Friday, September 2, 2022

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Movie Pirate Sentenced in Criminal Case Designed to Send Warning
Andy Maxwell, 02 Sep 08:08 AM

warningThe decision whether to pirate content or pay for it is ultimately a personal choice influenced by any number of factors.

From content availability to the ability to pay, from wanting content now or being forced to wait, the scales can easily tip one way or the other.

By emphasizing the benefits of legal consumption and elevating public perception of risk, anti-piracy groups try to tip the scales in favor of rightsholders. Showing real-life consequences of piracy is one of the available options.

Deterrence For All

Torrent sites offering Danish content were popular in Denmark for obvious reasons, at least until anti-piracy group Rights Alliance teamed up with police to shut them down.

When key DanishBits players were arrested, convicted and later sent to prison, anyone inclined to launch a new site had a crystal clear example of the potential risks. As a deterrent to regular BitTorrent users, it wasn't the right message.

The pursuit of high-level players would've simply reinforced the belief that only those at the top face any risk. But Rights Alliance hadn't forgotten regular torrent site users and was preparing to send them a hand-crafted message.

Regular BitTorrent User Sentenced

A former user of DanishBits appeared in court Thursday having pleaded guilty to sharing around 40 movies on DanishBits. As previously reported, he had no formal connections with the site other than membership, and wasn't part of any specific uploader group. He was a normal user, much like any other.

Rights Alliance needed a conviction that would resonate with the general public so after hiring a specialist company to gather tracking evidence, a case was built against the DanishBits user. Instead of being handed to a lawfirm for civil action, the case was accepted by the police for criminal prosecution.

Yesterday the Court of Frederiksberg handed down a 30-day conditional prison sentence and ordered the man to pay DKK 2,840 (US$380) in damages, the exact amount requested by Rights Alliance on behalf of its rightsholder partners. The Court also ordered the confiscation of two computers and external hard drives.

Compared to the wild damages awards available to U.S. courts in civil cases, $380 may seem insignificant. But what it represents is a real amount attached to a very real criminal conviction, one that Rights Alliance (RA) believes can offer significant support to credible anti-piracy messaging.

RA: Conviction Marks a Turning Point

Considering the importance of the prosecution, TorrentFreak asked Rights Alliance CEO Maria Fredenslund if the conditional prison sentence would send the right kind of message. Was it too harsh, or perhaps not harsh enough?

"That was what the prosecution was going for, and we certainly think that a prison sentence has a deterrent effect," Fredenslund says.

"Not least because the compensation claim is also taken into account, and our experience with the' environment' shows that it also means a lot for the preventive effect."

Rights Alliance obviously wants knowledge of the conviction to be a dominant factor when choices are being made over whether to pirate content or pay for it. Maria Fredenslund believes that the combination of police intervention and adjudication of compensation claims in criminal cases could help tip the scales in favor of legal content.

But just as importantly, Rights Alliance CEO believes that the case represents a turning point in the fight against piracy – the involvement of the police.

"Finally, we have come to the point where the theft of films, series and other content is also a task that the police take care of. It is a necessity and therefore also a milestone in the work to ensure good conditions in the digital area," Fredenslund concludes.

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

Cloudflare Rejects Role as Internet or Piracy Police
Ernesto Van der Sar, 01 Sep 09:52 PM

cloudflare logoIn 2017, Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince decided to terminate the account of the controversial neo-Nazi site Daily Stormer.

"I woke up this morning in a bad mood and decided to kick them off the Internet," he wrote at the time.

The company's lawyers later explained that the move was meant as an "intellectual exercise" to start a conversation regarding censorship and free speech on the internet. However, external parties took this discussion in a different direction than the one Prince had planned.

For years, Cloudflare had a policy not to remove any accounts without a court order, so when it kicked out Daily Stormer and later 8Chan as well, eyebrows were raised. For example, copyright holders wondered why the company could terminate these accounts but not those of the most notorious pirate sites.

Cloudflare's seemingly arbitrary termination choices were repeatedly cited in policy discussions and copyright litigation. In addition, it triggered an ongoing wave of termination requests.

Over the past few days, Cloudflare found itself in the midst of a 'cancel' discussion again, with people calling on the company to disconnect the harassment-linked forum Kiwi Farms. This prompted Matthew Prince to clarify the company's stance on offensive, abhorrent, and copyright-infringing content.

No More Voluntary Terminations

The company makes a clear distinction between the various services it offers. When Cloudflare is the primary hosting platform it leaves plenty of room for voluntary terminations. For its CDN, security, and core Internet infrastructure services, voluntary actions will no longer happen.

This strict line in the sand is the result of discussions with policymakers worldwide. Cloudflare sees itself as an Internet utility that should remain as neutral as possible, even when its customers do despicable things.

"Just as the telephone company doesn't terminate your line if you say awful, racist, bigoted things, we have concluded in consultation with politicians, policy makers, and experts that turning off security services because we think what you publish is despicable is the wrong policy.

"To be clear, just because we did it in a limited set of cases before doesn't mean we were right when we did. Or that we will ever do it again," Prince adds, referring to the earlier terminations.

Wave of Requests

While many people applauded Cloudflare for booting out The Daily Stormer and 8Chan, these decisions were actively used against the company. Not just by copyright holders, but also by authoritarian regimes.

"In a deeply troubling response, after both terminations we saw a dramatic increase in authoritarian regimes attempting to have us terminate security services for human rights organizations — often citing the language from our own justification back to us."

As we suggested back in 2017, Cloudflare essentially handed out free ammunition to adversaries, who could use the voluntary terminations as an argument to request more restrictions. That includes kicking out pirate sites.

Cloudflare is clearly uncomfortable with this position. The company stresses that voluntary terminations will no longer happen for sites that use its CDN or security services. Instead, those demanding action will need to get a court order.

Slippery Termiation Slope

In recent years various courts have already ordered Cloudflare to block pirate sites. The company has complied with these orders. However, it vows to fight cases where core infrastructure is at play with tooth and nail. This includes a recent order in Italy, that required the company to block pirate sites on its public DNS resolver 1.1.1.1.

"Unfortunately, these cases are becoming more common where largely copyright holders are attempting to get a ruling in one jurisdiction and have it apply worldwide to terminate core Internet technology services and effectively wipe content offline," Prince writes.

These global injunctions would set a dangerous precedent, Cloudflare's CEO says, as it would allow the most restrictive regimes to control what content should be available online. Preventing bad precedents is the prime reason why Cloudflare believes it is important not to intervene voluntarily in the future.

"Holding this line we believe is fundamental for the healthy operation of the global Internet. But each showing of discretion across our security or core Internet technology services weakens our argument in these important cases."

In other words, Prince doesn't want another Daily Stormer or 8Chan that can come back to haunt the company in the future. This means that The Pirate Bay and other pirate customers have little to worry about, at least for the time being.

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

No comments: