TorrentFreak's Latest News

6 Ways to Download Torrents with your Web-BrowserErnesto, 17 May 06:47 PM In a world where playing music or watching videos on-demand is the standar

6 Ways to Download Torrents with your Web-Browser Ernesto, 17 May 06:47 PM In a world where playing music or watching videos on-demand is the standard, downloading torrents can seem quite cumbersome. This is particularly true for people who are new to file-sharing. Why would I install software to download a small file that then downloads a larger file, you hear them think. The hesitation is understandable and the good news is that there are many ways to download torrents in a regular web browser. We already addressed this topic thirteen! years ago. But, since all the older options are now defunct, we'll revisit the topic once more. Below are some of the browser torrenting options that work in 2020, each with a small description and a list of pros and cons. 1. WebTorrent For the name alone we have to start with WebTorrent, which was specifically created to integrate BitTorrent with the browser. The technology impressed Netflix and there are dozens of projects that use the code to make it easy for people to share files in a browser. WebTorrent's Instant.io is a good example of a basic client. Another more feature-rich WebTorrent client is βTorrent, which also operates its own tracker. This web client allows people to select files, set download priorities, or seed files to share with others. Pros: It works anywhere, without the need to install separate software or to register an account. Cons: WebTorrent relies on WebRTC, which has to be supported and enabled in the browser. Also, since communication between peers relies on WebRTC it can't communicate with standard clients by default. 2. uTorrent and BitTorrent Web For more than a decade, uTorrent and BitTorrent were standalone applications with no connection to the browser. That changed recently. Parent company BitTorrent Inc. is now pushing the browser versions of these clients, which come with all the features one would expect from a standalone client. Like many other browser solutions, they allow users to stream torrents directly in the browser too. When enough people are sharing a file and there is plenty of bandwidth available, videos can be streamed near enough instantly. uTorrent Web Pros: Well-known brands with all the features most people desire in a torrent client. Quick to connect to other clients. Cons: You have to install a separate application. The interface promotes "trending videos" from Ddlive.tv. 3. Seedr Seedr's tagline is "get stuff instantly." It is a browser-based service where you can add torrents which will then be downloaded through Seedr's servers. This means that other downloaders won't see your IP-address, making the process more anonymous. And if the file has already been downloaded by someone else, it will show up instantly. When a download is finished at Seedr's end you can download the files to your computer, stream them directly in the browser, or cast to your TV via Chromecast or Airplay. The service works in any browser without having to install a separate application. Users will first have to register, however, and the free tier is limited to 3GB in storage. Seedr Pros: Fast, downloads anywhere, and more anonymity than regular torrent clients. Cons: It requires an account and the free plan comes with limitations. 4. Cloud downloaders Seedr introduces us to a vast array of cloud downloading services. Put.io, for example, which has been around for over a decade. In addition to torrents, it also supports downloading from YouTube, while it integrates with many other services and apps including Chromecast, Roku, iOS, and Kodi. Other Cloud downloaders such as Premiumize.me go a step further, allowing people to download much more than just torrents. This premium service also supports Usenet downloads and can grab files from several file-hosting services. Like other cloud downloaders, it integrates with many apps, services, and devices. Put.io Pros: Fast, nothing to install, relatively anonymous. Cons: No free options and an account is required. Brave When we first addressed this topic in 2007, Opera was one of our top suggestions. It was far ahead of its time when it first supported torrent downloads. Interestingly, torrent support was dropped around 2013, pretty much out of nowhere. Luckily, there's a good browser that still allows users to download torrents natively. The Brave browser, which also blocks trackers and intrusive ads, has a private browsing mode that relays your traffic through Tor. This is certainly the most convenient option of all if you already use it. Brave Pros: It works out of the box, is free, and doesn't require an account. Cons: You will possibly have to install another browser. Controls and features are very limited. Extensions and Addons Browser extensions and addons to download torrents were very popular early on. Today, it's hard to find a good and stable one. However, that doesn't mean that there aren't any helpful extensions out there. Torrent Control, for example. Torrent control allows people to easily add files to your torrent client, without having to use the application. This works with all clients that have a remote interface, including uTorrent, Transmission, BiglyBT and BitTorrent. This also allows you to add torrents remotely, from work, school, or on the road. There are similar add-ons available for other browsers as well, including Chrome, which offers .torrent to Transmission and the Easy uTorrent addon. Torrent Control Pros: It can be quick and simple. Allows for remote downloading. Cons: Not all extensions are regularly updated. Remote downloading still requires a torrent client. — That it's. There are plenty of options available for people to use a browser to download torrents. What's right for you mostly depends on how you plan to consume content. We'll take another good look at the available options in 2033. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also help you to find the best anonymous VPN. Do Justifications For Content Piracy Really Hold Up Under Scrutiny? Andy, 17 May 01:22 PM There are hundreds of places around the Internet inhabited by content pirates. From dedicated forums and chat channels attached to file-sharing sites to more public entities like Reddit, discussion about piracy isn't difficult to find. Reddit's /r/piracy sub-Reddit, for example, is both huge, public, and intriguing. To outsiders, its 534,000+ members are hardcore content pirates who will copy anything digital, in any way humanly possible. But that only describes a sub-set of the population. For those who stick around long enough, a more diverse mix can be discerned. While the place is clearly inhabited by some who flat-out refuse to buy anything, there are also plenty of contributors who appear to buy content but pirate on the odd occasion, to supplement an already expensive monthly outlay. Reasons to pirate can be seen everywhere and are often expressed by posters. Some of the most common and recurring posts are now titled/flaired "dAtS wHy I pIrAtE!!!" These can range from a picture of an empty wallet to memes bemoaning security systems such as Denuvo. Dozens of variants can be found, such as the timeless classic of depriving increasingly 'greedy' corporate entities of cash to ensure they don't "take over the world". When put under the microscope, however, do they stand up to scrutiny? As personal reasons to pirate, they are all legitimate, as legitimate as something can be when it's illegal, of course. But as strict justification, as a solid argument that piracy is actually a reasonable response to a complicated set of negative circumstances and perceptions, things begin to get interesting. This week one Reddit user attempted to put every reason why someone might pirate into a single post and while the list seems pretty comprehensive, it fails – as this article will too – to cover every possible angle. That is because everyone is different or, as some will argue, the reasons aren't reasons at all but merely excuses to pirate. It will come as no surprise that not being able to afford content comes at the top of the list. It is the most enduring reason for piracy since piracy began but one that can be viewed from another angle too. Is it always about not having the money, period, or is it often about saving that money so it can be spent elsewhere on things that can't be obtained for free? This leads to another infamous theory, the one regarding the so-called 'lost sale'. If people genuinely have no money, then there isn't a lost sale. If they do have money but choose not to spend it, that raises questions of whether something was lost as a result of that instance of piracy and why another business sector, one selling alcohol or sneakers, for example, has more right to that revenue than content creators. Ah, content creators…and distributors. Now there's an interesting bunch. There can be little doubt that video services like Netflix and Disney+ and gaming platforms like Steam are smash-hits with consumers. They appear to offer content not only at a fair price but also surrounded by a user-friendly experience. At least to some extent they are solving the piracy puzzle by hitting that sweet spot of being pocket-friendly and a pleasure to use. Until they aren't. While Netflix aims to release its own content around the world simultaneously, its country-specific libraries are a constant pain in the neck for consumers. How many times have Netflix customers read online that a show is available to stream and yet when they try to find it, it's unavailable in their region? These geo-restrictions seem absolutely ridiculous to Joe Public and while they don't provide a cast-iron reason to pirate, some people – arguably quite rightly – feel justified in obtaining that content for free. After all, they're being short-changed, aren't they? The problem here is that while there are genuine business reasons for geo-blocking due to licensing issues, people with access to piracy sources have very little time or sympathy for them. The same is true for DRM on games, which may prevent a certain amount of piracy but only affects legitimate buyers. By their very nature, pirated games come without DRM. It isn't difficult to see why people feel aggrieved at being punished for being a loyal customer and why excuses for piracy suddenly become justifications. Justification for piracy is perhaps most keenly witnessed among people who already invest significant sums on official content and media every month but then find themselves backed into a corner on specific items they'd like to experience. With budgets only stretching so far, why would anyone be happy to subscribe to yet another service to access a single TV show 'exclusive' when that is all they want from the platform? Equally, why would someone happily subscribe to a massive TV package in order to access a single channel that gets watched for an hour each week, purely because the TV company insists on selling an overpriced bundle that it refuses to split? Is this a reason to pirate or is it a justification? Indeed, after spending all of their available funds on official media, does accessing this TV channel for free even represent a 'lost sale' now? Like all of the other questions in this niche, the answer is not straightforward. In fact, we're dealing with a moving target here. Once we determine that this is a lost sale in the example above and then decide to shift the available funds from one company to another, the consumer loses out by paying for things he doesn't want, loses out by losing access to things that he does, and generally walks away feeling disappointed. And disappointed customers are bad things. Disappointed customers, those who feel like they've been exploited or taken for granted, can turn against companies long-term. Then, as if by magic, their excuses to pirate suddenly become their personal and solid justifications to pirate, which could last for a very long time. But, not only that, it might lead them down the track of paying for even less media, media that they are now particularly militant about obtaining for free. So, do justifications for content piracy really hold up under scrutiny? Well, it's a question of personal perspective but broadly, some do and some don't. Others absolutely don't, while others are borderline. The argument always remains that if someone has created something the least people can do is pay for it, or not "steal it" in industry parlance. Perhaps the real question is this: does it really make any difference why people pirate to the people who do it? Multi-billion dollar content companies and smaller players alike already know what they must do to win and maintain business while converting pirates. They have to deliver the best product they can and ensure that the offer is perceived as good value for money by customers. Perhaps most importantly of all, they must never offer a product that is inferior to piracy in any significant way and then, when they have customers on board, they shouldn't take them for granted. Because when they do, reasons to pirate are tossed aside and people start to feel justified in not buying the real thing. That's when the real problems begin. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also help you to find the best anonymous VPN. ©2020 TorrentFreak | Office 21338 PO Box 4336 Manchester, North West M61 0BW United Kingdom Web Version   Preferences   Forward   Unsubscribe     Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company