Wednesday, March 4, 2020

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

Torrent Sites Help Game Developer to Share Free Copy of 'Death and Taxes'
Ernesto, 04 Mar 09:13 PM

In life, there are few things as certain as death and taxes. For many creators, piracy falls into this category too.

There are multiple ways people can respond to this threat. In Hollywood and the music industry, takedown notices and other anti-piracy efforts are preferred. Others simply do nothing.

There's also a third option. Over the years a small subset of creators has actively embraced piracy. Not because they don't want any income. Instead, they see it in part as a promotional vehicle.

This is also the case with Oak, the developer of the game named 'Death and Taxes.' The recently released 2D narrative-based game, where people can play the role of Grim Reaper, currently sells for $12.99 on Stream.

At the same time, however, the game is also available for free on many torrent sites. There is an official 'pirate' release from the group PLAZA but, in addition to that, the developer also shared his own torrent.

"I'd just like the inevitable release to be on my own terms, meaning that it's the best possible version, that people can enjoy hassle-free, not a potentially janky release with shitty workarounds or other problems," Oak from Placeholder Gameworks tells TorrentFreak.

The developer torrents are available on a variety of torrent sites. They come with a special message from Placeholder Gameworks, stating that they are ok with piracy and that they understand that some people can't afford games, or want to try them before buying.

While major corporations may not understand this move, it makes total sense for the smaller indie developer. A game produced on a small budget can't afford expensive marketing campaigns. They do want eyeballs, however, and that's where torrent sites come in.

"It's super difficult to stand out nowadays, especially for a game that has literally ZERO budget. I can just hope that having a free version out will help the game and its ideas reach a wider community than we would have been otherwise able to connect to."

In his quest to release the torrent, the developer went a step further than some others. Oak actually reached out directly to some torrent sites, which gladly helped him. This explains why his official release is on a site such as RARBG, which generally isn't open to public uploads.

"I received assistance from 1337x and RARBG. Both sites' staffers were super helpful and helped me get up the release within minutes. Mad props to them! I literally couldn't have done that without them," Oak tells us, adding that Reddit's Crackwatch admin team lent a helping hand as well.

These types of developer-sanctioned releases are not new. Just recently, we highlighted a similar move from the developer of the indie shooter game 'Danger Gazers,' who actually noticed a significant boost in sales afterward.

While that can happen, embracing torrent sites is by no means a magical 'profit boost' wand. In 'Danger Gazers' case, the announcement went viral and it was later picked up in the press, which made it a self-fulfilling prophecy to a certain degree.

Death and Taxes didn't get this massive external boost and shows a much more natural sales pattern.

On February 20th, when it was first released on Steam, Death and Taxes was sold 4,282 times, followed by 4,017 and 2,915 copies the days after. This dropped to 2,770 a day later, when the torrent came out and continued to fall in the following days to 1,398 on Wednesday the 26th.

These numbers are quite typical for the release of a new game. There certainly no magic boost thanks to piracy, but sales didn't fall beyond what was expected either. In the broader scheme, however, the developer thinks that the torrent will have a positive effect.

"It's quite simple: more people will be playing our game. More people will be talking about it, more people will have opinions about it. That's the best we could ever ask for," Oak says.

What also plays a role is that the developer used to be a pretty hardcore pirate himself. As a young game fan, he simply couldn't afford to pay for every release. That said, now that he has the means to do so, Oak is making up for it.

"If I counted the games that I torrented (and edonkeyd/emuled), I would die of old age. I didn't grow up rich, and could only afford maybe a single game a year," Oak says.

"I've now tried to buy all the games that I had pirated as a kid. Better late than never, right? And having access to that, I got enamored with games and really I generally try to buy everything now, since as a developer I feel honor-bound to buy my colleagues' works."

The developer torrent also includes a link to the official Steam release, where people can buy it if they want. Most importantly, however, Oak hopes that people will enjoy the game. Based on the responses thus far, that seems to be the case.

"People like the game, they enjoy what it offers, they seem to really like the art, writing, music and voice acting, which I also think are our strongest aspects. Could have always had better gameplay design, but we had limited time and I think we did pretty well," Oak says.

'Death and Taxes' is available on Steam as well as many torrent sites near you. In the future, the source code will be made public as well.

Drom: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also have an annual VPN review.

ApolloTV Streaming App Shuts Down Following ACE Cease-and-Desist Notice
Andy, 04 Mar 10:57 AM

While third-party Kodi addons remain popular with those seeking free access to premium video, standalone apps for Android and iOS have gained traction in recent years.

Easy to install and use on set-top boxes, tablets and phones, these tools often provide a Popcorn-Time or Showbox-like experience, offering the latest movies and TV shows in a familiar Netflix-style interface. On the one hand, they're popular with users but Hollywood studios and other content creators consider them a risk to their business that needs to be countered.

ApolloTV is a relatively recent addition to the growing market. Available for iOS and Android, the application gained a reasonable following and is featured in dozens of tutorials and YouTube video installation guides. At the time of writing, however, it seems highly unlikely that the project will continue.

Over the past several days, rumors began to circulate that ApolloTV would be shutting down. The whispers suggested that the application's developer had been targeted by copyright holders and as a result, the app would be discontinued. Counter-rumors suggested that the developer simply wanted a way out so TorrentFreak approached 'Sam' directly to find out.

"I received a cease and desist from the Alliance 4 Creativity – the same people who took down Openload and Streamango – citing ApolloTV making available copyrighted works copied and hosted by unaffiliated third parties without permission from the copyright holder," Sam informs us.

The claim seems reasonable given the circumstances. ApolloTV didn't host any content of its own but did provide access to content hosted on third-party file-hosting platforms, a common feature among similar 'scraper'-type applications.

As TF discovered, Sam made little to no effort to hide his identity so it appears that ACE had few difficulties tracking him down. However, while we reached him easily via email, ACE managed to discover his home address which enabled them to serve the cease-and-desist notice by hand.

"I was surprised that I actually received the cease and desist physically, in person (it was delivered by a court officer), at my home address," he explains.

Sam says that he doesn't have the time or the resources to fight a lawsuit and since ACE were very reasonable, he'll be complying with their requests immediately. He doesn't want to go into too many additional details but says that as part of the settlement, he will need to shut down the project's Github page and hand over the Apollo domain to ACE.

At the time of writing, the official ApolloTV repository on Github has been taken down. ACE nor the MPA appear to have filed any official DMCA takedown requests with the developer platform so at this point things seem to be progressing quickly on a voluntary basis.

TorrentFreak sought comment from ACE on the reported action but, at the time of publishing, we were yet to receive a response.

Update: ACE responded and a spokesperson provided the following comment on the ApolloTV case:

"As part of the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE) ongoing efforts to protect the legal market for creative content and reduce piracy, ACE representatives contacted an individual in the United Kingdom suspected to be involved with the development, operation, and distribution of an illegal video streaming application."

Drom: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also have an annual VPN review.

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

Tuesday, March 3, 2020

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

RomUniverse Maintains Innocence and Demands Damages From Nintendo
Ernesto, 03 Mar 10:40 PM

Last September, gaming giant Nintendo filed a lawsuit against the game download portal RomUniverse.

The website, which also allows users to download movies and books, stands accused of enabling massive online copyright infringement, including that of many popular Nintendo titles.

"The Website is among the most visited and notorious online hubs for pirated Nintendo video games. Through the Website, Defendants reproduce, distribute, monetize, and offer for download thousands of unauthorized copies of Nintendo's video games," the company wrote.

RomUniverse profited from these copyright infringements by offering paid premium accounts that allow users to download as many games as they want, Nintendo further alleged.

The site's operator, Los Angeles resident Matthew Storman, clearly disagreed with these allegations. Without an attorney, he decided to defend himself in court and responded to Nintendo's claims by filing a detailed motion to dismiss.

This motion eventually failed after Nintendo picked it apart. The court instead ruled that Storman had to face the charges and file a reply to Nintendo's complaint.

The reply was initially due in January, but the court later agreed to push this deadline back. That was done to allow the RomUniverse admin to attend a Federal Pro Se Clinic to get free advice on how to fight the gaming company on his own.

After the brief delay, Storman filed his answer to the complaint at the California federal court. Still without an attorney, he maintains his innocence and denies all allegations of piracy and infringement.

The site operator states that he is unaware of any infringing content that was uploaded to the website. And if there is any, these uploads may be legally protected by the first sale doctrine.

Storman likens his site to other platforms that deal with user-uploaded content. He therefore argues that he can't be held liable for uploads carried out by others because he is entitled to safe harbor protection.

"Defendant provides copyright owners access to all files that are arranged by uploaded title only. This is required under 17 U.S. C and an implied contract with Nintendo, where Nintendo has full access to all contents to locate any potentially infringing material..," Storman writes.

That the site also collects membership fees is not a problem as long as Nintendo doesn't remove any content from the site, according to the admin.

"Defendant is unaware of content. Furthermore, Nintendo can request removal of any material it has a good faith believe to be infringing. Defendant may receive potential membership fees as long as Nintendo does not remove all material," he writes.

In an attempt to turn the tables, Storman argues that Nintendo profited from his site. RomUniverse.com and the associated NDSUniverse.com, serve as free advertising vehicles for the gaming company which generated profit from it, for which the site owner never received a penny.

"Copies on the Website originally from Nintendo when seen by users is a positive advertising asset to Nintendo. It is part of an implied contract with Nintendo over the last 10 years. This advertising asset can be calculated and measured by Nintendo in cooperation with Defendant," Storman adds.

The response to the complaint includes several of the arguments that were also made in the motion to dismiss. However, it also does a step further, by demanding damages from Nintendo.

Instead of compensating Nintendo, Storman wants the gaming company to pay up instead. He demands $150,000 per copyrighted work for the false allegations of infringement, as well as $2,000,000 for each false counterfeiting claim.

On top of that, Storman also wants Nintendo to "permanently approve all copying, distributing, selling, performing, displaying, playing, or otherwise using any copy of an [Nintendo] copyrighted work, or any derivative thereof."

Storman's demands are the exact opposite of Nintendo's, which requested the same damages for the alleged infringements and wanted the site admin to permanently cease (instead of approve) the copying of any copyrighted works.

While Storman's reply is certainly a bold move, we expect that Nintendo will have a different view on the matter. The company's legal team may also point out several procedural and technical issues, as it previously did.

In any case, it will be a major challenge to defeat a company of this size in court, without any legal representation. For now, however, both RomUniverse.com and the associated NDSUniverse.com remain online.

Matthew Storman's answer to Nintendo's copyright infirngement complaint is available here (pdf).

Drom: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also have an annual VPN review.

Two Piracy-Configured 'Kodi Box' Sellers Handed One-Year Suspended Sentences
Andy, 03 Mar 10:58 AM

Over the past several years the sale of TV devices pre-configured for piracy has become a big deal all around the world.

Largely avoiding the inconvenience of scouring potentially dozens of websites looking for movies and TV shows, automated software tools embedded in these set-top boxes have provided a simple way to access the latest content from the comfort of an armchair.

The software of choice is often the Kodi media player which in itself is entirely legal until modified for piracy purposes with third-party add-ons.

Such devices can be bought online or commonly in the UK, via shops and market traders. This was the business of Londoners Thomas Tewelde and Mohamed Abdou, who sold modified 'Kodi Boxes' to the public via a stall at Bovingdon Market in Hemel Hempstead.

Their activities attracted the attention of Hertfordshire Trading Standards officers who carried out a covert purchase operation in July 2017. They found that not only were the set-top devices illegal but also fell short of electrical safety standards.

Earlier this month the men went on trial and after four-day hearing, were found guilty by a jury of offenses under the Serious Crime Act 2007 and Fraud Act 2006. Sentencing took place at St Albans Crown Court last Friday.

"This is not a victimless crime, every legitimate subscriber is a victim," the judge commented during the hearing, as per the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT), which assisted with the investigation.

"It may not be possible to calculate loss but it will be significant given the usual charge for services, number of devices, and period over which the enterprise appears to have operated. Another serious factor is that components were unsafe. It is clear that immediate prison sentences are justified for this type of offenses."

'Immediate prison sentences' in this case comes with conditions. While Tewelde and Abdou were handed one year each in prison, the judge suspended those sentences for two years, meaning that if the pair keep out of trouble, they will avoid a stretch behind bars. Nevertheless, both are still required to complete 120 hours of unpaid work and must also pay £1,000 in costs.

Despite the potential for more serious punishment, the sentences were welcomed by the parties involved in the prosecution.

Andrew Butler, Head of Regulatory Services at Hertfordshire County Council, described the sentences as a "great result" for Trading Standards while FACT Chief Executive Kieron Sharp issued the customary warning to others involved in or considering the same line of business.

"This sentence shows that if you are involved in the sale of illicit devices you can receive a criminal conviction for fraud that will have a detrimental effect on your life," Sharp said.

"We urge consumers to remain mindful of counterfeits and illicit goods being sold at markets as many illicit streaming devices have failed to meet UK safety standards, potentially risking the lives of loved ones if installed in the home."

The sentencing comes close on the heels of several other pieces of news related to unlicensed streaming and related devices in the UK.

Last week, John Dodds, who was previously sentenced to serve 4.5 years in prison for selling pirate IPTV devices to pubs and clubs, was ordered to pay £520,000 to the public purse. The court warned that failure to comply will mean an additional five years for the man who was convicted in a Premier League-led prosecution.

Also last week, FACT revealed that a man who previously received a 16-month prison sentence relating to the supply of set-top boxes configured to receive Sky and BT Sport broadcasts without a subscription was ordered to hand over £10,000 under the Proceeds of Crime Act. In his case, non-payment will result in an additional six months in prison.

Last Wednesday, FACT investigators and the North West Regional Organised Crime Unit (ROCU) reportedly visited an address in North West England to execute warrants related to a "significant provider of illegal streaming activity." At this stage, no further information is being made available by FACT or the police so who the target was or indeed the precise nature of the activity remains unclear.

Drom: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also have an annual VPN review.

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company

Sunday, March 1, 2020

TorrentFreak's Latest News

 

U.S. Court Denies $28,500 Default Judgment Against Accused Pirate
Ernesto, 01 Mar 09:16 PM

In recent years, adult entertainment outfit Malibu Media has often been described as a copyright trolling operation.

The company, known for its popular "X-Art" brand, has gone after thousands of alleged file-sharers in U.S. courts. Many of its targets settle their cases out of court, but others choose to ignore them.

Not responding at all can be quite risky. If a defendant is named in a lawsuit and properly served, the court typically requires a response. If that doesn't come, the complaining party can request a default judgment.

This is also what happened to New Jersey resident Amiram Peled, who was accused of downloading 19 titles from Malibu Media after the company linked his IP-address to unauthorized BitTorrent activity. Peled was made aware of these allegations but didn't show up in court to offer a defense.

As a result, Malibu Media submitted a motion arguing that it's entitled to $28,500 in statutory damages for copyright infringement and an additional $467.55 in costs.

In many cases, courts grant default judgment requests, as there is no defense. This has allowed Malibu Media to collect dozens, if not hundreds of default judgments. However, in the present matter, a judge decided otherwise.

In a recently released opinion, U.S. District Judge Katharine S. Hayden denied the motion, concluding that Malibu Media isn't entitled to anything.

The denial is based on a culmination of rulings in similar BitTorrent piracy cases. While Malibu Media portrayed the defendant as the copyright infringer, the Court wasn't convinced that Peled is the one who actually downloaded the files.

"[T]he Court is concerned that, no matter how reliable the tracing technology is, Peled's status as the subscriber of the IP address is insufficient to prove that he was in fact the infringer of the copyrighted materials," Judge Hayden writes.

Judge Hayden carefully reviewed how other cases handled similar allegations. While some ruled that geolocation data and an IP-address is sufficient for a default judgment to be granted, other rulings were more critical.

The order specifically cites the highly critical opinion of Judge Royce C. Lamberth, who threw out a similar case in the District of Columbia.

"In a scathing opinion, Judge Lamberth described Strike 3 as a 'copyright troll,' and accused it of using bad technology to support predatory litigation," Judge Hayden writes, also referencing the part claiming that Malibu appears to use the courts "as an ATM."

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling in the Cobbler Nevada v. Gonzales case is mentioned as well. There, the court ruled that identifying the registered subscriber of an IP-address is by itself not enough to argue that the person is also the infringer.

This order trickled down to lower courts, with several judges demanding "something more" than just an IP-address in these cases. This includes a previous denial of a default judgment in New Jersey, and also the present case against Mr. Peled.

"Because Malibu Media has not made a sufficient showing to conclude that Peled in fact infringed its copyright, the Court denies the request for default judgment," Judge Hayden concludes.

A copy of the opinion written by U.S. District Judge Katharine S. Hayden is available here (pdf).

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

What Type of Anti-Piracy Campaign Is More Likely to Work on Infringers?
Andy, 01 Mar 12:23 PM

Over the past couple of decades, campaigns aimed at discouraging people from accessing infringing content online have come in all shapes and sizes. Whether they are effective is still up for debate.

It could be argued that since copyright infringement is now easier than ever, with even novices able to access almost any content they like without paying, none of these campaigns have really worked. On the other hand, however, who knows where infringement would be today without a certain level of overt discouragement.

This week the UK's Intellectual Property Office published its latest Online Copyright Infringement Tracker report, aspects of which we covered in an earlier article. Interestingly and in addition to a truckload of statistics, the report also covers consumer opinions on what type of anti-piracy campaigns might be effective with the general public.

Framed as "behavior change" mechanisms, the report looked at two broad types of anti-piracy campaigns – those that make it clear that downloading or streaming infringing content is illegal and others that set out to highlight the consequences or repercussions of the illegal behavior.

"Responses to campaigns depended somewhat on the level of experience and frequency of infringing, as well as moral standpoint. Two broad segments emerged," the report reads.

"Cautious Infringers: Those who worry about infringing the law and the risks of illegal activity [and] Savvy Infringers: Those who are more tech savvy and knowingly access content illegally without much concern over related dangers or consequences."

It makes perfect sense that different types of campaigns would work on these two groups. Those who are less well-informed and worry more about the chances of getting caught are probably easier to convince. The more tech-savvy bunch often have a tendency to see past scare-tactics, for example, and may even have the means to mitigate most threats.

According to the research, campaign imagery was effective in several areas, such as when the campaign was made more personal by centering it around an everyday scenario, such as watching a football match.

Relevancy is also listed as a matter of importance. For example, it was considered more effective to elicit an emotional response from the viewer (becoming a victim of identity theft) than to err more towards facts, such as being infected by malware.

Furthermore, campaigns must be clear.

"Campaigns with straightforward and uncomplicated messages are preferred. Any form of confusing rhetoric or double meaning runs the risk of taking attention from the core message (e.g. 'You wouldn't buy a digital virus…')," the report notes.

Perhaps most importantly, the tone of campaigns must be carefully considered. The report states that while most believe that detailing the consequences of accessing content illegally needs to be spelled out, "a few take issue with the use of 'scare tactics'
and feel the ads are too accusatory."

Perhaps the most obvious example of scare tactics and overly-dramatic tone to date is the 'You Wouldn't Steal/Piracy is a Crime" campaign. It has been the subject of various parodies, such as the most well-known one featured in the IT Crowd.

Interestingly, another even more outrageous example surfaced just recently on Reddit and while intentionally offensive in parts, it really drives home the message that going over the top is more likely to elicit mockery rather than change.

So how best to deal with the different types of infringers?

For 'Cautious Infringers' it's suggested that simple messages are best, particularly ones that identify which behavior is illegal and then sign-posting further information and detail. "This is especially important for those who are sent content by others and/or use services where there is some ambiguity around legality (e.g. Kodi boxes)," the report notes.

When it comes to 'Savvy Infringers', it's suggested that giving real-life examples of people who were caught and fined (or were victims of hacking) may help to address the perception that "it will never happen to me." It's also noted that simply stating that the behavior is illegal or that people could become a victim of fraud may not be enough.

Instead, there may be some mileage in talking about "potential impact on credit score, losing money, or accessing personal photos etc."

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

 
 
Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company