The file-sharing landscape has changed dramatically over the past decade. To a certain degree, this is also true for the BitTorrent ecosystem.

Popular sites such as KickassTorrents. Torrentz.eu, and ExtraTorrent are no more, and the original YTS and EZTV groups have been long disappeared as well.

While sites have come and gone, there’s still one torrent client that the public at large prefers. When we last looked at the market share of BitTorrent clients, more than ten years ago now, uTorrent was already firmly in the lead. Today, this is no different.

With help from iknowwhatyoudownload we looked at over 25 million logged BitTorrent connections on a single day last week. This reveals that more than two-thirds (68.6%) of these were using uTorrent’s desktop version.

The vast majority of these users were updated to the most recent 3.5.5 release, but dozens of older versions are in use as well. Although no longer officially supported, there are also hundreds of thousands of people who still use uTorrent for Mac.

The most popular Mac client, however, appears to be Transmission. This is a notable change compared to a decade ago when its market share was much lower. Although Transmission also has a beta Windows release, that userbase is believed to be relatively small.

Below is an overview of all software with at least 0.1% market share* which translates to roughly 25,000 logged connections.

BitTorrent Client Market Share, March 2020

Ranking	Client	Market Share
torrentfreak.com
1	uTorrent	68.6%
2	BitTorrent	6.6%
3	Libtorrent (uTorrent Web e.a.)	6.3%
4	Transmission	5.1%
5	MediaGet	3.7%
6	qBitTorrent	3.4%
7	Zona	3.3%
8	Deluge	0.9%
9	Bitcomet	0.6%
10	BiglyBT	0.3%
11	FDM	0.2%
12	BitSpirit	0.2%
13	BitLord	0.1%

The table shows more good news for uTorrent’s parent company BitTorrent Inc., as the Mainline BitTorrent client takes second place with 6.6%. This client has a different name but is developed by the same company. It’s also pretty much identical to uTorrent in terms of code and features.

Aside from the sheer dominance of uTorrent, the appearance of Libtorrent also stands out. Although very popular, this is not a torrent client but a library that is used by a wide variety of torrent applications.

The most-used Libtorrent version is 1.2.2.0. Some follow up research revealed that this is used by the latest version of uTorrent Web. Instead of its own ‘client ID,’ the latest web version of uTorrent, which is being pushed as the main option now, identifies as Libtorrent. This means that uTorrent’s market share is even higher than the reported 69%.

Other surprising entries in the list of most-used clients are Zona and MediaGet. Both applications offer downloading and streaming functionality with an easy-to-use interface. While they are available in English, their userbases are mainly from Russia.

The list is further completed by qBitTorrent, Deluge, Free Download Manager (FDM), and BiglyBT. The latter is operated by former developers of Vuze, which was the second most-used torrent client ten years ago, but is no longer actively developed.

Other clients that were found in our sample but didn’t make the 0.1% cut are Tribler, Frostwire, Tixati, tTorrent, aTorrent, and PicoTorrent. These may still have thousands of active users on any given day, but their use pales in comparison to the top clients.

That is also true for Popcorn Time, which generated quite a bit of press attention over the years. None of the Popcorn Time forks, which identity as ‘webtorrent,’ were anywhere close to the top of the list.

The Popcorn Time observation also highlights an important caveat. The data presented here represents clients from users who are actively sharing files. If a client, such as Popcorn Time, stops seeding after a movie is done, it will no longer be logged in the following days. As such, clients used by people who continue to seed files may be somewhat overrepresented.

We are planning to repeat these and similar analyses more frequently in the future, so we can spot more trends. However, it’s quite clear that uTorrent is not going to give up its top spot anytime soon.

—

*BitTorrent clients are identified through the ‘client ID’ which is publicly broadcasted to trackers and over DHT. The totals reported here are based on a sample of the client IDs with at least 10,000 connections. After that, different versions of the same client were added up.

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

In recent years, millions of file-sharers all over the world have been pressed to pay hefty settlement fees, or face their day in court.

The process was pioneered in Germany where it turned into an industry in itself, and copyright holders later went after alleged pirates in the US, Canada, the UK, Sweden and elsewhere.

These so-called “copyright trolls” are also active in Denmark. While some ISPs have protested what they describe as ‘mafia-like‘ practices, well over 150,000 Internet subscribers are believed to have been targeted. A massive number, for a population of fewer than six million people.

While a large percentage of the targeted users choose to settle, some cases are litigated. In court, the judgments can vary quite a bit. When defendants have a secured Wifi network they can be held liable, but the Copenhagen City Court recently dismissed all claims against an accused pirate, despite having a secure WiFi connection.

The man, who was a student living in Odense at the time of the offense, was sued by a movie company. The name of the company is redacted in court records but the defendant stood accused of sharing a pirated film from his IP-address during the summer of 2015.

More than two years later, the movie company sent the suspected pirate a letter requesting a settlement. However, the man denied the allegations, after which the matter made its way to court.

Since the evidence showed that the pirated movie was indeed linked to the defendant’s IP-address on a properly secured network, the movie company thought it had a strong case. However, the defendant continued to deny the allegations and presented some strong counter-evidence in return.

Although his memory of that day, years ago, wasn’t crystal clear, bank records showed that the man used his payment card at 7:59 PM, roughly 160 kilometers from his home, while the download was logged at 6:39 PM.

Based on the evidence, as well as the defendant’s testimony that he took his computer with him, the Copenhagen City Court agreed that he was probably not at home when the offense was logged. Although it’s not indisputable, the court found it unlikely that the man shared the movie himself.

“The court finds that the defendant [through the bank records] and his explanation that he had his computer with him, has shown concrete circumstances that with great certainty exclude the possibility that he himself was present at the address, or via his computer, picked up the movie at the address while he was not at home.

“The defendant hereby disproves the presumption that he himself shared or downloaded the movie at the time, which is why the case is dismissed,” the Copenhagen City Court adds.

The ruling will add to the growing list of jurisprudence in the piracy realm. As mentioned by Lexology, several file-sharing cases in Denmark are currently on hold, pending judgments from the Eastern High Court, which is likely to further clarify when account holders can be held liable.

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

Since 2018, pirates around the world have become familiarized with the term ‘1XBET’.

Included in the titles of thousands of pirate video filenames and advertised on dozens of pirate sites, the Russia-based gambling company has been controversial, if nothing else.

In a report published last year by research company Mediascope, the scale of 1XBET’s advertising budget became even more apparent. While Google and PepsiCo took first and second places in a study charting online advertising spend in Russia, 1XBET came in third, ahead of food giant Danone and even Universal Pictures.

Mediascope has just published the results of its latest research which reveals yet another interesting development. 1XBET is no longer one of the most prolific online advertisers, far from it in fact. With PepsiCo taking the top sport, gambling platform 1XBET, which is illegal in Russia, has plummeted to 20th place.

Obtained by RBC, the study reveals that despite not holding licenses with Russia’s Federal Tax Service, 1XBET sharply increased its advertising activity in early 2019. However, as the year progressed, the platform took its foot off the gas, dropping out of the top 10 and putting it at imminent risk of disappearing from the top 20.

While this development in isolation might have been welcomed by anti-piracy groups, there is a twist to the story. Leaping into the top six online advertisers in Russia is 1XStavka, a platform that is not only legal (it has licenses from the Tax Service) but is visually identical to 1XBET.

Only adding to the problem is that 1XStavka is now advertising on pirate sites and according to Alexei Byrdin of anti-piracy group Internet Video Association, that’s proving more profitable for them. It’s also making enforcement more difficult.

Byrdin told RBC that dealing with 1XStavka is a safer option than dealing with 1XBET because the latter is effectively banned in Russia. When a gambling platform is unlicensed, the Tax Service and telecoms watchdog Roscomnadzor can quickly restrict access – not only to the service itself but also locations where it’s advertised.

This means after filling out a simple form, the Internet Video Association (IVA) can get sites blocked easily, something they did to tackle 1XBET and its ads during the course of 2019. Since 1XStavka is licensed, however, the process becomes more difficult, even though by advertising on pirate content the company is still be breaking the law.

This leaves only the standard mechanism to have pirate sites blocked, i.e through legal action in the Moscow City Court or via the search engine deindexing measures available as part of the active anti-piracy memorandum, options currently pursued by IVA.

Finally, the report also notes a massive decrease in advertising by another known sponsor of piracy, Azino 777. In 2018, the gambling site was the top online advertiser in the region but this time around only managed 24th place.

As a result, Mediascope’s latest report concludes that despite 1XStravka’s links to ads on pirate sites, the top 10 online advertisers are all currently legal.

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

Mention the word ‘Limewire’ to today’s file-sharers, downloaders, or streamers, and you’ll probably get a vacant stare in response. After being handed a massive defeat at the hands of the RIAA in 2010, it’s now viewed as old technology, a redundant cassette tape in a brand new hi-tech world.

But if a decade seems like a long time for a technology like Limewire, spare a thought for Megaupload. In a few months’ time, the shutdown of the site at the hands of US and New Zealand authorities (assisted by the MPAA and RIAA, of course) will be less than a year away from its own tenth anniversary.

Only a gambling man would dare to predict when or even if the multiple cases against Dotcom will ever be concluded but for chairman and RIAA CEO Mitch Glazier, none of that seems to be as crucial as it once was.

In an interview just published by Rolling Stone, Glazier recalls his time at the RIAA, covering a wide range of topics affecting the industry. In respect of copyright and piracy issues, he effectively declares victory over the German-born entrepreneur.

“We have had some huge significant victories along the way,” he told Rolling Stone.

“Going to the Supreme Court to show that music is protected online; winning that case against Kim Dotcom and the cyberlocker world to deter future Kim Dotcoms from doing the same thing.”

The statement is interesting on a number of fronts. Firstly, it’s important to note that Kim Dotcom has yet to set foot in a US court to face not only a criminal action by the US Government but also civil suits filed by Hollywood and the music industry, headed by the RIAA.

That, of course, is entirely down to the Megaupload founder. He’s been fighting tooth and nail to avoid extradition to the United States and with decades in prison on the table, who wouldn’t?

Nevertheless, a court-stamped victory in any of these procedures remains on the distant horizon. As reported last week, the cases filed by the RIAA and MPAA have been on hold for years and have just been delayed for another six months.

So, from a technical perspective at least, the RIAA hasn’t had the pleasure of “winning the case against Kim Dotcom”. However, not all victories are achieved in court. In fact, ‘gone to trial and received a verdict’ affects a tiny minority.

If the aim of the action was to destroy Megaupload, that has been achieved in no uncertain terms. Within minutes of the launch of the operation, the file-hosting site was brought to its knees and, shortly after, there was little left but a mountain of servers gathering dust. This, of course, could be the significant victory Glazier was talking about.

And there are other matters too. The deterrent effect of the Megaupload raid was considerable and in the wake of its demise, other large file-sharing sites closed down. No one really knows how many other developers changed course as a result but it wouldn’t be a surprise if ‘many’ was the answer.

Nevertheless, just a year later Dotcom launched Mega, a massive file-sharing site that is still going strong today, albeit not under his control. Given the way Mega operates, it’s unlikely it could ever be tackled in the same way as Megaupload was. In many respects, its formation was guided by the case against Megaupload, which effectively handed the platform a guidebook on how not to fall foul of the law.

As the years have ticked by since the destruction of Megaupload, the acquisition of free music hasn’t sat still. In common with many types of piracy, it continues today and presents new challenges for those seeking to mitigate its effects. While file-hosting services still provide a threat, it’s more likely these days for the RIAA to be tackling sites that help users to obtain content for free from legitimate sources like YouTube.

“Now in the stream-ripping world, we are trying to figure out from an anti-circumvention point of view how to stop somebody hacking into YouTube’s system,” Glazier explains.

This is a clear reference to so-called YouTube-ripping sites, that allow music fans to download rather than stream content. The RIAA is in a battle with these platforms using a mix of direct legal action and the sending of large volumes of DMCA anti-circumvention notices. The latter might be proving an irritant to ripping platforms but they are not being put out of business.

Interestingly, Glazier hints that the anti-circumvention notice approach, which results in URLs of stream-ripping sites being permanently delisted from Google, may have in part been prompted by issues with the RIAA’s distribution platforms, the largest of which is YouTube.

“[T]he resources required to stop [stream-ripping] create tension between us and our licensing partners, so we have to see if we can address the issue through search or some other means. The brainstorm has been ever-changing,” he reveals.

But while there are always new challenges, some things never change. Pre-release leaks are a major source of distress to the record labels and Glazier says that these “emergencies” always keep him on his toes.

“If an artist has an album coming out and it goes up on a site before that, our job is to work with the other groups around the world — 24/7, 365 days a year — to get that down so the artist can receive the benefit of the release of their product,” he says.

Leaks apparently appear in Glazier’s email marked with a “little red flag” alongside what appears to be an action plan. Given the global reach of the labels, mitigation may start off in one time zone and then shift to another, to ensure that anti-piracy personnel are on the case around the clock. And that helps to blur the lines between Glazier’s working and social life too.

“[E]very 20 minutes there will be another ping from the label: ‘Is it down yet? Is it down yet? Is it down yet?’ Because the artist is saying to the label: ‘Is it down yet? Is it down yet? Is it down yet?’,” he explains.

“It’s always emergencies at the weekend. It’s just Murphy’s Law.”

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

Last year, Bulgarian authorities carried out several sting operations to take down key players in the IPTV piracy ecosystem. It also provided key assistance in the police action against Xtream Codes.

The country’s increased efforts to protect copyright holders haven’t gone unnoticed in the United States. The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) previously removed Bulgaria from their ‘Special 301 Watch List’ and the country hopes to keep it that way.

This week, TorrentFreak obtained a transcript from the most recent hearing on the 2020 Special 301 review. The Government of Bulgaria also sent a representative to the meeting, Ivo Konstantinov, who informed the USTR about the country’s continued progress.

In addition to mentioning IPTV sting operations and legislative developments, Konstantinov stressed that more work has to be done. Specifically, Bulgaria is working on shutting down several major torrent sites with help from U.S. law enforcement.

“Most important of all, the elephant in our room are two of the largest torrent tracking servers that are operating in our country, whose servers are outside of the country,” Bulgaria’s representative said.

“[O]ur National Police and Combat Organized Crime Unit is preparing requests for legal assistance from the U.S. side to deface them and take them down from their host services, which are here in the United States.”

Konstantinov informed the USTR that “this is coming.” No concrete dates were given but the authorities are also working on indictments, which suggests that criminal prosecutions may follow as well.

During the hearing, no websites were mentioned. However, we managed to track down several USTR filings from earlier this year which identify the two trackers as Zamunda.net and ArenaBG. Both sites are among the top 25 most-visited websites in Bulgaria.

In one document the Bulgarian Government states that it intends to “terminate the activities of the Zamunda and Arena.bg torrent trackers,” adding that “5 pre-trial proceedings were opened” for “intellectual property and tax crimes.”

Bulgaria states that U.S. assistance is required as the sites in question use American services. This includes their domain names. Zamunda currently has a .net domain and ArenaBG operates from a .com domain, for example. Both are maintained by Verisign, which is based in the US.

The domains can also be targeted by going to ICANN, which oversees the entire domain name ecosystem. This route is also covered, as the Bulgarian Prosecutor’s Office and the Organized Crime Unit will request ICANN to withdraw the associated domain names.

Yet more pieces of the puzzle fell into place when we stumbled upon another document the Bulgarian Government sent to the USTR. This shows that the U.S. Department of Justice is already actively involved and that more sites are being targeted.

The document references a business trip Bulgarian representatives made to the US last October. These officials met with US law enforcement and businesses, discussing potential anti-piracy actions.

These actions include domain seizures relating to four websites. The aforementioned Zamunda.net and ArenaBG.com, but also Zelka.org and RarBG.to. The latter is a major target, as it’s one of the most-used torrent sites worldwide.

During the trip, Matthew Lamberti from the US Department of Justice agreed to help, under the mutual legal assistance treaty, to seize the associated domain names.

“During the meeting with Mat Lamberti an agreement was reached that an MLAT will be sent by our country, regarding initiated pre-trials concerning four torrent trackers – with the aim of seizing domains, registered in the USA,” the document reads.

If all goes well, Bulgaria will also enlist assistance from other countries to seize any other associated domain names, including mirrors.

“If the planned procedure is successful and the domains are seized, our country intends to send the MPP to the other countries where the mirror domains of the above are registered.”

Bulgaria also mentioned that Cloudflare, a US-based company, is used by most of the top torrent sites in the world. The sites use the CDN provider to “conceal the actual location” of these “criminalized Internet resources.”

During the USTR meeting in Washington, Konstantinov mentioned that Cloudflare is cooperative as it helps to identify the sites’ true hosting locations. It’s now up to Bulgaria and the US to get the paperwork sorted, so domain names and possibly servers can be seized and shut down, he added.

The documents are remarkable, as they lay out in detail how Bulgaria and the US are working together to try and take down several top torrent sites. All the quotes and references, while not easy to find, have been made public by the USTR itself.

In some instances, the paperwork refers to ‘Arena.bg’ and ‘Rar.bg’ instead of ArenaBG.com and RarBG.to. While that’s confusing, the latter two are the largest sites by far and likely the main targets.

Finally, it’s interesting to note that, in this case, Bulgaria needs assistance from the US to shut target popular pirate sites. Especially, when taking into account that the US frequently points to lacking enforcement actions in other countries.

All in all, we can say that the documents clearly lay out the playbook to target the four torrent sites, but thus far, all targets are still operating as usual.

—

The transcript from the USTR hearing is available here (pdf) and the additional documents that were sent to the USTR can be found here (pdf) and here (pdf).

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