TorrentFreak's Latest News

Fewer Rightsholders Use YouTube Content ID, But They Flag More ContentErnesto Van der Sar, 09 Nov 12:29 PM Last year, YouTube released its first-eve

Fewer Rightsholders Use YouTube Content ID, But They Flag More Content Ernesto Van der Sar, 09 Nov 12:29 PM Last year, YouTube released its first-ever copyright transparency report. The streaming platform revealed that the vast majority of all claimed infringements were reported through the Content ID system. This pattern remained intact in the first half of 2022. YouTube's latest transparency report reveals that 99 percent of all unique claims were made through the automated system, despite the fact that only a tiny fraction of the rightsholders have access to it. 757 Million Claims Hundreds of thousands of entities sent copyright claims to YouTube over the reporting period. Of these, just 4,773 actively used the Content ID system. This is a small decline compared to last year when 4,893 rightsholders used the automated anti-piracy system. The decline occurred despite more entities having access to the system today. Interestingly, the decline doesn't result in fewer copyright claims; the number of reported Content ID copyright actions increased to nearly 757 million, a five percent bump compared to last year. YouTube Copyright claims (H1 2022) YouTube's Content ID system is mostly automated. More than 99 percent of all claims don't involve any human intervention but the system does allow rightsholders to submit manual claims if the fingerprint filter fails to pick something up. "For videos missed by automated identification, many Content ID partners have the ability to issue claims manually. While this tool covers an important gap, it accounted for fewer than 0.5% of Content ID claims made in the first half of 2022," YouTube explains. Manual Claims are Contested More Interestingly, these manual claims are twice as likely to be disputed by YouTubers. This suggests that 'human' claims are more controversial than those identified by automated filters. The Content ID system isn't without controversy of course. YouTubers regularly complain about content being flagged in error. At the same time, many rightsholders are unhappy because they are not allowed to use the cutting edge tool. YouTube says that it intentionally restricts access to the tool to the top echelon of verified rightsholders. This is partly done to limit abuse, as Content ID can wreak havoc when it ends up in the wrong hands. "This is especially important because claiming can happen automatically, and while one copyright request removal made from the webform impacts only one (or a handful) of videos, just one invalid reference file in Content ID can impact thousands of videos and users, stripping them of monetization or blocking them altogether," YouTube notes. More DMCA Webform Takedowns Aside from Content ID claims, 'normal' rightsholders can use the standard DMCA webforms or the copyright match tool to flag content. This represents only one percent of all flagged content on YouTube. That said, webform usage increased by more than 30 percent year-over-year. Finally, it's worth noting that YouTubers always have the option to contest copyright claims. During the first half of the year, 3,690,786 disputes were filed, which is on par with a year earlier. These disputes can pay off as more than half were resolved in favor of the uploader. The three transparency reports YouTube has released thus far show the massive scope of the Content ID system, which processed more than two billion claims in 18 months. Going forward, it will be interesting to see how the various trends develop. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. Filmmakers Win $4.2m Piracy Damages from Defunct VPN Hosting Company Ernesto Van der Sar, 08 Nov 10:16 PM Copyright holders have tried a wide variety of options to tackle online piracy over the years, including through direct legal action More recently we have seen lawsuits against people who allegedly downloaded and shared pirated content, but operators and developers of pirate services have also been sued. A group of US-based independent movie companies has expanded its legal reach by going after third-party intermediaries. The makers of movies such as "Hellboy," "Hunter Killer," "Rambo V: Last Blood," and "The Hitman's Bodyguard" have taken aim at VPN services and their hosting companies. This legal campaign has already returned several successes. Earlier this year, the filmmakers won $14 million in damages in their case against VPN provider LiquidVPN. Other companies including Torguard, VPN Unlimited and VPN.ht settled their disputes and agreed to block torrent traffic on U.S. servers. Hosting companies haven't been spared either. Sharktech, for example, initially fought back but later agreed to settle and block prominent pirate sites including 'Pirate Bay,' 'YTS', and 'RARBG'. $4.2 Million in Damages Last week, another victory was added to the list. At a federal court in Colorado, United States District Judge R. Brooke Jackson issued a judgment against the defunct hosting company MICFO, awarding $4,200,000 in statutory damages for contributory copyright infringement. The judgment is a clear win for movie company Millennium and its affiliates. For MICFO, which is no longer operational, it only adds to its troubles. In addition to this civil lawsuit, MICFO finds itself at the center of a criminal case. The hosting company and its owner were indicted by a grand jury in Charleston, South Carolina in 2019, and stand accused of a scheme to fraudulently obtain IP addresses from ARIN. These IP-addresses were sold to major companies such as Amazon and Saudi Telecom for millions of dollars. MICFO also used the IP-addresses to serve its own clients, which included VPN companies Hide My Ass, NordVPN and Proton. Ignored Piracy Notices The filmmakers accused the hosting company of turning a blind eye to piracy activities allegedly committed by the subscribers of its VPN clients. In practice, this meant that it didn't forward any of the piracy notifications that were sent. "Defendant failed to take any action against these customers in response to the Notices because it was motivated to receive subscription funds from the customers rather than terminate service," Judge Jackson writes in his order. MICFO was held liable for copyright infringement through a default judgment and after an evidentiary hearing, the court ruled that maximum statutory damages of $150,000 per work is appropriate here. With 28 movies at play, this brings the total to $4,200,000. This damages award is "more than reasonable," Judge Jackson argues, as the movie companies calculated that the actual damage they suffered is much higher. "The Court finds Plaintiffs' request for maximum statutory damages of $4,200,000 more than reasonable in view of Plaintiffs' lost revenue of nearly $7,000,000..," the order reads. Open Ends MICFO is no longer operational. The company and its CEO pleaded guilty in the criminal wire fraud case and will be sentenced soon. Interestingly, that appears to be good news for the filmmakers, as the US Government seized close to $17 million in funds and assets in that case. Part of the seized assets could be used to pay the damages award. And indeed, Judge Jackson's order clarifies that the Plaintiffs may execute judgment immediately to claim restitution from the District Court in South Carolina. The filmmakers are also assigned any third-party contract breach claims the hosting company has against its clients. This includes any claims against the VPN companies it served. MICFO's terms of service required its customers to indemnify the hosting provider in the event of liability claims. This means that the filmmakers can use this as a stick to go after the hosting company's VPN clients. More Legal Action Over the past several years, Millennium Funding and affiliated film companies have established a record of obtaining leverage in court, which can then be used for related matters, both in and outside of court. It wouldn't be a major surprise to see this pattern repeat. The only active VPN case that we're aware of is against VPN provider PIA, which recently defeated the direct infringement claims through a motion to dismiss. The contributory and vicarious copyright infringement claims remain, however. Following the partial dismissal, the filmmakers filed an amended complaint against PIA and the case is still ongoing. — A copy of the money judgment against MICFO, issued by United States District Judge R. Brooke Jackson, is available here (pdf). The associated findings and conclusions can be found 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