Sunday, October 31, 2021

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

PopAds Accuses MPA of Spreading False and Misleading Piracy Accusations
Ernesto Van der Sar, 30 Oct 01:11 PM

Tomksoft PopadsEvery year, major copyright industry groups compile their lists of the most notorious pirate sites, which are publicly reported to the US Trade Representative (USTR).

These overviews provide input for the USTR's annual notorious markets overview, where sites such as The Pirate Bay, Fmovies and Uploaded have appeared as repeat offenders.

Pressure Tool

The goal of this process is to identify pressing piracy problems and to encourage foreign administrations, from where these portals often operate, to take action. It's very much a diplomatic pressure tool with the ultimate goal of helping US rightsholders tackle online piracy.

Over the past years, there has been a lot of debate about which sites and services should be included. Not everyone agrees that YouTube downloaders and domain registrars are piracy havens, and adding advertising companies is seen as a controversial step as well.

Copyright holders clearly believe that these services deserve to be called out. This is apparent from the Motion Picture Association (MPA) submission, which lists a wide range of third-party services. They include advertising company PopAds, which is described as follows:

PopAds and PopCash are ad networks owned by Tomksoft in Poland but incorporated in Costa Rica. PopAds generates advertising revenue for copyright infringing sites including gomovies123.org, megafilmeshdplus.org, video.az, and mega1080.com, while PopCash is currently used by watchmoviestream.me. PopAds had previously been generating advertising revenue for Openload and Streamango, two of the most popular video file hosting services with over 136 million and 32 million visits per month, respectively, according to SimilarWeb (Openload and Streamango were shut down in October 2019).

PopAds Responds

PopAds is not happy with this callout. The company's attorney Kamil Nagrabski sent a rebuttal to the USTR and points out that MPA's submission includes false and misleading information. For one, PopAds has no relationship with PopCash.

"My Principal has nothing to do with PopCash and has never had. My Principal has no idea why is he connected with PopCash at all. This information is completely false and misleading for the general public and your institution," the rebuttal starts.

The main complaint from copyright holders is that PopAds provides its services to alleged pirate sites. The suggestion is that the Costa Rican company does nothing to stop or limit piracy. PopAds wholly disagrees with this assertion.

The advertising company points to its DMCA reporting tool. While the DMCA doesn't mention advertising networks, PopAds has chosen to implement this functionality to help reduce piracy. PopAds doesn't only remove ads from reported pirate sites, it also terminates accounts of repeat offenders.

"Of course, repeated offenders, anyone who tries to cheat the system is immediately and permanently banned. My Principal also operates a Multi-Account Control System that will automatically detect and ban new accounts opened by a person who had an account banned in the past," PopAds notes.

Piracy Blocklists

The advertising outfit doesn't stop there either. It recently launched a new Adscore Compliance Intelligence system. This automatically detects copyright-infringing websites, which are subsequently blocked from displaying ads.

At the moment, PopAds uses several official piracy blacklists. This includes Operation Creative's IWL blacklist from the City of London Police, as well as the WIPO ALERT blacklist, which is maintained by the World Intellectual Property Organization. Sites on these blacklists are blocked in real time.

These blocking efforts prevent ads from appearing on sites that are blacklisted. In addition, PopAds also makes sure that content loaded by these sites through frames is blocked as well.

'MPA Can Easily Block Ads'

The above suggests that rightsholders have a variety of options to report and block content on pirate sites. This also applies to the MPA, which works with the IWL blacklist.

"MPA can just list any website that they believe is illegally hosting copyrighted content on the Operation Creative IWL blacklist. Once that happens, PopAds system will automatically stop displaying any advertisements on the reported website within 24h without any human involvement," PopAds notes.

Based on PopAds' rebuttal, it seems that copyright holders still have room for improvement on their end. For example, MPA told the USTR that PopAds generated revenue for gomovies123.org, megafilmeshdplus.org, video.az, and mega1080.com. However, it did little to report this activity to PopAds directly.

"My Principal has never received any DMCA complaints on any of these websites, neither they are listed on any of the piracy website blacklists my Principal participates in," PopAds' attorney informs the USTR.

A copy of PopAds' full rebuttal, submitted as part of the USTR's 2021 Review of Notorious Markets, is available here (pdf)

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

Saturday, October 30, 2021

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Feds Indict 'Pirate' Sports Streams Operator Who Settled with Hollywood
Andy Maxwell, 29 Oct 07:15 PM

FBIBack in July we reported that the Alliance for Creativity (ACE) and the Motion Picture Association (MPA) had obtained a DMCA subpoena compelling Cloudflare to hand over the personal details of sports streaming service HeHeStreams.

Soon after, the site – which in the main facilitated access to MLB, NBA, NFL, and NHL content – disappeared and began redirecting to ACE. We can confirm that a settlement was reached but since both sides are honoring their agreement, no further details are available.

For HeHeStreams' operator, who founded the site in 2016/17, felt the shutdown marked the end of an era from which he could move on but that wasn't to be the case. A separate criminal investigation representing a different set of rightsholders was already underway, one that doesn't come with the option of a civil settlement.

HeHeStreams Operator Charged With Numerous Crimes

Joshua Streit, better known online as Josh Brody, was named yesterday as the operator of HeHeStreams. According to the Department of Justice, Streit has been charged with numerous crimes including computer systems intrusions at Major League Baseball and the illegally streaming of content from MLB, NBA, NFL and NHL to the public, for profit. He was also charged with attempting to extort $150,000 from MLB.

Before diving into those details, an explanation of HeHeStreams' operations is in order.

HeHeStreams Was a Special Type of IPTV Service

The majority of traditional IPTV suppliers facilitate access to pirated streams by offering them from their own servers. This is a model that burns through lots of bandwidth and is seen as a necessary cost of doing business. What HeHeStreams managed to do is eliminate these costs almost completely by not utilizing pirated streams at all.

Instead, it found a way to connect HeHeStreams users to genuine streams offered by the sports broadcasters. This had obvious upsides – no more massive streaming server bills and since official streams rarely break down or buffer, a bunch of happy customers.

"Streit obtained the copyrighted content by gaining unauthorized access to the websites for those sports leagues via misappropriated login credentials from legitimate users of those websites. One of the victim sports leagues sustained losses of approximately $3 million due to Streit's conduct," the DoJ notes.

This method of using official streams to supply 'pirate' customers was alluded to in our interview with Akamai earlier this year. A pair of DISH lawsuits against SportsBay and Nitro IPTV also illustrate the same problem, one that broadcasters need to fix.

Quite why these gaping loopholes aren't being closed isn't clear but what we do know is that disclosing such vulnerabilities can go horribly wrong.

Bug Bounty Or Criminal Extortion?

Back in the summer, TorrentFreak sought comment from Joshua Streit on the ACE/MPA settlement deal. After he declined, the discussion shifted to the apparent loopholes at DISH-owned Sling TV referenced in their lawsuits, ones that fail to prevent non-customers from piggybacking onto legal streams.

How these are exploited went unexplained but without mentioning any services in particular, Streit indicated that he had been trying to share knowledge of serious vulnerabilities with one (or more) providers. He expressed some frustration at their apparent reluctance to work together. We later got the impression that things had improved but that was clearly not the case.

According to the criminal complaint filed by the US Government, around March 2021 Streit emailed an MLB employee noting that he'd previously disclosed a network vulnerability but was disappointed by the company's response. "The lack of gratitude is frankly shocking," he reportedly wrote.

Streit later sent another email noting that he'd reported yet more vulnerabilities to the company over a particular weekend and he had two reporters who cover MLB matters interested in the story. An unnamed MLB executive then contacted Streit by phone and reportedly found him "upset" by MLB's failure to acknowledge his efforts.

Streit allegedly informed the MLB executive that he expected to be financially compensated for the work he'd done but was told that while MLB has no bug bounty program, the company "appreciated" his disclosures. Streit responded that bug bounty programs are useful for cooperation and according to the complaint, added that it would be bad for MLB if the media found out about the vulnerability.

After a gap of several months, Streit allegedly emailed MLB again in the hope that the earlier discussions could be continued. The MLB executive replied, informing Streit that "people here are concerned about this as unauthorized access to our systems" but then went on to ask Streit what kind of money he was expecting. $150,000, apparently.

streit-bug bounty

Serious vulnerabilities can return big bug bounties and there is no question this vulnerability is serious. The complaint against Streit says that an analysis conducted by just one of the sports leagues reveals losses of almost $3m to the HeHeStreams operation alone. And herein lies the problem.

It's not known if MLB would've been more responsive to a neutral third-party discloser but at least as far as FBI Special Agent Joshua Williams is concerned, Streit's overall conduct means that his request for payment amounted to extortion.

"[I] believe that…although the defendant approached MLB in the guise of being helpful to MLB, his simultaneous intrusion into MLB accounts and illegal streaming of MLB content on the illicit streaming website indicates that Streit acted knowingly and with the intent to extort MLB," Agent Williams writes.

Potentially Serious Prison Time

As per the Department of Justice, 30-year-old Streit from Minnesota is charged with:

One count of knowingly accessing a protected computer in furtherance of a criminal act and for purposes of commercial advantage and private financial gain, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.

One count of knowingly accessing a protected computer in furtherance of fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.

One count of wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and one count of illicit digital transmission, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison. He also faces one count of sending interstate threats with the intent to extort, which carries a maximum sentence of two years in prison.

Of immediate interest here is the reference to "illicit digital transmission". This terminology is used in the Protecting Lawful Streaming Act (PLSA), a law that made certain streaming conduct a felony. It was signed into law last December and as far as we're aware, hasn't been used until now.

The criminal complaint can be found here (pdf)

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

Friday, October 29, 2021

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Goodbye Hadopi: France Will Launch New 'Arcom' Anti-Piracy Agency in 2022
Andy Maxwell, 29 Oct 10:15 AM

Pirate KeyFor more than a decade the Hadopi (High Authority for the Distribution of Works and the Protection of Rights on the Internet) anti-piracy agency was France's official response to the threat of peer-to-peer file-sharing.

The anti-piracy body pioneered the so-called "graduated response" system back in 2010, with Hadopi tracking down copyright infringers using mainly BitTorrent networks and then warning, fining, or even disconnecting them. Over time, however, more convenient methods of illicit consumption (such as streaming) gained traction, putting Hadopi a little behind the times.

New Bill to Tackle Infringement

Back in April, France's Council of Ministers was presented with a new bill that aimed to more tightly regulate and protect access to cultural works in the digital age. At the forefront is the protection of creators' rights by tackling sites and services that Hadopi's graduated response failed to reach.

The plan was to merge Hadopi with the Higher Audiovisual Council (CSA) to create a new regulator, one with greater powers and jurisdiction over the entire field of audiovisual content. The bill was adopted by parliament last month by 49 votes to 4, effectively giving the green light for the Audiovisual and Digital Communication Regulatory Authority (Arcom).

The new law "on the regulation and protection of access to cultural works in the digital age" was officially published this week.

Arcom Will Launch in January 2022

In an accompanying announcement, Hadopi and CSA welcome the publication which effectively "consecrates the birth" of Arcom.

"The creation of Arcom will make it possible to constitute an integrated regulator with extended powers, particularly in the creation chain, from the setting of obligations to the protection of copyright and the fight against piracy. This new authority will also be more in touch with digital issues, the fight against fake news and hate content, and the regulation of subscription video platforms with the obligations incumbent on them," Hadopi says.

"Far from being a simple juxtaposition of skills, Arcom will thus be the support and the engine of a new public policy by modernizing the exercise of regulation," Hadopi continues.

"It will thus embody the new model of audiovisual and digital regulation that we are putting in place: regulation that is more attentive to audiences and their concerns, but also resolutely committed to the defense of freedoms of expression, information, and communication of creation."

Arcom Anti-Piracy Powers

On January 1, 2022, Hadopi will be dissolved and the CSA will take the Arcom name. This new regulator will operate with expanded investigation powers and will be responsible not only for tackling piracy but also for the protection of minors and the fight against disinformation and hatred online.

On the anti-piracy front, Hadopi's 'graduated response' will be adopted by Arcom and the regulator will also focus on illicit streaming, direct download, and linking platforms that profit from the online publication of works in violation of creators' rights.

Arcom's key responsibilities will include the management of a "blacklist" of infringing sites. A site can find itself on this database after being labeled a "repeat infringer" in a yet-to-be detailed process. A site appearing on the list will act as a signal for search engines to carry out delistings, advertisers to curtail business deals, or be presented as support for rights holders engaged in legal action.

The new regulator will also establish a system to combat "mirrors", sites that help to facilitate access to platforms previously blocked following earlier enforcement actions. Measures can include more blocking or search engine delisting.

In addition, Arcom will create a mechanism to deal with piracy of live sporting events, one that is able to cope with ad hoc emergency referrals aimed at quickly preventing access to pirate sports streams. That falls in line with the recent passing of the Digital Services Act proposals by the European Parliament which also envisions rapid 30-minute takedowns.

The new law can be read here

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

US Copyright Office Expands Jailbreaking Exemption to Roku and Apple TV
Ernesto Van der Sar, 28 Oct 08:50 PM

Section 1201 of the DMCA prohibits the circumvention of copyright controls without permission.

This legal restriction prevents the general public from bypassing DRM protection on a wide variety of content and devices.

There are some important exceptions to this rule, however. This includes phone jailbreaking, which was declared legal in 2010. These provisions are renewed every three years after the Copyright Office hears various arguments from stakeholders and the general public.

Jailbeaking Video Streaming Devces

This triannual review also allows interested parties to come up with new proposals. In the most recent rulemaking process, for example, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) suggested an expansion of the current jailbreaking exemptions to include video streaming devices.

In previous years the Office already allowed the public to jailbreak smartphones, tablets, wearables, and smart TVs. According to the EFF, general video streaming devices such as Roku and Apple TV boxes should fit in the same category.

Jailbreaking these devices will enable the public to "exercise full control" over their hardware, EFF argued. That allows people to unlock valuable new features, such as adding a web browser and compatibility with other tools such as privacy-enhancing VPNs.

Copyright Holders Fear Widespread Piracy

This proposal received broad support from digital rights activists. However, major copyright industry groups including the RIAA, ESA, and Hollywood's MPA, fiercely opposed the plan. They urged the Copyright Office not to grant the exemption as it would open the door to widespread piracy.

The groups fear that jailbreaking will result in widespread copyright infringement, as it allows the public to install piracy tools on these video devices as well.

"Access controls on these devices are designed to prevent unauthorized access to copyrighted works," the copyright holders wrote. "Once circumvented, even for the ostensible purpose of first installing a lawful application, nothing prevents a user from later installing infringing applications or applications that enable infringement on these devices."

Jailbreaking Exemption Approved

After reviewing the input from both sides, the Copyright Office recommended approving the new DMCA anti-circumvention exemption. According to the Office, the current limitations hinder fair use modifications of these devices.

"Proponents have satisfied their burden of showing that technological measures applied to video streaming devices and routers or other networking devices are having, or are likely to have, an adverse effect on noninfringing uses. The Register accordingly recommends adoption of exemptions authorizing the jailbreaking of both types of devices, with appropriate limitations."

Copyright holder fears that the exemption will open the door to piracy apps is ungrounded. Similar comments were made in 2015 when the Smart-TV exemption was discussed, and the Copyright Office sees no reason to change its position.

"While opponents argue that the proposed exemption could lead to unauthorized access to copyrighted works and to unapproved apps, as in 2015, "[n]o actual evidence was submitted to illustrate the claim that jailbreaking . . . will make it easier to gain unauthorized access to copyrighted content'," the Office notes.

Limitations Apply

The final exemption class does come with some limitations. People are only allowed to use jailbroken devices with "lawfully obtained software." In addition, jailbreaking should not be carried out to "gain unauthorized access to other copyrighted works."

This advice was adopted and the Librarian of Congress has now published the full list of new rights that go into effect today. The full streaming device section reads as follows:

Computer programs that enable smart televisions to execute lawfully obtained software applications, where circumvention is accomplished for the sole purpose of enabling interoperability of such applications with computer programs on the smart television, and is not accomplished for the purpose of gaining unauthorized access to other copyrighted works. For purposes of this paragraph (b)(10), "smart televisions" includes both internet-enabled televisions, as well as devices that are physically separate from a television and whose primary purpose is to run software applications that stream authorized video from the internet for display on a screen.

The Copyright Office specifically states that the new exemptions apply to Roku and Apple TV but hardware from other manufacturers with similar restrictions should fall into the same category. Jailbreaking was already quite common for these devices and now people are allowed to do this legally.

The final rule also includes other new exemptions, including broader rights to repair video game consoles. However, the proposal to allow museums and libraries to allow the public to access abandoned video games off-premises was rejected.

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company