Monday, March 16, 2020

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

'Copyright Troll' Uses Social Media Info Against Alleged BitTorrent Pirates
Ernesto, 15 Mar 08:59 PM

Strike 3 Holdings is a familiar name in US federal courts. In recent years, the adult entertainment company has filed thousands of lawsuits against alleged copyright infringers.

While many of these resulted in private settlements, Strike 3 has also experienced some setbacks. This includes a scathing opinion that was released by Judge Royce C. Lamberth.

In 2018, Judge Lamberth accused the company of being a "copyright troll," that uses "famously flawed" technology to prey on "low-hanging fruit," flooding the courthouse "with lawsuits smacking of extortion."

The Judge denied early discovery, which meant that Strike 3 couldn't find out who the subscriber of an IP-address was, something that's crucial in their cases.

The case in question is currently being appealed, with Strike 3 claiming that it wasn't treated fairly, perhaps in part due to the adult nature of its works. This was discussed in detail during a hearing last week at the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Among other things, the appeal court judges questioned Strike 3 about possible false accusations, where the subscriber on an IP-address is not the infringer. The company admitted this indeed happens in roughly a quarter of all cases. However, to determine that they first have to know who the subscriber is.

This is where Strike 3's attorney Lincoln Bandlow provided some interesting background. To back up some of their claims, the company has been scouring social media sites for possible leads. In some cases, that helps to serve as indirect evidence.

"We have cases where we get the name and address and we can look. We found somebody who's tweeted 'Love your content, do more works with this particular talent, etcetera, etcetera.' Clearly that's somebody who likes the works and there's reason to believe that they are the ones who have infringed," the attorney writes.

According to Bandlow, Strike 3 conducts a substantial investigation to back up their initial claims. And if it turns out they have the wrong person and can't identify the target, the case is dismissed. However, in order to get to that point, they need to know who's behind the IP-address.

This position was countered by the amicus curiae appellant, which wants the district court order to be upheld. While this decision is ultimately up to the appeals court, the social media angle also applies elsewhere.

Earlier this week we stumbled upon a new case Strike 3 filed at a federal court in Connecticut, which also mentions social media.

The lawsuit in question is different from the traditional 'trolling cases' where Strike 3 doesn't know the defendant. In this case, it already obtained the subscriber information through the Florida state court, which we reported on previously.

Having a name and address upfront allowed Strike 3 to dig up some extra information, more than just an IP-address, which in this case includes social media info.

"Defendant's social media webpages establishes that Defendant is interested in…," the complaint reads, listing a summary of redacted interests.

While the adult entertainment company redacted the details, they likely relate to adult interests, or perhaps something piracy related. Whatever the case, it shows that people who put this type of information on social media may eventually have to face it in court.

Whether the judge in this case will see if as sufficient is another question. However, it clearly shows that the traces people leave online are not always as innocent as they seem.

Drom: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also have an annual VPN review.

'Pirate' iTunes Download Site and Three Others Targeted By the RIAA
Andy, 15 Mar 09:24 AM

Despite the fact that most modern music is readily available for free on ad-supported platforms such as YouTube and Spotify, a thriving market for pirated content remains.

While streaming is convenient and mostly cheap, part of the lure of pirate sites is that music can be downloaded to users' machines, to be played back whenever they like, with or without an Internet connection and associated costs.

The threat from unlicensed sources is actively countered by groups such as the RIAA, which is regularly seen targeting so-called YouTube-downloader sites via legal action and DMCA anti-circumvention notices. However, there are also efforts to identify the people behind these sites and the weapon of choice in that respect appears to be the DMCA subpoena.

The latest, filed by the RIAA at a district court in Columbia, targets a handful of unlicensed music platforms, all of which use or have used the services of Cloudflare. The theory is that the CDN company holds information on the operators of these sites so if the RIAA can gain access to that too, something can be done to disrupt their activities.

"We have learned that your service is hosting the below-referenced websites on its network," the RIAA's latest subpoena to Cloudflare reads.

"These websites are offering recording s which are owned by one or more of our member companies and have not been authorized for this kind os use, including without limitation that referenced at the URLs below. We have a good faith belief that this activity is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law."

The first unlicensed site targeted by the RIAA is iPlusFree.org, a music download site that appears to specialize in tracks culled from iTunes.

iPlusFree isn't a particularly big platform when compared to some of the most popular YouTube-ripping sites and if anything its traffic has been reducing over the past several months. However, at least a quarter of the site's traffic comes from the United States so the RIAA appears keen to unmask its operators for offering tracks by prominent artists without permission.

They include The Other Side (SZA & Justin Timberlake), Rare by Selena Gomez, and A Boogie wit da Hoodie by Artist 2.0.

The three other sites listed in the DMCA subpoena do not appear particularly popular in the United States. However, the RIAA will be concerned by their popularity in South America, Brazil in particular, where the trio are thriving.

From virtually no traffic at all six months ago, Asmelhores.net (Portuguese: 'The Best') is now enjoying more than 360,000 visits per month, with 97% of users hailing from Brazil.
Baixarcdscompletos.net (Portuguese: 'Download Complete CDs'), the second most-trafficked site in the list with 340,000 visits per month, is also big in Brazil with a similar percentage of traffic.

With more than 218,000 visits per month according to SimilarWeb, Xandaodownload.net is also dominated by traffic from the same region. Unlike the others, however, the site also offers non-musical content including movies, TV shows, software and games.

This trio are accused of offering unlicensed copies of tracks from Red Hot Chili Peppers (Scar Tissue), Smells Like Teen Spirit (Nirvana), Sexx Dreams (Lady Gaga), Daydream (Maria Carey), plus several others.

"As is stated in the attached subpoena, you are required to disclose to the RIAA information sufficient to identify the infringers," the letter to Cloudflare reads. "This would include the individuals' names, physical addresses, IP addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, payment information, account updates and account history."

The subpoena was signed off by a court clerk in the District of Columbia three days after it was filed, with two of those days covered by a weekend. It requires Cloudflare to hand over the personal details requested by the music industry group by 17:00 on March 13, 2020.

Whether Cloudflare holds any useful information will remain to be seen. All four sites are operational at the time of writing.

The RIAA's subpoena to Cloudflare can be obtained here (pdf)

Drom: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also have an annual VPN review.

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: