Wednesday, April 20, 2022

TorrentFreak's Latest News

tele
 

MPA Signs New Anti-Piracy Deal Committing to "Rolling Site-Blocking Regime"
Andy Maxwell, 20 Apr 10:10 AM

mpaDespite the absence of any similar coordinated scheme in the United States, Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Sony, Universal, and Warner Bros. regularly criticize countries for not implementing measures to block pirate sites.

When they do, however, praise isn't far behind/

In April 2021, the Philippines joined the growing list of countries to implement site-blocking measures, in this case one that needs no oversight from the courts. The voluntary agreement saw the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL), the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) and the country's internet service providers team up to block pirate sites in a swift and streamlined manner.

In the same month, IPOPHL announced the signing of a memorandum of understanding with the Asia Video Industry Association, which aims to increase information sharing alongside the development of piracy monitoring, site-blocking processes, and their implementation.

The MPA welcomed these voluntary moves, highlighting "bureaucratic process" as an enemy in the fight against piracy, a nod towards actually having courts decide whether sites should be blocked or not. This week the MPA and IPOPHL signed a new site-blocking agreement of their own.

Memorandum of Understanding

In an announcement Tuesday, IPOPHL revealed that it has partnered with the MPA, which commits to support IPOPHL "in developing an effective piracy monitoring system and a rolling site-blocking regime that will disrupt accessibility to piracy sites."

"This newest partnership with MPA elevates IPOPHL's whole-of-society efforts in fostering a digital environment that respects intellectual property (IP) rights," IPOPHL Director General Rowel S. Barba said at the signing ceremony.

"Unfortunately, some people would watch illicit content because it is free rather than pay for legitimate ones, failing to see how this can destroy our economy and creativity as a nation in the long run."

According to a recent survey, carried out on behalf of the Coalition Against Piracy, piracy increased in the Philippines during the pandemic. YouGov found that 61% of consumers in the Philippines admit to accessing pirate services versus the 49% of Filipinos that admitted to accessing piracy sites in September 2020. It is hoped that blocking pirate sites will help bring the numbers down.

"A site blocking framework, which incorporates transparency and due process, can be incredibly effective at reducing levels of online piracy in key markets like the Philippines," says Jan van Voorn, the MPA's Executive Vice President of Global Content Protection.

Transparency – Something Lacking in Site Blocking Processes

The statement from the MPA's van Voorn that this framework will be transparent will be tested in time. The memorandum doesn't appear to have been published so its precise contents remain a mystery for now. The announcement states that there will be a "lawful sharing of information" and the MPA has committed to conduct training on piracy takedown measures.

Other than that, transparency appears to be minimal, something that is becoming more evident in blocking practices elsewhere.

In the early days of site blocking in the UK, Europe and beyond, the legal processes that led to sites being blocked were indeed very transparent. Over time, however, there has been a shift towards keeping the details as secret as possible. Outside the content companies and cooperating Internet service providers, an accurate picture of how many domains are blocked is a complete unknown.

Ostensibly this aimed at keeping pirates in the dark to prevent circumvention but even processes that aim to remove hundreds of sites from search engines (something that cannot be circumvented) are conducted in private and in some cases voluntarily, between interested corporations.

As such, there appears to be no legal requirement to open these practices up to scrutiny.

MPA Praises The Philippines, US Govt. Not So Sure

In November 2021 at the MPA's 'Global Site Blocking Legal Conference', the major Hollywood studios and Netflix gave the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines a fancy glass award titled "Site blocking in Asia Pacific – Government Leadership Award."

This suggests that the MPA probably likes what it sees in the Philippines vis-à-vis site-blocking and could press other countries to follow suit in the future. Behind the scenes, however, the MPA criticizes the country for not doing enough.

"Market access barriers for the region's theatrical, television, and streaming industries take several forms, including content quotas, foreign investment limitations, and dubbing and advertising restrictions," the MPA wrote in its submission to the US Government's 2022 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers.

Local screen and content quotas applied to theatrical and/or payTV businesses "limit consumer choice and often contribute to piracy by restricting the licensed supply of content," the MPA wrote, calling on the Philippines to "remove any consideration of a screen quota" in proposed legislative amendments.

The Philippines, along with countries including New Zealand, were also called upon to extend copyright terms from 50 years to 70 years, with the former also being called out for being "a safe haven for some top piracy websites." On top, the Philippines was also criticized for having long been "a primary source of camcord piracy of major motion pictures."

In its final report (pdf), the US Government recognized some improvements in the Philippines but noted that courts are influenced by bribery while "corruption is a pervasive and longstanding problem" in both national and government agencies.

Some of the activities of the National Telecommunications Commission (a key signatory to the earlier site-blocking memorandum) are "inherently non-transparent", the US added, noting that the country overall is declining according to Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index.

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

85 'Pirate' IPTV Apps Reported as Illegal But Most (If Any) Carry No Content
Andy Maxwell, 19 Apr 08:28 PM

IPTVOver the past several weeks, numerous rightsholders have filed submissions to the European Commission hoping that sites and services will be added to the upcoming 'Counterfeit and Piracy Watch List'.

Today, we look at the submission of Spanish football league LaLiga which has been fighting a prolonged battle against pirates for several years. Regular site-blocking, dynamic injunctions targeting IPTV services and criminal investigations are all part of its toolkit.

In a call for action sent to the EC, LaLiga calls out many pirate IPTV services and illegal streaming sites that make live matches available to the public in breach of copyright. Those detailed in the two images below are undoubtedly illegal services. In at least one case, there are breaches of trademark law too.

laliga illegal iptv

laliga illegal streaming

While these are all straightforward cases, LaLiga goes further by attempting to paint software tools as infringing too.

LaLiga Reports 'Empty' IPTV Players to the EC

To access any kind of video content stored either on the internet or a local machine, users need some kind of software to facilitate that. From a basic web browser to dedicated media players such as VLC, many tools will do the job, but when users want to access IPTV streams (Internet Protocol Television), they often turn to tools designed for that specific purpose.

Many tools are available, some free (open source or supported by advertising) and others where a small fee is required. What the vast majority have in common, however, is that they are just video players and mostly come with no content installed 'out of the box'. When they do carry infringing content, rightsholders almost universally call them 'pirate streaming apps', not IPTV players.

Of course, in common with other content-agnostic tools such as VLC, most IPTV players are capable of playing both legal and illegal content. Crucially, that choice is left to the user.

If tools come bundled with an infringing channel playlist (usually in the .m3u/.m3u8 format), that would render them immediately illegal and open up serious liability for their operators. Most developers avoid doing so, but LaLiga believes their software tools are still illegal, even when they carry no infringing TV content.

"The chart below [truncated by TF to include all with more than 500,000 downloads] includes the most relevant player applications, as of the date of this contribution, which amounts to a total of eight-five (85). All of them have the same characteristics and are being monitored by LaLiga. The millions of downloads of all these applications describe the serious threat they pose," LaLiga writes.

laliga iptv players small

"It is important to note that all of these player applications allow the consumption of an innumerable amount of audiovisual contents such as sports, movies, series TV channels, etc. In other words, this problem affects the entire audiovisual and entertainment industry in general," LaLiga adds, carefully choosing its words.

Indeed, if we look at all applications that "allow the consumption of an innumerable amount of audiovisual contents" we could start with Chrome, Firefox and Safari, then add Windows Media Player and VLC. The big question is, does LaLiga present any additional facts to back up its infringement claims?

"Illegal Application" IPTV by Alexander Sofronov

Because it's the most-downloaded IPTV player on LaLiga's list and presumably a good example of an infringing app, LaLiga highlights the 'IPTV' app by developer Alexander Sofronov. It's available here on Google Play but was previously available via another URL.

In support of its case for a crackdown on this 'IPTV' app, LaLiga provides the following screenshot:

iptv player laliga-ss

That was captured when the 'IPTV' app was available at its previously-available Google Play URL (copy here via Wayback Machine). This is notable because, for reasons known only to LaLiga, the football league decided to crop out the most important aspect of the 'IPTV' app – it carries no channels and no playlist, so users have to supply their own. (see the final line on the uncropped version)

iptv app screenshot not cropped

The European Commission will presumably carry out its own independent checks against all of the apps in the LaLiga list and if they do come with any infringing playlists or TV channels, action will be required. However, the top few listed by the football league don't seem to fall into that category.

Other "Illegal Applications"

For example, 'IPTV Extreme' (here, Google Play) specifically notes "Please don't ask me for playlists, I don't have / don't share / don't sell playlists!" and GSE Smart IPTV (here) states: "Please note this app does not contain any playlists except sample playlists. User must provide their own content."

We haven't tested them all but if any 'player' in the list offers infringing content out of the box, a simple DMCA takedown to Google will do the trick meaning that help from the European Commission is not needed. That being said, LaLiga is offering its own demonstrations of why these applications are illegal.

"LaLiga has powerful technological tools developed internally and a team of experts working on a daily basis to detect these illegal applications. Naturally, LaLiga has much more extensive and detailed technical information than that included in this contribution, which could be shown to the Europan Commission if required," the league concludes.

Finally, it's worth pointing out that the way apps are promoted can play a part in determining their legality. If developers promote their tools for infringing purposes, there might be a case to answer, even in the absence of infringing playlists.

For example, in the case of the 'IPTV' app, it is currently marketed with screenshots on Google Play featuring BBC channels. That is probably less problematic since publicly available playlists use the BBC's URLs which can be legally accessed by those with a UK TV license and UK IP address. However, if developers present lists of Hollywood movies or subscription channels, that would be much harder to argue away.

LaLiga's full submission, including all of the "illegal" IPTV players can be found here (pdf)

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: