Wednesday, February 24, 2021

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Denuvo Cracker EMPRESS "Arrested", Blames Repacker FitGirl & Reddit For Witch-Hunt
Andy Maxwell, 24 Feb 06:19 PM

Pirate FireA couple of decades ago, online piracy was a relative niche pastime enjoyed by relatively few people. Dominated by music and software, consumers were largely grateful for whatever they could get their hands on, supplied by largely nameless individuals with a "sharing is caring" philosophy.

Today, however, the landscape is dramatically different. Many pirates have become discerning consumers, demanding only the highest quality content neatly presented in fault-free or functionally-specific packages. Around that, a cult of personality has developed around some of the best known 'pirate' brands, from distributors such as The Pirate Bay through to Scene groups known only by a series of initials.

While the original founders of The Pirate Bay were able to skillfully manage their reputations while being known by millions of pirates, Scene groups have taken a different approach. By providing no useful information about themselves, it has mostly been difficult for pirate consumers to interact or even criticize them.

However, when other pirates with a fresh outlook have dared to step into the spotlight more recently, the jarring glare of social media has presented a whole new set of problems.

A Shift in The Game Cracking Scene

For many years, the removal of copy protection from games was the domain of largely faceless groups operating in the shadows of 'The Scene'. Unknown to the vast majority of pirates, these collectives have enjoyed a level of security by default. However, in more recent times, the ability to crack, release and distribute cracked content independently has lured some crackers much closer to the surface. As a result, they have become more accessible to fans and detractors alike, with serious security implications.

In 2018, this led to the demise of Voksi, a Bulgaria-based cracker who rose to fame on sites including Reddit, who reportedly ended his work after being visited by officers from Bulgaria's General Directorate for Combating Organized Crime. According to him, this happened at the behest of Irdeto – the new owner of the infamous Denuvo anti-tamper technology.

While this could've happened to anyone, it's hard to imagine that Voksi's significant public profile didn't play a major part in his downfall. But in common with many similar situations over the years, it hasn't prevented others from following a similar path. Case in point – the larger-than-life Denuvo cracker EMPRESS.

EMPRESS Takes Things to a Whole New Level

Last year we reported how games cracker EMPRESS burst onto the scene with a plan to crowdfund the cracking of Denuvo titles. Straight off the bat, EMPRESS showed a remarkable lack of concern by confirming what appeared to be sensitive information, including that EMPRESS and another group, C000005, were actually one and the same. Links to another group, CODEX, were also revealed/claimed.

Since then, EMPRESS has delivered previously Denuvo-protected titles as promised but somewhat bizarrely, these achievements have been accompanied by masses of superfluous drama. Instead of maintaining a low profile, EMPRESS has become increasingly outspoken, restating connections to CODEX and even PARADOX (PDX), a group that has existed in some form or another for more than 30 years.

Labeling them all as "pathetic" probably wasn't a great start but things were only just getting started. Fellow Denuvo-crackers CPY (which have considerable standing in the Scene) were branded "selfish and ignorant" and then attention turned to repackers including the world-famous FitGirl, whose work appears to have irritated EMPRESS intensely.

Stop Hogging The Limelight

In an interview with Wired published this week, EMPRESS responded to the repacking issue by noting that these entities, Fitgirl included, are somehow able to get the credit for releasing games to the public, rather than EMPRESS, who is doing "the REAL work".

So, in an effort to take the spotlight away from people like FitGirl, EMPRESS decided to cap the download speed of 'her' latest release, to prevent speedy repacks. This didn't go down well with fans. And it wasn't well-received by FitGirl either.

"As many of you could see, the Immortals: Fenyx Rising repack was listed in Upcoming Repacks list for almost a day already. Why is it still not up? You would never guess, EMPRESS intentionally limited the uploading speed of her seedbox to 200 KB/s and feeding the same chunks to the crowd, so no one would download the ISO before others," FitGirl wrote.

"And why did she do it, you ask? The answer is mind-blowing: she hates all repackers for 'stealing the spotlight' from her work. Yes, you've read it right," FitGirl added. "It's against common logic and piracy ethics."

In response, FitGirl announced a boycott of EMPRESS releases.

"I can't allow myself to be a puppet of a person, whose main agenda seems to be 'I am the only Denuvo-cracker in the world, praise me'. Well fuck that. I'll let other repackers with less strict principles to deal with her works."

Cult of Personality Incompatible With Longevity?

The problems mentioned by FitGirl are actually just the tip of a very large iceberg but surprisingly few issues relate directly to the cracking of games. Somehow, the personality and divisive opinions of EMPRESS (or simply those being presented online) appear to be fueling the dramas upon which social media often thrives. And as usual, nothing good has come of it.

Threads discussing EMPRESS have descended into chaos, with supporters jostling with detractors over the perceived size of the EMPRESS ego and whether or not some of her philosophical musings (1,2,3) are best aired on forums dedicated to cracking or somewhere else far, far away. Either way, these issues have now become irretrievably entwined with her persona resulting in both hostility and an extremely toxic environment.

And according to EMPRESS at least, the ultimate damage has now been done.

"Finally Caught By The Police, Good Job Everyone"

In a post under her new Reddit handle of 'InfinityGoddess', a few hours ago EMPRESS told the masses on the CrackWatch subreddit that the worst-case scenario had unfolded. Pointing the finger at FitGirl, fellow repacker 'Masquerade' and "all the beautiful non toxic community here", EMPRESS said that some people on Reddit had reported both her and her real address to the authorities.(Quotes verbatim)

i am not quiet sure how it happened, but even with putting my philosophical side aside, i think i pissed off the entire internet just by trying to control 'MY' own crack for 24 hour is actually something i am still not able to believe.

In less than an hour, i will be dragged out of my home here with my lawyer, but considering i was caught red handed while preparing version 2 fix for my immortals crack, i don't think there will be much of hope against it at all.

i must repeat again, thank you a LOT fitgirl, and all her followers who enjoyed insulting and reporting me for the little stupid mistakes i did. there are no perfect person in this world, but i at least tried to do something 'right' out of all this. but no one saw it, and instead they only saw the negatives.

At the time of writing, no one apart from EMPRESS knows for sure whether the above statement is true, partially true, or indeed a complete fabrication. That having been said, it cannot be argued that any of this (including what led to this statement) is good for the games cracking scene.

Even if the authorities aren't involved and Redditors aren't to blame for what is being alleged, this kind of infighting – whoever may have started and/or perpetuated it – is the kind of destabilization that companies like Denuvo could only dream of.

Apparently without Denuvo lifting a finger, a major player appears to have been forced out of the game, not by the most secure copy-protection system available today, but by a self-perpetuating grass-roots clash of personalities with a single pivotal mistake underpinning everything.

The fact is that by becoming so accessible and accountable to the masses, games crackers and pirates of all kinds put themselves at risk. Most or indeed all of this slow-motion car wreck could've been avoided if the traditional firewall of crackers distancing themselves from pirate consumers had been maintained. But for now at least, the damage appears to have been done, and who is to blame is irrelevant.

The big question is whether the same mistakes will be made again. Given what we've seen thus far, that seems likely.

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

Record Labels Blame YouTube For a Lot of Things But Continue to Upload Music
Ernesto Van der Sar, 24 Feb 10:06 AM

youtube sad errorWith the option to stream millions of tracks for a monthly fee, subscription services such as Spotify and Apple Music have proven to be a serious competitor to music piracy.

In just a matter of years, these services have shaken up the music business to become the biggest source of revenue.

UK Parliament Reviews Music Streaming Economy

This sounds like great news, but many musicians are not happy. Many creators only see a tiny fraction of the streaming income, with much bigger percentages going to the labels. This topic, which is far from new, is now at the center of a UK Parliamentary inquiry on the economics of music streaming.

After listening to hours of testimony it's clear that the streaming landscape is complicated. There are various copyright holders involved and, for the artist, revenue can be severely limited depending on their contract.

Another confusing matter is how money is shared among the various acts. This largely depends on the subscription income received by companies such as Spotify. In other words, more streamed 'listens' don't automatically result in more revenue.

These and many related topics were discussed in a UK parliament hearing over the past weeks where several prominent witnesses testified. They includes Geoff Taylor, Chief Executive of the music industry group BPI.

Among other things, Taylor was asked why a company such as Spotify, in which several record labels have a stake, pays so little per stream. This can be in part explained by the subscription revenues, which remain relatively low. The easy solution would be to raise prices, but that's not as easy as it sounds.

'YouTube Distorts Subscription Prices'

"There are various distortions in the market that have essentially reduced the amount of value that comes into the streaming economy. The first one is that, obviously, the consumer price has not moved in 10 years and has fallen behind inflation, but there are reasons behind that," Taylor said.

"The most important reason is competition with free services. You have services such as YouTube in the market that have huge numbers of users, which, for a lot of their content — all the content that is uploaded by their users — pay a fraction of what is paid for a stream on Spotify."

In other words, because people can stream music for free on YouTube, paid subscription services are reluctant to raise their prices. If they do, people may simply switch to this free alternative which generates less revenue.

Piracy and the Safe Harbor Problem

According to Taylor, there is a huge difference in the money earned 'per stream' from subscription services when compared to user-uploaded YouTube videos. In addition, pirate sites remain a problem too, and these generate no income at all.

"Then of course the other big distortion in the market is piracy, which affects all artists, all labels and so forth. That costs about £200 million a year in lost revenues," Talor notes.

According to the BPI's Chief Executive, safe harbors are causing this distortion. They allow companies such as YouTube to host music uploaded without permission, without being held liable.

"The existence of the safe harbor changes the negotiation substantially. That is why you see that huge differential in per stream rates between user-uploaded content on YouTube, for example, and other streaming services."

In other words, Spotify and other subscription services are afraid to raise prices because they fear that people will flee to free alternatives such as YouTube and pirate sites, which will decrease the overall revenue.

Spotify and Apple Agree

This is not just how the BPI sees it either. In yesterday's hearing Spotify's Chief Legal Officer Horacio Gutierrez warned that the company has to strike a balance and ensure that "music doesn't become unaffordable." If that happens, Spotify could be "pushing them back into online piracy scenarios."

This was corroborated by Apple Music's Elena Sega, BBC reports. She also highlighted YouTube as one of the outlets they have to compete with.

"Competing with free is very difficult," she said. "They don't necessarily have licenses for all the music that they use, and they don't need to."

These testimonies make it clear that YouTube is mostly seen as a problem by these insiders. While the platform has paid out billions of dollars to the music industry over the years, the payouts should be a lot higher, the reasoning goes.

Labels Still Upload Their Music to YouTube

This is an argument that has come up before. Unfortunately, however, the UK parliament members didn't ask why the major record labels continue to upload their music to the site. If YouTube is such a problem, why use it then?

Low payouts are not the only problem either, according to insiders. YouTube is also seen as the biggest source for stream-ripping, which is the music industry's single biggest piracy threat. Many of the tracks that are ripped are uploaded by the labels themselves.

The easy solution would be to stop uploading to YouTube altogether and load the Content-ID system with every music track on earth, so all user uploads are removed as well. But that's not happening.

This suggests that the music industry sees at least some value in YouTube. After all, why else would it support a site that keeps subscription service revenues low? The main issue here is that the music industry would like to get more money from YouTube.

'Labels Should Take a Look at Their Own Business'

The Members of Parliament also questioned Katherine Oyama, Google's Global Head IP Policy, who had an entirely different take on the matter.

"Honestly, I was surprised and a bit disappointed by the testimony that I heard. Frankly, it does not reflect at all the individual relationships that we have with individual members of the BPI," she said.

Oyama reiterated that YouTube is paying billions of dollars to the music industry and that they are working hard to raise this revenue. At the same time, the company has built tools to allow copyright holders to remove infringing content from the platform.

Instead of pointing the finger at YouTube, the major labels may want to take an honest look at their own business, indirectly hinting at the fact that some artists only get paid a fraction of streaming revenues.

"I think maybe what was happening in the first panel today was a little bit of a distraction to alleviate hard questions about their own industry, frankly. It is true that not every artist is having the same experience.

"I do think that there has been a lack, maybe, of some other voices as part of this process. We would be so happy to recommend some who can share some best practices about things that they are doing," Oyama added.

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: