TorrentFreak's Latest News

Mobdro Pirate Streaming: Police Arrest Suspect, Three Others QuestionedAndy Maxwell, 10 Mar 05:49 PM Over the past several years, streaming app Mobd

Mobdro Pirate Streaming: Police Arrest Suspect, Three Others Questioned Andy Maxwell, 10 Mar 05:49 PM Over the past several years, streaming app Mobdro grew to become one of the most significant players in the piracy scene. As one of the newer breeds of standalone piracy apps, Mobdro grew alongside the likes of Popcorn Time, Showbox and Terrarium TV. With the provision of live TV, sports channels and 24/7 content presented in an easy-to-use interface, Mobdro became a fan-favorite. In February, however, it became clear that the video streaming tool was suffering serious problems. Alongside reports that Mobdro was no longer working, there was speculation that Mobdro may have been subjected to law enforcement action. No official confirmation arrived to back up these claims but following a new announcement from Eurojust (European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation), it is clear that the authorities were involved in the app's demise. Major Entertainment Companies File Complaints According to Eurojust, investigations into Mobdro began back in 2018 following complaints from the Spanish Professional Football League (La Liga), the Premier League, and the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment. The agency says that the main suspect behind Mobdro "used primary domains and servers" to illegally connect to legally operating streaming services, content from which was presented in the Mobdro app. Eurojust further reports that 43 million users worldwide have downloaded Mobdro to watch unlicensed content, leading to estimated profits of "at least" five million euros for its operators. The two-year investigation is said to have uncovered additional illegal streaming activities too. Co-ordinated 'Day of Action' While the precise date is not revealed by the agency, Eurojust said it recently coordinated an "action day" against Mobdro. This led to the search of four locations and removed the possibility for Mobdro "to be uploaded" via platforms and servers in Spain, Portugal and the Czech Republic. While the terminology deployed in the news bulletin is somewhat confusing (Mobdro itself can be uploaded easily from anywhere), perhaps the most important issue relates to detentions. One suspect was arrested by Spanish authorities and three others were reportedly taken in for questioning in Spain and Andorra. European Investigation Orders involving Portugal and the Czech Republic were executed with the assistance of Eurojust, which also helped with a request for Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) from Andorra. "Europol provided analytical support to the operation, which was carried out on the ground in Spain by Investigative Court nº 12 of Valencia and the National Police Corps," a Eurojust statement adds. "In Portugal, the Department of Criminal Investigation and Prosecution of Lisbon and the Lisbon Judiciary Police Directorate supported the joint action day, with the assistance of the Municipal Public Prosecutor's Office of Prague and the District Directorate of Police for Prague IV, Department of Analytics and Cybercrime." The Investigative Judge of the Specialised Investigation Section number 2 of Andorra and the General Prosecutor Office of Andorra also provided assistance. Mobdro Fallout Given its all-in-one nature and range of content, in the short-term Mobdro will be difficult to replace, particularly given the size of its userbase. However, it may well be that Mobdro's strengths played a key part in its own downfall. Stepping on the toes of the Premier League, La Liga, and the members of the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (all at once), was never likely to end well. While Mobdro has been under investigation since 2018, just under two years ago the app featured in a report from the Digital Citizens Alliance alongside claims that users of the app were effectively becoming part of a proxy network. The claim wasn't a surprise to anyone that had bothered to read Mobdro's EULA. Mobdro operated an ad-supported model, with users who preferred not to see ads given an option to become peers within the Luminati network. This meant that their bandwidth and IP addresses could be legally used by Luminati customers for their chosen Internet activities. Quite how many understood the implications of their choice to opt for no ads is unclear but it seems likely that relatively few bothered to read Mobdro's EULA in full. While it remains to be seen how the case will progress in Spain, Eurojust is clear that Mobdro made a lot of money. The detail and post mortem of how that revenue was generated and from where will likely prove an interesting topic of conversation in the months to come. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. EU High Court: Embedding Protected Images Can Breach Copyright Law Andy Maxwell, 10 Mar 11:45 AM Framing is a common technique used online to make content published on one site appear on another. Examples include YouTube videos and tweets that are hosted by their respective platforms but can be embedded in third-party sites for a seamless viewing experience. A less straightforward example can be found in a dispute involving Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek (DDB), a library website based in Germany. Embedding: A Digital 'Showcase' The main goal of the DDB project is to provide free access to the cultural and scientific heritage of Germany via the Internet. This includes millions of books, archives, images, sculptures, music and other audio, films, and sheet music. DDB's library links to digitized content stored on the Internet portals of various participating institutions, displaying thumbnails of that content in what is described as a "digital showcase". DDB operator Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz (SPK) has a licensing agreement with copyright collecting society Verwertungsgesellschaft Bild-Kunst (VG Bild-Kunst) to display those thumbnails. However, the agreement mandates that DBB should use technical measures to prevent third-party websites from embedding those images using the 'framing' technique. Referral to the EU Court of Justice Following a dispute with VG Bild-Kunst, SPK went to court in Germany arguing that the requirement to prevent framing on third-party sites was unreasonable. Seeking clarification, the Federal Court of Justice referred questions to the EU Court of Justice. The German court asked the EUCJ to determine whether Article 3(1) of the Copyright Directive must be interpreted to conclude that when a copyrighted image is embedded in a third party site and made freely accessible to the public – contrary to deployed or demanded protection measures imposed by the copyright holder – that constitutes a communication to the public. EU Court Of Justice Decision In a decision handed down Tuesday, the EUCJ states that embedding copyright images on third-party sites is indeed a communication to the public. As such, this type of activity requires permission from the copyright holder. "[W]here the copyright holder has adopted, or obliged licensees to employ, measures to restrict framing so as to limit access to his or her work from websites other than that of his or her licensees, the initial act of making available on the original website and the secondary act of making available, by means of the technique of framing, constitute different communications to the public, and each such act must, consequently, be authorized by the rights holders concerned," the decision reads. The Court found that copyright holders must be able to rely on the rights laid down in Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29 [pdf] otherwise a fair balance between the rights of users of protected content and those of the rightsholders would be disregarded. Indeed, should third-party embedding be allowed without the permission of the rightsholder, as soon as the content is made freely available anywhere on the Internet, the right of communication to the public would be effectively exhausted. This would mean that the rightsholder would be unable to retain control of the exploitation of his or her content, contrary to Article 3(3) of the Copyright Directive. As a result, the Grand Chamber ruled as follows: Article 3(1) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the embedding, by means of the technique of framing, in a third party website page, of works that are protected by copyright and that are freely accessible to the public with the authorization of the copyright holder on another website, where that embedding circumvents measures adopted or imposed by that copyright holder to provide protection from framing, constitutes a communication to the public within the meaning of that provision. The decision goes against the nonbinding opinion of EU Advocate General Szpunar published last September. Advocate General Szpunar advised that framing should not require the copyright holder's permission, since he or she was "deemed to have given it" when the work was initially made available. He noted that the same should apply to works protected by measures to prevent framing since the "public" is always the same, i.e the public of the website targeted by the link. The EU Court of Justice's decision can be found here From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. ©2021 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