Monday, March 20, 2023

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Zippyshare Quits After 17 Years, 45m Visits Per Month Makes No Money
Andy Maxwell, 20 Mar 12:34 PM

zippylogoWhen file-hosting service Zippyshare showed its first signs of life in September 2006, accessing the site using an iPhone was impossible; the smart phone's existence wouldn't be announced for another four months.

Zippyshare's success was built on solid yet basic foundations; straightforward free hosting of files, via a clean interface, at zero cost to the user. With relatively few options available elsewhere, Zippyshare was a huge success and to celebrate its first birthday, Zippyshare went BIG.

"A few days ago Zippyshare.com turned one year old," its operators wrote in 2007. "For Zippyshare's first birthday we are raising the filesize limit to 100mb."

Upgrade After Upgrade

After repeatedly upgrading to meet rising demand, Zippyshare launched Zippyshare Uploader, a software application that allowed users to upload files without using a web browser.

zippy1

Almost three years after the surprise 100mb limit was introduced, Zippyshare doubled its filesize limit to 200mb. A little later, when the internet was consumed with Megaupload being taken down, Zippyshare carried on as if nothing had happened, or it did once its email servers had been fixed.

Zippyshare Breaks Five-Year Silence With Bad News

When Zippyshare's operators announced the shutdown of the site yesterday, that was the first update posted to the site for almost five years.

"We've decided that we're shutting down the project at the end of the month. Please make backups of your important files, you have about two weeks to do so. Until then, the site will run without any changes," the announcement reads.

zippyshare shuts down

In addition to hardware upgrades, Zippyshare also received visible updates over the years, but in broad terms, the view for users stayed much the same. As the file-hosting market developed and competition increased, being zippy was still good but wasn't enough.

Simple Formula Meets Innovation and Mass Ad-Blocking

"Since 2006 we have been on the market in an unchanged form, that is, as ad financed/free file hosting. However, you have been visiting in less and less over the years, as the arguably very simple formula of the services we offer is slowly running out of steam," Zippyshare continues.

"I guess all the competing file storage service companies on the market look better, offer better performance and more features. No one needs a dinosaur like us anymore."

Zippyshare Dashboardzippy-dashboard

While Zippyshare was never likely to return to its heyday, it still receives tens of millions of visits every month. The problem is that even when users get a free service, they continue to block ads. For sites like Zippyshare, that almost guarantees a downward spiral, one exacerbated by today's rising energy costs.

"Sure, we all use [adblockers], but they take away any control the site owner has over the site. Eventually we get to the point where a vicious cycle begins, in order to pay for the server infrastructure you are forced to place more and more ads, then users fire up more and more adblockers and we get to a point like today," the site continues.

"Over the past year, electricity prices have gone up 2.5 times, which, with a large number of servers, gives a significant increase in costs that we have no way to balance. There are still a bunch of smaller reasons [for closing down], but we could write a book on this, and probably no one would want to read it.

"To sum it up, we can no longer afford to maintain the site."

Odds Always Stacked Against Zippyshare

That Zippyshare survived this long is a minor miracle in itself. While the platform survived the shutdown of Megaupload, traffic volumes took a dive over the next few years to a background of copyright-related complaints by entertainment industry groups.

Nominated for "notorious market" status by the RIAA in 2013, Zippyshare became a magnet for rightsholder complaints, regular referrals to the U.S. government, and millions of DMCA notices.

To date, rightsholders have requested the removal of more than 14.5 million Zippyshare URLs but for internet users in Europe, worse was on the horizon.

In March, April and June 2019, Zippyshare blocked users from the UK, Germany, and Spain, respectively. Why this action was taken remains unclear but it seems likely that copyright issues were a factor and geo-blocking was seen as the solution.

If Zippyshare closes as promised at the end of the month, it will still have considerable assets at its disposal. The site still enjoys around 45 million visits per month and Zippyshare.com is one of the top 1000 most-visited domains on the internet today.

We asked Zippyshare what will happen to the domain when the site closes down, but at the time of writing, we're yet to receive a response. As for the team behind the site, they've rarely appeared from the shadows but will live on…somewhere.

"Thanks for being with us over the years. See you in the depths of the Internet."

Zippyshare (2006-2023)

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

Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – 03/20/2023
Ernesto Van der Sar, 20 Mar 12:09 AM

bearThe data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only.

These torrent download statistics are only meant to provide further insight into the piracy trends. All data are gathered from public resources.

This week we have four newcomers on the list. "Cocaine Bear" is the most downloaded title, beating Oscar winner Everything Everywhere All at Once.

The most torrented movies for the week ending on March 20 are:

Movie Rank Rank last week Movie name IMDb Rating / Trailer
Most downloaded movies via torrent sites
1 (…) Cocaine Bear 6.1 / trailer
2 (…) Everything Everywhere All at Once 7.9 / trailer
3 (1) Operation Fortune: Ruse de guerre 6.5 / trailer
4 (8) The Whale 7.8 / trailer
5 (3) A Man Called Otto 7.5 / trailer
6 (2) Luther: The Fallen Sun 6.5 / trailer
7 (…) Babylon 7.2 / trailer
8 (4) Puss in Boots: The Last Wish 7.8 / trailer
9 (5) Black Panther: Wakanda Forever 7.0 / trailer
10 (…) Boston Strangler 6.5 / trailer

Note: We also publish an updating archive of all the list of weekly most torrented movies lists.

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

Filmmakers Want Owner of Defunct VPN Arrested in Piracy Case
Ernesto Van der Sar, 19 Mar 09:27 PM

liquidvpnOver the past two decades, online piracy has proven a massive challenge for the entertainment industries.

Some copyright holders have pursued legal action against individual pirates, but today it's not uncommon for third-party intermediaries to also be considered legitimate targets.

Over the past several years, internet service providers, hosting companies, and VPN providers have faced infringement liability lawsuits. Most of the VPN companies chose to settle disputes but when LiquidVPN was sued, the provider simply ignored the lawsuit.

Filmmakers Win $15m in LiquidVPN Lawsuit

LiquidVPN was previously owned by David Cox, who was initially listed as a defendant. As the case progressed it emerged that Cox had sold the VPN provider before the lawsuit was filed, with Puerto Rico company 1701 Management identified as the buyer.

Despite facing serious allegations, 1701 Management and its alleged owner, Charles Muszynski, failed to answer the claims filed at a federal court in Florida. This prompted the film companies to request a default judgment of more than $15 million, which was eventually granted a year ago.

The default judgment marks the end of the road on the question of liability but doesn't necessarily mean that the filmmakers automatically get the money. As it turns out, that can be quite a challenge.

Chasing The Money

Over the past several months, the filmmakers' attorney Kerry Culpepper has submitted several writs of garnishment to the court. Through these requests, the court can order the seizure of property owned or controlled by the debtors.

In this case, those efforts targeted a yacht, docked at a Florida harbor, and various other types of properties. In addition, the filmmakers obtained a worldwide restraining order against the assets of Mr. Muszynski, 1701 Management, and the third defendant AUH2O.

This hunt for assets connected several companies to Muszynski, including the New Mexico company "WasteResources LLC." According to the legal paperwork, there is evidence to show that the company is owned and controlled by the defendant.

wasdte

In January, the filmmakers filed a request to apply the $15 million default judgment against garnishee WasteResources. Part of this judgment also includes trademark infringement damages in favor of a company owned by Kerry Culpepper, the attorney in this case.

$15m Judgment Against WasteResources

After considering the presented evidence, and without the waste company showing up at a court hearing, this week District Court Judge Beth Bloom granted the default judgment.

"At the Hearing, WasteResources did not appear. Plaintiffs presented multiple exhibits demonstrating that WasteResources is an alter ego of Defendants which the Court accepted into evidence," Judge Bloom writes.

"Pursuant to the evidence presented […] the Court finds that Default Judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against WasteResources is appropriate in the full amount of the unsatisfied Final Judgment against Defendants which is $15,172,403.00," the judgment adds.

The default judgment is a big deal for the filmmakers, as it allows them to seize the company's assets, including any payments owed by its customers.

Filmmakers Want Mr. Muszynski Arrested

The waste company isn't alone in being targeted, there are other garnishees as well. Meanwhile, the filmmakers submitted a motion for an order to show cause why the defendants shouldn't be held in contempt.

As part of this request, the rightsholders suggest that Mr. Muszynski should be arrested and held until he complies with the court's orders.

In January, the court issued an order that requires the debtors to pay a fine of $500 per day, for as long as they fail to comply. The filmmakers note that this failed to move the needle.

"Neither a multi-million dollar judgment or a $500/day fine has persuaded Muszynski to comply with Court Orders. Accordingly, confinement of Muszynski will be the only means to coerce him to comply with the Court order," the motion reads.

arrest

Two sides, Two Lawsuits

The above mostly represents the perspective of the complaining parties but in a rare move, Mr. Muszynski also made an 'appearance' in court, via letter (pdf) last month.

The former VPN operator noted that he doesn't have any funds available, not even to pay for a lawyer. In addition, he maintains that the court doesn't have jurisdiction over him, since he's a citizen of St. Kitt's & Nevis.

Mr. Muszynski further stressed that he isn't, and never was, the owner of the companies held liable in the initial judgment.

"I have made this letter to avoid 'appearing' in the US court and to avoid lending legitimacy to any claim that I ever so appeared. I have been, since 2019, a citizen and resident of St. Kitts & Nevis, have never been served in this matter, and was not an owner of 1701 Management, LLC or AUH2O."

The letter also mentions that the filmmakers filed a separate lawsuit in St. Kitt's & Nevis, asking the Florida federal court to await the result of that proceeding before taking any further steps.

Tip of the Iceberg

These events represent just the tip of a legal iceberg. The U.S. case alone has hundreds of docket entries, most of them filed after the final judgment was issued.

All in all, this lawsuit shows that after an initial judgment, a case can continue for months or even years. Whatever the outcome, it's clear that the filmmakers are willing to go to extreme lengths to collect what they're owed.

A copy of the default judgment, issued by Florida District Court Judge Beth Bloom this week, is available here (pdf) and the associated order can is available here (pdf). A copy of the motion for an order to show cause why the defendants shouldn't be held in contempt is 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: