Friday, January 14, 2022

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Cox Challenges $1 Billion Piracy Verdict Over 'Lies' and 'Serious Misconduct'
Ernesto Van der Sar, 14 Jan 11:47 AM

cassette tape pirate musicThree years ago, Internet provider Cox Communications lost its legal battle against a group of major record labels.

A Virginia jury held Cox liable for pirating subscribers because it failed to terminate accounts after repeated accusations, ordering the company to pay $1 billion in damages.

This landmark ruling is currently under appeal but Cox also discovered new information that could turn the initial verdict on its head. A few months ago the ISP stated that the music companies concealed important evidence and it now asks the Virginia federal court to review these findings.

Doubts About Piracy Evidence

The new information centers around the copyright infringement notices that were sent by MarkMonitor, the anti-piracy outfit that tracked files downloaded by BitTorrent pirates. To confirm that these files were indeed infringing, they were downloaded and verified by Audible Magic's fingerprinting technology.

Cox has always had doubts about these notices. Before and during the trial, it argued that the underlying evidence was created after the fact. As such, it could be inadmissible. However, the music companies successfully denied that this was not the case.

During the jury trial, the music companies presented a hard drive that contained the files, suggesting that they were the original songs that were pirated between 2012 and 2014. This evidence was central to prove direct copyright infringement.

'Lies and Serious Misconduct'

This eventually resulted in the $1 billion verdict. However, according to Cox, this verdict is based on lies and tainted by serious misconduct.

Relying on information that surfaced in a separate lawsuit the music companies filed against Charter, Cox is now convinced that the hard drive evidence was indeed recreated at a later date.

This information wasn't disclosed at trial and Cox accuses the music companies of misrepresenting key evidence and misleading the jury. As such, it has asked the Virginia federal court for relief of judgment, with $1 billion on the line.

"As is now clear, evidence produced over Plaintiffs' objection in their similar litigation against another ISP, Charter Communications, confirms that the unprecedented judgment in this case was based on evidence that was created years after the alleged infringement occurred," Cox writes.

'Created After the Fact'

Cox points out that the new revelations show that MarkMonitor compiled the hard drive of the allegedly "infringing" files in 2016, two years after the claim period. These files were allegedly downloaded and verified in 2016, after which the evidence was destroyed.

coxlie

This information was concealed from Cox during the trial and the ISP argues that it would have crippled the record labels' case.

"The materiality of these misrepresentations and the prejudice to Cox could not be clearer: they were intended to — and did — fend off well-founded challenges to the admissibility of key pieces of evidence, the exclusion of which would have crippled Plaintiffs' case.

"The bottom line is that Plaintiffs lied. They lied to Cox; they lied to the Court; and they lied to the jury. And they rode those lies to a $1 billion judgment," Cox adds.

Cox asks the federal court to indicate that it's inclined to grant the motion for relief. If that's the case, the ISP will ask the appeal court to send the case back to the district court so the issue can be resolved there.

At the time of writing the music companies have yet to respond to Cox's allegations. They have roughly a month to do so and will likely contest the motion.

A copy of Cox's motion for relief from the judgment is available here (pdf)

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

Major Online Services Help Identify Pirate Streaming Site Operators
Andy Maxwell, 13 Jan 10:52 PM

Pirate KeyAn interesting lawsuit filed in a Texas court during the summer last year saw DISH Network and Sling TV partner up to sue the people behind SportsBay.org, SportsBay.tv, Live-NBA.stream, and Freefeds.com.

Unlike lawsuits against regular pirate IPTV providers, the platforms were alleged to have circumvented the DRM technologies deployed by Sling TV's streaming system (Widevine, Fairplay, and PlayReady) in order to provide their users with Sling programming, directly from Sling's servers, for free.

DISH provided considerable detail on how the operation worked while alleging willful violations of the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions and claiming considerable sums in damages.

Sometime in September 2021, all of the sites went offline and still haven't resurfaced, leaving millions of users high and dry. The reasons for the disappearances haven't been confirmed but DISH had been granted permission to subpoena a number of major service providers to further its case.

Subpoenas Target Major Online Service Providers

The targets of the subpoenas included domain registrar Namecheap (plus domain protection service WhoisGuard), Tucows, Cloudflare, Digital Ocean, Google, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.

Namecheap was asked to hand over information related to Namecheap or WhoisGuard accounts associated with sportsbay.org, live-nba.stream, freefeds.com, and the IP address 198.54.117.210, from May 2018 through August 3, 2020.

This included documents sufficient to identify the full name and contact information (including street addresses, web addresses, email addresses and telephone numbers) for the person that registered each account, plus documents submitted in order to create or make changes to each account. The subpoena also requested the handover of detailed payment information.

A similar subpoena requesting almost the same information was filed with domain company Tucows and another with Cloudflare, the latter also containing a demand to identify the names of the hosting companies connected with the four domains.

Highlighting a specific server IP address (159.65.35.50), a subpoena sent to Digital Ocean requested the handover of contact, payment and user IP address information, plus all communications sent or received to the accounts.

Google was sent a demand to hand over information related to a specific Google Analytics account including names, addresses and contact records, plus all IP address logs and communications sent to or received from related accounts. Facebook, Instagram and Twitter were ordered to hand over all identifying information they hold on the sites' social media accounts and it appears other providers were required to hand over information too.

Subpoenas Enable Plaintiffs to Name Defendants

With DISH and Sling apparently leaving no stone unturned, it seemed almost inevitable that one or more of the subpoenas would lead to the identities of one or more of the previously unnamed defendants. That now appears to be the case.

In a first amended complaint filed this week, the plaintiffs identify two men – Juan Barcan and Juan Nahuel Pereyra, both residents of Argentina.

"Defendant Juan Barcan is an individual residing in Buenos Aires, Argentina that owned and operated the Live-nba.stream, Freefeds.com, Sportsbay.org, and Sportsbay.tv domains and websites," the complaint reads

"Barcan used his PayPal account to make payments to domain registrar Namecheap and GitHub for the Sportsbay Websites. Barcan operated the Sportsbay Websites with CloudFlare, GitHub, and Google accounts."

sportsbay summons

"Defendant Juan Nahuel Pereyra is an individual residing in Buenos Aires, Argentina that owned and operated the Live-nba.stream, Freefeds.com, Sportsbay.org, and Sportsbay.tv domains and websites," it continues.

"Pereyra used his PayPal account to make payments to domain registrar Namecheap for the Sportsbay Websites. Pereyra operated the Sportsbay Websites with CloudFlare and Google accounts."

The amended complaint further notes that all of the 'SportsBay websites' had similarities among their domain registrars and service providers, and each deployed Cloudflare as a reverse proxy, pass-through security service. According to the plaintiffs, all four domains used the same Google Analytics ID (UA-187547947) which is also referenced on a number of other defunct streaming portals not mentioned in the complaint.

Finally, after repeating their calls for damages, DISH and Sling also call for a permanent injunction to prevent the defendants from infringing their rights moving forward, including by circumventing DRM or any other technological protection measures that control access to Sling programming.

The amended complaint can be found here (pdf)

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

Google 'Censors' The Pirate Bay and Other Pirate Domains in Several Countries
Ernesto Van der Sar, 13 Jan 01:52 PM

google sopaCopyright holders have tried a variety of measures to curb copyright infringement over the years, with varying levels of success.

Site blocking has emerged as one of the preferred solutions. While these measures are not foolproof, the general idea is that they pose a large enough hurdle for casual pirates to choose legal options instead.

This strategy has been rolled out in dozens of countries. Backed by governments or court orders, large Internet providers are required to block The Pirate Bay and other 'infringing' domains in the UK, India, Australia, Brazil, Japan and elsewhere.

These blocking orders are typically limited to ISPs, so it's still possible that people are directed to infringing sites through other means. This includes search engines, such as Google, which continue to index these domains.

The blockades prevent people from easily accessing these sites. Nevertheless, some copyright holders suggested removing these domains from search engines as well, which Google repeatedly refused to do. According to the company, this would prove counterproductive and lead to overbroad censorship.

Google Started Removing 'Pirate' Site Domains

Over the past few months, this stance appears to have changed. A few weeks ago we reported that Google had completely removed several Pirate Bay domains from its search results following a request from anti-piracy group BREIN.

In March of 2021, BREIN sent Google a copy of a Dutch court order which compelled local ISPs to block these domains. In response, Google decided to follow suit, even though it wasn't mentioned in the court order.

Google didn't respond to our request for comment but BREIN informed us that it certainly made sense for the search engine to comply. Otherwise, BREIN would probably have demanded a similar measure in court, based on the ISP order.

As far as we know, this was the first time that Google had voluntarily complied with a pirate site blocking order. However, it certainly wouldn't be the last.

This week we stumbled on several other requests which resulted in the removal of Pirate Bay domains. Not just that, several other pirate sites are affected as well. What all these requests have in common is that they refer to an existing ISP blocking order that doesn't directly involve Google.

Domain Removals Spread to Norway, Brazil and France

In Norway, Google has removed the results of several pirate site domains from search results after the Motion Picture Association alerted the company to ISP blocking orders, which were first issued in 2015.

The list of domains includes The Pirate Bay and several mirror sites, as well as ExtraTorrent, and Movie4k domains. These domain names were indeed removed in recent weeks.

The same is true in France where The Pirate Bay, Zone-telechargement, Oxtorrent, Cpasbien, and several other domains were also deindexed. This is again in response to an older ISP blocking order, which was sent to Google by French music industry group SCPP.

france blocking order

In Brazil, several pirate site domains were removed as well. This request came from Brazil's Ministry of Justice and does specifically name Google. In addition to more than 200 pirate site domains, the blocking order also covers dozens of piracy-related apps in the Play Store.

UK and Sweden Also Request Domain Removals

Finding these orders in the Lumen database is not easy so it's possible that there are more. What we know for sure is that new requests continued to come in over the past few weeks.

On January 1st, a Swedish law firm acting on behalf of several Hollywood studios forwarded a local ISP blocking order to Google. This notice covers The Pirate Bay and many of its proxies. However, at the time of writing these are still indexed by the search engine.

The same is true in the UK where the entertainment industry law firm Wiggin sent 15 older ISP blocking orders to Google. This request, which lists 198 domains in total, was also sent last month and the domains haven't been blocked yet.

SOPA Anniversary

In a way, it's fitting that we post this article a few years before the tenth 'anniversary' of the SOPA protests. At the time, millions of people were up in arms because search engines could be forced to remove infringing domain names.

Google was one of the leading opposition forces and "censored" its logo in protest. "Tell Congress. Please don't censor the web," the search giant wrote.

Other heavyweights also chimed in, using the same censorship terminology. This included Vint Cerf, one of the fathers of the Internet.

"Relative to the questionable efficacy of this proposed remedy, requiring search engines to delete a domain name begins a worldwide arms race of unprecedented 'censorship' of the Web," Cerf wrote at the time.

Today, there is little outrage. Our previous coverage of Google's Pirate Bay removals in the Netherlands hardly went noticed. This could in part be because the U.S. is not affected, at least not yet.

Or perhaps times have changed? Google seems to think so…

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: