‘Sharing is Caring’ Once Described Piracy But Things Have Probably Changed

While people have always made money from bootleg videos and music, the very early days of file-sharing mostly embodied the “sharing is caring” ethos. Have a tune, give one away. Have a game, pass it around. However, over the past 15 years – the last 10 in particular – there has been a noticeable shift. Does anyone share or provide platforms altruistically anymore, or is money behind pretty much everything?

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

For those old enough to remember, the early days of what would become mainstream Internet piracy were an enlightening time to be around.

With few, if any, legal alternatives available, sharing music and later movies online offered an early and exciting glimpse into the future of media consumption.

The entertainment industries hated all kinds of piracy back then and they still hate it now, that’s not up for debate. But today, almost 20 years after peer-to-peer burst onto the scene, there’s mixed opinion even among pirates as to whether things have changed for the better.

TorrentFreak recently caught up with the former operator of a BitTorrent tracker that launched to the public in 2005. The site itself shut down before 2010, ostensibly after its operators decided family life was more important. Its founder tells us that was only part of the story – money was the real issue.

“When we got into this we started a quiet private club where people could share (and I do mean SHARE) stuff with each other,” he explains.

“The staff and members were squirrels gathering up nuts and whatnot and sharing them on the tracker. All of us could snatch what we wanted and didn’t even feel obliged to return the favor but we all did because we knew each other already and it just worked. Guess giving felt good as getting.”

With a few thousand members at its peak, the site was intentionally never big. Hosted on a free shared server with two other sites thanks to a friendly website designer, the limitations were in place right from the start. Unfortunately, the site’s users became restless. Other trackers were bigger, faster, easier to seed on, but more crucially had a wider range of content.

“Can’t tell you when precisely (a few years later) but we started to tear ourselves apart. Some of the best uploaders found other sites and drifted off which had a big effect on the rest of the site. We managed to find a couple of people who were willing to upload but they wanted new stuff in return and we didn’t have it.

“Someone with access to a pay dump offered to help but they wanted paying as well and I noped right out of paying for warez. Most of our rivals did and it hurt us.”

Even when the site got fresh content, that didn’t really help things either, the former admin says. Users with access to other sites uploaded the content on those immediately and some members didn’t like it and wanted it stopped. That didn’t sit right with the admin because behind the scenes his people were doing exactly the same. What they really needed was money to improve the site to get more people in, who would hopefully bring content with them.

“We stuck out for years not asking for donations but at the end of the day we were in limbo. You build this thing and you’re watching it die. There’s still no question in my mind that we should’ve let it die gracefully in its sleep but hindsight and all that.”

The donations helped for a while but the former admin says that things were never the same. He says that most of the time the amount coming in exceeded the running costs of the site which then made it “morally hard” to keep asking for money. However, he said donations were still requested regularly because when people got out of the habit of giving, they were hard to get back, especially when other sites were offering bang for their buck.

“Pay to leech. That was the beginning of the end for me and I still get emotional about it now. To keep up with [site names redacted] we had to boost [sharing] ratios. It was wrong. We’d gone from a family affair to barely more than a pay site. The older members felt they didn’t know us anymore but the newer ones seemed to want it and cultures clashed and I got the blame.”

So-called ‘pay-to-leech’ is a term most often used to explain how a torrent site can raise revenue by manipulating sharing ratios. If a site has enough seeders and excess upload bandwidth, users can pay to be exempted from strict sharing rules. While rules on various sites differ, in general terms it means that members can download content with relative impunity without giving back, i.e not sharing.

The former admin didn’t want to go into detail about what happened in the wake of the decision to start accepting donations but things didn’t go well. What he did reveal is that it changed the mood on the site. In exchange for their money, people flat-out demanded better service and became more and more vocal when they didn’t get it. They felt they’d paid for a service.

“We had angry posts in the forums with people pasting details of their donations and even private conversations about them with the moderators. I had my wee baby crying downstairs, a pissed-off girlfriend who I never saw and man babies crying on the site over a pittance. I took it and took it and took it and then one day a five minute chat on IRC later with another admin and i’d gone. ‘Here’s the keys to the frontdoor.’ Best thing i’d ever done.”

The striking thing about our discussion with the former admin is that he says that while arguments are commonplace on the Internet these days, they were the exception when his site was first launched. He says there was a sense of belonging to something special and people didn’t want to spoil it because they were not only part of it, they’d helped to create and maintain it too. These days, he complains, things are different because ‘sharing and caring’ have been forgotten.

“Is there a file-sharing family anymore because if there is I don’t know where to find them. People still share alright but it’s pictures of them or their food on Facebook and Instagram. You can’t find people sharing files for fun as we did back in the day because the cat’s out of the bag and it’s an earner and you can’t turn back the clock. Why do you think all the kids dumped torrents for upload sites unless it was about the payback?

“I don’t know if it’s me that’s stuck in the past and this had to happen for piracy to exist as it does now but it’s a shame because all I see now is greed. You tell me, but is sharing out of kindness almost dead?” he asked.

With an entirely different experience, millions of users and uploaders to The Pirate Bay and similar sites would probably beg to differ.

After more than 15 years online, people are still uploading content as they did in the early days, each with their own reason for doing so. The site is still widely accessible and people can take whatever they like for free. The site obviously makes money though, using ads and a crypto-miner, so money remains part of the loop.

More elitist and/or discerning users will always point to professionally organized private trackers as being more community-based, more reliable, much better organized, and with greater emphasis placed on quality control. Old-style sharing can still be found on many but they are certainly not immune to change and the pressures of commerce.

Invites, when they become available, are sometimes handed out for free but in an increasing number of cases, sites charge for the privilege. One can’t make sweeping statements about all of them because there are many and they’re secretive. However, there can be no doubt that a significant number have developed into money-making machines, both for their operators and in some cases their uploaders too.

That raises the question: is there any way to turn back the clock? Is there a way to remove money or other financial incentives out of the equation? With streaming, the most popular form of piracy currently, apparently not.

“You are not realistic,” the operator of a streaming site told TF.

“You write it every day that someone is arrested or blocked or PayPal closed. I can do this for nothing then. Nobody is doing this for nothing. Servers are free so show me where I can buy?”

The owner of a smaller public torrent site (who has operated several other piracy-focused sites in the past) was more talkative.

“My motivation is purely money related. I would not run any piracy related sites if they didn’t earn anything. Just too much risk involved,” he explained.

“Personal issues left me to rely on income from the sites to support my family. I would simply not run the sites if they didn’t make anything. Making money from piracy is so easy so that’s why I think people do it. Rarely you’ll see a site not using any ads. When I was younger things felt a lot different to what they do now. They don’t do it for the love now. But for the money.”

We posed similar questions to a long-standing major site operator – what motivates people to run torrent, hosting and streaming sites these days? He told us that the latter pair make “lots of money” but in respect of torrent sites, he believes there’s no point in running one anymore. The only exception would be for small sites that might still operate for ‘fun’ or on a break-even basis.

“[Some people might run] some small ones [for no profit] – sure – but the user base will be small because the time spent on development will be low,” he said.

For anyone running a bigger site, making nothing or even breaking even isn’t a realistic option, he added. Costs increase every month and if you don’t keep balancing the books, “it won’t work out.”

Ultimately, the operator insisted that going completely back to old-style “sharing is caring” won’t be possible. There’s a new type of demanding consumer out there that is very difficult and increasingly expensive to keep happy.

“That’s never going to happen. The Netflix generation is used to content ready to use, they don’t think about what’s involved in the process of reaching them.”

Tim Kuik of Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN says that he hasn’t seen platforms that aren’t in it for the money for a long time.

“Even if there are uploaders or subtitlers who do it for the kudos, the platforms they post on are making money out of it. We see illegal link aggregators that are supported by platforms that make money off downloaders or streamers by selling them higher download speed,” he says.

But for anti-piracy groups like BREIN, motivation probably doesn’t make much difference to the end result. Piracy is piracy and whatever drives it, it still means illegal content ends up online for free.

“Even if it were for a hobby, would that make it alright to cause damage with it?” Kuik asks.

But ultimately, in the final reckoning, do today’s consumers of pirated content even care what goes on behind the scenes financially, as long as they get it free or at least on the cheap?

One can’t put words into the mouths of millions of individuals but given the popularity of online piracy, especially the astronomic growth of premium IPTV, the suggestion is that largely, people don’t. In fact, for newer entrants to the piracy scene, the fact that people make money is probably the accepted standard.

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

Mark Zuckerberg: Freiheit ist immer die Freiheit von Facebook

Facebook-Chef Mark Zuckerberg hat sich in einer Rede als Hüter der Meinungsfreiheit aufgespielt. Darunter versteht er vor allem den eigenen Vorteil. Von Lisa Hegemann (Facebook, Soziales Netz)

Facebook-Chef Mark Zuckerberg hat sich in einer Rede als Hüter der Meinungsfreiheit aufgespielt. Darunter versteht er vor allem den eigenen Vorteil. Von Lisa Hegemann (Facebook, Soziales Netz)

Netflix Bosses Play Down Competition Threats

Netflix’s Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos and CEO Reed Hastings has played down the growing threat posed by the imminent arrival of several competing streaming platforms by claiming that competition isn’t anything new and that Netflix is ready to me…



Netflix's Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos and CEO Reed Hastings has played down the growing threat posed by the imminent arrival of several competing streaming platforms by claiming that competition isn't anything new and that Netflix is ready to meet the new challenges.

Market watchers were alerted last month when Hastings boldly claimed that a "whole new world" was coming to the streaming scene with the launch of Apple TV+ and Disney+ in November.

Sarandos and Hastings both claimed later on that the sensitive phrase used was a "playful" one that borrowed a reference from Disney's Aladdin, one of the many titles that will no longer make an appearance on Netflix but will be an exclusive on Disney+.

Instead, both argued that competition isn't something new for Netflix, having to be in the same marketplace as the likes of Hulu, Amazon and even YouTube.

"From when we began in [2007] streaming, Hulu and YouTube and Amazon Prime Video were all in the market," Hastings said. "All four of us have been competing heavily, including with linear TV, for the last 12 years. So fundamentally, there's not a big change here."

Netflix will now not only face off against Amazon, Hulu and YouTube, but it will also now have to compete with Apple TV+, Disney+ and HBO Max from Warner Media, and Peacock from NBC Universal. The latter two of which will be taking several of Netflix's most-binged shows, including 'Friends', 'The Office' and 'Seinfeld'.

For now, Hastings believes that Netflix's real competitor will still be broadcast TV, pointing out that cable companies over the past 30 years have not been competing with each other, but with broadcasting.

[via Media Play News]

Google Play Removes Perfect Player After “Bogus” Copyright Complaint

This week Google removed the popular IPTV software Perfect Player from its Play Store following a hard-to-fathom copyright complaint. A major pay TV provider claimed it was possible to stream pirate content in the app so it must be illegal. However, the app ships with no links to content whatsoever, so anything infringing must’ve been added at a later stage.

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

‘Pirate’ IPTV services make the news every week, mostly in connection with streaming movies, TV shows, and sports without obtaining permission from rightsholders.

Enforcement actions against these entities are certainly on the increase and in most instances it’s easy to see why copyright holders have a problem with them. However, it’s clear that some companies either don’t understand what they’re dealing with or simply don’t care.

Case in point, the popular Android app Perfect Player. This software is effectively a network-capable media player that enables users to enter a playlist from an IPTV provider and watch video, no matter what the source. In common with Windows Media Player, it doesn’t involve itself with end-user conduct and can be used to watch legitimate streams.

This week, however, the software – which has in excess of a million downloads from Google Play – was removed by Google because of a copyright complaint. It was filed by a major pay-TV provider, the name of which we’ve agreed not to publish while the complaint is ongoing.

It states that the software allows users to watch channels from unauthorized sources and is therefore illegal. However, there appears to be a considerable flaw in the pay-TV company’s arguments.

In common with the developers behind various torrent clients, Perfect Player’s developer doesn’t dictate how the software is used because no control can be exercised over that. Just like Windows Media Player, uTorrent, or even VLC (which has similar capabilities), it can be used for entirely legal purposes – or not, depending on the choice of the user.

To support its complaint, we understand that the pay-TV provider supplied screenshots showing Perfect Player playing content to which the company holds the rights. This is particularly odd because any content being played is actioned by and is the responsibility of the user.

To have received the content in the first place, the company (or whoever they obtained the app from) must’ve actively configured Perfect Player to infringe by loading it with the playlist from an illicit IPTV provider. Perfect Player contains no playlists when supplied directly from Google Play, it’s content-neutral.

To strike an analogy, you can’t put a bullet in a gun, shoot someone in the head, and then blame the gun manufacturer. Likewise, if you don’t want illicit streams turning up in a software player, don’t have someone load it with infringing playlists from third-parties and then blame a software developer.

“These guys told me that they own ‘Premier’ channels and we should stop transmitting these channels. I answered that the app doesn’t contain any content or channels,” Perfect Player’s developer informs TorrentFreak.

“They then sent another email with a screenshot, showing that they are able to watch their channels in the app.”

TorrentFreak contacted the TV company’s anti-piracy team asking why they chose to target Perfect Player while gently pointing out the playlist issue detailed above. Unfortunately, at the time of publication, the company had not responded to our request for comment.

Giving the TV company the benefit of the doubt for a moment, it’s not beyond the realms of possibility that it acquired a ready-configured copy of Perfect Player from a third-party that already contained a URL for a ‘pirate’ service. That could give the impression it’s a dedicated pirate app.

That being said, downloading a copy from Google Play would’ve highlighted the important differences between a non-configured player and one set up for piracy. That’s impossible now, of course, because Google has taken Perfect Player down.

With the help of a lawyer, the developer is now filing a DMCA counter-notice with Google Play which will require the pay-TV company to either double down or back off. Unless Google chooses to restore Perfect Player in the meantime, of course.

Earlier this month, Google also took down the IPTV Smarters app from its Play Store following a “false complaint”, according to its developer. The company’s lawyers are reportedly working to have the software restored but at the time of writing, it remains unavailable on copyright grounds.

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

Redemption not guaranteed: El Camino is a fitting coda to Jesse Pinkman’s story

Aaron Paul’s strong performance anchors this epilogue to Breaking Bad.

Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul) must elude capture and get out of town in <em>El Camino</em>.

Enlarge / Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul) must elude capture and get out of town in El Camino. (credit: Netflix)

The series finale of Breaking Bad has been touted as one of the best series finales of all time by critics, as former high school chemistry teacher-turned-meth manufacturer Walter White faced the inevitable reckoning for his many crimes and misdeeds. But it left other narrative threads unresolved, most notably the fate of Walter's former student and partner in the meth business, Jesse Pinkman. Series creator Vince Gilligan had long wanted to finish Jesse's story, and the result is El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, which debuted on Netflix last week, six years after the series concluded.

(Major spoilers for the Breaking Bad TV series below. Mild spoilers for El Camino.)

Breaking Bad starred Bryan Cranston as Walter, who is diagnosed with stage 3 lung cancer. Assuming his death is imminent, he frets about providing for his wife and kids. So he decides to put his chemistry expertise to use making methamphetamine, with the help of former pupil Jesse (Aaron Paul). This naturally draws the attention of Albuquerque's criminal underworld. Further complicating matters is Walter's brother-in-law, Hank (Dean Norris), an officer with the Drug Enforcement Administration intent on tracking down this mysterious new player nicknamed "Heisenberg." Over the course of five seasons, viewers witnessed Walter's gradual transformation from an uptight science teacher cooking meth in his tighty-whities to a manipulative, cold-blooded killer.

Read 9 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Redemption not guaranteed: El Camino is a fitting coda to Jesse Pinkman’s story

Aaron Paul’s strong performance anchors this epilogue to Breaking Bad.

Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul) must elude capture and get out of town in <em>El Camino</em>.

Enlarge / Jesse Pinkman (Aaron Paul) must elude capture and get out of town in El Camino. (credit: Netflix)

The series finale of Breaking Bad has been touted as one of the best series finales of all time by critics, as former high school chemistry teacher-turned-meth manufacturer Walter White faced the inevitable reckoning for his many crimes and misdeeds. But it left other narrative threads unresolved, most notably the fate of Walter's former student and partner in the meth business, Jesse Pinkman. Series creator Vince Gilligan had long wanted to finish Jesse's story, and the result is El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie, which debuted on Netflix last week, six years after the series concluded.

(Major spoilers for the Breaking Bad TV series below. Mild spoilers for El Camino.)

Breaking Bad starred Bryan Cranston as Walter, who is diagnosed with stage 3 lung cancer. Assuming his death is imminent, he frets about providing for his wife and kids. So he decides to put his chemistry expertise to use making methamphetamine, with the help of former pupil Jesse (Aaron Paul). This naturally draws the attention of Albuquerque's criminal underworld. Further complicating matters is Walter's brother-in-law, Hank (Dean Norris), an officer with the Drug Enforcement Administration intent on tracking down this mysterious new player nicknamed "Heisenberg." Over the course of five seasons, viewers witnessed Walter's gradual transformation from an uptight science teacher cooking meth in his tighty-whities to a manipulative, cold-blooded killer.

Read 9 remaining paragraphs | Comments

HTC reveals specs for its cheap blockchain phone

HTC has become a bit player in the smartphone space in recent years, but the company is trying to carve out an unusual niche for itself by releasing a series of blockchain phones. Last year’s HTC Exodus 1 is a $699 smartphone that can double as a…

HTC has become a bit player in the smartphone space in recent years, but the company is trying to carve out an unusual niche for itself by releasing a series of blockchain phones. Last year’s HTC Exodus 1 is a $699 smartphone that can double as a cryptocurrency wallet and function as a full node. […]

The post HTC reveals specs for its cheap blockchain phone appeared first on Liliputing.

Lawmakers express “deep concern” over Blizzard’s Hong Kong protest response

A rare bipartisan issue that Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Rubio can agree on.

The words Free HK have been photoshopped onto the face of a video game character.

Enlarge / Mei from Overwatch has become a grass roots symbol of the Hong Kong protests in the wake of Blizzard's decision. (credit: r/hongkong)

A bipartisan group of Senate and House lawmakers has signed a letter expressing "deep concern" over Activision Blizzard's recent decision to punish Ng "Blitzchung" Wai Chung after the pro Hearthstone player expressed support for continuing Hong Kong protests last week. "This decision is particularly concerning in light of the Chinese government's growing appetite for pressuring American businesses to help stifle free speech," the letter reads, in part.

Blizzard originally banned the Hong Kong-based player for a year and withheld his prize money after he said "Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our age!" in Chinese during the livestreamed event. That penalty was later reduced to a six-month suspension and Chung's prize money was reinstated.

But the letter, addressed to Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick, urges Blizzard "in the strongest terms to reconsider your decision with respect to Mr. Chung. You have the opportunity to reverse course. We urge you to take it."

Read 5 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Minecraft becomes a board game, and the results are faithful, fantastic

Builders & Biomes condenses series tropes into a surprisingly fresh game.

Minecraft becomes a board game, and the results are faithful, fantastic

Enlarge (credit: Sam Machkovech)

I'm not shocked that the first-ever Minecraft board game is cute and fun. But this new game, made as a collaboration between video game studio Mojang and board game producer Ravensburger, has no right to be this elegant.

Minecraft: Builders & Biomes is breezy. It's quick. It's kid-friendly. Yet it's full of the tricky decisions, competitive countermeasures, and three-moves-ahead plotting that can ratchet a game to the top of a diehard tabletop community's rankings.

Best of all, it has a goofy, tactile centerpiece that feeds into the gameplay loop while also looking exactly like what you'd expect from a "Minecraft board game." Builders & Biomes, which is out now in Europe and launches in the US on November 15, has come out of nowhere to punch my licensed-game skepticism down like a blocky, in-game tree.

Read 18 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Proteste in Hongkong: Hochrangige US-Politiker schreiben an Activision und Apple

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Marco Rubio und weitere Politiker der großen US-Parteien haben offene Briefe an die Chefs von Activision Blizzard und Apple geschrieben. Sie fordern darin, dass die Firmen nicht mehr die chinesische Regierung in deren Kampf ge…

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Marco Rubio und weitere Politiker der großen US-Parteien haben offene Briefe an die Chefs von Activision Blizzard und Apple geschrieben. Sie fordern darin, dass die Firmen nicht mehr die chinesische Regierung in deren Kampf gegen die Proteste in Hongkong unterstützen. (Activision Blizzard, Apple)