PROJET AUTOBLOG


TorrentFreak

Archivé

Site original : TorrentFreak

⇐ retour index

File-Sharing Legend “Napster” Turns 20 Years Old Today

samedi 1 juin 2019 à 09:51

Somewhere in the fall of 1998 a user named ‘Napster’ joined the w00w00 IRC channel, a chatroom on the EFnet network populated by a few dozen elite ‘hackers’.

‘Napster’ shared a new idea with the group. The then 17-year-old developer wanted to create a network of computers that could share files with each other. More specifically, music tracks.

To many people, including some in the IRC channel, that idea sounded absurd. At the time people could already download files from the fringes of the Internet but on a very limited scale. And even then, the choice was limited, and transfers were very unreliable.

Creating a network of hundreds, thousands, or even millions of people who would all open up their hard drives to the rest and offer up bandwidth, was something that was entirely alien. ‘Napster’, however, had a feeling that people might be interested.

This feeling was shared by another teenage computer fanatic named ‘Man0War’. The two shared ideas online and eventually decided to meet up.

That’s when Shawn Fanning (aka Napster), who got the Napster nickname for his ‘nappy’ hair, first saw Sean Parker (aka Man0War). Together, they came up with a plan to bring the idea to fruition.

Fast forward a few months and it’s June 1, 1999. What started as a distant vision was now a fully-fledged application that was ready to shake the world. The software, which carried the name of its inventor, Napster, soon found its way to millions of computers all over the world.

Napster

From there, things developed quickly. After roughly three months, Napster already provided access to four million songs and in less than a year, 20 million people had downloaded the application.

What started as a simple idea quickly transformed into a multi-million dollar business. The company, which employed several people that were in the w00w00 IRC channel, changed the way millions of people enjoyed music.

For many of Napster’s users, the application represented something magical. It was a gateway for musical exploration that dwarfed even the largest record stores in town. And all for free.

Initially, the novelty concealed the fact that people were not supposed to share their music libraries with the rest of the world, but this would quickly change. Within a year, the RIAA sued Napster Inc. and soon after several artists including Metallica and Dr. Dre followed.

Like most record labels, these artists saw the file-sharing software as a threat. They felt that it would destroy the music industry, which was at its peak at the time. However, there were also more positive sounds from artists who recognized the promotional effect of Napster.

While Dr. Dre said “Fuck Napster,” Chuck D famously described it as “the new radio.”

Napster’s users were not concerned about what the labels and artists thought. They were interested in expanding their music libraries. While there are no official numbers, Napster was responsible for a significant portion of the global Internet traffic at the time.

Napster

University campuses were soon transformed into file-sharing hotspots. At some campuses over half of all bandwidth was consumed by MP3-sharing students and staff. This eventually led to a ban of the application at several universities, even before copyright issues arose. 

Meanwhile, the user base swelled to a peak of more than 26.4 million users worldwide in February 2001. But despite the epidemic growth and backing from investors, the small file-sharing empire couldn’t overcome the legal challenges.

The RIAA case resulted in an injunction from the Ninth Circuit Court, which ordered the network to shut down. This happened during July 2001, little more than two years after Napster launched. By September that year, the case had been settled for millions of dollars.

While the Napster craze was over, file-sharing had mesmerized the masses and the cat was out of the bag. Grokster, KaZaa, Morpheus, LimeWire, and many others popped up and provided sharing alternatives, for as long as they lasted. Meanwhile, BitTorrent was also knocking on the door. 

While the aforementioned software was often associated with piracy, Napster had a momentous impact on the development of legal services. People clearly signaled that there were interested in downloading music, so the first download stores were launched, with iTunes taking the lead.

These download portals never came close to what Napster offered though. Many music fans were not interested in buying a few tracks here and there, they wanted millions of files at their fingertips, ready to be played. This included a Swedish teenager named Daniel Ek. 

The Napster experience eventually triggered Ek to come up with a legal alternative that would replicate his first experience with piracy. That application was Spotify, which for its part sparked a music streaming subscription boom. 

Interestingly, music streaming is now the most important source of income for the music industry. These Napster-inspired services are good for roughly half of all the music revenues worldwide, completing the circle, in a way. 

Even the Napster brand, which has switched owners several times, lives on as a music subscription service today, owned by US retailer Best Buy. 

Napster’s founders, meanwhile, went on to create several other successful companies.

Sean Parker is a multi-billionaire now, in part thanks to his early involvement with Facebook. Fanning, aka Napster, is not doing badly either, with a net worth of more than 100 million, much like many other members of the w00w00 IRC channel.

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

As US Stream-Ripping Increases, Almost Half of Rippers Are Educated & Affluent

vendredi 31 mai 2019 à 22:21

According to major industry players, stream-ripping is a growing problem for recording labels and Internet platforms alike.

With revenues from streaming set to increase, people permanently downloading music from YouTube and similar platforms is considered a threat. Those who obtain content in this way can effectively circumvent the streaming business model, it’s argued.

A new study carried out by music industry research company MusicWatch suggests that in the United States, the phenomenon is on the increase.

The study was carried out among 5,000 Internet users 13 years and above in January and early February 2019. From 15 million participants in 2017, the study found that around 17 million citizens in the U.S. participated in stream-ripping during 2018.

“I suspect the gain might be related to a few reasons,” MusicWatch Managing Partner Russ H. Crupnick informs TorrentFreak.

Crupnick cites a few factors, including the overall popularity of YouTube and the decline in purchases from iTunes – but people still wanting to have a song for their collection. The gradual decline of P2P sharing may also play a part as people still retain a desire for music, thanks to streaming.

“As more people stream they get a greater appetite for music,” Crupnick notes.

MusicWatch says that just over half (56%) of those who stream-rip are male, with 68% of all ‘rippers’ falling into the 13 to 34-years-old bracket. The company categorizes 30% of users as ‘heavy’, ripping around 112 files (or roughly 10 to 11 albums worth of music) every year.

The main reasons for people to stream-rip are to have offline access to songs (46%) and wanting to own a song that isn’t considered worth buying (37%). While neither comes as a surprise, cost isn’t cited as a major factor.

Indeed, MusicWatch found that almost half (48%) of stream-rippers come from households with an annual income of $75K-$199K, with 43% holding down white-collar jobs. So what drives these people to rip?

“With a lot of piracy it’s not been about cost, it’s been about selectivity. I want something but not enough to pay for it?” Krupnick says.

“Unlike the P2P days, they aren’t downloading thousands of songs randomly. Just what they want for a collection, or a project. And they don’t want that song enough to pay $.99 for it.”

MusicWatch informs TF that the demographic for heavy streamers and those with a lot of devices is the affluent and the belief is that they are more tech-savvy than average. However, many people don’t consider that what they’re doing is potentially illegal.

“It’s using YouTube; the app is on Google Play or Apple’s App Store…what’s the problem?” Krupnick says,

“And in fact, I think that is part of the problem. We all knew that Napster/Limewire was ‘bad’. Here’s an app I get from Apple, that works fine on my iPhone or Mac, connects to a legal streaming service – where’s the problem?”

MusicWatch believes that search and app platforms should do more to educate consumers about which uses of their services could potentially result in copyright infringement. The company adds that stream-rippers are more likely to go the movies, play video games and subscribe to Netflix or Hulu, so if they pirate/rip music, that behavior could spill over to other areas.

“Discouraging stream-ripping isn’t just good for music; it’s good for the entire entertainment ecosystem,” MusicWatch concludes.

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

RapidVideo Blocks Pirate Sites Over Copyright Concerns

vendredi 31 mai 2019 à 15:59

RapidVideo is a popular file-hosting site that specializes in hosting videos.

Similar to other file-hosting services, it can be used for good and bad. The bad, in this case, is uploading pirated videos. 

Whether the site’s operators want it or not, that’s what many of RapidVideo’s users are indeed doing. A few months ago this resulted in a scathing report from Hollywood’s MPAA, which branded the site as a “notorious” piracy haven. 

The U.S. Trade Representative didn’t adopt this recommendation in its yearly overview. Whether RapidVideo’s outspoken response had anything to do with it is unknown. However, the video hosting site has recently taken several measures which are are not typical for a “notorious” site.

In April we reported that RapidVideo had shut down its pay-per-view rewards program, which was one of the MPAA’s main complaints. This week the video hosting service went a step further, by banning referrals from popular pirate video indexing sites.

The site’s operator informs TorrentFreak that referrals from the German sites Kinox.to , Streamkiste.tv , Filmpalast.to and Movie4k.to are now actively blocked. Instead of the requested videos, users now see the following message, translated from German.

“I’m sorry! This portal is temporarily not available based on a copyright protection claim. Unfortunately, this content is not available in your region.”

Blocked

The message is shown to all visitors from these four video indexing sites. They are shown based on the referring URL but, if these fail, RapidVideo is also considering adding IP-address blockades in the future. 

RapidVideo took the drastic measure because it’s particularly concerned about the German legal concept of ‘Störerhaftung’ (‘interferer liability’). This means that a third party can be held responsible for someone else’s infringements, even when it played no intentional part.

Add in Europe’s proposed Article 17, previously known as Article 13, and you get a volatile mix of potential copyright problems.  

“Article 13 is coming within a few months to 2 years, so the control has to become tougher, because ‘Interferer liability’ and ‘Article 13’ together are a bad combination,” RapidVideo’s operator tells us.

RapidVideo’s operator stresses that there could be more blockades like this when Article 17 is implemented throughout the European Union member states.

It is worth noting that the four targeted sites are all blocked by the German ISP Vodafone as well. This is also what RapidVideo mentioned to Tarnkappe as an additional motivation.

A video hosting service such as RapidVideo blocking ‘pirate’ sites is quite a game changer, to say the least. In the case of Kinox.to it appears to have had some effect already, as the site has removed all links to RapidVideo.

Movie4K seems to have taken another approach. When we tried to access a RapidVideo link from the site it went through an anonymous referrer service, which worked just fine.

But that’s the thing with blockades, there’s always a way around them.

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

BitTorrent to Fork IPFS to Create Decentralized File-Storage System

vendredi 31 mai 2019 à 09:48

In 2018, BitTorrent Inc. was officially aquired by Tron, a relatively new player in the cryptocurrency space.

Both companies have a keen interest in decentralization, with shared goals of allowing users around the world to communicate without third-party intervention.

While there is a constant online buzz about the cryptocurrency side of TRON, the 100+ million users of the uTorrent and BitTorrent Mainline clients have been keen to hear what this acquisition will mean for them.

Last year, TRON founder Justin Sun said that introducing financial rewards for seeders will lead to faster download speeds and greater content retention. While this system has yet to be revealed in public, this week Sun teased a potentially more exciting development via Twitter.

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8">

Last evening, as promised, BitTorrent Inc. put more meat on the bones of this tweet.

“BitTorrent, a leader in peer-to-peer protocols and products, will incorporate BitTorrent File System (BTFS) to allow users to receive and host storage on their computers with other individuals and businesses,” the company said in a statement.

While the existing BitTorrent system is already a kind of decentralized storage system, BTFS will be different. Based on the existing InterPlanetary File System (IPFS) protocol, BTFS seems destined to offer a way to store files online without the use of centralized hosting.

Instead of placing files on traditional hosting sites, files will be distributed across the computers of those participating in the BTFS network. At this stage, the most likely candidates appear to be the users of the uTorrent and BitTorrent Mainline torrent clients, but TRON hasn’t yet provided any solid information.

“BTFS is a continuing step in our mission to create a decentralized internet that allows everyone to share in the wealth of web commerce,” said Justin Sun, founder of TRON and CEO of BitTorrent.

“We’re creating a platform with BTFS, BitTorrent Speed blockchain integration and the BTT utility token to let users quickly and privately interact with each other around the world without a middleman or government intervention.”

Many believed that Sun’s tweet earlier this week meant that BTFS itself was three days from launch, but that isn’t the case. BitTorrent Inc. says the BTFS Mainnet will be launched “for public access” in Q3 2019 but BTFS itself is still undergoing testing and won’t be available until 2020.

An easy-to-understand explanation of how IPFS works can be found below.

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

ISP Reports Movie Company to Data Protection Agency Over ‘Piracy’ Data

jeudi 30 mai 2019 à 17:55

While some movie companies are satisfied with the income generated by their content, others are increasingly looking for additional revenue streams via legal action.

One of those companies is Venice PI, the outfit behind the Bruce Willis movie Once Upon a Time in Venice. It has filed several lawsuits in the United States with the aim of extracting cash settlements from alleged BitTorrent users, cases that haven’t always gone in the company’s favor.

In common with other companies involved in so-called “copyright trolling” cases, Venice PI has already found itself in awkward positions in court. That hasn’t prevented it from filing further lawsuits, however.

Indeed, Venice PI and partners have gone after ‘pirate’ services too, including Dragon Box, Showbox, and Popcorn Time. Given the status of these cases, it seems that settlements rather than full trials are still on the agenda.

Venice PI also appears to be testing similar markets overseas, with the company demanding that Spanish ISP Euskaltel hand over the identities of individuals who allegedly downloaded and shared the previously-mentioned Bruce Willis movie.

Euskaltel says that it has repeatedly refused to hand over any data but was eventually ordered by Commercial Court No. 2 of Bilbao to hand over the personal details of subscribers behind IP addresses said to have pirated the movie.

“Despite the repeated refusal of the ISP to deliver any data to the Court, the Commercial Court number 2 of Bilbao issued a ruling dismissing Euskaltel’s opposition allegations, forcing the ISP to provide the Court with the required information,” a statement from Euskaltel reads.

“The Court forced Euskaltel to provide the data of the affected clients, without the possibility of appeal, delivering them to the film producer.”

Of course, it was no surprise when, in recent weeks, Euskaltel customers began receiving correspondence from lawyers representing Venice PI.

Somewhat unusually for such cases, the ISP reports that customers were targeted via their email addresses (rather than regular mail) with demands to pay a 150 euro settlement within five days of the notice “to avoid the initiation of legal proceedings.”

Interestingly – and despite being ordered to hand over the information by the Court – Euskaltel believes the use of the personal data in this manner may constitute a breach of Spain’s Data Protection regulations.

“The Telecommunications operator Euskaltel has filed a complaint with the Spanish Agency for Data Protection (AEPD) against the film producer Venice PI, LLC, for possible violation of data protection regulations as a result of the use of what the producer did with the Euskaltel customer data,” the company says.

“At no time did the Euskaltel group identify the owners of such IP addresses as authors of any infringement or make any assessment of the legality or illegality of the actions taken by users.”

The ISP says that when it provided information to Venice PI in compliance with an order for preliminary proceedings, the movie company was “not free to decide what to do the data, a circumstance that seems to have been breached and that may constitute an infringement of data protection regulations.”

The complaint was filed with the AEPD (Agencia Española de Protección de Datos) on May 20, 2019. The data protection agency has not yet commented on the complaint.

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