In recent years website blocking has become one of the most widely-used anti-piracy enforcement mechanisms in the world.

The process was pioneered in Denmark over a decade ago and was optimized and expanded in the following years.

For example, all major ISPs signed a voluntary agreement to block a site when there’s a court order against one provider. Also, in 2018 the Scandinavian country became the first country to block so-called YouTube rippers.

Last summer a new court order was issued following a complaint from the anti-piracy group Rights Alliance. This order targeted a new set of YouTube rippers, including Converto and MP3-YouTube. Interestingly, however, the court deferred the judgment against Yout.com, which decided to intervene in the case.

This type of intervention is quite unusual. Blocking cases are generally between copyright holders and ISPs. Although the affected sites are notified, they generally don’t get involved.

Yout operator John Nader chose a different path, one that was already forecasted four years ago in an interview on Reddit. Responding to potential copyright issues, Nader said the following.

“You may be right, and I may not see the gravity of the situation I am in. But if I get to the point where this becomes an issue, I will fight for a cause I believe in, and I’m content with that.”

A few years later, Nader boarded a plane to Denmark, to defend his site, without a lawyer. This trip turned out to be in vain, as Rights Alliance provided Nader with the wrong date for the hearing, but the case went on.

The Yout operator eventually hired a lawyer and defended his site in court. Among other things, he argued that Yout never stores any copyright-infringing content on its servers. It merely offers a ‘pipeline’ to enable users to grab YouTube audio or video.

This stance was backed up by an extensive expert testimony from Luis Peter Wahl Knudsen, who works as a technical manager at the Danish software company Minuba.

“From the analysis of the source code for Yout.com’s recording function, it can be concluded that Yout.com does not contain any functionality which stores/saves content from media sources on Yout.com’s servers,” he informed the court last November.

Rights Alliance responded by presenting testimony from Georg Nolte, Google Germany’s Senior Legal Counsel. He stressed that downloading copies is prohibited in YouTube’s Terms of Service.

“In order to prevent unauthorized downloads on a technical level, YouTube implements so-called ‘cipher’ technology to mitigate unauthorized access to YouTube content,” Nolte wrote, adding that this encryption was implemented to protect copyright holders.

Yout’s witness didn’t deny this but stressed that the technical protections are rather weak, reiterating once again that Yout doesn’t store any files. Rights Alliance, for its part, said that Nader was well aware of the potential copyright complications while pointing to the Reddit interview we mentioned earlier.

After reviewing the positions from both sides, the court agreed with Rights Alliance. In an order issued last month, Judge Kinna Eidem orders Internet provider Fibia to block Yout.com.

“The Court finds that Yout.com, by means of the method described, in breach of the exclusive rights held by the holder, is making protected works available to a new public by means of a new technical method whereby they are communicated to the public.

“The Court also finds that Yout.com, via its mode of operation, plays an essential role in the communication of protected works,” the order adds.

According to Judge Eidem, Yout.com helps users to retrieve files from YouTube and store these on their computers. As such, it is classified as a “stream ripping service.” The defense argued that Yout.com should be seen as a recording tool, similar to Xbox Game Bar, but the court disagreed.

“This facilitation is not comparable to the recording functions found in e.g. Xbox Game Bar, whereby the users, in real-time, can record what is being played locally on the users’ own computer,” the order reads.

Judge Eidem also highlighted Google’s testimony, which makes it clear that users are not allowed to access protected YouTube videos. Yout.com, however, offers a tool to do just that, by circumvention the technical protection measures.

In addition to granting the blockade, Yout.com is also ordered to pay the legal feeds of Rights Alliance, which total roughly $4,350 (30,000 DKR). Nader’s request to be compensated for his pointless trip to Denmark was denied, however, as the defense failed to provide more details on the incurred costs.

TorrentFreak reached out to Nader, who is disappointed with the verdict but prefers not to comment on the matter at this time. Yout.com, meanwhile, is blocked by all major Danish ISPs now.

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

With millions of fans all over the world, Spain’s football league ‘La Liga’ is one of the most popular in the game.

Like other sports organizations, the organization has a dedicated anti-piracy team that actively tracks and reports unauthorized live streams.

In recent weeks, however, there haven’t been any live football games to protect. As in many other parts of the world, all La Liga matches have been put on hold to stop the coronavirus from spreading.

This means that many of La Liga’s antipiracy resources are unused. Not just personnel, but also a supercomputer with the nickname ‘Demogorgonin’, which is located at the League’s headquarters in Madrid.

The supercomputer in question is reported to be 4,232 times as powerful as regular desktop machines. Normally, it is used to track pirate live streams, but now it is mostly fighting COVID-19.

La Liga’s engineers and IT experts previously came up with the idea to lend out processing capacity to Folding@home, a distributed computing project that has been going for nearly two decades. With donated computer resources from all over the world, the project aids important medical research.

“We have engineers, IT experts, people who know the systems so well and they thought: ‘Look, we can hand this over, we haven’t got games every day — Barcelona aren’t on every day,'” La Liga technician Emilio told ESPN.

Initially, La Liga’s spare computer resources were used for cancer research, but this has now been switched to COVID-19.

“We were helping investigations into cancer. But then when all this happened, attention shifted and we handed it over to fight against coronavirus,” Emilio explained.

La Liga is not alone in this. At the start of the year there were 30,000 computers connected to the Folding@home network. This has now grown to more than a million, according to an NVIDIA report.

With all this computing power the researchers aim to better understand how COVID-19 virus proteins contribute to the disease, to hopefully help find useful remedies. This process has previously led to success with other diseases.

La Liga and all other participants should of course be applauded for their work. That also includes the German Pirate Party, The Pirate Society, Torrent Invites, and many others.

In this case, copyright resources are usefully being redirected to help medical specialists. Unfortunately, however, the same can’t be said for all rightsholders.

Last week Reason reported that biomedical technicians are actively ignoring copyright law to fix medical devices.

Manufacturers often don’t allow third parties to tinker with their products, which ignited all sorts of DIY crowdsourcing initiatives. A prime example is Franks’s Hospital Workshop, which is operated by a technician from Tanzania. In recent weeks, his site has been overwhelmed with traffic.

To lift this pressure, iFixit started a new initiative to help gather manuals and other technical information about medical devices, which can save lives, especially now.

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

For several years, entertainment industry companies have been applying for blocking injunctions under Australian copyright law. According to them, having sites rendered inaccessible by consumer ISPs is an effective response to large-scale piracy.

This week yet another injunction process, involving a range of movie and TV show companies, came to its conclusion in the Federal Court.

Roadshow Films, Village Roadshow Films, Disney, Paramount Pictures, Columbia Pictures, Universal Studios, Warner Bros., and Netflix (the ‘MPA/Roadshow applicants’) previously claimed that their copyrights, related to content including The Lego Movie, Toy Story, Spider-Man, Dunkirk, and Stranger Things, were being infringed on a wide range of unlicensed platforms.

Television Broadcasts Limited and TVBO Production Limited (the ‘TVB applicants’) alleged the same in respect of their Chinese television programs including Dead Wrong and Provocateur. Madman Anime (Madman) made similar claims over their film Tokyo Ghoul.

Together, they demanded that 86 “target online locations” should be blocked by 50 ISPs operated by Telstra, Optus, Vocus, TPG, and Vodafone under s115A of the Copyright Act 1968.

Under that legislation, the Federal Court is able to grant an injunction to prevent access to an “online location” based outside Australia when it infringes or facilitates an infringement of copyright and has the same “primary purpose or primary effect.”

The Court found that the MPA/Roadshow and TVB applicants had standing to bring the action as owners and/or exclusive licensees of content. In respect of Madman, the Court found that despite no copyright owner being joined in the action, its status as an exclusive licensee was sufficient.

The range of sites targeted is broad, including streaming and download platforms, linking sites (including torrent sites), sites that offer software that allows streaming or downloads, subtitle archives, plus sites that offer proxy access to pirate sites.

Some notable inclusions are the community-resurrected KickassTorrents site operating from Katcr.co, plus some less authentic Kickass clones. Others, trading on familiar brands but unconnected to their namesakes, include 123movies, Primewire, CouchTuner, Putlocker, WatchFree, ProjectFreeTV, and YesMovies-style domains.

Further additions are getpopcorntime.is (a site offering a Popcorn Time software variant), subtitle download sites TVSubtitles.net and MSubs.net, plus Russian torrent giant Rutor.info and the China-focused btbtdy.me.

Efforts were made by the applicants to contact the operators of these platforms but according to the Court, just one responded. Sarah Florian, the supposed operator of Animelon.com, claimed to control a “non-profit educational entity that uses animated videos to provide a novel and fun way for users to learn the Japanese language.” The Court concluded, however, that Animelon.com “flagrantly facilitates the infringement of copyright.”

The nature of the other sites in the applications warranted discussion but were all determined to breach copyright law. According to the Court, in various ways they provide direct access or facilitate access to copyright works, including movies, TV shows, and subtitle files. This applies to the proxy and Popcorn Time sites too.

Noting that many of the sites are already blocked in other regions as a result of similar copyright injunctions, Justice Burley declared the platforms to be “flagrant” copyright infringers.

“I am satisfied, having regard to the content made available at the target online locations, that each either makes copyright works available online for transmission to users, or facilitates the infringement of copyright by making it easier for users to ascertain the existence or whereabouts of other online locations that themselves infringe or facilitate the infringement of copyright within section 115A(1)(a),” his order reads.

“I am also satisfied that the primary purpose or primary effect of the target online locations is to infringe, or facilitate the infringement of, copyright: s 115A(1)(b).”

The injunction granted by the Judge allows the applicants to make additions to the domain names, URLs and IP addresses listed in the original order, after the order has been made. This is to tackle countermeasures often implemented by target sites to evade blocking.

The process for this application has been adjusted in order for new instructions to be processed quickly, to reduce costs, and to ensure the objective of Australia’s blocking process isn’t frustrated, the Court adds.

“It is apparent that the legislative intention is to facilitate, in appropriate cases, a more expeditious and less expensive means by which orders may be amended. Importantly, parliament did not intend, and the orders I propose to make do not permit, the applicants to bring new target online locations within the scope of the orders,” Justice Burley notes.

“Rather, the applicants may only seek to bring within the scope of the orders new domain names, IP Addresses or URLs for the 86 target online locations which are in issue in these proceedings. Should the applicants wish to block access to a new target online location, a separate application will need to be brought.”

The injunction (Roadshow Films Pty Limited v Telstra Corporation Limited [2020] FCA 507) can be obtained here.

The full list of domains to be blocked by the 50 ISP respondents reads as follows:

mrunlock.space
mrunlock.red
nocensor.surf
nocensor.casa
nocensor.fun
unblockproject.pw
unblockproject.icu
unblockproject.info
123unblock.space
123unblock.fun
unbl0ck.online
123unblock.icu
prox4you.club
prox4you.pro
prox4you.info
unblocked.to
prostylex.org
torrents.io
katcr.co
katcr.to
kikass.to
kat.sx
kickass.sx
kickass1.to
kat.ag
ibit.to
onionplay.eu
onionplay-network.xyz
onionplay.co
proxyportal.org
proxyportal.ws
p30download.com
torrentquest.com
rutor.info
btbtdy.me
lookmovie.ag
037hdd.com
cuevana3.io
cuevana3.co
exsite24.pl
downduck.com
downloadha.com
emotionvideo-tv.com
movieon21.biz
movieon21.xyz
m6.modufree.net
j20.hitjjal.com
phim33.com
tfp.is
tvsubtitles.net
msubs.net
dytt8.net
ttdytt.cc
ttdytt.net
fast-torrent.ru
heroturko.net
imovies.cc
imovies.ge
getpopcorntime.is
toxicwap.com
english-films.com
topeuropix.net
topeuropix.com
poseidonhd.me
poseidonhd.co
anakbnet.com
moviesjoy.net
filmlicious.net
proxybit.fun
proxybit.pro
123movies.love
1primewire.com
movies.cab
putlocker.digital
solarmoviefree.net
solarmovie.net
yifyddl.movie
yify.yt
yifymovietorrent.com
ytsdownload.com
movie4k.ag
fmovies.org
5movies.cloud
couchtuner2.com
couchtuner123.com
couchtuner.watch
couchtuner0.com
2watchfree.me
1watchfree.me
putlockerstoworld2.com
putlocker.actor
rrys2019.com
zmz2019.com
m4ufree.tv
them4ufree.info
projectfreetv.xyz
yesmovies.gg
yesmovies.ai
yesmovies.cloud
99kubo.tv
cayphim.net
dramacool.video
dramacool.movie
gimy.tv
kenh88.com
yeuphimmoi.com
anime-sharing.com
tokyotosho.info
animetosho.org
animebam.net
animebam.se
animelon.com
animejolt.com
project-gxs.com
eyeonanime.tv
animehd47.com
animereborn.io

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

The Internet offers a wealth of free information and entertainment, often monetized by advertisements.

Ads come in all shapes and sizes, ranging from classy commercials, through annoying banners, all the way to malicious ads.

In recent years, URL shorteners with built-in monetization tools have been added to the mix. Services such as AdFly, Adshrink, Linkvertise, and Shrinkearn pay hard cash for directing links through their ads.

The services allow people to make easy money, which sounds great, but it’s also a major annoyance for everyone else. This is why developer Tim Speckhals, aka ‘Sainan‘, came up with an easy tool to circumvent these redirects: Universal Bypass.

“I was annoyed by those sorts of sites and hadn’t seen an extension of that type, so I thought I’d fill that niché,” Speckhals tells TorrentFreak. Fast forward two years and this idea turned into one of the most-loved browser extensions.

Universal Bypass is now used by hundreds of thousands of people. It’s available for several browsers, including Chrome and Firefox, and doesn’t cost a penny. Up until recently, everything had gone smoothly. However, that changed when an outfit behind a URL shortener sent its lawyers after the developer.

Earlier this month, Linkvertise’s lawyer informed the Universal Bypass developer that his addon has a significant impact on the company’s business model. According to the letter, it violates copyright law by circumventing Linkverse’s technical protection measures.

“[This activity] is prohibited under 595a Copyright Act and triggers various counterclaims under copyright law. You are also aware that the addon you have programmed is used to circumvent monetization by my client,” the letter reads, translated from German.

Linkvertise has reached out to Universal Bypass before, asking it to stop its activities, but that didn’t work out. The most recent request is more strongly worded, however, and comes with a legal threat.

The letter demands that Universal Bypass stops interfering with Linkvertise URLs. Also, users should not be allowed to manually add a Linkvertise bypass script to the addon. On top of that, the entire GitHub repository should be removed as well.

If the developers comply, Linkvertise is willing to pay its own legal bills. If not, it will take legal action to enforce their demands and request compensation for all legal fees.

“You should appreciate this courtesy from my client, who gives you the opportunity to get out of this situation without prejudice, even though you recently let the first chance go untapped. He won’t give you another chance,” Linkvertise’s lawyer warns.

The deadline that was initially offered has already expired, but the developer didn’t budge. After all, Speckhals believes that his open-source software doesn’t violate any law.

“I don’t think I violated their copyright in any way, but I’m also not a lawyer,” Speckhals informs us, adding that he hired an attorney to help fight off the legal pressure.

After the deadline expired Speckhals was given a new one, but the issue has already escalated. It is likely that Linkvertise will request an injunction, which the developer hopes to contest in court. To help pay his legal bill, he has begun collecting donations through Twitter.

The entire saga is reminiscent of another legal battle in Germany. Last year, German publisher Alex Springer sued Adblock Plus for copyright infringement claiming that adblockers endanger digital journalism.

With ad blocking being extremely prevalent, these cases could potentially have a much wider impact. The Universal Bypass developer is well aware of this and is not planning to back down anytime soon.

“I am planning to fight this until I get a favorable result,” Speckhals says.

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

More than a year ago, author John Van Stry embarked on a mission to take down former Pirate Party Canada leader Travis McCrea.

McCrea was the operator of eBook.bike, a free-to-use eBook download platform that ostensibly accepted user uploads of books and presented them to the public. The site became hugely controversial after authors complained that they had never given the platform permission to distribute their content.

McCrea, on the other hand, insisted that his platform was legal and was protected by the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA, noting that if people sent valid takedown notices, content would be removed. Nevertheless, opposition against the site continued to build and McCrea himself ran out of patience, asking someone to sue him to get the “BS over and done with.”

Shortly after, author John Van Stry accepted the challenge by suing McCrea in a Texas court. While Van Stry employed a team of professional lawyers to handle the matter, McCrea decided to defend the case himself.

As legal battles go, this one was particularly lopsided. With Van Stry’s team laying out its case in detail, McCrea – when he participated at all – seemed either overwhelmed (or potentially underwhelmed) by the importance of the case against him.

While frustrations were clearly building on Van Stry’s side from having to commit time and financial resources to the case, it became clear early on that McCrea would be unlikely to prevail.

McCrea hoped to lean on the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA, arguing that as long as he took allegedly infringing content down, he could not be held liable under the law. That failed, at least in part due to McCrea’s failure to register an agent at the US Copyright Office. Claims that his acts were covered under laws designed to protect religious freedoms were also dismissed.

Earlier this month it became clear that the case hadn’t got long to run. A motion for summary judgment filed by Van Stry demanded $15,000 in damages each for 12 of his books, to a total of $180,000 plus costs. However, to obtain this amount the case would’ve had to go to a full trial, with all the additional costs that would’ve entailed.

In the event, the presiding judge suggested an alternative route. Based on the assertion that Van Stry’s damages claim was “like to be illusory”, the judge said that if Van Stry limited his request for statutory damages to the statutory minimum award of $750 per work — an amount already agreed by McCrea – a trial would not be needed. That opportunity was accepted by Van Stry.

“Mr. McCrea has been found to have willfully infringed the following of Mr. Van Stry’s copyrighted works: Portals of Infinity: Book One: Champion for Hire; Perfect Strangers; Portals of Infinity: Kaiju; Portals of Infinity: Book Two: The God Game; Portals of Infinity: Book Three: Of Temples and Trials; Portals of Infinity: Book Four: The Sea of Grass; Portals of Infinity: Book Five: Demigods and Deities; Portals of Infinity: Reprisal; When It Falls; Stand On It; Black Friday; and Over Our Heads,” Judge William Bryson
wrote in a final judgment handed down yesterday.

“[P]ursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 504(c) and the Court’s April 20, 2020, order, Plaintiff is awarded statutory damages from the Defendant in the amount of $9,000.”

The Judge also handed down an injunction, preventing McCrea from copying, reproducing, and/or distributing Van Stry’s books, “whether now in existence or hereafter created.”

Furthermore, due to his failure to comply with his discovery obligations during the case, McCrea was further ordered to pay Van Stry $3,605 in sanctions.

While the total damages awarded are considerably lower than initially demanded by Van Stry, the author has also run up significant legal bills pursuing the case against McCrea. These costs will also have to be covered by McCrea, with the amount to be advised to the court within 14 days of the order.

In a posting to his GoFundMe campaign launched last year to assist with the costs of his litigation, last evening Van Stry declared victory, explaining that his goals have now been achieved.

Van Stry said that he took umbrage at McCrea’s bragging that he was making money from authors’ work and that by offering ebooks on his site, he was “helping” authors in some way. He also slammed McCrea for “destroying the retirement of many authors, who rely on the royalties they get from their backlogs to pay their bills.”

“The primary goal of this lawsuit was always to get an injunction and stop him from stealing my works and the works of other authors. I didn’t even know his site existed until I was told my works were on it by some fans and other authors,” he wrote.

“[McCrea] was destroying the ability of new authors to enter the market. If your book only sells a few copies on Amazon, but it’s the ‘book of the week’ on his website, with people downloading thousands of copies. Do you think that author is ever going to write again? It takes thousands of hours to write a book. It takes money to get cover art and editing services. If you don’t get paid for your hard work, you find another job.”

Van Stry said he felt a responsibility to tackle McCrea not just for himself, but for other authors too. However, he says he didn’t want to sue McCrea and it came with considerable costs.

“Sometimes, you just have to stand up for what is right. This lawsuit hurt me, considerably, and not just because of the money that came out of my pocket. Rarely did a day go by that I wasn’t thinking about it, and rarely did a week go by when I wasn’t having to deal with my attorneys. But it wasn’t just about me, it never was,” he said.

Whether McCrea will ever pay a penny will remain to be seen. McCrea lives in Canada and according to Van Stry, may not have a permanent place of residence.

“He now claims that he’s broke and living out of a conversion van (aren’t those expensive?). I don’t know if that’s true or not, and I don’t care,” the author wrote.

The final judgment and permanent injunction can be found here (pdf)

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