Friday, March 31, 2023

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Canadian ISPs Blocked Pirate IPTV & Logged Customer IP Addresses
Andy Maxwell, 31 Mar 10:54 AM

iptvWhen the first pirate site blocking applications began to gather momentum in Europe, those concerned about where it all might lead spoke of slippery slopes and thin ends of wedges.

More than 15 years later, judges in dozens of countries have not only approved blocking injunctions that target static sites but are also happy to hand down flexible orders designed to rapidly counter new domains, proxies, and mirrors.

When pirate IPTV services hit the mainstream less than 10 years ago, the legal and technical challenges of blocking content quickly were considerable. But by carefully tapping in the wedge, showing patience, and not asking for too much at the wrong time, rightsholders can now block pirate IPTV services while judges are tucked up in bed.

Canada's Blocking Fast Track

Canada's Federal Court approved the country's first IPTV blocking order in 2018, and the Federal Court of Appeal upheld it in May 2021.

Just two months later, the architects of the first order – Rogers, Bell, TVA, and others – filed a new application demanding faster, more flexible blocking. The Federal Court obliged and in 2022, Justice William F. Pentney handed down Canada's first dynamic pirate IPTV blocking order, crafted to protect the NHL broadcasters' revenues.

Justice Pentney also issued instructions for one or more experts to review the process to ensure compliance with the Court's criteria for identifying 'pirate' IP addresses. Dates and times when the IP addresses were supposed to be blocked, and whether they actually were, for example. A report on general compliance was the overriding theme.

Report Satisfied Judge, New Injunction Awarded

Before Rogers, Bell, TVA, and the other plaintiffs were able to renew their injunction, the Court reviewed the experts' report to ensure that its instructions had been followed. The report was produced by IP lawyer David Lipkus and Jon Wilkins, co-founder of Quadra Partners.

While both men have business connections with the plaintiffs, the Court saw no issues with their work, and ultimately renewed the injunction. The report's key findings were as follows: (Note: FMTS is a reference to Friend MTS, an anti-piracy company heavily involved in live pirate IPTV blocking)

– Experts verified the criteria used by Friend MTS to select IP addresses for blocking
– ISPs used automated blocking, 9 out of 10 blocked 100% of the IP addresses tested
– No legitimate complaints from individuals or businesses related to blocking
– Data supports the assessment that availability of infringing content was reduced
– Blocking considered effective; delivered a measurable benefit for a low cost

The report itself wasn't available when mentioned last year, but recently appeared on the docket at Canada's Federal Court. It reveals how the review was conducted and how the data was verified, plus additional details that help paint a bigger picture on site-blocking measures when combined with existing information.

All About The Blocklist

FMTS provided the experts with a spreadsheet containing a confidential blocklist of 568 IP addresses and timestamps indicating when they were added to the blocklist. To verify the selection criteria, the experts used a randomized sample set of 181 IP addresses and were able to confirm that all 181 were added to the blocklist.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect here is that ancillary comments appear to add weight to the theory that IP addresses aren't spotted 'live' and then immediately blocked; they're on the blocklist before live games even begin.

IP addresses added to the blocklist are those determined by FMTS to be part of streaming infrastructure making the Copyrighted Content available without authorization during the NHL Live Game Windows, as well as during the Pre-Monitoring Period

What constitutes a 'Live Game Window' is not detailed in the report since this and similar information is considered highly confidential. However, data made available in other jurisdictions suggests that 'windows' go way beyond the competitive live action taking place 'now' on TV.

In orders issued to ISPs in other countries where FMTS blocks live football streams, "Match Periods" refer to other days in a given week where pirate IPTV services have already been observed illegally streaming matches owned by the same rights owner. It seems likely that 'Live Game Window' is the NHL equivalent.

Similarly, the 'Pre-Monitoring Period' is a block of time that precedes one or more 'Match Periods' in the same week as the current live match. Pirate IPTV services that show a) a subscription channel on which match footage is due to be broadcast or b) a sports-related subscription channel operated by a specified broadcaster, are eligible for IP address blocking.

Identifying Pirate Streams

According to the Canadian report, FMTS uses a proprietary technology that allows it to compare legitimate samples of existing NHL game footage with content being made available on pirate platforms.

"When matches are detected, the IP addresses of the source and associated streaming infrastructure are flagged for potential inclusion in the blocklist. Screenshots and video footage of the matched content are retained [and] were made available, along with thumbnail images of the identified content and the legitimate sample content it was found to match," the experts note.

The report says that some of the 181 IP addresses in the sample were matched with multiple games in the Pre-Monitoring Period and NHL Live Game Windows, together generating 356 hits.

After reviewing thumbnail images, screenshots, and video captured from streams for each, the experts concluded that 178 IP addresses were valid matches, with the remaining three "unintentionally matched" against suspected pirated content. "FMTS immediately corrected the issue," the report notes.

Limiting Overblocking, Handling Complaints

Blocking a large number of IP addresses over time is likely to lead to a small number of errors. At least statistically, an accuracy rate exceeding 99% is considered commendable in many fields, although not necessarily of comfort to those wrongfully blocked.

With that in mind, it was good to learn that FMTS carries out checks to ensure that, as far as it can, target IP addresses are unlikely to have any legitimate uses at the specified time. Interestingly, some of the ISPs also decided to mitigate potential overblocking using their own tools.

When carrying out connectivity tests to establish whether 'pirate' IP addresses were accessible via ISPs during the 'NHL Live Game Windows' of the NHL Finals, 77.51% of tests failed to reach the IP addresses in question. However, on 157 occasions, it was possible to reach 'pirate' IP addresses that should've been blocked.

"In an effort to reduce the potential for over-blocking, some of the ISPs blocked the IP addresses after there was a certain threshold of network traffic," the report notes.

While that may be considered a plus, customers and privacy advocates may be less pleased with other details. ISPs used to champion themselves as oblivious 'dumb pipes' but are now required to block specified network locations when courts order them to do so.

Did the Federal Court ask the ISPs to monitor customer traffic? Because that's what some did.

Some ISPs Monitored Demand For 'Pirate' IP Addresses

Monitoring customer activity and then disclosing that information to third parties sounds like a privacy disaster, not to mention a legal minefield. No ISPs are mentioned by name but for one reason or another, the information in the report is either disappointing for customers or disappointing for rightsholders.

One ISP reportedly had a logging system that tried to count the number of unique customer IP addresses that attempted to access 'pirate' IP addresses during NHL Live Game Windows. The counts varied from 109 IP addresses up to 300 IP addresses – 109 subscribers or potentially 300 – give or take. Unfortunately, the number never exceeded 300 because the system "was only capable of recording a maximum of 300" in the relevant periods.

One ISP counted 40,105 customer IP addresses, another 50,794, but showing that these customers were actually attempting to watch NHL content proved impossible.

"[A]lthough with respect to supply, a number of sites containing Infringing Copyrighted Content were effectively blocked, we lack empirical data to make any reasonable inferences with respect to the impact on the overall supply of Infringing Copyrighted Content," the report notes.

"[W]ith respect to actual Canadian Internet user demand behavior (deterring and dissuading use of Infringing Copyrighted Content), we lack empirical data to make any reasonable inferences with respect to whether, even for those Internet users who may have attempted to access to a given site, the dynamic blocking approach here had any impact on the economic interests of Plaintiffs."

No Legitimate Complaints About Blocking

While it was determined that no legitimate complaints were received relating to the injunction in general or over-blocking more specifically, some complaints were received. A Proton Mail email address was published on ISPs' websites (1,2,3) specifically for that purpose and it went as well as could be expected.

"There was several vulgar emails from one individual that communicated displeasure with the issuance of the Order, generally. However, these were not relevant complaints," the report notes.

"Additionally, an email was received from an IPTV service advertising 'free iptv sport, news, kids channel [sic]' along with a Whatsapp number and website address, and a second email relating to a spear phishing campaign."

The report concludes with some recommendations, including a general suggestion that if ISPs scaled up their monitoring and provided a little more data on user activity, the plaintiffs would be in a better position to determine, in broad terms, if blocking is worthwhile and will make them more money.

Should there be any future requests for just a little more data, it seems unlikely that any will carry a wedge warning. Perhaps they should.

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

CD Projekt's Legal Pressure Pushes GOG-Games to The Dark Web
Ernesto Van der Sar, 30 Mar 10:29 PM

gog logoAs the creator of The Witcher series and Cyberpunk 2077, game developer CD Projekt won the hearts of millions of gamers.

The Polish company also scored points when it spoke out against DRM on numerous occasions, including the 'FCKDRM' campaign promoted by its game distribution service GOG.

The anti-DRM stance is laudable but also has its drawbacks. Most notably, it becomes much easier for pirates to copy and share games. And indeed, new GOG games were swiftly shared online, including on a site that even copied its name: GOG-Games.com.

CD Project likely anticipated that their games would be pirated, but seeing a site use its own brand to promote pirated games must have stung. As a result, the videogame company has worked hard to get GOG-Games offline.

GOG-Games Under Pressure

Earlier this week, those efforts appeared to pay off when GOG-Games replaced its game repository with a notice that signaled serious problems.

Notice posted on GOG-Games earier this week

gog news

According to the operators, CD Projekt's GOG team has been trying to take the site offline since 2011. Since GOG-Games uses a host that simply ignores DMCA notices, results have been limited, but more recently, the admin was contacted directly.

"[S]omeone from their legal team sent a 'DMCA – final call' email directly to our site admin email address," the notice reveals.

The email in question wasn't directed at the operators of the site directly, but at the hosting company. It notes that GOG-Games violates GOG's copyrights and trademarks, urging the provider to take action.

"The website is infringing GOG's word by using it to brand an unlawful operation of downloading both CD PROJEKT Group's and third parties' games. The website also infringes CD PROJEKT S.A. trademarks and copyrights related to CD PROJEKT S.A games; The Witcher and Cyberpunk 2077."

"We are extremely determined to take the above mentioned website down and we would like to ask you to treat the situation with utmost importance," the email adds.

From GOG Legal's email

email gog host

Fearing that the game company could eventually file a lawsuit against the hosting provider, or worse, GOG-Games.com decided to pull the plug voluntarily. At least for the time being.

"We are going to treat this matter seriously. As such, we are honoring the DMCA notice and all the copyrighted content is made in-accessible," the GOG-Games team announced.

The site's operators apologized to the people who donated in the past but also offered assurances that this wouldn't necessarily be the end. The operators were considering a move to the dark web, shielding its hosting location.

GOG-Games Moves to the Dark Web

The plan was more concrete than the message suggested. Just a few hours after the 'takedown' announcement first appeared, it was already replaced by another one, noting that the site was accessible again on the dark web.

we have moved to the tor network

As far as we can see, the dark web version of the site continues to operate as it did before, offering a library of pirated games.

Commenting on the recent developments, a spokesperson for CD Projekt's GOG platform informed TorrentFreak that it has a gamers-first approach, while respecting rightsholders.

"Piracy is totally against those values and undermines the great work that developers and publishers do to create games we, and our community, cherish. Having said that, we are monitoring pirate sites that violate gamers' experience and are taking action, as necessary.

"Each case is treated individually, and the GOG-games.com case is not an exemption from that rule," the spokesperson added, noting that the company will continue investigating this issue.

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

Thursday, March 30, 2023

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Z-Library Raises Tens of Thousands of Dollars to Keep its Pirate Library Running
Ernesto Van der Sar, 30 Mar 10:02 AM

zlibrary logoZ-Library has become the go-to site for many readers in recent years by providing access to millions of books, for free.

The site's continued ability to do so was put to the test late last year when U.S. law enforcement seized over 200 domain names connected to the site. Two alleged Z-Library operators were arrested as part of a criminal investigation.

Z-Library Comeback

Despite losing two alleged members of its team, as well as over 200 domain names, Z-Library had no intention of throwing in the towel. The site remained accessible through the dark web and a few weeks ago made a full comeback on the clearnet as well.

The new setup comes with some technical tweaks. For example, every user now has a unique subdomain to access Z-Library, which may make it more difficult for law enforcement to take down the whole operation all at once.

Implementing these changes and some others, including a new recommendation section and Telegram bot, required substantial investments. To help pay the bill, Z-Library is now asking its users to chip in.

Substantial Damage

In a message posted earlier this month, the Z-Library team revealed that the U.S. law enforcement actions caused substantial damage. While the 220 terabytes of data weren't lost, getting everything up and running again wasn't easy.

"[A]lmost all public domains of the library were blocked in November 2022 by order of the US Secret Service. The inner infrastructure of the project suffered some substantial damage too," Z-Library said.

"Today, we are still under unprecedented pressure. At the moment, Z-Library is going through the hardest times in all the 14 years of its existence. The library might work with interruptions, and we ask you to be patient."

Donation Drive

These comments are part of a donation drive encouraging users to contribute. Z-Library offers a variety of support options, including crypto, gift cards, WeChat, and Alipay.

"We will be extremely thankful for every dollar that will be donated," Zlibrary notes.

zlibrary-raise

These types of requests are nothing new for pirate sites. In most cases, however, the donation amounts fail to impress, presumably because the audience prefers to spend its money elsewhere. With Z-Library, the situation appears somewhat different.

Tens of Thousands, Per Day?

The donation window opened on March 15 and, based on the public numbers we've seen, tens of thousands of dollars have come in so far. The 74 top contributions of $100 and up are already good for $9,802.

That number is just a fraction of the total, however. After keeping score for half an hour, we counted 90 donations totaling $928. Repeating this on a different day resulted in nearly the same result; 93 donations and $916.

Those numbers are good for an average of over 4,000 daily donations, and $40,000. That figure has to be multiplied by 14 to determine the amount donated over two weeks.

donations

We can't confirm the accuracy of the reported figures but if these are legit, it must be one of the most successful pirate site donation drives in history.

This isn't the first time that Z-Library has asked for donations. In fact, earlier requests for contributions helped U.S. law enforcement identify and arrest two Z-Library suspects.

Follow-The-Money

According to public court filings, Amazon gift cards and associated Gmail addresses helped the authorities to identify two alleged operators who spent part of the donations on clothes and beauty products.

The remaining operators must be aware of that so presumably the current donation drive has been set up to avoid a similar fate.

If the reported donation numbers are indeed correct, the pirate library should have sufficient funds to keep the site afloat for a while, as long as the authorities don't intervene again.

At the time of writing, the status of the extradition proceeding of the two arrested Z-Library suspects is unclear. TorrentFreak reached out to their attorney in the U.S. criminal case who didn't provide any further detail.

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

Meta's Anti-Piracy Deal: How Facebook & Broadcasters Kill Live Pirate Streams
Andy Maxwell, 29 Mar 09:59 PM

facebookliveFor reasons that make absolutely no sense while somehow making perfect sense, millions of internet users think that social media platforms are perfect for piracy.

Social media platforms like Facebook are admittedly quick and easy, but such positives are quickly overwhelmed by extraordinary privacy issues, not to mention centralized control. Nevertheless, the masses love quick and easy so in common with similar platforms everywhere, social media has a piracy problem.

Partners Against Piracy

This week Meta and Italian broadcaster RTI announced the signing of a multi-year partnership that will attempt to prevent the latter's TV content from being pirated on Meta platforms. According to RTI, the companies will "collaborate on the implementation of a set of tools and systems" to protect RTI's copyrighted content, including its live TV broadcasts.

The odds of Meta/Facebook implementing systems that only benefit RTI seem slim, but it may be possible to identify areas for improvement useful to a broader set of rightsholders. However, since RTI specifically mentions that Meta will provide dedicated training on how to use Meta's 'Rights Manager' system more effectively, it wouldn't be a surprise if that was the key focus of the agreement.

So what is Rights Manager, and how does it work?

Rights Manager Took Inspiration From Content ID

YouTube's Content ID system first appeared more than 15 years ago, and today many users of the site will have seen it in action. Content ID uses algorithms to generate digital 'fingerprints' of content uploaded to the platform which can then be compared against reference files (original content) provided by rightsholders.

When a match is found, rightsholders have several broad options – block the uploaded content, monitor its statistics, monetize the upload with advertising and take the revenue, or sit back and do nothing.

Facebook launched its own content-matching, rights management tool in 2016. In common with Content ID, Rights Manager relies on reference files uploaded to the platform by rightsholders.

When a match is found, rightsholders can perform 'match actions' – block the uploaded content, monitor for insights into performance and audience engagement, place a banner on matching videos linking to content of their choice, or monetize with advertising and, of course, take the revenue.

In common with YouTube's system, 'match actions' can be mixed, such as blocking in one country but taking revenue in another.

Rights Manager panelrights-manager

The details of the Meta/RTI 'partnership' are unknown, but it's worth noting that Rights Manager cannot function without Meta collaborating with rightsholders.

In February 2022, Meta told the U.S. Copyright Office that features available in Rights Manager are "the result of a voluntary collaboration between Meta, rights holders, and many other stakeholders." Meta said it actively solicits feedback from rightsholders which determines what features to add or change in Rights Manager.

Matching Reference Content With User Uploaded Content

Content matching systems have been around for a long time, but those who design and operate them tend not to share too many details. In October 2022, as part of the reCreating Europe project, a group of researchers published a study that pulled back the veil on fingerprinting systems including Audible Magic, Content ID, and Rights Manager.

The researchers noted how once a reference file is uploaded to Rights Manager, the owner of the content can specify what constitutes a match, under four general "dimensions" – (1) User Dimension, (2) Geographical Dimension, (3) Comparative Dimension, and (4) Content Dimension – explained by the researchers as follows:

According to the user dimension, (1) a reference file uploader can authorize specific pages or accounts to use the content of the reference file. Further, geographical regions (2) can be included/excluded for viewers. Per the comparative dimension (3), reference file uploaders can specify the temporal overlap between the reference file and an uploaded content that will constitute a match, which in practice is a way of enabling copyright exceptions. For example, copyright owners might allow others to use parts of their video if their posts are not longer than 10 seconds.

The researchers found that Content Dimension (4) only applies to videos and live video.

For example, if RTI uploaded one of its recorded TV shows to Rights Manager, it's likely to be offered a choice; does the company wish to protect only the moving images or the audio content as well? If the soundtrack contains music to which another company owns the rights, a request to protect both could be problematic.

Taking Down Live Streams

That YouTube and Facebook are able to take down live streams is well-known, especially by those sitting down to watch a Premier League game or a PPV boxing event without having paid for the pleasure. Broadcasters and sports leagues can use Rights Manager to protect their content but in a statement to the U.S. Copyright Office, Meta said it also uses machine learning to recognize patterns on Facebook.

match rule

"[W]e use automated systems that detect and track the presence of keywords typically associated with piracy, prior IP violations from problematic accounts, and other factors that signal the presence of potentially infringing content and bad actors on our platforms. This includes proactively identifying and removing suspected live pirated broadcasts," Meta explained.

The very nature of live streams means that uploading 'reference content' before an event begins is impossible. However, Rights Manager and Content ID both allow rightsholders to pipe live feeds directly into their platforms meaning that even live content can be matched, give or take a few minutes.

Whether it's used by Rights Manager is unknown, but some rightsholders have also developed logo recognition systems.

These could be particularly useful during sports broadcasts or PPV events where broadcasters have a tendency to display their logos on screen throughout. There's also some evidence to suggest that pirate IPTV providers' logos have been used to identify infringing broadcasts.

With so many technologies available, any number or combination of methods could be deployed, and most people would remain completely oblivious. At least until Facebook's AI flicks the switch.

RTI's statement on its partnership with Meta can be found here (pdf)

Image credit: Pixabay/gerault

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

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company