competent legal advice. It is important to understand the legal playing field. Defendants are not helpless in these actions, so ignoring the claim and allowing the plaintiff to proceed in obtaining a default judgment is probably not the best option for most people,” he said.

That is the type of advice one would expect from an attorney. However, in this case, it is certainly warranted. And the outcome could be positive as well, as Plotkin has already helped one defendant to get rid of the claim, without a settlement.

Summarizing, we can conclude that lawsuits continue to target alleged BitTorrent pirates in Canada. The cases are filed by a small number of movie production companies and have nothing to do with Game of Thrones. 

Those who are unfortunate enough to get caught up in this should carefully research their options. Unlike the “notice-and-notice” emails, ignoring the legal paperwork is generally not a good option.

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

UK Porn Filters Could Mean Sweaty Palms For Piracy Blockers

Before the dawn of the mainstream Internet, underage access to pornographic content meant trying to sneak a glance over someone’s shoulder at a well-thumbed adult magazine.

Or, if you were ‘lucky’, finding a VHS cassette in a friend’s dad’s cupboard, behind the coats and shoes, in a box, inside another box, in an envelope marked “holiday video”. Such things apparently happened.

With the dawn of the Internet, things have certainly changed. With just a few clicks, one can find pornographic material, with ‘graphic’ often being the operative word. What adults choose to watch is their business, but children being able to access much of the content on today’s platforms is probably not what most parents want.

So in the absence of traditional parental controls, the UK government has stepped in to prevent youngsters from inadvertently stumbling across adult content. From July 15, the country will adopt a checking scheme that will require profit-making sites with more than a third of their content pornographic in nature to verify visitors’ ages.

It’s believed that the AgeID system, operated by major porn site owner Mindgeek, will one of the key facilitators of that. People who want to access porn sites will be required to provide scans of their driving licenses or passports, provide credit card details, or activate via SMS. Users’ details will then be verified by a third-party.

There will be other ways to obtain verification too, since some shops will be selling special cards containing a code that people can use to access sites like Pornhub and YouPorn. However, eligible sites that refuse to play by the verification rules will be blocked by local ISPs, preventing them from doing any business in the UK.

In theory, at least.

While the aims are noble, circumvention of this entire scheme (for adults and children alike) lies just a few key presses away. Subscribing to a VPN will effectively drive a coach and horses through the legislation, providing no-fuss and instant access to all age-compliant websites, and those that refuse to comply too.

The government acknowledges that this could happen, but it wants to be seen to be doing something. Indeed, as part of the Digital Economy Act 2017, the UK will become the first country in the world to proudly deploy such a system. However, thanks to many years of website blocking on the piracy front, large numbers of people will already have the tools at hand to make July 15 seem like life on the 14th.

Herein lies the problem. As website blocking increases – whether that’s via direct ISP action or the verification scheme detailed above – people have more and more reasons to learn how to evade those blocks. It doesn’t really matter whether it’s adults or even teenagers spreading the knowledge, on July 15 (if not sooner) circumvention methods will spread like wildfire.

And this can only mean bad news for those who have worked incredibly hard to have many hundreds of pirate sites blocked in the UK over the past nine years or so.

Once those VPNs get fired up to access XVideos or whatever other sites tickle people’s fancies, it will soon become apparent that every single one of those previously blocked torrent and streaming portals will become accessible again too.

Good VPNs do not discriminate and they don’t care what people are looking at. Their aim is to protect their users’ privacy and make web censorship a thing of the past. The only saving grace in respect of the verification scheme is that decent ones also cost money, so teenagers may not always have the means to pay for one.

That raises the possibility – or even likelihood – that many people will take the easy option of downloading a ‘free’ VPN from Google Play or Apple’s variant. Many of these have a questionable track history, especially when it comes to privacy, so people flocking in this direction won’t be doing themselves any favors.

All that being said, the architects of the scheme say that the potential for circumvention of the verification scheme is low. Perhaps today’s teenagers are less interested in seeing forbidden content than those that went before and will embrace the scheme with open arms. We shall see.

For most adults, however, it seems likely that handing over passports, driving licenses, and credit cards will only add to the already considerable but relatively straightforward pressure of remembering browser history wiping and incognito tabs.

In the meantime, there’s always The Pirate Bay, RARBG and all the other ‘pirate’ sites offering adult material. None of them will be included in the verification scheme but could see a small surge in traffic, if ‘porn-pass panic’ sweeps the country. And if it does, they’ll be easier to access than ever before.

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

‘Game of Thrones Season Premiere Pirated 54 million Times in a Day’


Last Sunday, the long-awaited final season of the hit series Game of Thrones aired in dozens of countries worldwide.

The show has broken several piracy records over the years and thus far this week, there has been another piracy bonanza.

As usual, the torrent download figures quickly ran into the millions. However, little is known about the traffic that goes to web-based streaming portals, which have outgrown traditional file-sharing sites in recent years.

One of the main problems is that it’s impossible for outsiders to know exactly how many visitors pirate streaming services get. Traffic data for these sites are not public, which makes it difficult to put an exact figure on the number of views one particular video has.

Piracy monitoring firm MUSO hasn’t shied away from this unexplored territory though and has now released some hard numbers.

According to MUSO, the premiere episode of the seventh season of Game of Thrones has been pirated more than 54 million times during the first day alone. This massive number is largely driven by streaming websites.

For comparison, HBO’s official, or legitimate, viewing numbers add up to just 17.4 million.

The data reveals that online streaming sites accounted for 76.6% of all pirate views, followed by web downloads at 12.2%. Public torrent sites were good for another 10.8% and private torrent sites close the row with 0.5%.

MUSO’s finding are partly based on data from SimilarWeb, which uses a sample of roughly 200 million ‘devices’ to estimate website traffic. Website visits are then seen as “downloads or view,” and the sample data is extrapolated into the totals. Whether people actually saw the full episode is unknown.

This web-based approach also means that certain types of pirate traffic are not taken into account. This includes data from Usenet and most of the pirate streaming boxes that have become popular in recent years.

TorrentFreak asked the company how it knows if a certain page hit actually generated a view but, at the time of writing, we have yet to hear back. 

In addition to the pirate numbers and sources, MUSO also revealed the top countries where the Game of Thrones premiere was accessed. India is in the lead here with 9.5 million pirate hits, followed by China and the US with 5.2 and 4 million respectively. 

The top ten of countries with the most Game of Thrones pirates is completed by the UK, Nigeria, Iran, Kenya, France, Canada, and Australia, as seen below. 

While it’s clear that Game of Thrones is widely popular among pirates, the data doesn’t show why that is. In some regions, it may not be available, and where it is, the price for a subscription can be too steep for some. Instead of missing out, people then choose to pirate instead.

According to Andy Chatterley, CEO of MUSO, it is important for rightsholders not to ignore these numbers, no matter what a person’s reason to pirate is.

“Regardless of rationale, the piracy figures for just the first 24 hours since the episode aired demonstrate that these audiences cannot – and should not – be ignored,” Chatterley says.

The main goal for HBO is to, eventually, convert these pirates into paying customers. They are some of the most passional consumers after all.

“[T]his data shows that consumers are still being driven to unlicensed sources to find content. It’s imperative that rights holders understand that piracy audiences are some of their most dedicated fans, which, above all else, presents a vast commercial opportunity,” MUSO’s CEO 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

Germany: Upload Filters Can Only Be Prevented “As Far As Possible”


On Monday, the EU Council of Ministers approved the Copyright Directive, which includes the controversial Article 17 (formerly 13).

The law requires platforms like YouTube and Facebook, for example, to sign licensing agreements with creators in order to use their content.

If that is not possible, the platforms will have a responsibility to ensure that infringing content uploaded by users is taken down and not re-uploaded to their services.

Much of the furious debate leading up to the initial adoption of the Copyright Directive by the EU Parliament (March 26, 348 Members of Parliament in favor, 274 against, and 36 abstentions) centered on the fear that platforms including (but not limited to) the above would have to install upload filters to comply with the take down and stay down requirements.

Proponents, on the other hand, said that the text doesn’t mention upload filters at all, and that those claiming otherwise were being alarmist in order to prevent the Directive from passing. It’s perhaps telling that no one has yet presented any workable alternative to upload filters.

In a statement issued by Germany in the wake of Monday’s vote, the government effectively admits that upload filters are not a great idea but will be required under Article 17 (formerly 13) if no one can come up with a better solution. In fact, it says their use is “likely”.

“There is indeed consensus that creators should be able to partake in the exploitation of their works by upload platforms. Article 17 of the Directive establishes an obligation to ensure the permanent ‘stay down’ of protected content which raises the likely use of algorithmic solutions (‘upload filters’) which have raised serious concerns and broad critique among the German public,” the statement reads.

Noting that that government wants to support performers, authors, and indeed all creators to use technology to create and distribute their work, it adds that the protection of that work and the right to earn revenue from it is paramount.

However, it also wishes to respect fundamental rights wherever possible, while preserving the right to use protected works “where permitted by legislation” on upload platforms.

The government says that the European Commission is “obliged to enter into a dialog with all concerned parties” to develop guidelines for the application of Article 17, but that doesn’t guarantee that “upload filters” won’t be required if all else fails.

“The government, therefore, assumes that the dialog will be borne out of the desire to ensure appropriate remuneration for creators, as far as possible prevent ‘upload filters’, safeguard freedom of speech and preserve user rights,” it writes, as per a translation by Sebastian Schwemer.

So, “..as far as possible prevent ‘upload filters’” is apparently the standard for Germany, probably the single most powerful player in the EU. Given the reputation of filtering technologies to go wrong at the worst possible time, opponents of the Directive will be saying “told you so.”

On the plus side, Germany appears to have listened to some of the general concerns previously voiced by its own Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information.

It notes that the EU “should support the development of open-source technologies with open interfaces (APIs)” while finding solutions that “counter a de facto copyright register in the hands of dominating platforms via public, transparent reporting processes.”

The German statement also insists that the new rules will only be aimed at “market-dominating” platforms and will specifically exclude sites like Wikipedia, Github, blogs, forums, messenger services like WhatsApp, and cloud storage platforms. But, of course, time will tell – the Internet tends to develop at a pace faster than law and nothing offered in this statement is legally binding.

EU member states will have two years to implement the grand aspirations of the Copyright Directive into local law, and that includes those who voted against it – Netherlands, Luxembourg, Poland, Italy, and Finland – who have negative views of the legislation.

“The objectives of this Directive were to enhance the good functioning of the internal market and to stimulate innovation, creativity, investment and production of new content, also in the digital environment. The signatories support these objectives,” the five countries said in a joint statement.

“However, in our view, the final text of the Directive fails to deliver adequately on the above-mentioned aims. We believe that the Directive in its current form is a step back for the Digital Single Market rather than a step forward.

“Most notably we regret that the Directive does not strike the right balance between the protection of rights holders and the interests of EU citizens and companies. It therefore risks to hinder innovation rather than promote it and to have a negative impact [on] the competitiveness of the European Digital Single Market.”

While YouTube and Facebook already have filtering systems in place, they aren’t the only players in town. It seems likely, therefore, that the next two years may yet prove as controversial as the two that preceded them. Memes are probably safe, but other content could have a bumpy ride.

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

Demonoid Founder ‘Deimos’ is Believed to Have Passed Away


As one of the oldest torrent communities, the Demonoid tracker has gone through many ups and downs over the years.

The site has disappeared for months, more than once, but always reappeared.

Early last year things were looking quite positive for the site. Founder and operator ‘Deimos’ was committed to rebuilding the site back to the thriving community it once was, but at the end of the summer new problems emerged.

Initially, there were some technical issues and isolated downtime. However, as the weeks passed on, the site disappeared completely. All the while, Deimos was nowhere to be found.

This was particularly unusual as some staffers chatted with him nearly every day but that changed abruptly. Months went by without a word from Deimos. Meanwhile, some of Demonoid’s domains started to expire.

Roughly two months ago, TorrentFreak received an anonymous tip which came as a complete shock. The short email pointed to information that suggested Deimos had passed away following a tragic accident. 

The information we received included several pointers that we could indirectly link to Demonoid’s founder. However, despite overwhelming circumstantial evidence, we were unable to confirm 100% that it was the same person. 

We shared this information with Demonoid staffer ‘phaze1G,’ who discussed it among the team. Slowly but steadily, the realization started to sink in that all signs indeed suggested that Deimos was no longer alive. 

Although there’s no complete certainty, phaze1G decided to inform the Demonoid community about the findings this morning. This wasn’t an easy decision and took weeks of consideration and attempts to get more clarity.

“With great sadness, I want to announce that Deimos, the founder of Demonoid known as someone who was one of the earliest and influential people on the torrent scene since it’s beginning has died in an accident back on August, 2018,” phaze1G writes.

The date of the accident, which was the result of a panic attack, coincides with Deimos’ disappearance. In addition, there were further signs that suggest that Deimos was indeed the victim. 

Phaze1G and other Demonoid staffers are devastated by the sad news and have put up a commemoration page to remember Demonoid’s founder.

“Our comeback kid Demonoid will now rest after years of fighting along with his father,” the commemoration page reads. 

After the initial disappearance, there were reports that someone logged in to the site under his account. In hindsight, phaze1G believes that this may have been a friend or family member, who wiped the server, perhaps after making a backup. 

“It was someone with enough tech skills such as friends, family or Umlauf, so currently there is at least one person who holds the database of Demonoid and if it ever comes back that person will not be Deimos,” phaze1G notes. 

For now, the remaining staff have no idea where to go next. They created a temporary forum a while ago to keep the community going, but without Deimos, the spirit of the site is gone.

“Demonoid Fora was formed as a reminder of Demonoid and Deimos, but I have no idea what to do next, or what to do regarding Demonoid at all. Demonoid is and always was Deimos’ child. Umlauf was there to help when it was hard, so without those 2 giants, there is no Demonoid.

“Even if we recreate it from the ground with 99% identical look and features, it will not be it without Deimos and won’t have that feeling of home it once had,” phaze1G adds.

Deimos started the site in his early twenties. While he handed over the reins to outsiders for a few years, he took over the helm again two years ago, hoping to return the site to its former glory. 

In the months leading up to his disappearance, he worked on the site continuously to achieve this goal, showing the passion and commitment many staffers knew him for.

“Many things were happening behind the scene, he cared so much about users’ privacy and replied almost to everyone who private message him and asked how he was and stuff. He was really a friendly person,” phaze1G says.

“I’m glad that I had a chance to know him and I will miss him dearly, not because of Demonoid only, but because of the person, he was,” 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

Premiere of Final Game of Thrones Season Triggers Piracy Bonanza


Yesterday the eighth and final season of Game of Thrones premiered, generating a massive demand on both legal and less-authorized channels.

The first episode came out a few hours early for some people on DirectTV Now, adding to the long history of Game of Thrones leaks.

Not much later, the season premiere was also widely available on various pirate sites. The first pirate releases were not sourced from the leak, however. They came from Amazon and were put online just minutes the show officially became available online.

Traditionally, Game of Thrones has been the most pirated TV-show in history, and it soon became apparent that this may also be the case with the final season.

At the time of writing, more than 120,000 people are actively sharing one of the three most-popular torrents. And at The Pirate Bay, the five most popular releases are all Game of Thrones episodes. 

The most-shared torrent at the moment, with tens of thousands of peers, is a 3.34 GB rip from the group MEMENTO. Like every year, the total number of downloads is eventually expected to run to several million per episode.

Part of this unofficial audience prefers piracy over a paid subscription. However, the fact that pirate copies are available before the official release in many countries doesn’t help either.

TorrentFreak spoke to the operator of one of the most popular torrent sites, who prefers not to be named. However, he informed us that the Game of Thrones premiere resulted in a 20% boost in visitors this morning.

This uptick is similar to what he’s seen with Game of Thrones episodes in the past. On average, the peak goes down a bit throughout the season. Then, for the season finale, there’s a similar increase again.

In absolute numbers, there are fewer people sharing the episodes via BitTorrent than a few years ago. The absolute record dates back to 2015, when over a quarter million people were simultaneously sharing a single file. This is in part because the piracy ecosystem has evolved. 

Torrent sites used to be the main distribution platforms for pirated TV shows, but unauthorized streaming sites are much more popular today. These sites don’t make any viewing numbers public, but they should be good for millions of ‘pirate’ views as well. 

HBO and other related rightsholders are already working hard to take fresh links offline, or at least remove them from search engines, but history has shown that putting a serious dent in Game of Thrones piracy isn’t easy. 

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