With file-sharers manually acquiring increasingly large libraries of content, several years ago it became clear that software to automate the process would prove popular with the masses.

One such tool was Sick Beard, a PVR-like piece of software that was able to utilize Usenet providers, indexers, and TheTVDB to identify airing dates for TV shows and automatically download whenever they became available online. It would then add the content to a user’s library ready for viewing.

Like many successful open projects, Sick Beard later found itself ‘forked’, with developers breathing life into SickRage, a GNU General Public Licensed tool that took Sick Beard’s dreams and ran with them. With improved Usenet and torrent support plus a whole raft of new features, SickRage gained an impressive following.

SickRage in action

Unfortunately, however, SickRage began to suffer problems common to many projects where not every developer is an agreement on every point of action. This led to fragmentation, with devs moving to work on other similar projects. One of those who departed was a dev known as Echel0n, who started up his own SickRage variant operating from SickRage.ca.

In July 2017, things appeared to boil over when Echel0n (later self-identified as ‘Justin Tabish’) filed a DMCA complaint with Github, claiming copyright over the SickRage code.

“SiCKRAGE and the original code has not been provided or its use authorized, this is a violation of my copyright. I have a good faith belief the distribution of SiCKRAGE includes content of which the distribution is not authorized by the copyright owner, it’s [sic] agent, or the law,” the complaint reads.

Just days later, SickRage fought back, filing a counter-notice with Github. Perhaps unsurprisingly given the various contributors to long-standing open projects, the counter-notice points out a number of issues with the original DMCA notice.

Disputing all of its claims, the counter-notice states that the original SickRage copyright holder (@midgetspy) endorsed adding his name to the license and adding the counter-notice filer’s name “underneath his as credit for later contributions as per convention.” It also states that ‘Echel0n’ has no standing to make a complaint.

“As such, all other claims are disputed for this DMCA. We are in compliance with all applicable law to the best of our knowledge. Very little if any code is shared among these forks, however if complainant would like a prior credit added that would be amenable,” the notice adds.

With that, Gihub reinstated the project and for some time it appeared that an uneasy peace had broken out. It now transpires, however, that Echel0n (Tabish) was just getting warmed up.

As the image below shows, in September the developer registered the trademark ‘SickRage’ in the US with the United States Trademark and Patents Office (USPTO).

SickRage trademark filing

Armed with this piece of paper, Justin Tabish fired off a complaint to developer Dustyn Gibson (aka ‘miigotu‘) of the SickRage project, warning him to cease and desist using the SickRage trademark, even though it doesn’t appear to have been awarded yet.

Cease and Desist

Tabish also wrote to Github, demanding that the site transfer ownership of the SickRage repository to him.

“I’d like to report a case of trademark infringement and am requesting transfer of ownership for the following organization to my control so that I can remedy the situation, the organization is https://github.com/sickrage and is owned/controlled by username Miigotu, user’s profile is located at https://github.com/miigotu,” he told the company.

“This repo also has a website located at https://sickrage.github.io. This user/repo is a ex-team member of mine that I let go awhile back, they and others decided to open a repo on you’re servers under the exact same name of my company and project causing confusion and misleading members, as you can see in the title of the repo they have placed ‘The new home of the SickRage community’ which leads others to think there was some sort of change of ownership.”

Describing the effort as a “hostile takeover” attempt, ‘miigotu’ posted a note to the official Github account promising to fight every inch of the way.

“I will have to fight this again, he is claiming his ‘company’ owns a trademark to the name SickRage. This is a joke and I will fight it tooth and nail,” miigotu writes.

“Just another attempt by the drug addict to try and claim he owns the work that we all did on this project. He abandoned the project and we made it what it is. Then he popped up 2 years later and removed the entire team. If I have to take him to court, that will happen.”

There’s now a pretty huge argument taking place on Github as to who is right and wrong, and who is infringing on various rights. It’s a minefield of opinions that’s best read directly to be understood. Needless to say, it’s very messy indeed.

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

Since its official launch in 2013, the PlayStation 4 (PS4) remained piracy-free for a long time, but last year things started to shift.

Following the release of a new jailbreak version a few months ago, things took a turn for the worse for Sony. This allowed the masses to tinker with their PS4 consoles which only increased the piracy troubles.

While it will be hard for Sony to put the genie back in the bottle, the Japanese company has decided to take a stand. In a new case filed at a federal court in California, Sony details its complaint against a local resident who allegedly offered for sale jailbroken PS4s filled with pirated games.

According to Sony, defendant Eric Scales was using the handle “Blackcloak13” to sell the jailbroken PS4s preloaded with over 60 pirated games on eBay.

“Defendant is an individual who has marketed, sold, and distributed ‘jailbroken’ PS4 consoles that: (a) contain ‘pirated’ (unauthorized) copies of PS4-compatible video games, and (b) were produced and designed for purposes of, and/or were marketed by Defendant for use in, circumventing technological protection measures,” the complaint reads.

One eBay listing

Sony ordered two devices online and found that they were indeed ‘as advertised.’ The PS4s were modified to run an unnamed exploit which effectively circumvents the technological protection measures that normally prevent people from playing pirated games.

“The exploit enables the PS4 console sold by Defendant to play the 60+ unauthorized copies of video games that are contained on its hard drive,” Sony writes.

In addition to the eBay shop, the man is also accused of running a separate website (now offline) where he advertised his services and products. The website stated that he’s been jailbreaking and modding consoles since 2006, and encouraged people to “stop buying games.”

“On Defendant’s website, where he uses the traditional ‘pirate’ symbol of a skull and crossbones shown below, Defendant states that purchasing his services or products will enable the purchaser to ‘be able to Download and copy any game’ and to ‘STOP BUYING GAMES’,” Sony notes.

STOP BUYING GAMES

With its lawsuit, Sony hopes to obtain an injunction ordering the defendant to stop any infringing activity and to destroy all jailbroken or “modded” PS4 consoles, hard drives, and games.

In addition, the game company requests damages for copyright infringement and for violating the DMCA by circumventing the PS4’s technological protection measures.

To our knowledge, this is the first jailbroken PS4 lawsuit, and it’s likely that Sony wants to set a clear example. With several first-party PS4 games being mentioned in the lawsuit, the potential damages run to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

—

A copy of the full complaint, obtained by TorrentFreak, 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.

This week we have two newcomers in our chart.

Ant-Man and the Wasp 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	(…)	Ant-Man and the Wasp	7.3 / trailer
2	(3)	Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation	6.3 / trailer
3	(1)	The First Purge	5.2 / trailer
4	(2)	Solo: A Star Wars Story	7.1 / trailer
5	(4)	Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom	6.5 / trailer
6	(6)	Sicario: Day of the Soldado	7.3 / trailer
7	(…)	The Darkest Minds	5.5 / trailer
8	(5)	Skyscraper	6.1 / trailer
9	(10)	The Meg (Subbed HDRip)	6.0 / trailer
10	(9)	Mission: Impossible – Fallout (Subbed HDRip)	8.1 / trailer

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

Well over six years have passed since Megaupload was shut down and it’s still unclear how the criminal proceedings will unfold.

Aside from Andrus Nomm’s plea deal, progress in the criminal proceedings has been slow.

Kim Dotcom and his former colleagues are currently fighting a legal battle in New Zealand to prevent their extradition to the US, for which the final decision has yet to be issued.

While all parties await the outcome, the criminal case in the United States remains pending. The same goes for the civil cases launched by the MPAA and RIAA in 2014, more than four years ago.

Since the civil cases may influence the criminal proceedings, Megaupload’s legal team previously managed to put these cases on hold, and last week they requested another extension.

This is not the first time that such a request had been made. There have been several extensions already, which caused some issues.

There were previously concerns that the long delays could result in the destruction of evidence, as some of Megaupload’s hard drives were starting to fail. However, after the parties agreed on a solution to back-up and restore the files, this is no longer an issue.

“With the preservation order in place, and there being no other objection, Defendant Megaupload hereby moves the Court to enter the attached proposed order, continuing the stay in this case for an additional six months,” Megaupload’s legal team informed the court this week.

Without any objections from the MPAA and RIAA, U.S. District Court Judge Liam O’Grady swiftly granted Megaupload’s request to stay both lawsuits until April next year.

And so that wait continues…

Order to stay

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

Millions of Internet subscribers use their connections to download and share copyright-infringing content. It’s been going on for almost two decades already and shows no sign of stopping.

For the vast majority of users, this kind of activity has no consequences. People grab the latest movies or TV shows, for example, and then hear no more. For many, this means they simply carry on, oblivious to the fact that their unauthorized transfers are probably being monitored by someone, somewhere.

In the majority of cases, this monitoring is simply for research purposes but increasingly, as content companies seek to reduce copyright infringement, further action might be the next step. That usually means that ISPs are contacted, with a request for them to tell their customers to stop pirating content.

Copyright infringement notices

The first time an Internet user realizes this has happened is when they receive correspondence from their ISP. This could potentially be a letter but it’s more likely to arrive in the form of an email, delivered to the account registered with the ISP.

From reports posted online, this is where many users begin to panic. The idea they’ve been caught doing something illegal seems to prevent them from reading the notice slowly and taking in all the details. This is a fundamental mistake and one that should be immediately rectified in order to understand what’s happened and is likely to happen moving forward.

Read the warning notice – and now read it again

While notices sent to subscribers differ between ISPs, they are all very clear. They will explain what is alleged to have happened and when, who made the complaint, the content involved (movies, TV shows etc), and what the user should do next. They are designed to be easy to understand and when read calmly, they are.

Generally, a notice will state that a subscriber’s Internet connection was allegedly used on a certain time and date to download and share copyright-infringing material. The notice will provide the IP address in use at the time and the name of the company that owns the rights to the content in question. It will also order the subscriber to prevent it from being shared again in the future.

While notices can be sent in error, anecdotal evidence indicates that the majority are accurate. When that is the case, users should follow the instructions in the infringement email. They might include ensuring WiFi networks are secure, speaking with other people in the house who may have committed the infringement, and checking computers to ensure they aren’t infected with malware.

In any event, subscribers who are required to respond to notices should take care not to incriminate themselves or others. For initial offenses, however, ISPs tend not to ask for feedback from the user so when that’s the case, no response needs to be provided.

Demands in infringement notices

In basic terms, most infringement notices are like speeding tickets but without the immediate cash fine. They are designed to be a warning and to prevent the same thing from happening again. When this is the case, the infringement notice makes that clear.

If users are still downloading and sharing the same content in their torrent client (the source of most infringement notices) the notices demand that they remove that content immediately and never share it again. Carrying on sharing in the face of a warning could result in more notices being sent for the same ongoing infringement, with additional consequences we’ll come to later.

Some ISPs also ask the account holder to fill in a questionnaire, which acknowledges that the subscriber has received the warning, understood it, and – in appropriate circumstances – has taken action to stop the infringement being repeated. Again, recipients should be cautious not to incriminate themselves but they are rarely asked to do so.

Importantly, there is sometimes an opportunity to contest the infringement claim so if notices are erroneous, the subscriber might choose to file a counter-complaint after assessing the situation.

Receiving no more notices is relatively simple

While many users panic when receiving infringement notices from their ISP, in the majority of cases there is no need to worry. Stopping sharing the content in question usually solves the problem and if no additional sharing takes place, no further warnings should be received, for that content at least.

However, those who disregard warning notices or fail to check the email address registered with their ISP (so they don’t know they’ve been receiving warnings), things can get complicated.

Repeat infringers are at risk

Subscribers whose Internet connections are used to infringe copyright on a number of occasions are now labeled ‘repeat infringers’. Under US law, this can turn into a more serious situation.

As clarified in a recent case involving ISP Cox Communications, action must be taken by ISPs against those who keep on infringing, or they risk being held liable themselves. This has probably contributed to the increased volume of infringement notices being passed on to subscribers and the corresponding reports of them online.

An article published by TF back in February reveals how Comcast deals with persistent pirates. Other ISPs will follow different processes but the basic idea is that if users keep on infringing, at some point they’ll be faced with consequences, possibly a suspension or even termination of their Internet connection.

How can Internet users be sure never to receive a warning?

The clearest and most foolproof piece of advice is that those who don’t share infringing files with others are the ones that never receive a notice. While some innocents do get sent notices in error, the safest approach is not to share infringing files using BitTorrent and similar peer-to-peer software. These transfers are public and can be tracked.

However, as any file-sharing forum reader will know, plenty of pirates carry out their hobby on daily basis without ever receiving an infringement notice.

The reasons for this are varied, but it usually boils down to people using streaming and/or direct download sites, or by protecting their BitTorrent connections with a VPN. Others are simply lucky or have chosen content that for some reason isn’t being monitored for infringements.

Important: Not all infringement notices are benign

In a relatively small number of cases, copyright holders aren’t interested in warning alleged pirates – they want to sue them and/or extract a cash settlement. When this is the case, correspondence received from a user’s ISP usually makes it clear that a copyright holder is trying to obtain their identity and personal details with a view to legal action.

If users receive such a notice, immediate legal advice should be sought since there are no second chances. Under no circumstances should recipients ignore this type of ‘warning’ as doing so could potentially lead to an expensive default judgment.

Conclusion

Notices of infringement targeted at regular Internet subscribers in the US are usually issued for the purposes of a) stopping the current infringement and b) encouraging users to stop infringing in future.

The decision to stop infringing (or carry on behind a VPN or similar) is obviously a personal choice but in 2018 it’s clear that being caught on multiple occasions puts ISPs in a position where they must take action, or face potential consequences themselves. No prizes for guessing who’ll get thrown under the bus when the pressure is on.

None of the above should be construed as legal advice. If there is any uncertainty concerning the nature of an infringement notice, users should seek professional advice.

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