TorrentFreak's Latest News

Z-Library Defendants Retain U.S. Lawyers But Questions RemainErnesto Van der Sar, 03 May 10:37 AM With more than 13 million books, Z-Library is one

Z-Library Defendants Retain U.S. Lawyers But Questions Remain Ernesto Van der Sar, 03 May 10:37 AM With more than 13 million books, Z-Library is one of the largest repositories of pirated books on the Internet. The site has millions of regular readers who find a wealth of free knowledge and entertainment at their fingertips. Z-Library's success was vigorously interrupted late last year when the U.S. Government seized the site's main domain names. The problems were later exacerbated when two alleged Russian operators were indicted. Following an FBI investigation, the authorities identified Russian nationals Anton Napolsky and Valeriia Ermakova as prime suspects. The pair were arrested in Argentina and await potential extradition to the United States. Z-Library Comeback The criminal action brought the site to its knees, but Z-Libary didn't close its doors. Despite losing two alleged members of its team, on top of more than 200 domain names, Z-Library had no intention of shutting down. The site remained accessible through the dark web and, earlier this year, made a full comeback on the clearnet. The new setup comes with some new features, including a unique subdomain for all Z-Library users, which may make it more difficult for law enforcement to take down the whole operation all at once. Implementing these and other changes required substantial investment so to help pay the bills, Z-Library asked its users to chip in. According to statistics reported by the site, tens of thousands of dollars poured in. After recently adding its 13 millionth book, Z-Library seems stable today. The two defendants in the criminal case are still expected to show up in a U.S. court but when that will happen remains uncertain, at least based on the information available to us. Defendants Retain U.S. Lawyers with a Russian Twist Two weeks ago, activity in the criminal docket indicated that Napolsky and Ermakova have both retained U.S. lawyers as their official representatives. Ermakova is represented by Temkin & Associates founder Maria Temkin, who speaks fluent Russian. Attorney Anna V. Brown of Brown Legal Consulting, who also speaks Russian, was added to the record as Napolsky's lawyer. Both lawyers have links with Russia, where they possibly have roots. Temkin, for example, studied English at the Institute of Foreign Languages in St. Petersburg, while Brown attended the Far Eastern Federal University in Vladivostok. Russia itself also showed a keen interest in the case early on. Soon after the indictment was announced by the US Justice Department, the Russian Embassy in Argentina got in touch with the defendants' friends and families and questioned whether extraditions are possible. "We proceed from the fact that the current legislation of Argentina does not allow automatic execution of extraterritorial decisions and requests from third states," the Russian Embassy wrote at the time. "We are counting on a transparent and fair consideration by the Argentine court of the American formal request for extradition, which, to our knowledge, has not yet been received," the diplomatic mission added at the time. Many Questions The Embassy's comments raise plenty of questions on the status of the two defendants but very little official information has been presented thus far. TorrentFreak contacted the Russian Embassy in Argentina for an update but, at the time of publication, we have yet to receive a reply. Information made available through official channels regarding criminal proceeding is also scarce. The remaining Z-Library team is mostly in the dark as well. "Unfortunately, we don't have new information on their case, but as far as we know, Anton and Valeriia are still in Argentina now," the Z-Library team informed us. TorrentFreak reached out to both of the defense attorneys a while ago. Temkin hasn't responded to our request and Brown declined to comment on the case at this time. The public record shows no sign of any extradition thus far, so we assume that Napolsky and Ermakova are still in Argentina. Without confirmation, they could also be in Russia, the U.S., or any other part of the world. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. ISP Must Forward Warning Notice to eBook Pirate, Dutch Appeals Court Rules Ernesto Van der Sar, 02 May 09:12 PM Supported by Hollywood and other content industries, Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN has been battling online piracy for almost a quarter of a century. The non-profit organization has shut down thousands of piracy sites since then, including former torrent giant Mininova and many other notable names. In recent years, BREIN has focused more heavily on deterring users as well. In part, this has been achieved by tracking down persistent pirates and putting them on notice via warning letters. This can be an effective strategy but contacting alleged pirates in the Netherlands is easier said than done. Just a few weeks ago a local court of appeal ruled that Internet provider Ziggo is not required to forward BREIN's warning letters to subscribers whose accounts were used to share pirated content through BitTorrent. Warning an eBook Pirate In this case, BREIN chose not to appeal the ruling. Instead, it was looking forward to a court of appeal ruling in a related case, which was handed down today. The matter involves a Ziggo subscriber who stands accused of offering a library of over 200 e-books to the public through an open directory. BREIN hoped that the ISP would forward a notice to the associated account holder or share their personal details, but Ziggo refused to do so voluntarily. BREIN took the matter to court which last year ruled that the ISP is not required to cooperate with the request. Without a license from the Dutch Data Protection Authority, linking the IP address to the subscriber's information would violate privacy law. Similarly, sharing the data with BREIN wouldn't be allowed either. Court of Appeal Rules on Piracy Warning Disappointed with this outcome, BREIN immediately filed an appeal. That paid off today when the Arnhem-Leeuwarden Court of Appeal handed a win to the anti-piracy group. "The court finds Brein's interests in having public access to this library closed via the internet outweigh the infringement of the privacy of Ziggo customers and Ziggo's interests," the court's press service writes. BREIN also requested a ruling that would require Ziggo to comply with its demands in similar cases going forward. Since future cases will have to be judged individually to weigh the interests of both sides, the request was denied. The Court of Appeal ruling means that Ziggo has five days to forward BREIN's warning notice to the relevant subscriber via email. If this fails to shut down the pirated eBook directory, Ziggo must share the subscribers' personal details with the anti-piracy group. The Court of Appeal also ordered Ziggo to pay €14,385 towards the anti-piracy group's legal fees. Business as Usual BREIN is pleased that Ziggo must forward its warning but a more straightforward way of reaching pirates in future instances was the overall goal. Speaking with TorrentFreak, BREIN Director Tim Kuik says that it will be "business as usual" for new cases. "That means we need to motivate a request for name and address details on the basis of the Supreme Court's Lycos/Pessers criteria. An intermediary then needs to assess and make a decision. If it refuses to cooperate BREIN can go to court..," Kuik says. The Mircom Angle Dutch courts are required to weigh privacy rights against the interests of rightsholders to determine whether ISPs are required to comply with disclosure requests. This cautious approach is good for Internet users but BREIN sees it as a major hassle. It also contradicts how these issues are handled elsewhere. In the United States and other countries, for example, ISPs are required by law to forward copyright infringement notices to subscribers. Interestingly, BREIN highlights a note in this week's decision that references an earlier judgment by the European Court of Justice. In this 'Mircom' case, Europe's highest court concluded that ISPs can be required to share the personal details of alleged BitTorrent pirates. Linking the IP addresses of alleged non-criminal pirates to subscriber details doesn't by definition violate EU privacy law, the EU court held. However, in the same case, the court also noted that national courts must test each case to appropriately weigh the rights of both parties, to ensure that everything is in accordance with local law. All in all, today's Court of Appeal ruling is a small victory for BREIN. That said, the battle between privacy rights and rightsholder interests in piracy cases certainly isn't over in the Netherlands. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. Pirate IPTV: 24 MEPs Demand Action From EC President Ursula von der Leyen Andy Maxwell, 02 May 02:10 PM Pirate IPTV providers and streaming websites offering discounted or even free access to live sports broadcasts are controversial worldwide. Rightsholders say these illegal platforms threaten their business and need to be brought under control. In the European Union, pressure has been building on the European Commission to urgently address the problem, via new legislation if necessary, but responses thus far have left rightsholders underwhelmed. Last October, over 100 rightsholders and organizations, including the MPA, UEFA, Premier League, beIN, LaLiga, Serie A, Sky, and BT Sport, told the European Commission time was running out. Three weeks later the EC rejected demands for legislative instruments or European-wide regulation but promised to come up with a recommendation on mitigation measures under existing law. Following public submissions that mostly underlined rightsholders' claims that existing law is inadequate, the EC began to prepare its recommendation for combating piracy. A draft leaked to the media last month revealed that rightsholders will be expected to wait for another three years while the situation is monitored for change. Faced with the prospect of no legislative action until 2026, rightsholders vented their disappointment via the Live Content Coalition, well in advance of the recommendation's official publication. Two Dozen MEPs Issue Demands at the Highest Level The Association of Commercial Television and Video on Demand Services in Europe (ACT) is leading the campaign for legislative change on behalf of its members, some of which are multi-billion dollar businesses in their own right. This morning, ACT made public a letter sent to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Dated April 28, 2023, it references the EC's recommendation due to be published this week or, more accurately, the draft leaked to the media last month. One Year Monitoring Period Signed by 24 Members of the European Parliament, the letter is a follow-up to correspondence in March that called on the the Commission to "act decisively, efficiently and with the utmost priority against those who drain our creative economies." Once again, a refusal to address the problem with urgent legislation is highlighted as a major concern. "As previously outlined, we, together with many of our colleagues remain disappointed that the European Commission proposed a Recommendation despite unambiguous requests from the European Parliament for a legislative instrument," the MEPs write. "The only encouragement this house received from the European Commission can be found in the response from October 2022 which recognises that this issue should be tackled with urgency allowing for a solid and transparent monitoring system." The MEPs say they support the implementation of a monitoring period since producing performance data will incentivize "all the players in scope of the Recommendation" to act. What they cannot accept is that the suggested monitoring period, at least according to the leaked draft, is 36 months in duration. "We took note from the press that a current draft of the Recommendation envisages a three-year review period. Such a lengthy timeframe will only benefit malicious actors to the detriment of our European creative and sports industries," the MEPs warn. "We strongly encourage the European Commission's services under your authority to ensure that the final Recommendation – to be released in early May – includes a review period that is not longer than one year from publication." MEPs Ask EC President to Keep Promises When the European Commission published its work program last October, it gave assurances that should the recommendation not generate "the desired effects in a timely manner," further steps would be taken, "including by proposing new EU legislation addressing this significant problem." It's unclear whether the leaked draft repeated or omitted that assurance but the MEPs insist that, for the avoidance of doubt, it needs to appear in the recommendation due for publication this week. "Otherwise, our previous exchanges would be contradicted, Madam President, and the European Commission would demonstrate a lack of resolve in defending the rule of law in the European Union and delivering on the Commission's commitment to ensure that what is illegal offline is illegal online," the letter concludes. The letter sent to EC President Ursula von der Leyen can be found here (pdf) 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