Sunday, October 16, 2022

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Pirate Sites That Rip-Off Other Pirate Sites' Branding Are About to Regret It
Andy Maxwell, 15 Oct 10:17 PM

123moviesMirTen years ago the High Court in London ordered all major ISPs in the country to block The Pirate Bay. The injunction couldn't stop the site from operating but indirectly left its mark in more insidious ways.

To demonstrate the futility of blocking, hundreds of Pirate Bay-themed proxy and mirror sites swarmed online, ready to stick to the man. Most looked and functioned like The Pirate Bay itself and by undermining the injunction, quickly became go-to platforms in the UK. Within the file-sharing community it was seen as a glorious yet functional display of the 'hydra effect'. But more was to come.

Chopping All Heads Off At Once

Over the next decade more than 20,000 sites and 75,000 domains would find themselves blocked in 39 countries, a total that now includes mirrors and proxies that facilitate access to previously blocked sites. Thousands are covered by dynamic injunctions, meaning that if previously banned sites use new domains to circumvent blocking, those will be blocked more quickly than the originals, no court process needed.

Meanwhile, however, another type of irritant has been gaining ground.

Rise of The Big Fat Phony

In a mainstream piracy scene where blocking has normalized the use of sites that simply resemble the original, imposter sites with big-name branding easily gain traction. Since the sites they impersonate are blocked by ISPs and delisted from Google, pirate site forgeries (not to mention malware sites) often dominate the top results.

The case of long-dead streaming site 123movies provides a good example. The MPA obtained an injunction to block the site in October 2016 after 123movies.to became the most-used pirate site in the UK. A month later it was confirmed that half a dozen additional 123movies domains had also been blocked.

In March 2018, the MPA described 123movies as the world's most popular pirate site. Two days later, 123movies.to shut itself down following a criminal investigation.

123movies shutdown notice

After pulling in tens of millions of visitors each month thanks to competing domains being shut down, in May 2021 the operator of yet another 123movies site, operating from 123movies.la, was identified by Hollywood and also forced to shut down.

As a result, many other unaffected 123movie-branded sites stepped in to reap the benefits.

And There's More

Continuing the fight that never ends, over the next few months MPA injunctions hit more and more pirate sites featuring 123movies branding, such as 123movies-one.com, 123moviess.online, 123movies-one.com, 123-movies.gy, 123-movies.as, 123-movies.gs, 123movies.ms, 123-movies.sx, 0123movies.cam, and 123moviesready.org.

At this point it's not difficult to imagine frustration setting in at the MPA. While domains are sometimes covered by existing injunctions, others demand more work and more court appearances. Although it wasn't apparent back then, blocking orders obtained late last year marked a significant turning point in the war against these imposter sites.

More Blocking Injunctions Turn The Tide

Orders obtained by the MPA last October and December targeted domains including 123movies.online, 123moviesfun.ch, and 0123movies.net, 1-2-3movies.com, 123movies.vu, and watch123movies.ch.

But, of course, this wouldn't solve the problem either. At least not immediately.

The application hasn't been made public but the MPA returned to the High Court this summer with two sets of new domains and requested blocking in connection with an earlier order. As far as we can establish they included 123chill to, 123series.ru, d123movies.to and w-123movies.com.

The first set was handled without a hearing but the second set was described by the High Court as "something of an extension of the relief" that had been granted earlier.

A hearing took place and here's what happened.

Clone and Imposter Sites Neutralized Injunctions

Referencing two injunctions targeting 123movies domains and handed down by Justice Falk and Justice Johnson late last year, Justice Meade stated the following:

"The problem is that when an order in the form granted by Falk J or indeed by Adam Johnson J (as he did in December 2021 and which I will touch on again shortly), the reaction of people willing to infringe this kind of copyright is to start up a website with a different but very similar domain name," the Judge wrote.

According to a confidential witness statement provided by an MPA lawyer, when 123movie domains were blocked following the December order, "traffic diminished, as one would expect." But then a new problem emerged.

"[O]ther websites with very similar names picked up the slack and either increased the previous traffic or started from zero and moved to significant traffic, with the effect that although the specifically-targeted websites were throttled back to a significant degree, overall traffic through websites with 123 Movies in their name was not restricted very much if at all," the Judge added.

Highlighting the difficulties in identifying the operators of imposter sites and establishing direct connections to sites already blocked by injunctions, the Judge found that the issue of ownership was irrelevant.

"It does not really matter: the problem clearly exists and is of real impact. To my mind this illustrates not only that the commercial problem facing the applicants is not addressed, but that the court's order, while effective, is much less effective than it might otherwise be."

Clone and Imposter Sites Punished For Copying

The MPA proposed a very simple solution. If new domains appear with similar 123movies branding and exist to infringe its members' rights in the same manner as those already blocked, they should be blocked in the same manner, regardless of ownership or connections to the previous targets.

After consideration, Judge Meade found the proposal "necessary, effective, dissuasive" and not unduly costly or complicated. Websites carrying out "infringing activities overwhelmingly" using a "colorably similar name" to an existing blocked website, will also be blocked by all major ISPs in the UK.

After the order has handed down, the MPA blocked additional 123-branded domains including 123movieshub.cfd, 123movieshd.icu, 123movies2022.org, 123moviesprime.com, 123movies.tools, 123moviesfree.quest, 123moviesfree.rest and 123moviesfree.mom.

Then in a single wave implemented yesterday, the implications of the MPA's new powers really hit home. More than one hundred 123-branded domains were blocked by UK internet service providers.

123movies blocked in 1 day

Of course, this standard will almost certainly be applied to other 'pirate brands' at some point and as far as we can see, GoMovies domains may already be in the mix.

Finally, it's worth pointing out that Australia is also testing a similar format, but it's unlikely to stop there and will probably spread pretty quickly.

Whether this new blocking freedom will end the flood of generic streaming platforms remains to be seen but, if nothing else, copying other sites' names to get search engine clicks may soon be a thing of the past.

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

Filmmakers' Repeat Infringer Lawsuit Against ISP RCN Can Move Forward
Ernesto Van der Sar, 15 Oct 04:30 PM

hitmeUnder US copyright law, Internet providers must terminate the accounts of repeat infringers "in appropriate circumstances."

Many ISPs have been reluctant to take such drastic measures, which triggered a wave of copyright infringement lawsuits in recent years.

Internet provider RCN is among the targeted providers. Last year, the company was sued by several film companies, including the makers of The Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard, London Has Fallen, and Hellboy.

The movie companies alleged that RCN wasn't doing enough to stop subscribers from pirating on its network. Instead of terminating the accounts of persistent pirates, the Internet provider looked away, they argued.

The stakes in these liability lawsuits are high. Internet providers face damages claims reaching hundreds of millions of dollars, while tens of thousands of Internet subscribers are at risk of having their accounts terminated.

RCN Wants Case Dismissed

RCN chose to fiercely defend itself. The company isn't new to these types of legal battles. In 2016, the company got involved by filing a proactive lawsuit against music rights group BMG that was eventually settled. In addition, it's also involved in another piracy liability lawsuit filed by several other music companies.

The filmmakers are a new opponent, however, and they also present some new claims. In addition to alleging that the ISP is liable for its customers' copyright infringements, alleged violations of the DMCA and a site-blocking request were added to the mix.

RCN asked the court to dismiss all of these claims last year. The ISP characterized the movie companies as being "part of a well-known web of copyright trolls" and argued that their claims fall short.

However, in an opinion handed down earlier this week, New Jersey federal court Judge Georgette Castner largely sides with the filmmakers.

Copyright Infringement Claims

Judge Castner concludes that the movie companies sufficiently pled that RCN is liable for contributory copyright infringement. This requires evidence that the ISP was aware of the infringing activity and that it contributed to it.

These two factors were both fulfilled as the plaintiffs sent 5,400 piracy notices to the ISP. In addition, the ISP contributed to these infringements by allowing these subscribers to continue their piracy habits.

Claims of vicarious copyright infringement also survive the motion to dismiss. According to the Judge, the filmmakers have provided enough information to show that RCN can 'control' the infringing activity and profits from it as well.

RCN argued that it charges a flat fee, so it shouldn't matter whether subscribers pirate or not. However, the court agreed with the filmmakers that allowing people to pirate can act as a draw, which may bring in more subscribers.

Site Blocking Injunction

Quite unusually, the filmmakers also requested a site-blocking injunction as a cause of action. This would require the ISP to block foreign pirate sites including 1337x, The Pirate Bay, RARBG, and YTS.

RCN objected to this demand, arguing that this type of injunction is a remedy and not a separate cause of action. The court agreed and the count was dismissed.

"The Court agrees with Defendants that Plaintiffs' Count Three should be dismissed as Plaintiffs' application for an injunction is a request for a remedy and is not a separate cause of action," Judge Castner writes.

The denial doesn't automatically mean that a blocking injunction is out of the question. The filmmakers can still request one as a remedy related to the copyright infringement claims.

DMCA Violations

Finally, Judge Castner denies the request to dismiss the DMCA violation claims. These relate to allegations that the ISP can be held liable for subscribers' alterations of copyright management information (CMI) in movies.

CMI includes the titles and other identifying information of a film. The pirating subscribers distributed files with altered CMI information, where piracy-linked terms like "YTS" and "RARBG" were added in.

These terms are presumably added to the pirated movies by the uploaders to signal the quality of the releases. That, in turn, would draw more traffic to their sites.

CMI-related DMCA violations haven't been common in piracy lawsuits until recently. However, the court finds that the filmmakers' allegations are sufficient to continue. That includes its claims of secondary liability for DMCA violations.

Moving Forward

All-in-all, the order is mostly good news for the filmmakers, who can continue to pursue their claims. These have yet to be proven in court or at trial, so it's too early to draw final conclusions.

A copy of US District Judge Castner's opinion is available here (pdf) and the associated order 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: