PROJET AUTOBLOG


TorrentFreak

Archivé

Site original : TorrentFreak

⇐ retour index

Canadian ISPs Want Ban on Piracy Settlement Notices

lundi 22 octobre 2018 à 21:30

Following a long series of debates, Canada modernized its Copyright Act several years ago. This included a new “notice-and-notice” scheme, which went into effect early 2015.

As a result, Internet providers were required to forward all copyright notices they receive from rightsholders to their customers. Providers that fail to comply, face damages up to $10,000.

This notice-and-notice scheme created a safe harbor for Internet providers, protecting them from copyright holder lawsuits. At the same time, however, their Internet subscribers faced a new threat.

In theory, the copyright notices were supposed to be relatively harmless, merely informing subscribers that their connections are being abused to pirate content. However, it soon became apparent that the system was also being used by some rightsholders to send settlement demands.

This problem initially garnered quite a bit of attention in the press and among politicians, but later faded away. However, now that Canadian lawmakers are working on a new update of copyright law, it’s being brought into focus again.

During a hearing before the House Heritage Committee last week, Pam Dinsmore of Rogers Communications mentioned that her company sends roughly 2.4 million notices per year. Like other ISPs, Rogers is not against the system itself, but it believes that updates are required.

This was the focus of an earlier hearing last month before the INDU committee, where Canadian ISPs including TekSavvy, Shaw, Rogers, and Bell shared their experiences.

One issue all parties appeared to agree on is that the notice-and-notice scheme should ban settlement demands.

Among the speakers was Andy Kaplan-Myrth, VP of regulatory and carrier affairs at TekSavvy. He noted that some of the copyright infringement notices can be intimidating to subscribers and that they can violate customer privacy, sometimes without even mentioning Canadian law

“Some notices include content that’s more familiar from scams and spam: advertising for other services, settlement offers, or personalized links that secretly reveal information about the end-user to the sender,” Kaplan-Myrth said.

“This puts ISPs in a difficult position, since we’re required to forward notices to end-users, including whatever extraneous, misleading or harmful content may be included,” he added.

TekSavvy recommended that the notice-and-notice scheme should be updated to ban these types of settlement notices as well as other unrelated info. This ban on settlement requests or other clear abuse was shared by Shaw, Rogers, and Bell.

“We’re a supporter of getting rid of settlement demands coming to consumers. That’s not appropriate. It should be written out of notices,” Bell’s SVP of Regulatory Affairs, Robert Malcolmson said.

Another notice-and-notice issue that was brought up by several ISPs is standardization. Right now there is no uniform notice template, which means that it’s hard to process all of them automatically. This makes it more expensive.

“On average, we receive thousands of infringement notices per week. They come from dozens of companies and use scores of different templates, fewer than half of which can be processed automatically,” TekSavvy’s Kaplan-Myrth said.

TekSavvy sees the costs that are involved with the notice processing as a significant burden for the company. What’s making it worse, perhaps, is that rightsholders themselves have almost no barriers when it comes to costs.

Adding a small fee to submit requests could level the playing field and prevent abuse at the same time, the ISP suggests.

“Currently there’s essentially no cost for rights holders to send infringement notices. As long as they can send notices at no cost, then even if they get settlements from only a small number of end-users, there will be a business model for rights holders to send greater and greater volumes of notices,” Kaplan-Myrth noted.

The standardization call is shared among all ISPs although there are some variations in what this should look like.

TekSavvy doesn’t want the notices to reference any external content, for example. However, Bell, which is also a copyright holder itself, wouldn’t mind adding the option to use the copyright notices to point subscribers to legal alternatives.

“I’m not sure it would be such a bad thing, from a public policy standpoint, for the notice to say, (a) you’re consuming this content illegally and (b) there’s another source of legal consumption, and here it is,” Bell’s Malcolmson said.

While that last part is up for debate, there is a broad call for a more standardized approach to copyright notices. Getting rid of the settlement demands is also widely supported. And since the Government previously indicated that it would like to get rid of these excesses too, that’s high on the agenda for the upcoming reform of copyright law.

Just to be clear, the notice-and-notice scheme is different from the regular legal actions copyright holders can take. Even if automated settlement notices are banned, rightsholders can still go after pirating subscribers in court. That’s more resource intensive and expensive though.

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

UK Govt. Mulls Easy Pirate Site Blocking & Streaming Crackdown

lundi 22 octobre 2018 à 12:21

Around Europe, many governments have expressed a desire to crack down on intellectual property infringement of all kinds. In the UK, efforts are particularly advanced.

Over the past couple of years, the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has produced studies detailing various piracy threats, with the illicit streaming phenomenon taking pole position.

Last November and in the wake of a landmark EU ruling, it published advice to consumers, stating that if devices are used to stream content that would otherwise be paid for, a crime is being committed. This morning, the IPO announced that the “pressure is growing” on producers of “illegal streaming devices and thieves of paid-for content.”

In a statement headlined by Minister for Intellectual Property, Sam Gyimah, the IPO first indicates that the number of recent prosecutions against infringers shows that existing law is working. To move things forward, however, fresh measures to further tighten the noose are being considered.

Again, the focus is on pirate streaming devices, aka customized ‘Kodi boxes’ and Android hardware pre-configured with apps designed to provide access to infringing content such as subscription TV, premium sports, or the latest films. Using apps or add-ons like these is against the law, the IPO notes, adding that around “one in four” may not be paying for the content they’re watching.

“Illegal streaming damages our creative industries. We have always been clear that media streaming devices used to access ‘paid for’ material for free are illegal,” says Minister for Intellectual Property, Sam Gyimah.

“Recent prosecutions have shown that if caught, sellers of boxes adapted in this way face fines and a prison sentence.”

In 2017, the IPO opened a consultation on illegal streaming devices, the responses to which will be published today. In addition, the IPO notes that it has been working with CrimeStoppers and industry stakeholders to highlight the risks associated with pirate streaming devices while tackling those who seek to commercialize them.

The main point of action appears to be a shift towards streamlining the current site-blocking regime in the UK. Rightsholders currently need to obtain an injunction from the High Court in order to have allegedly-infringing sites blocked by local ISPs. The IPO, however, sees an opportunity to achieve the same goal without intervention from the courts.

“Consider the evidence for and potential impact of administrative site blocking (as opposed to requiring a High Court injunction in every case), as well as identifying the mechanisms through which administrative site blocking could be introduced,” the IPO’s first bullet point reads.

While blocking content at consumer ISPs’ is one course of action, it’s somewhat akin to locking the stable door once the horse has bolted. Workarounds exist for the more technically minded, so the IPO appears to want to take action against those that facilitate, such as developers of Kodi add-ons and other apps that provide access to infringing content.

“Work to identify disruptions that may be applied at other points in the supply chain, for example App developers, and further develop our understanding of the effect of new generation smart TVs on how this infringement occurs,” the IPO adds.

In parallel, the government sees value in understanding why people use ‘pirate’ devices in the first place. To that end, research will be undertaken to assess consumer attitudes and motivations behind set-top box use in order to deter future uptake.

Finally, the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit will continue its work in disrupting unlicensed supply to the UK market. The IPO says the unit will “continue to prioritize resources” in this area, taking action against those who encourage infringement through the sale of IPTV boxes and services.

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

Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week on BitTorrent – 10/22/18

lundi 22 octobre 2018 à 09:43

This week we have three newcomers in our chart.

The Spy Who Dumped Me is the most downloaded movie.

The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only. All the movies in the list are Web-DL/Webrip/HDRip/BDrip/DVDrip unless stated otherwise.

RSS feed for the articles of the recent weekly movie download charts.

This week’s most downloaded movies are:
Movie Rank Rank last week Movie name IMDb Rating / Trailer
Most downloaded movies via torrents
1 (…) The Spy Who Dumped Me 6.2 / trailer
2 (2) Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again 7.1 / trailer
3 (1) Ant-Man and the Wasp 7.3 / trailer
4 (4) The First Purge 5.2 / trailer
5 (3) Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation 6.3 / trailer
6 (…) Slender Man 3.1 / trailer
7 (5) Solo: A Star Wars Story 7.1 / trailer
8 (…) Galveston 6.2 / trailer
9 (6) Sicario: Day of the Soldado 7.3 / trailer
10 (8) The Meg (Subbed HDRip) 6.0 / trailer

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

OpenVPN CEO: “Choose a VPN That Doesn’t Allow BitTorrent”

dimanche 21 octobre 2018 à 23:11

With privacy scandals and security breaches dominating news headlines, more and more people are signing up with a VPN service.

A properly configured VPN hides people’s IP-addresses from online snoopers and state of the art encryption also protects against some malicious attacks.

While that sound like a good idea, there’s a catch. In return for this protection, all your traffic is routed through the VPN provider, which means that you’re putting a lot of trust in the company.

We have addressed this issue in the past and were happy to see that it was also highlighted by Francis Dinha, the CEO of OpenVPN Inc, which owns the software which many VPN services rely on.

Dinha rightfully points out that picking the right VPN requires some careful thought. This was also one of the reasons why we previously began compiling our yearly overview of various VPN policies.

As we read further, however, the advice goes in an unexpected direction. Many people believe that VPNs are supposed to be content-neutral, but Dinha warns against using a VPN with BitTorrent and the dark web.

“Use of the wrong VPN to go through BitTorrent and access the dark web just to get to ‘free’ content exposes you to bad actors who can extract value out of whatever you’re receiving in other ways,” he writes in a Forbes piece.

“Such practices put you at risk of running afoul of piracy, copyright violation and fraud laws. Unrestricted access also exposes you to malware and viruses and a lack of protection entirely from the risks in the dark web.”

We fail to see how BitTorrent is linked to the dark web. It is nothing more than a file-transfer protocol, after all. And even if it is somehow related, what has that got to do with a VPN?

It’s not a secret that BitTorrent has a piracy stigma. And it makes sense to advise people not to break the law, with or without a VPN, but Dinha goes quite a few steps further. In the article, he recommends that people use a VPN that blocks BitTorrent traffic.

“For all these reasons, it’s essential to choose a VPN that doesn’t allow the use of BitTorrent and follows all applicable United States laws. It’s the only way to protect yourself against liability,” he stresses.

So, for some reason, a VPN that allows BitTorrent traffic causes liability issues? That’s a bit far-fetched, to say the least, because all regular ISPs allow BitTorrent traffic just fine. And for a good reason.

BitTorrent has plenty of legal use cases and companies including Facebook, Amazon, and Twitter all use it internally. If the Comcasts, Bells, and Virgin Medias of this world don’t block it, why should a VPN?

Calling for a BitTorrent ban isn’t very open for a company that’s called OpenVPN, and it remains a mystery why and how that might shield users from “liability.” Perhaps it’s a PR plug for OpenVPN’s own VPN service PrivateTunnel?

Well, that brings us to a rather ironic situation.

Considering the comments from OpenVPN’s CEO, we would expect PrivateTunnel to ban all BitTorrent traffic outright. However, when we asked the VPN’s support desk we were informed that P2P ‘blocking’ rules are not enabled in the Netherlands and Switzerland. Hmmm…

Anyway, those who prefer a more open VPN that allows all traffic, just like their regular ISP, can find a long list of BitTorrent-friendly VPNs here.

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

Sony Promotes Kodi Streaming Add-Ons as Ideal for its Android TVs

dimanche 21 octobre 2018 à 10:46

Despite always operating within the law, the team behind the popular Kodi media player have found themselves at the middle of huge piracy controversy.

While a stock Kodi installation is entirely legal, millions of users install special third-party add-ons that grant access to huge libraries of infringing content. This isn’t recommended by the official Kodi team but there’s little doubt that most Kodi users now connect the media player with free movies, TV shows, and live sports.

To counter this threat, the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment – a coalition of 30 media giants including the MPAA, Netflix, Amazon, Disney, and Sony – has been targeting developers of third-party add-ons that provide access to infringing content. Many have stopped their activities following legal threats but the ecosystem remains lively and as a result, Kodi remains popular with the public.

With this in mind, it’s perhaps a little surprising that Sony Australia is actively encouraging users of its range of Android-based smart TVs to install Kodi on their devices.

As the image from Sony’s website shows, the company not only places Kodi in the number one spot for recommended Android TV apps, it highlights that “community-created addons” can be used to “provide access to popular internet streaming media services.”

Kodi streaming addons are where it’s at…

The hyperlink in Sony’s recommendation links to the official Kodi wiki which in turn links to official addons (which shouldn’t cause any legal issues) and unofficial repositories, which aren’t guaranteed to be problem-free by the Kodi team.

However, the same page also offers a list of banned addons, which are mostly used to access infringing content. They can’t be downloaded or installed from the wiki page but they do provide a handy guide for users looking for an entry point into the darker parts of the Kodi world.

At this point, it should be reiterated that stock Kodi is entirely legal and there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with Sony’s promotion of Kodi or legal addons. However, seeing Sony recommending Kodi’s ability to utilize third-party add-ons is somewhat of a surprise, given Sony’s efforts as part of ACE to discourage people from using those that infringe.

Of course, that’s where the problem lies.

The vast majority of users of Kodi and/or Sony’s TVs will not know which add-ons they are supposed to use and which ones are legal and which ones are not. That said, it’s almost inevitable that they’ll gravitate towards the ones offering the most exciting content, which means precisely the type of addon being targeted by ACE and by default, Sony Pictures.

Still, if Sony is happy to recommend third-party Kodi add-ons to get the best out of its televisions, it must be confident that its customers will do the right thing. There are plenty of legal addons available but good luck to the layman when it comes to filtering them out.

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