Monday, September 12, 2022

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

P2P Streaming Tool "Ace Stream" Decries Unjustified Site Blocking and Piracy Allegations
Ernesto Van der Sar, 12 Sep 08:36 AM

aceWith millions of regular users, Ace Stream is one of the most popular streaming applications out there.

The software was first released in 2010 under the name "Torrent Stream". Three years later it rebranded its service to Ace Stream, after which it took off.

The original name reveals that the streaming application relies on a torrent engine built into the widely popular VLC media player. This combination results in a peer-to-peer streaming mechanism that doesn't rely on central servers.

This concept empowers the public to use an open tool to stream content to the masses, without relying on third-party streaming platforms. That's proven to be a great idea that has received widespread support.

In 2013, Ace Stream received financial support from Google to present the technology at Techweek Chicago. Around the same time, it also received a grant from the European Union. This allowed the company, which is incorporated in Ukraine as Innovative Digital Technologies LLC, to improve and optimize its streaming tool.

Third-Party Piracy

Today, millions of people regularly use Ace Stream. This includes a subset of pirates, who utilize the software to rebroadcast copyrighted live streams, including many sports matches.

Rightsholders are obviously not pleased with this activity. However, Ace Stream is a content-neutral piece of software, similar to web browsers, media players, or regular torrent clients.

Where normal torrent clients use .torrent files and magnet links, Ace Stream relies on Ace Stream Content IDs and transport files to find and play streams instead. These are similar to .torrent files and info hashes that normal torrent clients use.

ace stream

The IDs are not hosted, organized, or maintained by Ace Stream. Instead, users of the software generate the links which can then be shared anywhere on the web. This is similar to how .torrent files are distributed.

'We Don't Publish or Host Content'

Speaking with TorrentFreak, Ace Stream's Roman Morozyuk stresses that the company and its software are simply a content-neutral tool.

"Ace Stream is not a content provider or a hosting service. We do not publish and we do not store any video or audio content. This automatically excludes the possibility of us violating video or audio content copyrights," Morozyuk says.

The decentralized nature of the streaming platform also means that implementing filters or blacklists, as rightsholders often insist, isn't a viable option. Ace Stream sees this decentralized nature as its main selling point, but rightsholders disagree.

ISPs Ordered to Block Ace Stream

A few weeks ago these tensions escalated when Ace Stream was added to Spain's piracy blocklist following a complaint from LaLiga. This means that local Internet providers have to block access to the streaming player.

This is a controversial decision, as noted by BandaAncha, because the software doesn't link to or host any copyrighted content. Even worse, Ace Stream says that it wasn't informed about the blocking request, so it couldn't defend itself.

"We did not receive any notification from LaLiga or any of its agents about such blocking of the site, and we learned about it by chance, from our users," Morozyuk says.

LaLiga shouldn't have had any problem contacting Ace Stream and both companies have discussed copyright infringement matters in the past. This was triggered by a complaint the Spanish soccer league filed with Google.

Play Store Removal

The organization previously asked Google to remove the Ace Stream software from the Play Store, which it did. However, Ace Stream appealed arguing that it was falsely accused of copyright infringement.

As it turns out, LaLiga backed up its claims with a screenshot showing how the software was used to stream copyrighted football matches. However, it didn't clarify that LaLiga loaded these streams themselves by using links from illegal sources.

ace android

To Ace Stream, this accusation is akin to asking for the removal of a web browser because it can load an illegal streaming site. Google eventually agreed with the streaming application, which was allowed back into the Play Store, but the trouble didn't end there.

From EU Funding to EU Blacklist?

Earlier this year, Ace Stream was shocked to learn that the Audiovisual Anti Piracy Alliance (AAPA) nominated the software for a spot on the EU's bi-annual Counterfeit and Piracy Watch List.

AAPA's submission put the streaming tool in a bucket with other "main content infringers," including blatantly infringing IPTV services. Needless to say, Ace Stream wasn't happy so attempted to set the record straight.

"We sent our justified claims and demands to immediately stop illegal actions against our company that discredit our legal project and our legal products, and also violate the rights of consumers," Morozyuk notes.

Unfortunately, Ace Stream hasn't heard back from AAPA or the EU yet. If things spiral out of control, the company may eventually take legal steps but, for now, it prefers to resolve the matter through dialogue.

"We did not file lawsuits yet, since we hope to resolve this entire situation by mutual understanding and out of court," Morozyuk tells us.

Talking to Rightsholders

Thus far, direct discussions with copyright holders have been challenging. Ace Stream had repeated contact with LaLiga, for example, and offered its service to the sports league to generate revenue.

LaLiga doesn't seem eager to use Ace Stream, perhaps because it can only make a fraction of the money that centralized streaming platforms offer.

This means that the tensions between Ace Stream and rightsholders will likely continue. According to the streaming app, resisting decentralized technology is futile, so rightsholders should look for ways to take advantage of it.

"We have effective solutions that will allow copyright holders to embrace the new reality, where decentralization is gradually becoming the basis of a normal entire Internet, and not to waste their efforts on a futile fight against fully decentralized P2P networks," Morozyuk says.

More details on this solution will follow in the near future. Meanwhile, Ace Stream hopes that that the blocking problem and the other piracy allegations will be addressed.

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

Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – 09/12/2022
Ernesto Van der Sar, 12 Sep 12:30 AM

thor loveThe data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only.

These torrent download statistics are only meant to provide further insight into the piracy trends. All data are gathered from public resources.

This week we have four newcomers on the list. "Thor: Love and Thunder" is the most downloaded title.

The most torrented movies for the week ending on September 12 are:

Movie Rank Rank last week Movie name IMDb Rating / Trailer
Most downloaded movies via torrent sites
1 (…) Thor: Love and Thunder 6.5 / trailer
2 (1) Top Gun: Maverick 8.6 / trailer
3 (…) Where the Crawdads Sing 7.1 / trailer
4 (…) Beast 5.7 / trailer
5 (…) Pinocchio 5.2 / trailer
6 (2) Nope 7.1 / trailer
7 (5) Jurassic World Dominion 6.0 / trailer
8 (3) Fall 6.3 / trailer
9 (7) Minions: The Rise of Gru 6.7 / trailer
10 (6) Prey 7.3 / trailer

Note: We also publish an updating archive of all the list of weekly most torrented movies lists.

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

Kiwi Farms: The Slippery Slope of Curating the Web
Ernesto Van der Sar, 11 Sep 07:44 PM

kiwiTen years ago millions of people from all over the world spoke out against a U.S. bill that would've allowed courts to take problematic domain names offline.

When that SOPA law failed to pass, many internet users celebrated a victory for free speech.

A decade later, Internet curation is still a hot topic. However, many people who rallied against SOPA are now calling for companies, individuals, and websites to be 'canceled' online. Apparently, viewpoints have changed quite a bit.

There is no denying that the web is full of despicable content that deserves to be taken offline. But by whom and on what basis are unanswered questions.

Cloudflare & Kiwi Farms

Last week, Cloudflare took a stand. The company said that in order to shield itself from escalating removal demands, including plain censorship, it would no longer terminate customers without a court order. This was already the company's policy, a policy it had deviated from twice by kicking out Daily Stormer and 8Chan.

Cloudflare's comments were triggered by increasing calls to terminate the account of the controversial Kiwi Farms site, which does indeed contain terrible content. Ironically, Cloudflare's firm stance was defeated just days later, when it terminated the troublesome forum, citing death threats as the reason.

cf blocked

Other companies decided to take action as well. DDoS-Guard, for example, swiftly followed Cloudflare's example after Kiwi Farms attempted to move there. In addition, Google appears to have intervened as it no longer shows Kiwi Farm's domains in the top search results. Even the Internet Archive has purged its archives of the controversial site.

Mission accomplished!?

Pirate Bay is OK

The people who called on Cloudflare to boot out Kiwi Farms will be pleased. Without any court intervention, they got their desired result. This is something some of the largest Hollywood companies and record labels failed to do with The Pirate Bay; a site that still uses Cloudflare to this day, despite its founders receiving criminal convictions in Sweden.

Kiwi Farms had plenty of deeply disturbing content but this is not an isolated incident. Cloudflare will receive more calls to kick out sites and this recent episode will be cited in court as well, where the company will have a harder time maintaining a content agnostic stance.

Domain Registrars, Registries & ISPs

The challenges won't stop at Cloudflare either. As noted earlier, Google appears to have demoted the domain already, although that's not officially confirmed. But what about Bing and DuckDuckGo? What is their role? Should they voluntarily take action against problematic sites?

We haven't even mentioned the elephants in the room, including domain registrars and domain registries. If these companies decide to suspend a domain name, Cloudflare and search engines are irrelevant. Perhaps these are even better targets to take sites down based on their own evaluations?

Alternatively, Internet providers could be held accountable as well. They help to pass on many despicable sites, services, and opinions. Profiting from hate and crimes? Surely, they can be motivated to intervene to block both domain names and IP addresses without a court order?

Slippery Slope?

Interestingly, copyright holders have made these suggestions for many years already, often without results. But the tide appears to be changing in their favor now, and this isn't a boat they're going to miss.

Voluntary curation of the web isn't new and can often be very useful. Many services already use it to stop malware, for example. Whether it's a good idea to expand this further depends on how slippery the slope gets. Like many other things, that's a matter of perspective.

What this perspective should be isn't clear for everyone. Apparently it's quite a sensitive issue. TorrentFreak reached out to some activist groups that were leading the opposition against SOPA. However, these either haven't responded or prefer not to comment at this time.

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: