Wednesday, July 29, 2020

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Court Lifts Copyright Troll Roadblock but Puts Brakes on Piracy Settlement Bonanza
Ernesto Van der Sar, 29 Jul 09:10 PM

stopIn the United States, federal courts are still swamped with lawsuits filed against alleged BitTorrent pirates.

This phenomenon, often dubbed as 'copyright trolling', started over a decade ago and remains ongoing.

The 'trolling' scheme can be both simple and lucrative. Rightsholders file complaints against "John Does" who are initially only known by an IP-address. They then request a subpoena to obtain the subscriber details from ISPs and demand a settlement from the account holder.

This tactic is also employed by Strike 3 Holdings, the most active filer of piracy lawsuits in the US. This works just fine in many cases but the company has had some setbacks as well.

Copyright Troll Roadblock

One such issue came via a devastating order issued by Magistrate Judge Joel Schneider last October which denied Strike 3 expedited discovery in several cases. The prevented Strike 3 from obtaining the personal details of the allegedly-pirating account holders from ISPs.

According to Judge Schneider, the underlying complaints included very few facts. Strike 3 has an IP-address but doesn't know if the account holder is involved in the actual infringements. Put differently, these cases are futile.

"The most fundamental basis of the Court's decision is its conclusion that, as pleaded, Strike 3's complaints are futile. The Court denies Strike 3 the right to bootstrap discovery based on a complaint that does not pass muster," the Judge wrote.

Strike 3 Appeals

Strike 3 disagreed and appealed the order, with success. Late last month, New Jersey District Court Judge Joel Hillman reversed the decision. The copyright holder is now allowed to subpoena ISPs for personal details of alleged infringers.

At first sight, this appears to be a clear win for Strike 3. However, it comes with a rather significant catch.

In addition to allowing the subpoenas, Magistrate Judge Schneider was subsequently tasked with writing a protective order to balance the rights of Strike 3 with the privacy interests of the defendants. This order, which was filed this week, puts the brakes on Strike 3's settlement efforts.

First off, the protective order prohibits the rightsholder from making the defendants' personal details public. Instead, they should be referred to as Does. However, the real sting comes after that.

Putting The Brakes on Settlements

"Plaintiff is prohibited from initiating, directly or indirectly, any settlement communications with defendant (or any person associated with defendant or the IP address), unless (1) that party is represented by counsel and (2) their counsel initiates settlement discussions.

"On request of plaintiff or an unrepresented party, submitted to the Court at any time, settlement shall be conducted under supervision of the Court."

This means that Strike 3 is no longer allowed to propose settlements. While cases can still be settled, defendants must take the initiative, and only if they are represented through an attorney.

Out-of-court settlements, which are very common in these copyright-trolling cases, are no longer an option either. Everything msut be supervised by the court.

The order, more or less, requires Strike 3 to pursue the cases on their merits, something it prefers not to do. This will not only increase litigation costs, but will also require the copyright holder to have their evidence in order.

A copy of the protective order, issued by Magistrate Judge Joel Schneider, is available here (pdf)

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Disney Obtains New 'Dynamic' Court Order to Block 118 'Pirate' Domains
Andy Maxwell, 29 Jul 11:55 AM

Page BlockedMajor Hollywood studios and other rightsholders consider site-blocking an effective tool to combat rampant online infringement. Opponents, on the other hands, view the tactic not only as a blunt instrument but one that can be easily circumvented.

What is clear, however, is that site-blocking is more effective when it targets many sites. This helps to ensure that when one site is blocked, users don't flood to other platforms that aren't.

As a result, entertainment companies keep returning to courts around the world to obtain orders requiring ISPs to add even more sites to their blacklists. Following an order handed down by the High Court in Delhi this week, Indian ISPs will have to add almost 120 new 'pirate' domains to their filtering systems.

Disney's Application to Block 118 'Pirate' Domains

The action, filed by Disney Enterprises "and others", was heard via video-conferencing due to the coronavirus pandemic. Defendants include dozens of pirate sites, Internet service providers, the Department of Communications (DoT) and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY).

The application notes that the plaintiffs are businesses incorporated in the United States and are all involved in the creation, production and distribution of motion pictures and other cinematographic works.

"The plaintiffs are aggrieved by the fact that certain rogue websites are enabling the down-streaming of their creative work which includes films and other entertainment programs, albeit, without requisite licenses. The plaintiffs aver that they have the copyright in the content of their creative works and, hence, need to be protected," a judgment handed down on Monday reads.

Range of 'Pirate' Domains Offering Movies and Cartoons/Anime

The list includes 37 'pirate' site defendants, none of whom were present to mount any kind of opposition. There appears to be a particular focus on sites specializing in anime and cartoons, including the massively popular Nyaa.si which took fifth position in our annual overview of the world's most popular torrent sites.

Other notable entries listed in the application and specializing in this genre include Horriblesubs, Kisscartoon/Kimcartoon, Wcostream/watchcartoononline, kissanime, gogoanime, and 9anime. The majority of these platforms have multiple domains detailed in the application, so Disney and partners are probably hoping to wipe them out quickly to avoid a resurgence.

While streaming sites dominate the domains to be blocked, a handful of torrent sites are included in the application. In addition to Nyaa, large private torrent site IPTorrents also gets a mention, with the plaintiffs demanding that 11 domains/sub-domains are blocked by ISPs. TorrentDownload and YourBitTorrent2 complete the list.

Finally, the application demands that named proxy sites are also blocked by ISPs, including Unblockit.red and Proxyof.com. However, the judge's order appears to consider a situation where the named sites deploy unblocking mechanisms of their own.

'Dynamic' Injunction Handed Down

The "injunction shall also operate in respect of the mirror/redirect/alphanumeric websites, which are put in play by [the defendant pirate sites] to grant access to the websites [referred to in the order]," the judgment reads.

Overall, the judge was happy to hand down the blocking order, noting that the plaintiffs are suffering "considerable damage" to their commercial interests. The balance of interests is in favor of the entertainment companies, the judge added, while handing down the following instructions;

"[The pirate site defendants] are restrained from, in any manner, hosting, streamlining, reproducing, distributing, making available to the public and/or communicating to the public or facilitating the same on their websites through the internet in any manner whatsoever, any cinematograph work, content, program and show in which the plaintiffs have copyright."

While the injunction is unlikely to be followed by many or indeed any of the sites listed, the Department of Communications and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology are instructed to inform local ISPs that they must block the domains covered by the application. Furthermore, the plaintiffs can also file a new application if they need to block new domains, making this a so-called 'dynamic' order.

"The plaintiffs are given liberty to file an application…to array other rogue websites if the same are discovered after the issuance of the instant interim order. The purpose being that the Court, in these cases, needs to dynamically monitor such egregious illegality and, if necessary, pass interim orders to restrain similar rogue websites from illegally streaming the creative content in which the plaintiffs have a copyright," the judge concludes.

The judgment of the Delhi High Court can be found here (pdf)

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: