Saturday, January 9, 2021

TorrentFreak's Latest News

christmascatvpn
 

Cloudflare Calls For Sanctions Over False Claims in Piracy Lawsuit
Ernesto Van der Sar, 09 Jan 10:34 PM

cloudflareEarlier this year Texas-based model Deniece Waidhofer sued Thothub for copyright infringement after the site's users posted many of her 'exclusive' photos.

While Cloudflare isn't new to copyright infringement allegations, this case has proven to be more than a nuisance. The company previously countered the claims with a motion to dismiss, but Waidhofer and her legal team are not backing off.

In an amended complaint some of the most egregious allegations, including the RICO conspiracy, were dropped. However, the copyright infringement claims remain and with two new cosplay models joining the action, the list of defendants has grown.

Last week Cloudflare responded to these new allegations, again denying any wrongdoing. In addition, the company filed a separate motion for sanctions a few days earlier, accusing the defendants of fabricating a fatally flawed theory of contributory copyright infringement.

The issue revolves around Cloudflare's "Argo Tunnel" service, which allows website operators to secure their systems from outside attacks. Put simply, it does so by routing all traffic to a site through Cloudflare's network via an encrypted tunnel.

The models argue that Thothub used this Argo Tunnel and that the CDN provider could have shut the site down by disabling this service. That would counter Cloudflare's defense that terminating Thothub's account would have had a limited impact.

Cloudflare informs the court that the Argo Tunnel wasn't created to help pirates, but to better secure the sites of its users. Not just that, it notes that Thothub never used this service.

"[I]t is clear that Argo Tunnel is a cyber security product of general applicability, created for and used by thousands of users," the company writes.

"And fatal to Plaintiffs' claims, Argo Tunnel was never used by the Thothub.tv website or any of its subdomains, which were the alleged source of the direct infringement."

argo

Cloudflare repeatedly told the defense attorneys that Thothub didn't use the Argo Tunnel and warned of potential sanctions, but the claims were added nonetheless.

This went a step too far for the CDN provider which is now asking the court to sanction the defendants and their attorneys for failing to conduct a reasonable investigation.

In addition, they should be sanctioned for "knowingly or recklessly maintaining false and frivolous allegations for the improper purpose of harassing Cloudflare with overbroad copyright infringement claims," the company writes.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the models and their legal team aren't happy with the accusations and swiftly fired back this week.

Turning the tables, their detailed reply accuses Cloudflare's attorneys of failing to conduct a reasonable investigation and failing to provide evidence. For this conduct, Cloudflare's lawyers should be sanctioned.

"Cloudflare's counsel's baseless and insulting accusations impugning Plaintiffs' counsel's integrity and professionalism, simply because Cloudflare and its counsel baldly assert the Argo Tunnel allegations are false," they counter.

"Because the Motion is frivolous and apparently lodged for an improper purpose to circumvent discovery, obtain privileged information, drive up litigation costs, and delay, distract, harass, and intimidate Plaintiffs, it should be denied and Cloudflare should be sanctioned."

The plaintiffs also provide further information that is supposed to substantiate their claims. Relying on an investigation from a technical expert, who previously worked at Akamai, they conclude that it's reasonable to believe that Thothub indeed used the Argo Tunnel.

Part of this evidence is based on the "Error 1003 Access Denied: Direct IP Access Denied" message that appeared when accessing one of the site's Cloudflare IP-addresses.

"Based on independent research, Mr. Bell learned that this error message indicated that the site could be using an Argo Tunnel," the models' lawyer writes.

While that may be true, it's no guarantee. The same error message also appears when one tries to access TorrentFreak.com's Cloudflare IP-address, and we don't use the Argo Tunnel.

In addition, the plaintiffs allege that Thothub used server port 8443, arguing that this is "often" used to implement an Argo Tunnel.

At the end of the day, both parties are calling for sanctions over unsubstantiated claims. Cloudflare wants the frivolous Argo Tunnel claims removed from the complaint, while the models seek to punish Cloudflare for its frivolous call for sanctions.

It is now up to the court to decide if any sanctions are indeed needed, but it's clear that this case is proving to be quite the handful.

—-

Cloudflare's motion for sanctions is available here and the models' motion can be found here

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

Xtream-Codes: We Have Nothing To Do With Resurrected IPTV System Xtream UI
Andy Maxwell, 09 Jan 12:27 PM

IPTVIn September 2019, the pirate IPTV market was thrown into turmoil when the Guardia di Finanza (GdF), an Italian law enforcement agency under the authority of the Minister of Economy and Finance, targeted Xtream-Codes as part of a huge law enforcement operation.

Xtream-Codes, which was operated by a Bulgarian company, was not a pirate IPTV service. What the company provided was a software services package that allowed people to manage their own IPTV reselling services and customers. This did not deter the Italian authorities from describing Xtream-Codes as a pirate operation.

While in complex cases the devil is often in the detail and may yet reveal an element of wrongdoing (or otherwise), Xtream-Codes itself was a tool that helped people manage IPTV services and from a technical perspective, it did not matter whether those services were legal or illegal. In the same way that torrent clients have the ability to download and distribute infringing content, like Xtream-Codes they may also be put to legitimate uses that do not involve piracy.

Since the authorities are staying tight-lipped on the important details of the case as the investigation continues, information regarding potential intent or complicity (or otherwise) has yet to enter the public domain. However, for the second time in two months the former operators of Xtream-Codes have broken their silence to complain that behind the scenes, justice isn't being done.

Xtream Codes Denies Being Part of Xtream UI

In the wake of the Xtream-Codes shutdown, hundreds of entities involved in the supply of IPTV that also relied on the company's software were left without the necessary tools to do their work. That left an immediate gap in the market for replacement panels such as those offered by Streaminy, Fastocloud, Ezhometech, and the interestingly-named Xtream UI.

Xtream UI appeared in the wake of Xtream Codes' demise and carries broadly the same features, having been based on the Xtream-Codes panel software. Given the name and history of the base tool, it now appears that authorities in Italy are making connections between the original and its apparent successor. That's according to the former operators of Xtream-Codes who say the authorities' assertions are wrong.

"Once again we are forced to issue a statement regarding the judicial events that unfairly involve us. It emerged that the investigating authorities are comparing the name of Xtream-Codes to that of another company, called Xtream UI, deducing that we are continuing to operate under the name of the latter," the company said in an announcement this week.

"On this groundless and specious assertion it is necessary to be more than clear: XTREAM-CODES HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH XTREAM UI NOR WITH ANY OTHER COMPANY OR PRIVATE ENTITY WHO ILLEGALLY USES THE NAME OR THE XTREAM CODES SOFTWARE."

In an effort to sever the links, the company has reportedly instructed its lawyers to take legal action to prevent Xtream UI from using its name moving forward. There is currently no mention of action against entities that rely on elements of Xtream-Codes' software to provide a similar service.

Xtream-Codes: We're Not Serving the IPTV Market

Last November, when the company first spoke in public after the raids in 2019, Xtream-Codes condemned its characterization by the authorities as a pirate service. It also explained how it had worked with "international judicial authorities" in order to "stop the phenomenon of piracy, to identify and stop those who illegally used our platform."

However, that work did not extend to cooperation with the authorities in Italy, who saw no difference between Xtream-Codes and a number of customers who used the platform to infringe copyright. In November, Xtream-Codes said that there was never any attempt at collaboration to "intercept" around a dozen abusive users, a number that now appears to have grown.

"We are involved in an unfair trial for the mere fact that about 20 users out of 4000 are accused of illegally using our software without our knowledge, despite the lawfulness of the software and the company, on whose dividends we obviously paid taxes to the state of Bulgaria, where we are based," the platform's former operators explained.

"Since we suffered the forced closure of our company, we have been forced to exit the market, both because we were fully confident that the obvious conclusion that Xtream-Codes is totally unrelated to the work of some of its users would emerge in a short timeframe, and because materially our economic and mental resources must necessarily be used in this unfair process that involves us."

Why Hasn't the IPTV Market Collapsed?

The picture painted by the authorities at the time of the raids in 2019 was that Xtream-Codes was vital to the pirate IPTV market, providing the necessary backbone to make it function. However, while traffic did indeed collapse in a big way immediately after the systems were taken down, recovery wasn't far away.

Indeed, pirate IPTV services in 2020 were still being described by many rightsholders as a major threat and as Xtream-Codes quite rightly points out, its demise at the hands of the authorities doesn't appear to have achieved much.

"Beyond the serious injustice that emerges from this information, it should however be noted that according to the thesis of the investigators, Xtream-Codes should be the backbone of the illegal IPTV market. Yet, we cannot help but notice, also thanks to what the media reported, that more than a year after the closure of Xtream-Codes, the illegal IPTV market seems more flourishing than ever," the company noted.

"Could it be that Xtream-Codes, as well as any other company offering software similar to ours, is not the cause of the spread of the illegal IPTV market? Could it be that the investigators are following a totally wrong path that irremediably involves our company which could be considered a European excellence at the time of closure?

"Time will give us the answer to these questions. Meanwhile, we remain at the disposal of the investigating authorities and remain confident in the work of the judiciary," the company concludes.

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: