Tuesday, February 28, 2023

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Pirate Couple Got Caught Uploading, Promised to Abstain, Got Caught Again
Andy Maxwell, 27 Feb 09:07 PM

lego-sadDutch anti-piracy group BREIN has built quite a reputation over the years. For many Netherlands-based file-sharers, BREIN was considered a mortal online enemy.

Passions don't run anywhere near as high today, but not because BREIN took its foot off the gas. Anyone involved in the Dutch piracy scene still risks running into BREIN, and while that isn't exactly ideal, it isn't necessarily the end of the world either.

BREIN usually has a handful of key goals. Most importantly, any infringement of its clients' rights must come to an immediate end. After that, BREIN seeks compensation to cover its costs and, depending on circumstances, a reasonable financial penalty.

The final component is a signature on a legal agreement that outlines what will happen if piracy somehow restarts. Agreement terms vary, but settling with BREIN and then breaching the agreement has a tendency to multiply any financial components.

Pirate Couple Caught Uploading

Although it probably wouldn't shy away from the opportunity, BREIN tends not to chase down casual pirates. The group is more interested in making a difference where it really counts, i.e removing pirate sites and their uploaders from the ecosystem. In a case dating back to 2018, BREIN focused on a torrent site and eliminated both.

According to BREIN, the site was small but persistent, offering movies, TV shows, ebooks and games for download. BREIN identified three people involved in the site, including the site's administrators, a middle-aged married couple.

Since all three were out of work, BREIN adjusted its settlement offer accordingly. The couple agreed to pay 2,500 euros but also signed an agreement that detailed the consequences should they return to their old ways.

Pirate Couple Caught Uploading Again

BREIN references a married couple in an announcement published today. The man and woman signed an abstention agreement back in 2018, just like the couple mentioned above. While the anti-piracy group rarely identifies infringers by name, uploading cases involving married couples are rare, particularly given the timeframe.

BREIN reports that during an investigation into various sites illegally offering movies, TV shows, music, ebooks and games, information came to light that various aliases responsible for thousands of illegal uploads belonged to a couple with whom BREIN had previously settled. As a result, BREIN determined that the terms of their settlement agreement had been breached.

Financial Consequences

"Despite their promise in the 2018 abstention statement, they had secretly continued their illegal uploads, hiding with the help of those involved in the illegal websites," BREIN explains.

"It has now been agreed with them that they will pay 16,200 euros and, in the event of non-payment, will immediately owe 55,000 euros."

Using the 2,500 euro settlement figure cited by BREIN in 2018, 16,200 euros represents a six-fold increase for a second offense and breach of the original settlement terms. With the amount for non-payment more than three times the amount now owed, any additional infringement will result in significant additional penalties.

According to BREIN, any future infringement carries a penalty of 5,000 euros per day or the same amount per infringement. Since this type of penalty is instantly enforceable, a visit from a bailiff could happen sooner rather than later.

Unintended Personal Consequences

BREIN notes that the married couple at the center of the case are no longer a pair. Marriages can collapse for any number of reasons and usually more than just one, but the suggestion is that being found in breach of the agreement didn't help at all.

That information might sound overly personal, but it's highly relevant to the case.

BREIN doesn't go into additional detail, but since the man and woman signed an agreement together and are confirmed as jointly and severally liable, even when separated they must pay the full amount jointly, or face liability for the full amount individually. That's obviously not ideal under the circumstances.

That raises the speculative question of whether one or both breached the original agreement to abstain from illegal uploading. Even if only one breached the agreement, both are still liable. It's not hard to imagine a scenario like that being even more controversial.

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

Monday, February 27, 2023

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Sony vs. Datel: Game Cheat Copyright Questions Referred to EU's Top Court
Andy Maxwell, 27 Feb 11:38 AM

pspBack in the 1980s, all computer nerds were familiar with Datel. The company produced peripherals for the 8-bit computers of the day, including RAM packs, keyboards, joystick interfaces, even sound samplers.

Datel's venture into the new world of videogame cheat devices was more controversial. The company's Action Replay range battled against Codemasters' Game Genie, with the latter eventually backing out of the market. Datel went on to release products for mainstream consoles, facing legal action on the way.

One of those lawsuits saw Sony Computer and Entertainment sue Datel in Germany over cheat software produced for the Playstation Portable (PSP) console. The PSP was discontinued in 2014, but after more than a decade, Sony's lawsuit is still alive and inching toward a conclusion – one way or another.

Sony Sends in the Lawyers

When Sony released the PSP in 2004, the race to run 'homebrew' software on the PSP also began. The inevitable game of cat-and-mouse saw Sony continuously updating PSP firmware, hoping to shut down exploits that allowed 'backups' and 'homebrew' to be played on PSP.

In parallel, Datel saw opportunities to 'enhance' the PSP with software that changed how games were supposed to be played. Gaming giant sony responded with a copyright infringement lawsuit targeting two companies and a director connected to the Datel products.

Hamburg Regional and Higher Courts Disagree

Datel's software – Action Replay PSP and Tilt FX – enabled gamers to cheat in Sony games. An example in the lawsuit describes how restrictions on "turbo" availability in racing game Motorstorm Arctic Edge were bypassed. Datel's product achieved this by manipulating code stored in the PSP console's main memory.

In January 2012, the Hamburg Regional Court found largely in Sony's favor. The Court found that Datel's software intervened in the 'program flow' of Sony's games and by changing the flow, the original code was modified to create a revision or derivative of Sony's copyrighted work.

The Court ruled that it made no difference whether the modification occurred in the game software itself or in the data stored by the game in the PSP's main memory. Even though the modification of data in memory was temporary, the Court said this still amounted to a revision under § 69c Nr.2 UrhG.

"The translation, adaptation, arrangement and other adaptation of a computer program" require permission from the copyright holder, the relevant section reads.

Datel filed an appeal and in 2021, the Higher Regional Court overturned the district court's judgment and dismissed the action.

The Court found that the changes apparent in the gameplay were the result of "parallel commands on the variables stored in the main memory."

The defendant's software intervened by changing the effect of data stored in the game console's main memory, but did not change commands in the game software itself.

Federal Court of Justice Appeal

Unhappy with the decision, Sony filed an appeal at the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH), Germany's highest court.

On February 23, 2023, the BGH said it had stayed proceedings in the appeal and referred key questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling.

bgh questions cjeu datel

The questions are as follows: (translated from German)

1. Is the scope of protection of a computer program according to Art. 1 Para. 1 to 3 of Directive 2009/24/EC (pdf) encroached upon if neither the object nor source code of a computer program or a copy is modified, but something else running at the same time as the protected computer program changes the content of variables that the protected computer program has created in the main memory and uses in the course of the program?

2. Does a revision exist within the meaning of Art. 4 (1)(b) of Directive 2009/24/EC if neither the object or source code of a computer program or a copy is modified, but something else running at the same time as the protected computer program modifies the content of variables that the protected computer program has created in the main memory and uses in the course of the program?

When the CJEU will publish its decision is unknown, but it's unlikely to be anytime soon.

Details of earlier hearings and decisions here (1,2) and the referral here (3)

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

Amazon Removes Books From Kindle Unlimited After They Appear on Pirate Sites
Ernesto Van der Sar, 27 Feb 08:15 AM

kindle piratedWhen Amazon launched the first Kindle fifteen years ago, book piracy was already a common problem.

When publishers clashed with The Pirate Bay over illegally shared copies, we envisioned that things could get much worse if Kindle-ready pirate sites began to pop up.

Rempant Book Piracy

Fast forward to today and book piracy is easier and more widespread than ever. It has reached a point where the highest echelons of U.S. law enforcement stepped in to tackle this issue, with the crackdown on Z-library. Thus far, this hasn't achieved the desired result.

The frustrations of publishers and authors is understandable. Many see their books being openly shared for free, just hours after they hits the stores. This isn't limited to bestsellers either, it affects independent authors too.

In the midst of this drama, Amazon is making things worse. Generally speaking, the company is a blessing to many smaller authors because of its accessible self-publishing options and promotional features. This includes KDP Select, through which books are made available on Kindle Unlimited.

kdp select

As part of the KDP Select agreement, authors promise to make digital versions of their books exclusive to Amazon. This makes sense, as it comes with various perks. However, this rule doesn't only apply to competing stores, pirate sites are included as well.

Amazon Punishes Authors for Piracy?

Over the past few weeks, several authors complained that Amazon had removed their books from Kindle Unlimited because they violated their agreement. The piracy angle is front and center, raising plenty of questions and uncertainty.

Raven Kennedy, known for The Plated Prisoner Series, took her frustration to Instagram earlier this month. The author accused Amazon of sending repeated "threats". This eventually resulted in the removal of her books from Kindle Unlimited, ostensibly because these were listed on pirate sites.

"Copyright infringement is outside of my control. Even though I pay a lot of money to a company to file takedown notices on my behalf, and am constantly checking the web for pirated versions, I can't keep up with all the intellectual theft.

"And rather than support and help their authors, Amazon threatens me. The ironic thing is, these pirates are getting the files FROM Amazon," Kennedy added.

A similar experience was shared by Carissa Broadbent, author of The War of Lost Hearts Trilogy. Again, Amazon removed a book from Kindle Unlimited for an issue that the author can't do much about.

"A few hours ago, I got a stomach-dropping email from [Amazon] that Children of Fallen Gods had been removed from the Kindle store with zero warning, because of content 'freely available on the web' — IE, piracy that I do not have any control over," Broadbent noted.

Petition

These and other authors received broad support from their readers, and sympathy from the general public. A Change.org petition launched in response has collected nearly 35,000 signatures to date, with new ones still coming in.

Author Marlow Locker started the petition to send a wake-up call to Amazon. According to her, Amazon should stand behind its authors instead of punishing them for the fact that complete strangers have decided to pirate their books.

petition

Most authors will gladly comply with the exclusivity requirements, but only as far as this lies within their control. Piracy clearly isn't, especially when it happens on an almost industrial scale.

"Currently, many automated systems use Amazon as a place to copy the e-files that they use for their free websites. It's completely absurd that the same company turns around and punishes an author by removing their book from KDP Select," the petition reads.

From the commentary seen online, several authors have been able to resolve their issues with Amazon. And indeed, the books of Broadbent and Kennedy appear to be back online. That said, the exclusivity policy remains in place.

Amazon Takes Note

Amazon is aware of the complaints and informs TorrentFreak that it's working with the people involved to find an appropriate solution. The company stresses that, if books are removed from Kindle Unlimited, they remain for sale on Amazon's regular store.

The company further explains that, before taking action, it sends authors an advance warning with an extended timeline so they can try to resolve the issue.

"We welcome author feedback and work directly with authors to address any issues or errors affecting their accounts," an Amazon spokesperson said.

The problem is, of course, that individual authors can't stop piracy. If it was that easy, most authors would be happy to do so. However, if billion-dollar publishing companies and the U.S. Government can't stop it, Amazon can't expect independent authors to 'resolve' the matter either.

It would make more sense for Amazon to update its KDP Select policy to exclude pirate sites from the exclusivity rule. With book piracy being as rampant as it is, no title can ever guarantee to be piracy-free, ever.

Perhaps it's also a good idea to use all the vocal and social media-savvy authors as an asset to educate the broader public on piracy. That will do more than having them stress over book removals and pointless DMCA takedown campaigns.

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

Saturday, February 25, 2023

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Media Sowed Piracy Panic For Years, Their VPN Ads Now Panic Hollywood
Andy Maxwell, 25 Feb 12:31 PM

RipperDuring international holidays, news in a tight niche like ours can completely dry up, so when an exciting headline suddenly appears after 14 hours at a desk, things aren't so bad after all.

Sadly, 'exciting' headlines that began appearing around 2017 didn't help.

Dramatic news articles in UK tabloids often plagiarized articles published by TorrentFreak. But worse than that, many featured massive exaggerations that insulted even basic common sense, with irrelevant bits of information tacked on for SEO purposes.

Over time the trend went in a different direction. When Kodi addons became the new piracy bogeyman, the tabloids gorged on the drama. Headlines containing phrases such as FREE STREAMING WARNING and NEW KODI THREAT appeared alongside JAILED and POLICE in almost unlimited quantities, regardless of what actually happened.

When the tabloids started spreading complete nonsense about a change in UK law, people with influence could've helped put that right. We certainly tried, but it only made things worse.

After giving Android streaming apps the same treatment, recent claims in the media that 'illegal streaming detector cars' have been deployed on the streets of Britain are depressing. They also highlight a continuing theme.

Every instance of outrageous 'reporting' sends a message of danger to the general public, warning that something terrible will happen if they aren't careful. Curiously, misinformation never leans in a direction that isn't beneficial to the entertainment industries. At least until now.

Piracy: A Problem Shared

The Industry Trust For IP is part of the British Association for Screen Entertainment. Sony, Universal, Disney, and Warner are listed as member companies, but its scope is much broader than that.

industrytrustmembers

In a new Industry Trust For IP report, the UK's piracy problems are outlined once again. In broad terms, the report contains familiar talking points but with a fresh approach. 'Taking a Whole Society Approach to Infringement in the UK' suggests that if everyone makes a contribution, a big problem becomes much more manageable.

"We have created this infringement overview to shed light on the ways in which we can make sizeable change to the current state of infringement through understanding, collaboration and actions," it reads.

"It suggests a fully supportive policy framework, more consistent use of technological measures and a more responsible media environment, all underpinned by proven education and enforcement that can match the growing scale of the threat and will encourage audiences to value and support creative endeavors."

Having waited six or so years for people with real influence to do something meaningful to prevent industry and legal matters being deliberately distorted in the press, the media reference came as a breath of fresh air. Unfortunately, a different problem is considered much more of a priority than factual reporting.

Irresponsible Articles

Listed as one of five "Key Problems" facing the UK and presented in the report under the heading Media Misinformation, the explanation reads as follows:

A growing number of mainstream news articles and film blogs are offering consumers suggestions for how they can seek out content that they may not have permission to view.

Creating clickbait "where can I watch X?" headlines, advocating internet search for unauthorized access, and advising on how to circumnavigate permissions with VPNs all serve to devalue the importance of copyright more broadly and may introduce a gateway to other forms of piracy, according to research.

While the language dances around the topic, it's fairly obvious what the report is driving at. Since no regular consumer has permission to view or obtain content from a pirate source, the phrase "may not have permission to view" seems to introduce a variable known as 'licensing'.

The next paragraph seems to reinforce that with the phrase, "advising on how to circumnavigate permissions with VPNs." Nobody can 'circumnavigate permissions' to view pirated content, so this is about articles that promote the use of VPNs to access legal streaming services from unlicensed locations.

The report doesn't call out publications by name but does explain how to find them. A search for 'where can I watch' and 'VPN' (no film titled needed) returned this mainstream article. There's no suggestion this particular article is considered offensive by the authors of the report, but it fits the criteria based on search parameters and content.

express-vpn-ad

The whole article makes for interesting reading and, of course, members of the public will reasonably argue that since they have paid for Netflix in the UK, what's the big deal? We'll leave that question open, at least for today.

A more interesting example can be found in the section that reads, "The best streaming VPN can unlock thousands of new episodes of hit TV shows, live Premier League fixtures, and blockbuster movies unavailable to stream in your country."

Articles with a similar theme can be found on The Mirror (1,2), The Sun (1) and many, many others. They're certainly not uncommon and even appear in pro-Hollywood publications.

The Hollywood Reporter (1,2) does highlight some legal caveats but according to the Industry Trust report, even this could "serve to devalue the importance of copyright" and "introduce a gateway to other forms of piracy" – at least according to research.

So what should the media do?

"Media could ensure that reporting about ways to watch respects the value of IP and always directs audiences to legal routes," the recommendation begins.

"Journalists and bloggers could take greater accountability for how they promote access to creative content, ensuring that advice on ways to watch respects the value of copyright and promotes legal routes. They should be mindful that endorsing internet search and VPN use for unauthorized access could create gateways to other forms of piracy."

These suggestions are completely reasonable but let's turn this around. When describing how easy and straightforward piracy has become in the UK, the report uses this statement: Convenience and ease of access fuels engagement.

If that philosophy was applied to legal content instead, there would be no need for anyone to circumvent anything.

It's a "whole society approach to infringement" and a solution, all in one.

The full report is available from The Industry Trust

Image credit

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

Mojang Targets Repositories of Browser-Based Minecraft Copy 'Eaglercraft'
Ernesto Van der Sar, 24 Feb 11:58 PM

eaglercraftMinecraft is, without doubt, one of the most iconic and recognizable videogames of recent times.

The game was originally created by Markus "Notch" Persson, who also founded Mojang Studios, which continues to develop the software today.

In the years following its first release in 2011, Minecraft captured a truly massive audience. With more than 238 million copies sold, it's also the best-selling video game in history, a reign that looks set to continue.

Minecraft's success inspired a subset of players to get creative by tinkering with the original game. Homebrew Minecraft mods and hacks that spice up the action are in plentiful supply.

Mojang is totally fine with this, as long as people don't charge money or distribute modded copies of the game. Mods can't use substantial content or code from the original game either, so when the rules get broken, Mojang reserves the right to step in and take action.

Eaglercraft Crackdown

This week, the Microsoft-owned game studio did exactly that. Mojang sent a DMCA takedown notice to its sister company GitHub, targeting 92 copyright-infringing repositories. All repositories are reportedly linked to copies of Eaglercraft.

Eaglercraft is a Minecraft variant playable in a web browser. This can come in handy for people who want to bypass blocking measures, which are common on some networks, schools included. Another main perk is that this Minecraft variant is totally free.

After seeing enough, Mojang urged GitHub to take the repositories offline, citing trademark and copyright infringements.

"The Repo and corresponding websites are a remake (decompile) of Minecraft 1.3. Their repo states this and the website running their code clearly shows a 100% reuse of our code and assets," the game studio writes.

"This user has presumably decompiled and reverse engineered portions of our code to find how to reuse/repost. Their code goes against our EULA and Terms of Use by modifying and reposting source code and the game."

minecraft github takedown

The takedown request was successful and the repositories were swiftly removed from the developer platform. Instead, visitors will now see a notice pointing them to the DMCA takedown request.

github dmca

This isn't the first time that Mojang has gone after browser-based copies of Minecraft, and Eaglercraft isn't a new target either. Over the past several months, Mojang has been working hard to take these free copies offline.

Eaglercraft Developer Gets Creative

Eaglercraft developer "lax1dude" took down the code from his own website after running into trouble with Mojang. However, he didn't stop tinkering; on the contrary.

Lax1dude's GitHub account currently lists an "EaglercraftX 1.8" repository that provides tools and instructions on how to decompile Minecraft 1.8.

Mojang may disapprove of this repo, but Lax1dude believes the game company can't take it offline. The repository doesn't include any copyrighted code or other infringing content.

"Attention Mojang/Microsoft employee assigned to stalk me: this repository does not contain your intellectual property. Filing a false DMCA is illegal and immoral," the developer writes in all caps.

Whether Mojang agrees is yet to be seen. Simply using Minecraft images and the trademark can already cause trouble, depending on the context, so this dispute might not be completely over just yet.

At the time of publication, Lax1dude's EaglercraftX 1.8 repository is still online.

mojang no stalking

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

Japan's Systematic Assault on Manga & Anime Piracy Broadens & Intensifies
Andy Maxwell, 24 Feb 01:13 PM

stop-piracy-smlAfter thriving in what was once a localized traditional market, Japanese comics known as 'manga' took the world by storm. Publishers and authors could only watch as their work fueled a huge but unlicensed black market.

By offering free localization and distribution services in what was once a chronically underserved overseas market, hobbyist translators and pirate sites made manga more accessible in every way. The problem for manga creators and publishers today is that pirates offer their copyrighted content for free in the same global market.

A new breed of highly-commercialized pirate entities, many of which seem to love money more than manga, only add to what is already a complex problem. And when Japanese rightsholders seek to mitigate infringement in overseas legal processes, new challenges appear around every corner.

Publishers Seek Help From U.S.

In August 2022, Japanese manga publisher Shueisha filed an ex parte application at a California district court seeking information for use in a foreign proceeding – a lawsuit in Vietnam or Japan targeting pirate site operators.

Hoping to identify the operators of pirate manga sites including gokumanga.com and doki1001.com, Shueisha sought permission from a court to obtain information from U.S. companies including Cloudflare, PayPal, Visa, Mastercard, and Google.

Even at this early stage, some of the pirate sites had moved to new domains. At least one site had been targeted in a DMCA subpoena obtained a year earlier and may have switched domains around that time too.

New Request For Information

On February 10, 2023, Shueisha teamed up with major publishers Shogakukan, Kadokawa, and Kodansha in another ex parte application (1) and proposed order (2), filed this time at a district court in Delaware.

Once again, the companies requested access to information held by U.S. internet companies to support a potential lawsuit in Vietnam or Japan.

ss-gokumanga

GoDaddy and eNom customers had registered domains for two pirate manga sites, and the rightsholders were keen to receive any information that might help their investigation. Those domains – gokumanga.com and doki1001.com – were also among the targets in the ex parte application filed last August.

More than six months later, the first process is still ongoing, and according to the recent application, no pirates have been identified. The domains they used have long since been replaced, but in the past, redirected to other domains listed in the same application. It's complex and messy, almost certainly by design. In this space, domain names may redirect, hibernate or even die, but the underlying sites prefer reincarnation.

Rightsholders Test Every Possible Option

Manga publishers, anti-piracy groups, the recording industry (RIAJ), movie and TV show companies (JIMCA and the MPA), trade organizations, tech companies players, search engines, and Japan's government, are engaged in almost constant communication over potential anti-piracy tools and the issues they raise.

Overseas legal procedures are considered burdensome, expensive, and a strain on both time and resources, says manga publisher Shogakukan. Plans to partner with overseas entities to create a more effective international legal network could help, but that will also take time.

In the short term, rightsholders will continue to request subpoenas, hoping that information held by U.S. service providers will help them to identify pirates. At the same time, every possible enforcement idea is considered worthy of exploration.

Liability, Pressure on Intermediaries

Other options under discussion include increased liability for intermediaries and requirements for ISPs and OSPs to obtain and retain more detailed customer information. Along those same lines, the MPA and its Japanese partners have drawn attention to U.S. Executive Order 13984.

The order is supposed to deter foreign malicious cyber actors' use of US-based Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) platforms. Hollywood's goal is to ensure that every domain name company, DNS provider, CDN, web hosting service, reverse proxy provider, advertising company and payment processor are bound by the same rules, so that pirates can be more easily identified.

Site Blocking and CDN Providers

Large international rightsholders are broadly in favor of site-blocking measures, but the topic is controversial in Japan. Proposals to restrict access to information would almost certainly face challenges under Japan's constitution.

At least as things stand, site-blocking proposals seem to lack momentum: freedom of expression, the protection of confidentiality of communications, and the prohibition of censorship, carry significant weight in Japan. These red lines may never be overcome but more immediate issues already have universal support.

datacenter

One of the most discussed issues concerns CDN providers, Cloudflare in particular. Despite various angles and mounting criticism, Cloudflare has thus far refused to give any ground. If rightsholders in Japan want content taken down, they should focus on hosting companies. These are the entities that can actually remove content; removing Cloudflare leaves infringing content online, the company says.

Suggestions that Cloudflare faces liability for pirate sites are directed to the Mon Cheri v. Cloudflare lawsuit in the U.S., from which the CDN company emerged with a clear win.

Claims that Cloudflare 'hides' the IP addresses of pirate sites are met with the usual response: if a site is infringing, any complaints will be forwarded to the site's host. If personal information is required, rightsholders should present a court order.

The reasons are unknown, but discussions with Cloudflare on this topic are sometimes marked 'undisclosed' or confidential in reports that openly discuss other companies' input.

pirate-site-jp

In broad terms, few of those who express an opinion are happy with Cloudflare's position. Paraphrasing comments made over the last few months, the general sentiment is that if Cloudflare has a primary goal of protecting sites from abuse on the internet, why is it the primary protector of pirate sites that are abusive in themselves?

Since Cloudflare's position is both clear and consistent across markets, the end result is a circular argument from which there are no obvious means of escape.

Search Engines

Google appears to be taking the same position in Japan as it does elsewhere. If a court rules that a site is illegal and should be blocked in its entirety, Google is likely to deindex its domain so it never appears in Japan's search results.

One of Yahoo! Japan's anti-piracy contributions is more immediately visible. When users search for the term '海賊版' (English: pirated version/pirate copy) Yahoo! returns an unmissable promotion for the STOP! anti-piracy campaign run by Authorized Books of Japan (ABJ) to protect manga and similar content.

pirated version

Other suggestions receiving support include educational or 'enlightenment' campaigns to guide casual pirates back on the right track. The music industry hopes to ensure that anti-piracy education reaches Japan's children, preferably during the early years of school.

Advertising, Domains, Security Software, Web Browsers

The Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC) is Japan's internet registry with responsibilities that include the allocation of IP addresses and AS numbers. JPNIC has reported discussions with ICANN relating to anti-piracy issues, noting that the Japanese government's "continuous efforts at ICANN are paying off."

Exactly what that means is unclear, but there does appear to be some pressure on ICANN to ensure that domain registries and registrars remain in compliance with the terms of their contracts. Those terms require customers to provide identifying information but by various means, that's usually not the case.

Overall, and in common with rightsholders elsewhere, there's a general sentiment that pirate sites abuse domain names. People who abuse domain names in the trademark arena tend to lose them; some feel that should be the case with pirates too.

On the understanding that advertising fuels many pirate sites, disruption in this area is seen as a priority. A music industry group says that identifying and obtaining contact information for advertising companies placing ads on sites should be a short-term priority. Longer term, technical measures to prevent adverts ever appearing on pirate sites should be the goal.

Non-profit organization Virtual Rights suggested that companies behind web browsers (e.g. Google LLC, Mozilla Foundation, etc.) could provide assistance on this front.

What Can Be Done About Vietnam?

Pirate sites with connections to Vietnam are recognized as causing global problems for companies in publishing, movies, TV shows, music and beyond.

Manga publishers Kadokawa and Kodansha say that all overseas pirates cause problems, but the latter concedes that the Vietnam problem is "enormous." Shogakukan says that when it comes to 'malicious' platforms with the most visitors, Vietnamese sites present the biggest problem.

japan-vietnam sites

Optimism that new legislation might ease the situation can be dampened relatively easily: Fmovies, BestBuyIPTV, Abyss.to, Fembed, 2embed.to – the list goes on and on.

Pirate sites have been shut down in Vietnam but as far as we can tell, mostly for displaying outlawed gambling advertising rather than piracy. Facing the same issues, the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment wants to recruit new members inside Vietnam, hoping that will turn the tide.

Various reports from the United States, EU, and UK describe a complex IP enforcement system in Vietnam featuring multiple agencies and overlapping jurisdictions, a lack of coordination among those agencies, limited institutional capacity and stretched resources related to IP enforcement.

Or as one Japanese anti-piracy report put it: Vietnam's Intellectual Property Office "has brains but no limbs."

These issues and others elsewhere seem unlikely to deter this systematic anti-piracy drive. At what point it will produce repeatable and sustainable results is unknown, but they will come, there's little doubt about that.

Sources/image credits: (1) Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, (2) Agency of Cultural Affairs(3) Japan Institute of Law and Information Systems, (4) Japan Internet Governance Forum, (5) Taylor Vick/Unsplash

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company