Last week the news broke that the Emmys will make the switch from physical DVD-screeners to online streaming screeners in 2020.

This transition comes with a lot of benefits. For one, it’s much cheaper for companies to put movies on an online screening platform than to manufacture and ship hundreds of thousands of DVDs.

Another advantage, according to some industry insiders, is that it’s easier to keep online screeners out of the hands of pirates.

In recent years there haven’t been many TV-screener leaks. However, if DVD screeners are eventually phased out by other awards shows, such as the Oscars, could that be the end of the screener season madness among pirates?

That’s highly doubtful. While it’s certainly true that online copies can’t get lost in the mail, there are other vulnerabilities. A login and password are easily shared and, once in, pirates can usually find a way to rip of capture a movie of TV-show. That’s what they’re good at, after all.

This is corroborated by pirate release group EVO. Short for EVOLUTiON, EVO has been around for years. The group has standing when it comes to screeners. Just a few weeks ago it leaked “Ralph Breaks The Internet,” one of the first DVD screeners this year.

According to EVO, online screeners are not necessarily more secure and the opposite may be true in some cases. The group mentions that it had access to a digital screener account last year which provided surprisingly little protection.

“We had access to digital screeners and they are indeed easy to leak. The DRM on it is a joke. We had an account last year with three screeners on it and they were pretty much MP4 ready to encode,” the EVO team informs TorrentFreak.

The group adds that online screeners have already leaked in the past, mentioning last year’s release of “Call Me By Your Name” as an example.

The Academy Awards have experimented with online streaming, but there is no sign of a switch yet.  The release group noticed, however, that DVD screener security has been increased. At least, for the disc they worked on.

“From what I’ve seen, doing Ralph, the DVD protection on it was increased, since it was a nightmare to crack,” EVO’s team member tells us.

The group believes that the current security measures around DVD screeners releases work fairly well. After all, there haven’t been too many DVD screener leaks this year. It further notes that the quality of screeners is intentionally kept low to decrease their value, in case they leak.

Legitimate screeners (for the SAG awards)

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Whether online or physical screeners are more secure ultimately depends on the type of protection measures that are implemented for each.

A highly secure DVD with watermarks is more secure than an online stream that’s only protected with a login, and a highly secure online streaming platform is more secure than an unprotected DVD. But none of these are 100% leak-resistant.

The safest conclusion is that piracy will likely remain a problem, no matter what the distribution platform is.

To get more perspectives we reached out to a variety of movie industry insiders, including those who offer secure online screening platforms. Unfortunately, none of them answered, suggesting that it’s a sensitive issue.

Based on previous coverage on the matter, we found that the movie industry hasn’t made its mind up on the security issue either.

Anthony Anderson, director of film security for Universal Pictures, previously told Variety that digital screeners will present new threats, which could make them less secure.

“Before, if you shipped a DVD to the home, you had to steal it from the doorstep. Now you can sit at home and attack the site, which presents a host of issues,” Anderson said.

The Television Academy’s decision to make Emmy screeners streaming only doesn’t come as a surprise though. In recent years many insiders have called for a transition and the major studios, including Warner Bros., have online “FYC” platforms in place already.

As far as we know, security concerns are not the main driver behind the switch. Variety’s coverage shows that streaming is simply seen as more practical, modern, and much cheaper by many. The downside is that not everyone likes streaming and that it’s harder to make titles stand out.

As for EVO, they don’t believe that the Academy Awards will follow the Emmys’ example anytime soon.  That said, the group prefers not to get involved with these type of releases too often, as it’s a security threat for them as well.

“Usually, we choose to stay out of the DVDSCR because it’s something that draws to much heat, and the studios are not happy about it. Every year people who actually leak them are arrested. No matter how good you are to erase the watermarks. There is always a trace,” EVO notes.

That’s true for both DVD and online screeners…

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

Belgium, here we come! Team Kodi will be at FOSDEM in Brussels next week. If you live anywhere near, if you’re attending, if you can make the detour – please, come along and meet some of the team.

FOSDEM is an annual, volunteer, non-commercial event that focuses on free and open source software development. It’s primarily aimed at developers, although the talks and stands are open to anyone who’s interested. Its main aim is to simply create a meeting place; it’s a fantastic opportunity for people to mix, chat, share ideas, collaborate, promote awareness, and generally interact with like-minded individuals.

So, every year, thousands of developers from all over the world descend on the Université Libre de Bruxelles to do just that. This year, there’ll be representatives of projects such as Gnome, Mozilla, Debian, Python, GitLab, LibreOffice, Apache, VideoLAN (and many, many more) – and some of the Kodi team as well. We won’t have a stand but, in between attending and delivering talks and generally mingling, we’d love to meet with our friends in the community who might be reading this.

Kodi v18 “Leia” Presentation

Martijn from the team will be presenting the final release of Kodi 18, the next release in everyone’s favourite media centre software. He will be taking people through the latest features to be introduced, as well as some of the changes that have been made “behind the scenes”, and what these mean for developers and users. He’ll also set the scene for what you can expect as we now build on these foundations and move in anger towards v19 development.

Room H.1309, Saturday 2nd February, 11:00-11:25.

Kodi Team Meetup

It doesn’t matter whether you’re a user or developer, whether you work with Kodi or something else, if you have commercial interests, or if you’re simply curious. Pop along if you’re interested; several Team Kodi members will be present to chat at your leisure.

Room H.3242, Saturday 2nd February, 16:00-17:00.

More information on the presentation here, meeting here, and on FOSDEM itself here.

We hope to see you soon!

Source link


After more than ten years in the game, RARBG is one of the most popular and resilient torrent sites on the Internet today.

The site took fourth spot in our 2019 list of most popular torrent sites, a position that has been earned through regular high-quality releases of everything from movies and TV shows through to music, games and adult content.

During the past few days, however, the site took a somewhat unusual step that has had some users scratching their heads. A quick look inside some new video torrents released by the site reveals not only the content itself, but also an initially mysterious file called ‘ RARBG_DO_NOT_MIRROR.exe’.

The presence of an .exe file often raises alarm bells

As a general rule, when video torrents contain an .exe file there is a need for caution. These executables can contain anything and in some cases may be malicious, such as a virus or malware. As a result, experienced torrent users never click them but the same can’t be said about novices.

In this instance, however, there is nothing for regular users to be worried about. Renaming the file to give it a .txt extension reveals that this is just a text file that displays the following information:

“This is not an .exe file. This is just a placeholder to prevent mirroring over other public sites.”

So if it’s just a text file, why would RARBG include it in their torrents? The explanation, it turns out, is pretty straightforward and not directed at users at all.

While the site makes thousands of releases every week, these are easily mirrored on other platforms. Since .exe files are viewed with suspicion by tools used to automate the crawling of the site (most sites don’t allow .exe files to be uploaded in video categories), their inclusion means less diffusion of RARBG torrents to other platforms.

“[The .exe file] is included in torrent files to stop distribution to other public sites,” RARBG confirms in a new addition to its FAQ.

Interestingly, the “.exe” experiment is also having a positive effect on the health of torrents tracked by RARBG. According to the site’s operator, the inclusion of the .exe file in torrents “reduces the average hit&run [people who grab a torrent and then fail to seed] by 35% !”

As mentioned earlier, there is nothing malicious with the .exe file as far as users are concerned and, as the site points out, people can easily ‘untick’ the file in their torrent client and it won’t even be downloaded.

That being said, their presence won’t be welcomed by people looking to mirror RARBG torrents elsewhere. Since the traffic to such platforms could be negatively affected following the rejection of torrents containing an .exe, the job of their operators becomes much more difficult.

Finally, it’s worth reiterating that real .exe files in any torrent – or indeed anywhere on the Internet – should always be approached with caution.

Running these kinds of files without due diligence can be a risky proposition so the default actions should always be to run up-to-date anti-virus/anti-malware software and/or ignore and delete unexpected content, just to be on the safe side.

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


Regular Internet providers are being put under increasing pressure for not doing enough to curb copyright infringement.

Music rights company BMG got the ball rolling a few years ago when it won its piracy liability lawsuit against Cox.

Following this defeat, several major record labels including Capitol Records, Warner Bros, and Sony Music filed a lawsuit in a Texas District Court. With help from the RIAA, they sued ISP Grande Communications for allegedly turning a blind eye to its pirating subscribers.

According to the labels, the Internet provider knew that some of its subscribers were frequently distributing copyrighted material, and accused the company of failing to take any meaningful action in response.

The case is now heading to trial, where the ISP might not have a safe harbor defense. However, if it’s up to Grande, the record labels should start the trial without their most important evidence; the “infringement notices” of Rightscorp.

Anti-piracy outfit Rightscorp has a database of close to a billion copyright infringements. While the company’s original business model of automated settlements hasn’t been very lucrative, the notices are gladly used by copyright holders in court.

They were the basis of the BMG v.s Cox lawsuit and in the record labels’ case against Grande they are also front and center.

According to Grande, however, this evidence is unusable. Its attorneys have previously branded it as inaccurate but this month they added an even more damaging claim. The ISP accuses the labels and Rightscorp of destroying vital evidence.

While the notices are all intact, much of the underlying information has been removed. The ISP argues that this makes it impossible to determine precisely how Rightscorp’s system functioned and what information about Grande’s subscribers was collected in each case.

Grande’s attorneys presented their findings to the Texas federal court. They submitted a motion for evidentiary sanctions based on the reported “spoliation” of evidence.

“Plaintiffs and Rightscorp have destroyed all of the evidence necessary to determine how the Rightscorp system operated at any given time relevant to this lawsuit,” Grande’s motion reads.

Recent depositions establish that Rightscorp, the RIAA, Plaintiffs, and their retained experts are all incapable of providing a cogent and detailed explanation of how the Rightscorp system actually functioned at any point during the relevant time period.”

The missing information includes communications with torrent trackers,
data that show if customers were actively sharing certain files, and data that was used to match downloads to copyrighted works. In addition, Rightscorp is also accused of deleting nearly all records from its call-center.

The ISP is convinced that it’s severely disadvantaged by the destruction of evidence. They risk more than a billion dollars in theoretical damages based on notices of which most of the underlying data is gone.

“Plaintiffs intend to rely heavily on Rightscorp’s notices to prove their infringement case. Yet, the destruction of the evidence underlying those notices seriously compromises Grande’s ability to independently evaluate the accuracy of the process, notices and downloads,” the company writes.

Interestingly, this is not the first time that Rightscorp is accused of spoiling evidence. In the Cox case, the anti-piracy outfit was found to have destroyed source code, which resulted in a monetary sanction.

Grande highlights this history and adds that the current issues are even more significant.

As such, Grande sees no other option than to sanction the record labels. They don’t want any monetary punishments. Instead, they request that the court excludes all Rightscorp evidence from trial, which will make it much harder for the labels to make their case.

“Given Plaintiffs’ and Rightscorp’s destruction of virtually all evidence underlying Rightscorp’s allegations, the only just remedy is the exclusion of the Rightscorp evidence. Because Rightscorp destroyed all of the related and underlying evidence, the Rightscorp notices and downloads have effectively been ‘spoiled’,” they conclude.

The record labels have yet to respond to the allegations, after which the court will rule on the matter.

A copy of Grande Communications’ motion for evidentiary sanctions 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


Preventing or at least reducing the flood of pirated copies of movies and TV shows online remains a priority for entertainment industry companies everywhere.

In the current environment, most public activity is aimed at distributors, such as torrent and streaming platforms. However, hitting those who supply content from higher up the chain is a long-standing but lesser-publicized strategy.

News coming in from Italy indicates that the authorities there have been looking closely at players who they consider to be particularly big fish.

The Guardia di Finanza of Pesaro, a department under Italy’s Minister of Economy, reports a long and complex investigation to target the individuals behind a release group they name as ‘FREE / iNCOMiNG’.

Operating between 2010 to 2016, the group is identified as “one of the main groups operating on the Italian and international scenes.” According to the GdF, ‘FREE / iNCOMiNG’ collaborated with foreign groups to which it supplied copies of movies recorded in Italian cinemas, reportedly accounting for 66% of copies of such movies made available online.

The investigation sought to link camcorded copies of movies with players in the group, an effort that was carried out by the Public Prosecutor of Pesaro in coordination with investigators at the Federation for the Protection of Audiovisual and Multimedia Content (FAPAV).

This led to the identification of four suspects with house searches subsequently executed in four regions of Italy (Marche, Piedmont, Lombardy and Puglia) and the seizure of equipment including PCs, smartphones, and media containing an estimated 800,000 files.

“The subsequent analysis of what was seized allowed us to discover that the group members, after the acquisition of the successful films and the major television series broadcast on pay-per-view channels, took care of the assembly and coding for upload on powerful servers,” the investigators reveal.

“The modified files were advertised on websites that, upon payment, facilitated illegal downloading. The group in question also established significant contacts and collaborations with other foreign release groups, thus succeeding in diversifying the sources of income connected to the illicit copies.”

Anti-piracy group FAPAV welcomed the results of the investigation, particularly in respect of the disruption to the supply of movies illegally recorded in theaters.

“According to our estimates, as far as the first cinematographic releases are concerned, in nine cases out of ten the audio and video source of the pirated files is represented by the unauthorized recordings that take place by ‘release groups’ in cinemas,” said Federico Bagnoli Rossi, General Secretary FAPAV.

“Camcording is, therefore, the primary source of piracy, a phenomenon that should not be underestimated considering the huge damage it causes the entire sector. Such recordings, in fact, are usually realized in the very first days following the release of films in theaters or when the works are in their initial phase of exploitation.”

The cases of the four men, whose identities have not been revealed, are said to have been handed to the authorities for action under relevant laws. At least as far as public piracy release databases reveal, iNCOMiNG ceased releases under that specific name around 16 months ago.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.





Source link


Last year, several major Hollywood studios, Amazon, and Netflix filed a lawsuit against Dragon Media Inc, branding it a supplier of pirate streaming devices.

Under the flag of anti-piracy group ACE, the companies accused Dragon of using the Kodi media player in combination with pirate addons. As such, the company facilitates mass copyright infringement, it was argued.

Dragon Box swiftly responded to the allegations by halting its sales. The company later decided to change its business model, moving from a Kodi-addon platform to a subscription-based service called BlendTV.

The box vendor maintained that this was perfectly legal, but the copyright holders clearly disagreed. This prompted Dragon Box to halt its sales again.

That wasn’t the end though. Last month the boxes returned with yet another service called “My TV Hub.” According to the Hollywood studios, this service is not legitimate either. Growing tired of this “whack-a-mole” they asked the court to intervene.

The ACE members requested a preliminary injunction to halt the infringing activity. It appears, however, that this is no longer required. A few days ago, Dragon Box’s attorney informed the court that they’ve agreed to settle the matter.

“Defendants respectfully notify the Court that the parties have agreed in principle to settle the above-entitled case,” attorney Matthew J. Faust writes.

“At this time, the parties are in the process of preparing a settlement agreement and intend to file the documents related to the final disposition of the case within the next few days,” he adds.

The court responded to the filing by vacating all other hearings and deadlines that were on the docket. However, given the history of this case, it’s probably wise to wait until all paperwork is filed before marking it as resolved.

At the time of writing the Dragon Box website remains online. The boxes themselves are no longer listed for sale, but the site does link to a “Blend TV” subscription which prospective users can buy.

A spokesperson for ACE informed us that they would release more information on the matter in the near future. We will update this article when that arrives.

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


 

XIAOMI MI BOX S GIVEAWAY

For you, the most loyal Boom Shakalandians, a small token of appreciation. Giveaway of the Xiaomi Mi Box S. It is an international giveaway, so whether you live on top of the Himalayas or near the shore of the Dead Sea, you can participate without hesitation.
Rules Of The Giveaway:
1. SUBSCRIBE – https://goo.gl/hDiwEg
2. COMMENT down below
3. LIKE this video
4. SHARE this video
The lucky winner will be drawn live on this channel this Sunday 27th of January 2019!
Good luck to everyone and thank you for your support!

Subscribe For More: https://goo.gl/hDiwEg
Become a Boom Shakalandian – Subscribe: https://goo.gl/dbo6IL

Android TV Box / Streaming devices:
Recommended TV Boxes: http://wp.me/p6WCol-mz
Recommended Remotes: http://bit.ly/2akQuTR
Best Value/Money Gamepad: http://bit.ly/2a0scxA

My recommendations for 100% secure VPN are:
IP Vanish http://bit.ly/1PowS0r
Private Internet Access http://bit.ly/2a2H5gW
Cybersilent VPN: https://goo.gl/LqK4oG

My Setup:
Modem/Router ASUS AC86U: https://goo.gl/BZdDPW
Capture Card Elgato HD60S: http://amzn.to/2GbqLMa
Main 4K Monitor ASUS PB287Q 28″ 4K: http://amzn.to/2E3Wo9O
Canon EOS Rebel T6: http://amzn.to/2rAl87c
Logitech C920 Webcam: http://amzn.to/2DzMvno
Microphone Sanson Meteor: http://amzn.to/2rCWv9Q
LED Softbox Lights: http://amzn.to/2Dx9ETx
LED Ring Light: http://amzn.to/2FaU3cK
Motospeed Red Switch Keyboard: https://goo.gl/a6npKe
Logitech MX Master Mouse: http://amzn.to/2BpThWR
My Laptop MSI GL62M 7REX: https://goo.gl/24t5Es

Contact Me:
Twitter – https://twitter.com/dimitrology
Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/dimitrology/
Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/dimitrology/
Reddit – https://www.reddit.com/r/dimitrology/
Email – [email protected]
Website – http://www.dimitrology.com


YouTube rippers are seen as the largest piracy threat to the music industry, and record labels are doing their best to shut them down.

In 2017, YouTube-MP3, the world’s largest ripping site at the time, shut down after being sued, and several other folded in response to increased legal uncertainty.

Not all stream-ripping sites throw in the towel without a fight though. FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com, owned by Russian developer Tofig Kurbanov, remained online despite being sued by several record labels last August.

Where other site owners often prefer to remain in the shadows, Kurbanov filed a motion to dismiss the case. According to the defense, the court has no jurisdiction over the matter. Only a small fraction of the visitors come from the US, and the site is managed entirely from Russia, it argued.

The RIAA labels, including Universal, Warner Bros, and Sony, clearly disagreed. In response, they argued that the operator of FLVTO.biz and 2conv.com downplays the connections to the US and Virginia. Therefore, he should stand trial there.

Yesterday, US District Court Judge Claude M. Hilton ruled on the matter. In a 14-page opinion, he clearly sides with the operator of the YouTube rippers. Kurbanov doesn’t have to stand trial in the US so the case was dismissed.

The ruling is merely about jurisdiction and doesn’t make an assessment of the alleged copyright infringements. The court carefully reviewed how the site operates and found no evidence that they purposefully targeted either Virginia or the United States.

The sites are available in the US and have plenty of visitors there, but that by itself is not enough.

“Even if the Websites’ servers knew exactly where the users were located, any interaction would still be in the unilateral control of the users as they initiate the contacts,” Judge Hilton’s opinion reads.

2conv.com

There could be personal jurisdiction if there’s a “commercial contract” involved. However, that’s not the case here. The site generates revenue from users through advertisements, but that’s not seen as a basis for a commercial contract, the court concludes.

“As the Websites are semi-interactive, the interactions with the users are non-commercial, and there were no other acts by the Defendant that would demonstrate purposeful targeting, the Court finds that Defendant did not purposefully avail himself of the benefits and protections of either Virginia or the United States.

“The Court finds that exercise of personal jurisdiction over Defendant would be unconstitutional as a violation of due process…” Judge Hilton’s opinion adds, before dismissing the case.

In addition, the opinion stresses that without personal jurisdiction the record labels don’t have the option to refile the case in California or elsewhere in the US.

The ruling

Val Gurvits, one of the attorneys who represented the site operator, is thrilled with the outcome. He believes this will also be beneficial to other foreign sites that offer similar functionality.

“This decision goes a long way towards curbing the copyright owners’ misuse of the US legal system to bully foreign website operators,” Gurvits informs TorrentFreak.

In many copyright-related cases, foreign defendants decide not to appear at all, but this case shows that fighting back can pay off.

“All too often plaintiffs file actions in US courts against foreign defendants that have no connections with the US – and all too often foreign defendants are subjected to default judgments for failure to appear in a US court,” Gurvits says.

“We are happy we were able to save our client from having to defend this action in a US court thousands of miles away from where the relevant business activities take place,” he adds.

The major record labels have yet to comment on the outcome. TorrentFreak reached out to the RIAA for a response, but we haven’t heard back thus far.

A copy of the memorandum opinion supporting the dismissal 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


The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has been protecting the interests of Hollywood since its formation in 1922.

It generates most of its revenue from contributions by the six major Hollywood studios – Disney, Paramount, Sony, Twentieth Century Fox, Universal, and Warner Bros.

But now, in a historic move, a significant new member has joined the movie and TV show trade association.

“On behalf of the MPAA and its member companies, I am delighted to welcome Netflix as a partner,” MPAA Chairman and CEO Charles Rivkin said in a statement.

“All of our members are committed to pushing the film and television industry forward, in both how we tell stories and how we reach audiences. Adding Netflix will allow us to even more effectively advocate for the global community of creative storytellers, and I look forward to seeing what we can all achieve together.”

The addition of Netflix to the MPAA fold doesn’t come as a complete surprise.

As reported in 2018, the MPAA faces a shrinking budget following Disney’s acquisition of 20th Century Fox. Despite reporting revenues of $57m (including studio contributions of almost $50m) in its latest public filings, that figure was down from $73 million in the previous year.

Disney previously promised to pay Fox’s MPAA contributions for a year after the finalization of the deal but that still had the potential to leave the MPAA down one-sixth in membership dues. Presuming that the streaming service will pay an equal share, Netflix’s membership of the trade group should go a long way to filling the Fox-shaped hole in its budget.

The addition of Netflix to the MPAA is groundbreaking on a few fronts.

Perhaps most significantly, Netflix isn’t a Hollywood studio, so its membership breaks with almost a century of tradition. And, of course, this is the first time that a dedicated streaming service has become so closely aligned with the interests of the 97-year-old organization.

“Joining the Motion Picture Association further exemplifies our commitment to ensuring the vibrancy of these creative industries and the many talented people who work in them all over the world,” said Ted Sarandos, Netflix Chief Content Officer.

“We look forward to supporting the association team and their important efforts.”

While Netflix settles in as the MPAA’s newest member, the streaming service is no stranger to working with the major Hollywood studios in respect of content protection.

In 2017, Netflix was revealed as one of the founding members of the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment  (ACE), a global anti-piracy group featuring the studios of the MPAA and dozens of other companies. As a key member, Netflix was granted full voting rights on ACE business, including the approval of initiatives and public policy, anti-piracy strategy, budget-related matters, plus approval of legal action.

If the MPAA is looking to expand further still, it’s possible that Amazon could yet join the fold. Not only is Amazon a founding member of ACE, but the company was also touted as a potential new MPAA member during 2018.

Amazon, however, is still a member of the Internet Association, a pro-tech group organization that Netflix parted company with recently, just in advance of joining the MPAA.

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


US music and movie industry companies helped to get pirate sites blocked in countries all around the globe.

On their home turf, however, pirate sites remain freely accessible.

After the SOPA protests, the blocking issue became a no-go issue in the US. Blocking efforts continued elsewhere though, including in the UK, where hundreds of pirate domains have been blocked.

Slowly but steadily, copyright holders now appear ready to reintroduce the idea of site blocking. Recent filings from Hollywood’s MPAA and the music industry’s RIAA believe that a new US-UK trade agreement is a good opportunity to do so.

The trade deal is required if the UK leaves the EU. To gauge what various stakeholders would like to see in a new agreement, the US Trade Representative (USTR) requested comments from the public.

Responding to this request the RIAA provides a list of priorities for the negotiations. This includes known talking points such as increasing liability for online platforms, but site-blocking also get a prominent mention.

In the UK copyright holders can request site-blocking injunctions fairly easily, and the RIAA would like to see the same in the US.

“Website blocking is a highly-effective form of copyright enforcement in the UK, and in numerous other jurisdictions around the world to combat infringing websites, and is a critical tool in ensuring legitimate trade in digital products and services,” the RIAA writes.

The music group adds that blocking has proven to be very effective in reducing traffic to the affected sites.

“Website blocking has been successful in the United Kingdom with 63 music sites being ordered to be blocked following music right holders’ initiatives. On average this produces a reduction in the use of those sites by UK users by approximately 75 percent.”

The RIAA further highlights the more recent “live” or “dynamic” blocking orders. These are currently targeting pirated football and boxing streams as they are broadcasted, and are limited to the duration of a season or event.

The music group is not alone in this request. The Digital Creators Working Group, which includes the Association of American Publishers, News Media Alliance, as well as the RIAA and MPAA, highlighted it as well.

In a separate submission to the USTR, the organizations list “website blocking, including “dynamic” blocking as provided in UK law,” as one of the priorities for a new trade deal.

The MPAA itself also sent in a list of priorities. In a carefully worded statement, which doesn’t mention the word “blocking,” it points out that the UK is ahead of the US in many regards when it comes to anti-piracy enforcement.

“With regard to online enforcement, a U.S.-UK agreement should include disciplines that can effectively address online piracy. In many ways, the UK has more nimbly and effectively responded to digital piracy than the U.S.,” MPAA notes.

The MPAA would like to pick the best elements from US and UK policy and combine them into an even more effective agreement.

“To promote a modernized IP trade framework, MPAA recommends moving to high-level language that reflects the fundamental principles on which the DMCA is based and which identifies key elements of the UK system, including no fault injunctive relief orders, as satisfying the standard. 

“Such an approach would be fully consistent with U.S. law and preserve the high levels of protection in the UK’s enforcement framework,” the MPAA adds. 

While blocking isn’t mentioned specifically, the “no fault injunctive relief orders” the Hollywood group refers to are generally used against ISPs to compel these companies to block pirate sites.

The submissions clearly show that major rightsholder groups are no longer avoiding the blocking issue in the US. This already became apparent a few weeks ago, when music industry outfits brought it up in comments sent to the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.

RIAA’s full submission is available here (pdf). MPAA’s response can be found here (pdf) and the  Digital Creators Working Group’s submission is 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