Author: Andy

Anthropoid is a new historical thriller which tells the story of the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, a high-ranking German Nazi official during World War II, and one of the main architects of the Holocaust.

The movie has been getting mixed reviews so for those worried that their investment may leave them underwhelmed, a pirate copy is often the solution.

In the early days following a release, file-sharers often have to put up with so-called ‘cam’ or camcorder copies. Nearly always of low quality, these are often avoided by those who don’t mind waiting for a better release. Nevertheless, studios feel that any copy is a threat and they often hire anti-piracy companies to purge them from the web.

That’s exactly what New York City-based film distribution company Bleecker Street did to protect the release of Anthropoid with their hiring of India-based anti-piracy outfit MarkScan. On August 12, on the day of the movie’s release in the US, MarkScan began sending takedowns to Google.

However, there was a ‘small’ problem. Anthropoid hadn’t even been leaked online yet.

In a notice to Google targeting 66 unique domains, MarkScan demanded the removal of dozens of allegedly infringing links. Of course, not a single one related to a leak of the full movie. As can be seen in the sample below, many links reference sites that appear to have the movie but in fact only carry the official trailer.

But while taking down the official trailer is enough to ensure that fewer people are aware of the movie’s existence, MarkScan weren’t finished yet, not by a long way.

The very first link in the notice targets a completely unrelated and entirely legal short film which just happens to use the word ‘Anthropoid’ in its description.

The third link – and this is a good one – attempts to stop anyone on Twitter finding the movie using the hashtag ‘Anthropoid’ by asking Google to remove ‘https://twitter.com/hashtag/anthropoid’ from its search indexes.

What follows is a car crash of sizeable proportions, with MarkScan attempting to take down promotional material and video clips from the Wall Street Journal, People.com, The Hollywood Reporter, and many other sites discussing the title.

As if that wasn’t enough, MarkScan then places the BBC in its sights, demanding that Google removes its world radio and TV homepage from the company’s search results, for no apparent reason.

Fortunately, Google spotted this disastrous notice before it did any real harm and refused to remove any links. That means that the many reviews the company tried to wipe out will stand, as will the BBC’s radio and TV page.

However, it boggles the mind to think that an anti-piracy outfit would send such a notice (and presumably charge the distributor for it) before taking the time to check that the movie had actually been leaked online. But by now, that’s not really a surprise, especially given MarkScan’s earlier efforts.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Due to their very nature, the Olympic Games are often considered to belong to the people. With competitors from every corner of the world, the Olympics is a celebration of sport on a truly global scale.

But while the utopian dream is one of beauty, the reality is that the Olympics are massively commercialized with billions of dollars at stake. And when sums of that scale hang in the balance, corporations go all out to protect their interests.

Earlier this week we reported how the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has been sending takedown requests to Twitter after Periscope users streamed Olympic events online without permission. Now it appears that people much higher up the food chain have fallen foul of the strict licensing framework put in place by the IOC.

According to a report by Mexico’s Eluniversal, the Rio Organizing Committee has taken the decision to withdraw press credentials from Mexico’s National Commission of Physical Culture and Sports (Conade) following a copyright dispute.

The publication says that Conade violated licensing conditions put in place by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) after one of its members filmed the gymnast Alexa Moreno using a cellphone. The video was subsequently posted to social media.

According to the Committee, Conade failed to obtain the necessary rights to broadcast Olympic content, so in retaliation nine Conade members, who work for the Mexican government, had their press credentials taken away.

“The use of Olympic materials turned into animated graphic formats like GIF, GFY or WebM, as well as short video formats like Vine, are expressly forbidden,” a Committee statement reads.

While the Committee probably felt it needed to set an example, taking away the credentials of the Conade staff will be felt back home in Mexico. Conade is the arm of the Mexican government charged with promoting physical education and sport in the country. Before their punishment, they were also the conduit between the Games and their countrymen.

But while the Rio Organizing Committee punishes the whole of Mexico for the sharing of a single video, thousands of people are sharing recorded events at will on sites such as The Pirate Bay.

The real action, however, is taking place on the thousands of streaming sites currently in operation. In addition to web-browser based services, users of Kodi with the correct plug-ins have continuous access to live Olympic events, often in HD quality, no matter where they are in the world. Rio can do absolutely nothing about that.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

To celebrate the five year anniversary of the Megaupload raids, in January 2017 Kim Dotcom hopes to deliver a brand new file-sharing system to the masses.

Provisionally titled Megaupload 2.0, Dotcom says the system will take decentralization, anonymity & encryption “to the next level” by connecting file transfers to bitcoin transactions.

Importantly, the new iteration of Megaupload will launch with the original Megaupload’s user database, which could potentially mean 100 million users checking in shortly after launch. Unsurprisingly then, news of the project has been generating a lot of interest online, even before any hard technical details have been made public.

While Dotcom is yet to reveal any of his investment partners, he has just made a surprise announcement concerning who he won’t be doing business with. It began with a tweet in which Dotcom claimed he’d been offered cash to participate in what he saw as a “pump and dump” deal.

Stay away from $MGT. They offered $500k for a no-substance partnership announcement with the sole purpose to pump up $MGT stock. I declined.

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) August 17, 2016

The MGT to which Dotcom refers is MGT Capital Investments, a company which advertises itself as dealing with cyber threats “through advanced protection technologies for mobile and personal tech devices.” Early May, security expert John McAfee was confirmed as the company’s new CEO and a chaotic period of stock trading ensued.

So why was MGT trying to get involved with Megaupload 2.0? TorrentFreak spoke with Dotcom to find out more and it transpires some big numbers were involved.

“[MGT’s approach] was connected to the new businesses I’m working on. They offered to invest $30m in cash and $MGT stock. But after some due diligence it became clear that their offer was unrealistic,” Dotcom informs TF.

“They didn’t have the substance to make such an offer. When I questioned that they responded that the substance can be created by the partnership announcement. Meaning an increase in stock value which would make the stock component of the deal more valuable”

While $30m plus stock might sound like a lot, Dotcom said he poured cold water on the idea.

“I told them I’m not interested in pumping up $MGT stock and that they need to raise the money first before we can enter into any kind of agreement,” he explains.

Undeterred, MGT had another proposal for the Megaupload founder.

“Then they offered $500k for signing a Letter of Intent to be announced at a big press conference during Defcon. The whole thing was designed to drive up the $MGT stock price with no substance. We declined,” Dotcom says.

We asked Dotcom if John McAfee himself was aware of the deal being put on the table.

“John knows about this,” he told us. “In my opinion it was all about pump and dump. All they always talked about was the effect of previous announcements on the stock price. That’s not how you create value or run a business.”

But while Dotcom may not have liked the offer made by MGT, behind the scenes it appears that he had also irritated McAfee.

Eric J. Anderson (Eijah) is a former Rockstar games developer and the founder of anonymous information sharing app DemonSaw, a product endorsed by McAfee. Dotcom says he offered Anderson, McAfee’s friend and the CTO of MGT, an important job.

“I offered Eijah [the] CTO role at Megaupload 2.0 – he agreed. Mcafee goes mental, scares Eijah, making serious threats,” Dotcom reveals.

“I decided to come forward about $MGT when I witnessed how Mcafee abused Eijah. I’m not concerned about the fallout. I stand up for friends.”

And now it appears the touchpaper has been lit. In a message from McAfee last evening, the security expert warned Dotcom that things might get a little bumpy today.

I have decided to play video games all day tomorrow :-) pic.twitter.com/RTm63PyBSL

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) August 17, 2016

Early reaction to Dotcom’s decision to go public about the MGT offer has been largely positive, with people praising the businessman for coming clean. However, Dotcom says his decision to go public could have its downsides.

“I had to say something. I know I’m exposing myself to attacks by $MGT but I had to go public. Based on everything I have learned about $MGT there is no substance, yet,” he says.

“They might create substance in the future. They might come up with real products that create real value. But at the moment they are focusing on making announcements to drive up the $MGT stock price instead of creating real value for investors. It’s unethical and that’s why we declined the money and I went public.”

TorrentFreak contacted MGT but the company did not respond to our request for comment.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

While jumping on an airplane is the most efficient way of traveling thousands of miles, there can be few who enjoy the hours of sitting idly in between. Some fill the time with a book, others choose in-flight entertainment.

One company providing such content is Global Eagle Entertainment. In addition to the latest Hollywood blockbusters and independent film, the company also offers a wide range of audio entertainment.

“No matter what their tastes, we can help your passengers settle back and immerse themselves in the onboard audio experience we have created specifically for your airline,” the company’s marketing reads.

“Our highly experienced audio team comes from a radio and music industry background, and is passionate about delivering a perfect mix of channels that will entertain and inform your passengers.”

The normal route for a company to provide such a service would be via licensing agreement with the record labels but for a number of reasons Global Eagle (GEE) did not enter into one. Instead, GEE subsidiary Inflight Productions (IFP) created its own packages by buying CDs and digital tracks and copying them to hard drives which were shipped out the airlines.

In May 2014, Universal Music filed a lawsuit against GEE and IFP for allegedly reproducing, distributing and publicly performing tracks from artists including Taylor Swift and Lady Gaga without permission. In total, UMG claimed infringement on more than 4,500 sound recordings.

This April, almost two years after the initial lawsuit was filed, UMG won its case. A Los Angeles federal court ruled that the in-flight entertainment provider willfully violated the label’s copyrights by “repeatedly making the business decision to continue its unauthorized use” of UMG’s songs.

With a big win in the bag for UMG, a trial to determine damages was scheduled for May. With 4,500 sound recordings and statutory damages of $150,000 per track available, Global Eagle faced paying out a potential $675m. In response, GEE said it would file an appeal.

Now, however, it appears that agreement has been reached between the warring parties. A filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission reveals that the companies have chosen to settle their differences with a massive cash and stock deal.

“Global Eagle Entertainment Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries entered into a Settlement Agreement dated as of August 9, 2016 with UMG Recordings, Inc., Capitol Records, LLC, Universal Music Corp. and entities affiliated with them resolving all claims relating to the previously disclosed lawsuit filed by UMG against the Company and certain of its subsidiaries for music copyright infringement and related claims,” the filing reads.

“UMG and the Company have agreed to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice and have further agreed that the Settlement Agreement does not constitute any admission of liability, wrongdoing or responsibility by any party to it.”

The agreement also states that GEE and UMG will reach a licensing deal within 60 days to allow GEE to continue using UMG content. In the meantime, UMG promises not to sue for any infringing use.

But of course, these lawsuits are extremely expensive and GEE will pay a heavy price for its failure to secure licenses. The filing states that GEE must immediately pay UMG $15m in cash and issue the company with 1,360,544 shares of its common stock, currently worth around $12.2m

Before March 31, 2017, GEE must also pay UMG a further $5m and potentially hand over yet more stock, 400,000 or 500,000 shares, if the share price exceeds $12 or $10 respectively. Global Eagle shares are currently trading at $9.13.

Facing a potential $30m+ payout, Global Eagle and other players in their market seem likely to take licensing more seriously in the future.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Back in June, Atlantic Records were in the final stages of releasing the track ‘Heathens’ by the platinum-certified band Twenty One Pilots. Things didn’t go to plan.

The track, which was also set to appear on “Suicide Squad: The Album”, was leaked online, first appearing on an anonymous Slovakian file-hosting service called Dropfile.to.

From there it’s claimed that the alleged leaker advertised that file on Reddit, posting a link which enabled any viewer to download it for free. The posting, which was made on the ‘Twenty One Pilots’ subreddit by a user called ‘twentyoneheathens’, caught the eye of Atlantic Records.

Earlier this month in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Atlantic described how the leak had ruined its plans for the release and promotion of the track. Underlying these complaints was the belief that the leak originated close to home.

The label said it had provided an early release copy “to an extremely limited number of individuals”, including members of 21 Pilots, their manager, Atlantic and [record label] Fueled by Ramen executives, plus members of Atlantic’s radio field staff.

According to Atlantic, all of its employees who were aware of the impending release were “contractually obligated and/or under a fiduciary obligation” not to disclose its existence until June 24.

So, in order to find out who was responsible for the pre-release, Atlantic asked the Court to force Reddit to hand over the presumed leaker’s details, including his or her IP address. Reddit, however, doesn’t want to play ball.

In a response to the Court, Reddit’s legal team at Harris Beach PLLC say that Atlantic’s claims fail to reach the standards required for discovery.

“In order to obtain pre-action discovery, Atlantic must demonstrate now that it has meritorious claims against the Reddit user. However, Atlantic has failed to show that its claims are meritorious for two, simple reasons,” Reddit begins (pdf).

“First, it has failed to establish that it has a contractual relationship with the Reddit user. Second, it has failed to establish that it has a fiduciary relationship with the Reddit user. Because Atlantic has not demonstrated that it has meritorious causes of action against the unidentified Reddit user, its petition for pre-action discovery related to such user should be denied.”

The problem lies with Atlantic’s allegation that the person responsible for the leak and the link on Reddit is under contract with the company. Reddit’s lawyers point out that while the label is clear about what action it would take in that instance, it has made no statement detailing what it would do if the person who posted the link on Reddit is disconnected from the initial leak.

“Atlantic does not describe the claims it would bring against a non-employee Reddit user who discovered the link on Dropfile.to and posted it to Reddit.com without assistance from an Atlantic employee or an employee of Fueled by Ramen, the members of Twenty One Pilots, or their manager, each of whom had access to the song at the time of the leak,” Reddit writes.

Underlining its concerns, Reddit points out that Atlantic provides no proof to back up its claims that the “individual or individuals” who uploaded the file to Dropfile.to also posted the link to Reddit.

“[T]he Reddit user may have been a member of the general public, who, after discovering the Dropfile.to link on another publicly available website, decided to resubmit it to Reddit.com. A member of the public would not likely have a contractual relationship with Atlantic that was breached and Atlantic has not alleged as much.”

Furthermore, Reddit says Atlantic has not advised the Court of any efforts made to obtain the alleged poster’s details from Dropfile.to. While that might indeed be the case, the operator of Dropfile previously informed TorrentFreak that his site is completely anonymous and carries no logs, so identifying any user would be impossible.

In closing, Reddit describes Atlantic’s effort as an “impermissible fishing expedition” and asks for its petition for pre-action discovery to be denied. However, should the Court decide otherwise, Reddit has asked for a cap to be placed on the amount of data it must hand over.

“Presently, Atlantic’s subpoena requests not only information related to the user twentyoneheathens, but also for information related to ‘all and any other Reddit accounts which accessed [Reddit’s] service from the same IP address on or about June 15, 2016’,” Reddit notes.

“While such users may share an IP address, they otherwise have no relationship among them. For this reason, any order requiring pre-action discovery should be limited to information directly related to the user twentyoneheathens and not violate the privacy interests of any Reddit users sharing the IP address.”

While Reddit is digging in its heels now, it seems likely that at some point the Court will indeed order the alleged leaker’s IP address to be handed over. However, only time will tell what action Atlantic will publicly take. Leaks are potentially embarrassing, so making their findings widely known may not be a priority.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

When Megaupload was shuttered in 2012, authorities in the United States, New Zealand and Hong Kong seized millions of dollars in cash and other property.

The US government claimed these assets were the result of copyright infringement and money laundering offenses, and attempted to forfeit the bank accounts, cars and other property seized from the defendants in the so-called “Mega Conspiracy”.

After branding Dotcom and his co-defendants “fugitives”, last summer the US Government won its case. Shortly after, however, Megaupload’s legal team filed an appeal with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

“We asked the Fourth Circuit to rule in favor of fairness, natural justice, and due process by stopping US efforts to take Kim Dotcom’s global assets for doing nothing more than lawfully opposing extradition to the United States—a country he has never been to,” Dotcom lawyer Ira Rothken told TF at the time.

Last Friday, however, hopes for a positive outcome were dashed when a three-judge panel at the Fourth Circuit handed down a two to one decision against Dotcom.

Affirming the decision of a lower court, the Court of Appeal opinion dismissed the notion that the order against Dotcom’s assets had no jurisdiction. The Court also found that Dotcom could not recover his assets due to him being a fugitive from criminal charges in the United States.

The assets in question amount to some $67m across multiple bank accounts, several cars, jet skis, jewelry and other sundry luxury items. While they are now another step out of reach, Dotcom is far from ready to throw in the towel. In the wake of the ruling, the entrepreneur lashed out on Twitter.

“I’m a ‘fugitive’ coz I use my treaty rights to defend against extradition & they take my assets without trial? 1938?” he wrote.

Did they think they can separate me from my kids without a fight? I fight corrupt US empire clowns all day, every day. Not even tired. 🇺🇸🔜🚽

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) August 13, 2016

Dotcom lawyer Ira Rothken said on Sunday that Dotcom would seek a review of the decision and if necessary file a petition at the Supreme Court.

“This opinion has the effect of eviscerating Kim Dotcom’s treaty rights by saying if you lawfully oppose extradition in New Zealand, the U.S. will still call you a fugitive and take all of your assets,” Rothken said.

“By basically saying ‘hey, we’re going to call that fugitive disentitlement, we’re going to take away your ability to have funds to defend yourself’, we think that’s too much. We think it’s American imperialism at its best, and we’re hoping the Supreme Court or the larger Court circuit will see it for what it is, and reverse it,” he added.

Meanwhile, Dotcom continues to fight extradition to the United States from New Zealand. This month his appeal will be heard at the High Court in Auckland.

Together with his former Megaupload colleagues Mathias Ortmann, Bram van der Kolk and Finn Batato, Dotcom was found eligible for extradition to the United States last December.

Even in the event the appeal fails, Dotcom won’t be stopping there. The entrepreneur has already made it clear that he’ll take his extradition case all the way to the Supreme Court in New Zealand – and he’s confident he’ll prevail.

Good that I'll never get extradited to the land of corrupt politicians & rigged courts. New Zealand Appeal Judges will apply the law. I win.

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) August 11, 2016

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Ask any half-interested user to name the best public torrent sites and many will fall back on those inhabiting the top ten most popular online today.

While there’s much glory to be had, being one of the world’s most-visited torrent indexes has its downsides.

Two huge sites previously in the top ten of 2016 – KickassTorrents and Torrentz – have now disappeared, with at least one falling victim to enforcement action. It’s possible, if not likely, that more will fall in the months and years to come.

But what about sites outside the top ten? What about those in the top 50, top 100 or top 250? What happens to those on a day to day basis?

Well, each endures its own unique set of problems associated with running a torrent site but due to their size, most don’t have high-powered law enforcement agencies breathing down their necks. That often means they’re able to provide a steady service to users without too many headaches.

But while small is sometimes cool, obscurity is often the enemy of growth, both in terms of users and availability of content, with the former being the provider of the latter. That’s where meta and/or multi-site search engines step in.

A meta-search engine is a search engine that searches other search engines, in this case other torrent sites and indexes. Without doubt, the most famous meta-search engine was Torrentz, but that shut down last week.

Torrentz be sorely missed. While it was always possible to visit The Pirate Bay or KickassTorrents to get a popular torrent, if that content was a little more rare, time-consuming visits to multiple sites might be necessary. Torrentz alleviated that problem by searching multiple sites at once and displaying the results in one location.

As the image above shows, most sites that were listed by Torrentz are very successful in their own right but the concept of meta-search doesn’t have to stop at the biggest players.

There’s no insurmountable reason why meta and multi-site search engines of the future won’t index hundreds of diverse torrent sites, sites that might usually fly under the radar due to their small size and low public profile.

Of course, once these sites become more visible (and searchable) they will naturally grow in size, with the higher quality platforms securing a larger share of the traffic. For some, this could mean the loss of their quiet life status and for others, it might mean breaking into the top 10.

Whether these changes in status will turn out to be a help or hindrance is a matter for each site operator, but for the user it will mean greater access to a broader range of sites that are less likely to be taken down.

The authorities are reasonably happy to play whac-a-mole at the top, but doing so with hundreds of targets lower down the food chain becomes an expensive, chaotic, and ultimately unwinnable game.

Giants might be doomed to fall but the era of the thousand little men might be just around the corner – if people can find them.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Regardless of differing opinions on what kind of content should be shifted around using the protocol, few will contest the beauty of BitTorrent.

Thanks to the undoubted genius of creator Bram Cohen, it is still extremely robust some 15 years after its debut.

But while some may assume that BitTorrent is no longer under development, the opposite is true. Behind the scenes, groups of developers are working to further develop the protocol via BitTorrent Enhancement Proposals (BEPs).

Early BEPs, such as those covering DHT, PEX and private torrents, have long since been implemented but the process continues today.

Just one of the P2P developers involved is Luca Matteis. He lives in Rome, Italy, where he studies Computer Science at the Sapienza University and works part-time on various projects.

Passionate about P2P and decentralized systems, Luca informs TorrentFreak that his goal is to enable people to share and communicate in a censorship resistant manner. His fresh proposal, Updating Torrents Via DHT Mutable Items, was submitted last month and aims to live up to that billing.

We asked Luca to explain what his group’s proposal (it’s a team effort) is all about and he kindly obliged. It begins with the Distributed Hash Table (DHT) and a previous enhancement proposal.

“So currently the DHT in BitTorrent is used as a peer discovery mechanism for torrents, and it has really nice decentralized properties. It works just like a tracker, with the difference being that trackers are on central servers with a domain name, and therefore can be easily shut down,” Luca begins.

“[An earlier enhancement proposal] BEP44 added some interesting properties to the DHT network, namely the feature of being able to store arbitrary data. So instead of just storing IP addresses of people downloading specific torrents, we can now store any kind of data (max 1000 bytes per item).”

Luca says that so far this functionality hasn’t been used by torrent clients. uTorrent apparently has it under the hood, with some developers believing it’s there for reasons connected to BitTorrent Inc’s Bleep software. At this point, however, it only exists at the network level.

Importantly, however, Luca says that BEP44 allows one to store changing values under a key.

“We call these mutable items. So what you could do is generate a public key, which can be thought of as your address, and share this with the world. Then you use this public key to store stuff in BitTorrent’s DHT network. And, because it’s your public key, you (and only you) can change the value pointed by your public key.”

As mentioned earlier, only a 1000 bytes can be stored (less than 1kB), but Luca points out that it’s possible to store the info hash of a torrent, 79816060EA56D56F2A2148CD45705511079F9BCA, for example. Now things get interesting.

“At this point, your public key has very similar properties to an HTTP URL [a website address], with the difference that (just like trackers before) the value does not exist on a single computer/server, but is constantly shared across the DHT network,” he explains.

“Our BEP46 extension is an actual standardization of what the value, pointed by your public key, should look like. Our standard says it should be an info hash of a torrent. This allows for a multitude of use cases, but more practically it allows for torrents to automatically change what they’re downloading based on the public key value inside the DHT.”

While the technically minded out there might already know where this is going, Luca is kind enough to spell it out.

“Torrent sites (such as The Pirate Bay) could share a magnet link they control, which contains their public key. What they would store at this ‘address’ is the infohash of a torrent which contains a database of all their torrents,” he says.

“Users who trust them would bookmark the magnet link, and when they click on it, a torrent will start downloading. Specifically, they’d start downloading the database dump of the torrent site.”

While that might not yet sound like magic, the ability to change the value held in the DHT proves extremely useful.

“The cool thing is that when the torrent site decides to share more torrents (new releases, better quality stuff, more quality reviews), all they need to do is update the value in the DHT with a new torrent containing a new .rss file.

“At this point, all the users downloading from their magnet link will automatically be downloading the new torrent and will always have an up-to-date .RSS dump of torrents,” he says.

But while this would be useful to users, Luca says that sites like The Pirate Bay could also benefit.

“For torrent sites, this would be an attractive solution because they wouldn’t need to maintain a central HTTP server which implies costs and can be easily shut down. On the other hand, their mutable torrent magnet link cannot be easily shut down, does not imply maintenance costs, and cannot be easily tracked down,” he concludes.

For those interested in the progress of this enhancement proposal and others like it, all BEPs can be found here.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

This week was one to forget for United States service provider Cox Communications after a federal court in Virginia found it liable for copyright infringements carried out by its customers.

The ISP was found guilty of willful contributory copyright infringement and ordered to pay music publisher BMG Rights Management $25 million in damages.

The case was filed in 2014 after it was alleged that Cox failed to pass on cash settlement demands to customers that were sent by anti-piracy outfit Rightscorp on behalf of BMG. The ISP also failed to take firm action against repeat infringers.

Now, with a BMG victory on the record, Rightscorp has come out swinging. Welcoming the decision of Judge Liam O’Grady, the anti-piracy outfit says that its long-held position, that ISPs must comply with its wishes, has been proven accurate.

“For nearly five years, Rightscorp has warned US internet service providers (ISPs) that they risk incurring huge liabilities if they fail to implement and enforce policies under which they terminate the accounts of their subscribers who repeatedly infringe copyrights,” the company said in a statement.

“Over that time, many ISPs have taken the position that it was simply impossible for an ISP to be held liable for its subscribers’ actions — even when the ISP had been put on notice of massive infringements and supplied with detailed evidence. There had never been a judicial decision holding an ISP liable.”

Of course, that changed this week with Judge O’Grady’s decision, and Rightscorp CEO Christopher Sabec couldn’t be happier.

“Although Rightscorp was not a party in this case, we are delighted with the outcome. The Federal District Court declared the liability of ISPs to be precisely what Rightscorp has been saying it is for years,” Sabec says.

“With this final Federal Court ruling, not only has our position on ISP liability been confirmed, but our Company’s technology and processes for collecting and documenting evidence of peer-to-peer copyright infringement on ISP networks has been validated as well.”

While Rightscorp was expected to make the most of BMG’s victory in its future dealings with ISPs, the level of aggression in its announcement still comes as a surprise. Essentially putting every provider in the country on notice, Rightscorp warns that ISPs will now have to cooperate or face the wrath of litigious rightsholders.

“As we have consistently told ISPs, we stand ready to assist those ISPs that desire to work in a constructive way with the copyright community in order to reduce the massive infringements that occur every day on their networks,” Sabec says.

“But our company has also amassed a vast amount of data documenting infringements that have occurred over the past five years on the network of essentially every ISP in the country. That data will be made available to copyright holders that wish to enforce their rights against ISPs that are not inclined toward a cooperative solution.”

Whether this week’s developments will help to pull Rightscorp out of the financial doldrums will remain to be seen. The company has been teetering on the edge of bankruptcy for a couple of years now, and its shares on Wednesday were worth just $0.038 each. Following the BMG news, they peaked at $0.044.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Last month saw the shutdown of KickassTorrents and the arrest of its alleged founder, a development which sent shockwaves through the file-sharing community.

That was followed by the surprise shutdown of Torrentz, the world’s largest torrent meta-search engine. It’s not known why the site chose to close its doors but its departure from the scene was somewhat more orderly than that of KAT.

Meanwhile, and as revealed in our earlier report, streaming continues to prove increasingly popular with Internet users, a fact the authorities are well aware of.

With that in mind, the UK’s Police Intellectual Property Unit (PIPCU) has just carried out a new operation against individuals it believes are involved in streaming content online and distributing set-top boxes modified to receive it.

Following a series of dawn raids carried out yesterday morning in Lancashire, PIPCU arrested three men aged 36, 40 and 58, on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering offences.

PIPCU say that the operation received assistance from local police and a forensic investigator from the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT).

While previous operations against streaming pirates have usually resulted in the seizure of Kodi-enabled Android set-top boxes, this operation appears to have gone a step up the chain.

Photographs provided by PIPCU show what appears to be a somewhat sophisticated operation, beginning with satellite TV reception.

The PIPCU operation spanned three residential addresses and an as-yet-unnamed business premises. It seems likely that the photograph of the server room shown below was taken in the latter location. Thus far, PIPCU say they have seized approximately 30 servers.

In addition, PIPCU say they also recovered set-top boxes which had been modified so that users could access hundreds of premium subscription-only channels.

“Some of the channels available on the devices include pay-per-view sports, the latest movies and UK broadcast television only available to UK licence fee payers. Officers have also identified 15 satellites,” PIPCU report.

Neither the police nor FACT have provided any information which allows us to easily identify those arrested or their operation. However, there are a number of clues which point us in a particular direction.

Firstly, PIPCU claims that the devices were being sold as legitimate products that could provide content to users anywhere in the world for an annual fee of around £400. Second, the unit also identified a small town with a population of just 41,000.

So, given the location of the raids and the specific nature and size of the business, TorrentFreak sources familiar with IPTV operators in the UK told us that one company in particular stands out as the most likely candidate.

The outfit has not yet responded to our requests for comment so naturally we won’t name them, but we do know that they offer IPTV packages to the expat market and those abroad for just a few pounds less than the £400 mentioned by PIPCU.

The packages (and indeed the hardware) are also marketed and sold as entirely legitimate. We’re also aware that a staff member at the company was previously involved in another business dealing in satellite communications.

At the time of writing their website is still up and running and registered to a business premises in Chorley, Lancashire, the town mentioned by PIPCU. Furthermore, a posting discovered online by TF indicates that the IPTV operation had been established for a number of years and was recently running 30 servers.

In a statement, head of PIPCU, Detective Chief Inspector Peter Ratcliffe, described the outfit as “a significant and highly resourced operation to distribute pirated television on an industrial scale” to tens of thousands of people across the globe.

“Operations like this remain an integral part of protecting livelihoods supported by the entertainment industry and the law abiding public who pay for their channels with their hard earned cash,” he said.

Director General of the Federation Against Copyright Theft, Kieron Sharp, said his organization will continue to pursue those engaged in this growing area of piracy.

“Illegally modified set-top boxes, along with infringing apps and add-ons, have created new opportunities for criminality and piracy. Tackling these threats and the people behind them is one of our highest priorities and therefore today’s multi-agency action is another great result for law enforcement and the creative industries,” Sharp said.

“We will continue to work with our members and partners, such as the City of London Police, to crack down on those involved in the illegal supply of these boxes so that both the content and its creators are protected.”

When TF has solid information concerning the identity of the company involved we will post an update.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.