TorrentFreak's Latest News

Russia's Site-Blocking System Isn't Performing & Could Even CollapseAndy Maxwell, 31 Mar 10:33 AM Russia's invasion of Ukraine has been going on for

Russia's Site-Blocking System Isn't Performing & Could Even Collapse Andy Maxwell, 31 Mar 10:33 AM Russia's invasion of Ukraine has been going on for more than a month. It isn't going to plan. In parallel with the terrible images being shared around the world, Russia is using its infamous site-blocking systems to deny access to websites that dare to challenge the Kremlin's narrative of Putin's 'Special Operation'. Telecoms regulator Roscomnadzor is working harder than ever to maintain its blockades against everything from Google News, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, to the thousands of pirate sites and other resources on the country's blacklists. But, like the invasion itself, things aren't going to plan here either. Urgent Checks Carried Out On Ability to Block A little over a week ago, local telecoms operators supplying internet access to Russian citizens were ordered to carry out "urgent checks" on their ability to continue blocking sites deemed illegal by the state. ISPs were required to carry out an audit and liaise with telecoms regulator Roscomnadzor. Today is the reporting deadline but according to several sources, problems are apparent in the system. With accurate and critical reporting being all but strangled by the state, it is not absolutely clear who or what ordered the review but the consensus is that prescribed blocking standards aren't being met. As previously reported, local torrent site RuTracker suddenly found itself unblocked earlier this month, reportedly due to issues at an ISP. Problems are also reported with the Roscomnadzor-controlled 'TSPU' Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) system embedded into the networks of around 80 local ISPs and recently used to restrict Tor, VPNs and Twitter traffic. Since there is almost no detailed public information on how the TSPU system works, it's almost impossible to say what the issues are or what caused them. That being said, reports suggest that TPSU is not working on all ISPs and on others it is not configured properly. However, if today's issues are a concern for the Kremlin, in a few months the problem is likely to get a whole lot worse. Russia's Internet Sector is Under Threat As sanctions start to bite, Russia is coming under increasing pressure. This includes a lack of telecommunications equipment due to a shortage of components, something that will directly affect not just the effectiveness of Russia's blocking systems, but the entire telecoms sector. According to a Kommersant report citing a review by Russia's RSPP Commission for Communications and IT, the dire economic conditions have led to an assessment that ISPs and other telecoms companies only have enough hardware reserves to ensure operability of infrastructure for four to six months. Add in a 40% rise in purchase prices for equipment and predictions that up to 30% of technical experts could leave the country in the next few months, it's not hard to see the crisis ahead. For Russian authorities, however, the desire to block seems greater than ever, as evidenced by an instruction this week to block a section of Wikipedia. The order, dated March 28 (pdf), demands the blocking of information related to the 'Russian invasion of Ukraine' which appears to accurately describe just that. According to the Kremlin, however, it contains "false reports" of acts of terrorism and false information "distributed under the guise of reliable messages." The page poses a "threat or harm to life" and could lead to a "mass violation of public order", the notice adds. Citizens of Russia can file an appeal (here and here) to have a resource unblocked but it seems unlikely much attention will be paid to these in the current environment. If Russia's blocking system does break down, copyright holders will no doubt be disappointed. But for most of the rest of the world and growing sections of Russian society, it can't come soon enough. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. LiquidVPN Ordered to Pay Filmmakers $14m in Copyright Damages Ernesto Van der Sar, 30 Mar 10:22 PM A few years ago piracy-related lawsuits were pretty straightforward. Copyright holders would either sue alleged file-sharers or the operators of pirate sites. More recently, we have seen a new breed of lawsuits filed on behalf of the makers of movies such as "Angel Has Fallen", "Dallas Buyer's Club", "Hellboy" and "Rambo V: Last Blood". These lawsuits target VPN providers, which are generally seen as third-party intermediaries. This includes LiquidVPN. The company was taken to court in March last year, shortly after the former owner was sued in a separate lawsuit. The new owner, Puerto Rico company 1701 Management, is allegedly linked to U.S. resident Mr. Muszynski, who continued operating the service. While running a VPN doesn't equal copyright infringement, the movie companies accused the service of encouraging and facilitating piracy. 'Popcorn-Time VPN' The complaint mentioned a variety of examples where the defendants directly or indirectly referenced copyright-infringing activity. This includes a screenshot of Popcorn Time which shows the Millennium film Survivor. The movie companies argue that, through various public statements, LiquidVPN 'encouraged' users to use its service to pirate movies. "The LiquidVPN Defendants describe their VPN service as a tool to 'Watch Popcorn Time without being detected by your ISP and P2P tracking software' and promote it as a tool that can be used to pirate copyright protected content 'without the risk of getting caught by your ISP or anyone else'," they wrote. Despite the serious allegations, 1701 Management and its alleged owner failed to respond in court. As such, the film companies requested a default judgment. This request was initially denied, as other defendants in the case had yet to resolve their disputes, but last week the filmmakers got the green light. In the request for a default judgment, the rightsholders asked for nearly $10 million in copyright infringement damages, for a total of 66 films. They also sought millions in damages for DMCA violations, as well as damages for trademark infringement. Court Issues Default Judgment This week, Florida federal Judge Beth Bloom granted most of the demands. Without LiquidVPN putting up a defense, the court relied on the accusations of the filmmakers, which were properly plead and accepted as true. "LiquidVPN Defendants intentionally induced and encouraged direct infringement of users of Popcorn Time," Judge Bloom writes, adding that the VPN provider is liable for direct, contributory and vicarious copyright infringement. The court stresses that the defendants don't qualify for safe harbor protection, as they didn't have a known repeat infringer policy or a registered DMCA agent. "LiquidVPN Defendants have no safe harbor from liability because they fail to implement a policy for terminating repeat infringers and have not registered a DMCA agent with the Copyright office," Judge Bloom adds. Millions in Damages The list of infringed films is 66 titles long and includes "After We Collided", "Angel Has Fallen", "Dallas Buyer's Club", "Hellboy", "Hunter Killer", "Rambo V: Last Blood", "Survivor", "The Hitman's Bodyguard", and "Wild Horses". For all these films, the LiquidVPN defendants have to pay the maximum statutory damages for copyright infringement, set at $150,000 per work. That adds up to a total of $9.9 million. In addition, they have to pay $4.9 million for altering copyright management information, which violates the DMCA. The court also granted the request for a permanent injunction that requires LiquidVPN to block the piracy websites included in USTR's annual overview. Those include The Pirate Bay, RARBG, and YTS. In addition, it must implement a repeat infringer policy. Whether LiquidVPN will comply with these requests is unknown. The homepage has been offline for a few months now, but the user panel where people can place new orders still appears to be operational. Popcorn Time Trademark In addition to the copyright-related damages, Judge Bloom also awarded $250,000 in trademark infringement damages to the Hawaiian company 42 Ventures. This company is owned by anti-piracy attorney Kerry Culpepper, who previously registered the "Popcorn Time" trademark. Two years ago, Culpepper used this trademark to suspend the Twitter account of a popular Popcorn Time fork. In the present case, LiquidVPN was successfully accused of using the trademark without authorization. "LiquidVPN Defendants have intentionally used Plaintiff 42's Mark Popcorn Time in U.S. commerce without authorization or license by using the name 'Popcorn Time VPN' to promote their VPN service to use the piracy application Popcorn Time," Judge Bloom writes. As far as we know, this is the first default judgment against a VPN provider. Other companies including VPN Unlimited and VPN.ht have been sued as well, but these settled their disputes out of court. — A copy of U.S. District Court Beth Bloom's final default judgment and permanent injunction is available here (pdf) From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. ©2022 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

TorrentFreak's Latest News

TV Boss Threatens Mastercard & Visa Over Support For Pirate SitesAndy Maxwell, 30 Mar 12:36 PM While all kinds of measures are promoted as the best

TV Boss Threatens Mastercard & Visa Over Support For Pirate Sites Andy Maxwell, 30 Mar 12:36 PM While all kinds of measures are promoted as the best way to deal with pirate streaming sites and unlicensed IPTV services, one of the best long-term strategies is to offer legal content on a convenient platform at a fair price. Like all fights against piracy, failing in any area can lead to issues. Persistent price increases, platform exclusives, and the need to subscribe to multiple platforms to get an acceptable content library can put customers off, meaning that pirate sites again find the oxygen they need to survive. Last August, producer and film investor Moshe Edery co-founded Screen iL, an international TV streaming platform aimed at Israelis living abroad. "Leave the pirates and come to the Zionists," Edery said, noting that everything available on Israeli TV networks would be available on his new platform. "By using our Screen iL, you ensure that the Israelis who create this content will be compensated, not some pirate company." Of course, not everyone was convinced. Screen iL costs $219.99 for an annual subscription whereas its pirate competitors are often free. Some offer an enhanced experience in return for a donation while others in the pirate IPTV space have subscription rates far lower than Screen iL. This is clearly a problem for Edery who, as part of a broader legal strategy, is putting payment processors on notice. Mastercard, Visa and American Express Put On Notice In a joint statement published in The Jerusalem Post, Screen iL plus content companies United King Films, Reshet, Keshet, RGE and Noga Communications, puts Mastercard, Visa, American Express, and Isracard on notice. Do something about your support for pirate sites, they warn, or expect us to come after you. "The credit card companies cannot hide behind the claim of not knowing, not hearing or not realizing that the pirate websites are involved in criminal copyright violation and money laundering activities," the statement reads. "It is a public activity, conducted openly throughout the Internet and subject of many public legal proceedings in Israel and abroad, as well as multiple items in the media, clarifying that it comprises a criminal and illegal activity." Allegations that Mastercard and Visa support pirate services are certainly nothing new. In Europe, rightsholders indicate that more must be done to prevent pirate sites from using payment processors to generate revenue but, thus far, direct legal threats have been few and far between. Screen iL's Targets Include a Major Player According to Screen iL and its partners, the pirate services of most concern are Israel-tv.com, Israel.tv and Sdarot.tv. They say that the Motion Picture Association reported these sites to London police, presumably the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU). In addition, the platforms were also reported to the FBI and the Department of Justice over copyright violations and money laundering. What the statement doesn't reveal is that all three of these platforms are also subject to civil litigation in the United States. In November 2021, Screen iL and partners sued Israel-tv.com (pdf), Israel.tv (pdf), and Sdarot.tv, demanding statutory copyright damages of $150,000 for every infringed work. Two Successes, One Big Failure In common with many similar lawsuits against pirate sites, none of the defendants have shown up to defend their cases. However, Israel-tv.com and Israel.tv (perhaps in response to the lawsuits) appear to have shut themselves down. Neither service is accessible from the domains listed in the complaints, something which cannot be said of the third site in Screen iL's list. Sdarot.tv is Israel's most popular pirate streaming site. Over the last three months its traffic has ranged between 5.8 million and 6.9 million visits per month. The US lawsuit appears to have had little effect on its operations, something that actions in Israel also failed to achieve. The lawsuits filed in the US by Screen iL and partners note that complaints in Israel resulted in court orders that prevent the sites being hosted by ISPs in Israel. Of course, that is easily circumvented, as demonstrated by Sdarot's ability to service millions of basic users (and subscribers) every month. That probably explains why Edery is now warning Mastercard, Visa, American Express, and Isracard that they will be targeted next, if they fail to prevent Sdarot from doing business with them. Whether that shot across the bows will have any effect remains to be seen but many rightsholders will be watching to see if the companies react. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. Canada's Supreme Court Denies TekSavvy's Site Blocking Appeal Ernesto Van der Sar, 29 Mar 09:23 PM In 2018, Canada's Federal Court approved the country's first pirate site-blocking order. Following a complaint from major media companies Rogers, Bell and TVA, the Court ordered several major ISPs to block access to the domains and IP-addresses of pirate IPTV service GoldTV. Site Blocking Appeals There was little opposition from Internet providers, except for TekSavvy, which quickly announced an appeal. According to the ISP, the blocking injunction threatens the open Internet, just to advance the interests of a few powerful media conglomerates. Canada's Federal Court of Appeal disagreed and last year it concluded that the blocking order can stay in place. According to the Court, site-blocking injunctions are an available option under the Copyright Act and they don't violate freedom of speech or net neutrality. This came as a disappointment to TekSavvy, which decided to take the matter to the Supreme Court. Last fall, the ISP petitioned Canada's highest court to hear the case, hoping to protect the neutral role of Internet providers. Among other things, the Supreme Court was asked to review whether the Federal Court can issue site-blocking orders in these types of copyright infringement cases. And if blocking measures are indeed permitted, how should freedom of expression be taken into account. Supreme Court Denies Request A few days ago, Canada's Supreme Court denied TekSavvy's leave to appeal. This effectively means that the Court refuses to take on the case. As a result, the battle over the legitimacy of Canadian pirate site blocking orders ends here. The Supreme Court didn't explain its decision but it clearly saw no reason to take a closer look at the matter. This news is welcomed by Rogers, Bell and TVA, who were represented by law fiem Smart & Biggar. "This decision confirms once and for all that site-blocking Orders are available in Canada, and is another major victory for Canadian copyright holders in the fight against online piracy," Smart & Biggar writes. Andy Kaplan-Myrth, TekSavvy's vice-president of regulatory affairs, is disappointed with the outcome. He hoped that his company and public interest groups would be given the chance to voice their concerns. However, with the denial, the blocking order stands. 'Breaks the Open Internet' Although TekSavvy complies with the court's order, it still isn't convinced that these blocking efforts are an effective anti-piracy measure. "Site blocking like this breaks the open Internet, and does little to actually block these services. GoldTV just moved around to new addresses, forcing Bell to clumsily try to keep up. Meanwhile, netizens use alternative DNS services, VPNs, or other ISPs that aren't blocked," Kaplan-Myrth says. Copyright holders disagree. The original GoldTV blocking order has been extended and is still active today. In addition, Bell and Rogers have recently applied for a dynamic IP-address blocking order to take action against pirated NHL streams. The rightsholders believe that these flexible blocking orders are needed to fight back against pirate services, many of which actively try to evade anti-piracy actions. More Blockades Coming? TekSavvy sees this new request as a dangerous development. And whether it is granted or not, the Supreme Court denial means that more blocking requests are likely on the horizon. "Now armed with GoldTV-style orders, whether they get dynamic blocking or not, what's to stop Canada's media giants from having courts force ever more ISPs to block ever more copyrighted content? Nothing; expect it to happen," Kaplan-Myrth says. Although TekSavvy has no other options to appeal in court, it will continue to engage with government and lawmakers to address the problem and protect the open Internet to the best of its abilities. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. ©2022 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

TorrentFreak's Latest News

Russian 'Loop Hero' Dev Approves Piracy After Sanctions Hobble SteamAndy Maxwell, 29 Mar 10:11 AM When Vladimir Putin's tanks and an estimated 200,0

Russian 'Loop Hero' Dev Approves Piracy After Sanctions Hobble Steam Andy Maxwell, 29 Mar 10:11 AM When Vladimir Putin's tanks and an estimated 200,000 troops began to roll across the border on February 24, 2022, his military expected swift subjugation of Ukraine. Four weeks later amid massive loss of human life and widespread destruction, things are not going to plan for Russia, militarily or economically. An unprecedented sanctions package aimed at deterring Putin has plunged Russia's economy into crisis and in common with Russia's bombs hitting innocent civilians in Ukraine, sanctions are also affecting those opposed to the war back home. Gamers and Gaming Part of the Fallout In early March, reports from Russia indicated that sanctions targeted at the financial sector were having an immediate effect on both game developers and gamers alike. Steam developers in the country distributing games through Steam discovered that they would not be receiving sales income from the platform due to their use of state-owned banks. Opportunities exist for developers to switch to unsanctioned alternatives but the situation is fluid and offers no guarantees. The situation for gamers isn't great either. Visa and Mastercard previously announced that locally-issued cards would no longer work outside Russia. This is a problem for Russian gamers who rely on these cards to buy games from Steam. With all parts of the gaming chain facing disruption, a developer in Russia has come up with its own solution to get its product into the hands of gamers. Four Quarters – Developers Against The War Russia-based software developer Four Quarters is the talent behind Loop Hero, an endless RPG that quickly racked up 500,000 in sales before going on to even greater success. According to SteamSpy, as many as two million people bought the game following its release in 2021 but those wishing to buy it in Russia via Steam face serious problems. With emotions relating to the conflict riding high online, it's worth pointing out that Four Quarters is firmly against the war. Since February 24 the company has made its opposition clear but that hasn't made any difference to its ability to sell the game in Russia via Steam or gamers' ability to buy it. So, in a move that removes all financial transactions, banks, cards and official distribution channels from the equation, Four Quarters is now encouraging gamers to install a BitTorrent client and pirate Loop Hero instead. Better Hop On To RuTracker As Russia's most popular torrent site, RuTracker has its own set of problems with Russian authorities. Nevertheless, it is likely to become increasingly popular with Russian users as options to buy content become more limited. That includes those who would like to play Loop Hero too. In an announcement on Russian social network VK, Four Quarters urges everyone to "help raise the pirate flag" by downloading Loop Hero for free, no strings attached. The announcement carries a link to the relevant page on RuTracker where the free giveaway is welcomed by some, but not necessarily by all. Demonstrating the divisions caused by war, comments on the game giveaway range from respect and thanks to allegations that the developer has somehow betrayed Russia. It's just a small sign of the problems Ukraine and the entire world faces as it emerges from this disinformation and propaganda-fueled tragedy. Finally, after "escaping" from Russia to nearby Georgia earlier this month, one of the developers at Four Quarters is now able to speak freely. The box is empty, he says, but might not stay that way for long. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. Court Denies Cox's Challenge of $1 Billion Music Piracy Verdict Ernesto Van der Sar, 28 Mar 10:09 PM Internet provider Cox Communications has been on the sharp end of several piracy lawsuits in recent years. The biggest hit came three years ago when the Internet provider lost its legal battle against a group of major record labels. $1 Billion Verdict 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 to the labels. This landmark ruling is currently under appeal. In addition, Cox challenged the verdict through another route as well. In January, Cox filed a motion for relief from judgment at the Virginia federal court. The Internet provider argued that key evidence was concealed during the trial, which could have led to a totally different outcome. The evidence in question pertains to the copyright infringement notices central to the case. Cox was held liable for failing to take action against pirating subscribers, despite receiving numerous notices that were based on evidence from the piracy tracking outfit MarkMonitor. During the trial, the music companies presented a hard drive that contained copies of 'verified' music files that were allegedly pirated by Cox subscribers, suggesting that those were the original songs that were pirated between 2012 and 2014. Recreated Evidence? However, based on new information that surfaced in a lawsuit against fellow ISP Charter, Cox now believes that this hard drive evidence was recreated at a later date. This information wasn't disclosed at trial and Cox accused the music companies of misrepresenting key evidence. "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," Cox argued in January. "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," the ISP added. These are strong allegations and the fact that they were lodged in a billion-dollar piracy lawsuit only adds to the weight. However, after reviewing the arguments from both sides, the court sees no reason to open the case back up. Hashes are Hashes U.S. District Court Judge Liam O'Grady acknowledges that some evidence was not disclosed by MarkMonitor at the time. However, the court believes that the 'recreated' evidence doesn't change anything materially. According to the court, it doesn't matter whether the infringing files were verified before or after the fact. The verification process is based on file hashes, which don't change over time. "That these files may have been downloaded and verified in 2016 — after the Claims Period — is of no consequence," Judge O'Grady writes. "Indeed, the dates of the file downloads do not matter in the context of this case because, as fully explained at trial, files with matching hash values are identical regardless of when downloaded." Cox Already had Its Chance The court also notes that Cox had received MarkMonitor's statement of work before trial, which contained the 2016 metadata. So the ISP could have looked into the matter at the time if it had wanted to. In hindsight, Cox may have done things differently. However, the court sees no reason to steer this matter toward a retrial and concludes that Cox already had its chance. "[T]he Court does not doubt that Defendants received a full and fair trial here. The jury had ample and relevant evidence by which to render their verdict," Judge O'Grady notes, denying Cox's request. While Cox's attempt to get a do-over failed, its protest against the $1 billion damages verdict continues at the appeal court. — A copy of U.S. District Court Judge Liam O'Grady's order on the motion for relief from judgment is available here (pdf) From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. ©2022 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