TorrentFreak's Latest News

Major Labels Obtain Stream-Ripping Site Blocking Order in IndiaAndy Maxwell, 20 Jan 12:48 PM In a September 2022 blog post, YouTube's Global Head of

Major Labels Obtain Stream-Ripping Site Blocking Order in India Andy Maxwell, 20 Jan 12:48 PM In a September 2022 blog post, YouTube's Global Head of Music revealed that in the 12 months between July 2021 and June 2022, YouTube paid over $6 billion to the music industry. Trade groups, including IFPI and the RIAA, believe the return should be even greater. So-called 'stream-ripping' services typically use YouTube as a source while allowing users to keep copies of copyright tracks on their devices. According to IFPI's Engaging With Music Report 2022 (pdf), an estimated 27% of Indian music consumers obtain music this way. India's Music Piracy Problem An IFPI announcement published yesterday focuses on India's piracy problem. The industry group says that while Indian consumers have access to more licensed digital services than ever before, three-quarters of internet users use unlicensed or illegal ways to listen to music in the country. That statement deserves nuance. While around three-quarters of internet users do obtain content illegally, 88% of Indian music consumers use licensed streaming services too. That's an impressive level of penetration overall, but IFPI would much prefer it if users consumed all of their content legally. For that to happen, India's stream-ripping habit needs to be addressed. Sony, Universal and Warner Take Legal Action IFPI's announcement followed the publication of a ruling handed down by the High Court in Delhi on January 12, 2023. The case, Sony Music Entertainment India Private Limited & Ors. vs. YT1S.COM, YT1S.PRO, YT1S.DE & ORS., aims to reduce stream-ripping piracy by compelling India's internet service providers to block popular stream-ripping platforms. "The ruling, which was published by the Delhi High Court today, requires ISPs in India to block access to 20 stream ripping sites, disrupting one of the most prominent forms of music piracy in the country," IFPI's announcement reads. The ruling made available by the High Court mentions three domains specifically. Yt1s.com enjoys around 18 to 20 million monthly visits, while the apparently connected yt1s.de reaches around two million. Yt1s.pro is a distant runner-up with less than 20,000 visits per month. No further domains appear in the ruling itself, but the court mentions 18 defendants "on the basis of their domain IDs." High Court Informed About Stream-Ripping Justice C Hari Shankar's ruling begins by noting that the plaintiffs are copyright holders, meaning that any entity that transmits, broadcasts, or reproduces their recordings without permission, violates India's Copyright Act. "[The stream-ripping sites] provide services whereby copyrighted content on various platforms, primarily YouTube, could be downloaded in MP3 or MP4 format by copying the YouTube link in the space provided in the website. This phenomenon, [Counsel for the plaintiffs] submits, is known as 'stream ripping'," the Judge notes. The labels informed the court that since the stream-rippers mask their WHOIS details, it would be impossible to pursue them in separate proceedings. That's important for rightsholders seeking a dynamic injunction, which the labels are in this case. Are Stream-Ripping Services 'Rogue Sites'? The Judge says that the plaintiffs describe the stream-ripping platforms as "rogue sites." When defendants are labeled as such, that puts plaintiffs in a strong position, but does it apply in this case? The term 'rogue site' was defined during a blocking case involving torrent site 1337x.to. Very broadly, if the primary purpose of a site is to infringe, the owner fails to respond to takedown notices and has a general disregard for copyright, that's usually considered a rogue site. Hiding WHOIS details also supports a 'rogue site' finding. In this case, the labels are seeking a permanent injunction against the 18 stream-ripping platforms (or any other "mirror/redirect/alphanumeric websites or any other iteration thereof") to restrain them from "hosting, reproducing or otherwise making available to the public or facilitating the downloading of the content in which the plaintiffs own copyright." Justice Shankar states that based on the facts before him, the plaintiffs make out a prima facie case, one that justifies an interlocutory injunction to prevent further infringement. This includes instructions for ISPs to block the domains in question, plus any new domains that may appear as a "mirror/redirect/alphanumeric avatar of the websites which already stand injuncted." The interim order can be found here (pdf). The next hearing is listed for Feb 22, 2023 From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. French ISPs and Sports Organizations Sign Anti-Piracy Agreement Ernesto Van der Sar, 19 Jan 08:42 PM At the start of last year, a French bill went into effect that sanctioned the formation of a new regulatory body. The old HADOPI anti-piracy outfit merged with the Higher Audiovisual Council, creating the Audiovisual and Digital Communication Regulatory Authority (Arcom). Sports Piracy Crackdown Along with this organizational change, Arcom received new anti-piracy powers. It can order online services to rapidly take down unlicensed streams of live sporting events, for example. Eager to put the new law to work, sports organizations quickly began reporting infringing sites. These referrals were investigated by Arcom, which forwarded hundreds of blocking requests to Internet providers over subsequent months. Arcom has published several updates to highlight the effectiveness of these measures. After six months, it reported that sports-related piracy was already cut in half. New Anti-Piracy Agreement This week, another major step was taken in the battle against piracy. Arcom announced that the four major Internet providers in France (Orange, Bouygues Télécom and SFR) have signed an agreement with the Association for the Protection of Sports Programs (APPS) to further streamline the process. Details of the agreement are not being shared in public, but Arcom says the goal is to strengthen and facilitate anti-piracy measures to protect sporting events. In addition, the parties also reached an agreement on how the costs of blocking should be covered. The French Telecoms Federation (FFTélécoms) welcomes the deal, which took more than a year to negotiate. Under the new terms, the roles and obligations of the parties are more clear. "We are delighted to have reached an agreement. It will allow Internet access providers to benefit from a contractual and technical framework that facilitates the implementation of these blockades and ensures that rightsholders are even better protected against illegal piracy," says FFTélécoms president Liza Bellulo. The Federation also taps other online intermediaries, including search engines and hosting providers, arguing that they should also play a greater role in the battle against piracy. "We now call for new agreements to be concluded by new players such as hosting providers and search engines in order to implement this 'safety net' throughout the digital ecosystem," Bellulo notes. IPTV? Rightsholders are also pleased with the outcome, the sports protection association says. The deal will make anti-piracy efforts more efficient and able to adapt to modern forms of piracy that are less reliant on websites. "This agreement will make it possible to accelerate and consolidate the fight against sports piracy, while leaving open the possibility of adapting it to the new forms of illegal access, notably IPTV services," says APPS President Maxime Saada. "Collectively, we will be able to better target illegal services that attack the pillar of sports financing, which are audiovisual rights." How IPTV services will be targeted is unknown, but it's possible that instead of focusing on domain names, ISPs will block streaming server IP-addresses too. This is already common practice in other countries, such as the UK and Canada. 1,299 Domain Names Arcom, meanwhile, takes the opportunity to highlight the successes of the past year. Through 85 referrals from sports companies and additional court rulings, a total of 1,299 domain names were blocked. As mentioned earlier, half a year ago the anti-piracy agency already claimed that 50% of all sports piracy had evaporated. We haven't seen any similar updates since, but at this rate, there won't be any pirates left by the end of the year. Plenty of challenges remain though. Arcom says that some people circumvent ISP blockades using VPNs or by changing their DNS servers. Those issues will be harder to root out. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. Pirate Bay Proxy Site Challenges Police DMCA Takedown at GitHub Ernesto Van der Sar, 19 Jan 01:22 PM As one of the most notorious torrent sites, The Pirate Bay has been blocked by ISPs around the world. The UK was one of the first countries to do so more than a decade ago when the High Court ordered local ISPs to prevent users from accessing the site. These ISP blockades have ignited a cat-and-mouse game, with pirates actively looking for alternative routes to access the site. A popular option is 'proxy' sites, which allow access to The Pirate Bay through alternative URLs. 'The Proxy Bay' is a site that helps people to find these alternatives. The site doesn't act as a proxy service directly but does provide an overview of available options elsewhere on the web. The legality of the service is up for debate but in the UK, thepirateproxybay.com and similar sites have been added to court-sanctioned blocklists. Police Alert GitHub Backed by this knowledge, City of London Police's Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU) reached out to GitHub a few days ago. On behalf of music group BPI, PIPCU sent a takedown request to the Microsoft-owned company, alerting it to the alleged criminal activity taking place on its domain. As it turns out, one of the Proxy Bay sites used a GitHub subdomain at proxybay.github.com. According to the DMCA notice, this meant that GitHub could potentially be aiding criminal activity. "This site is in breach of UK law, namely Copyright, Design & Patents Act 1988, Offences under the Fraud Act 2006 and Conspiracy to Defraud," PIPCU wrote. In response to the DMCA notice, GitHub swiftly disabled the domain, which now returns a 404 error instead. In most cases, that would effectively end the matter, but the Proxy Bay operator isn't giving up just yet. Proxy Bay Files Counternotice A few hours ago, the operator of the site sent a DMCA counternotice to GitHub, arguing that PIPCU's takedown request is wrong because there isn't any copyright infringing content hosted on the site. "The person claiming DMCA doesn't understand, that there is no content hosted on proxybay.github.com hence why it is wrong to send a DMCA request for it," the site owner notes. "This is why companies like [private] and other reputable Domains Registrators like [private] ignore those fake DMCA claims submitted by bots which are just automatic submissions triggered by keywords." The counternotice doesn't refer to the police directly but uses the term 'mister DMCA robot' instead. The notice asks for further clarification on the claimed infringements and notes that the operator is happy to remove content if needed. "There are no content/media of any kind hosted on proxybay.github.com, if there is – again ask mister DMCA robot to provide with exact links of media files which were infringed and I will be glad to remove them from repository." Reinstated? The counternotice puts the ball back into PIPCU's court. The police or the rightsholders they represent now have two weeks to file a lawsuit against The Proxy Bay operator. If that doesn't happen, the DMCA prescribes that GitHub should restore the domain. In the past, we have seen that counternotice can indeed be effective. Three years ago, Popcorn Time challenged a DMCA takedown request from the Motion Picture Association. And indeed, two weeks later, GitHub restored the repository. Whatever the outcome, the counternotice clearly shows that The Proxy Bay isn't giving up without a fight. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. ©2023 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