As 2016 nears its midway point the rhetoric over DMCA takedowns is more fiery than ever. Aware that a favorable change in the law might be possible sometime in the future, copyright holders are pushing the Copyright Office in the United States to consider a ‘takedown, staydown’ system.

This proposal, should it ever become enshrined in law, would enable copyright holders to issue a DMCA notice to a site for a particular piece of content with the expectation that it will never appear again on that same platform. Opposition to such a regime is notable but it’s not difficult to see why copyright holders are so keen to have it implemented.

In the meantime they are stuck with the existing system and their efforts are clearly illustrated in Google’s Transparency Report. During the past month alone 7,015 copyright holders and 3,176 reporting organizations sent requests for 87 million URLs to be removed from Google’s indexes. It’s a huge amount by any standard.

What is interesting is how a relatively small number of domains account for a disproportionate number of takedowns. For instance last month two sites – file-hosting site 4shared and MP3 site GoEar – accounted for close to 11 million takedowns. That means that it took complaints against another 77,855 domains to make up the remaining 76 million URLs.

When looking at the figures for the last year a similar picture emerges, with a small number of domains attracting disproportionate levels of complaints. Interestingly, those thinking that The Pirate Bay or KickassTorrents would get the top slots will be disappointed. Those sites pale into insignificance when compared to the front runners.

Also of interest is the kind of site being targeted.

In first position is 4shared, a file-hosting site traffic ranked 434th in the world by Alexa. While that represents huge amounts of traffic, it’s the site’s popularity in Brazil that is causing it to receive a disproportionate number of notices. 4shared is ranked the 53rd most popular domain there, something that hasn’t gone unnoticed by local anti-piracy outfit APDIF who since 2013 have filed 17 million complaints in response.

MP3 indexing site FlowXD takes second place with an ‘impressive’ 8.2 million takedowns. Again APDIF has been sending the lion’s share of the notices, presumably due to the site’s popularity in Brazil and elsewhere in South America.

In a close third with almost 7.7 million takedowns in the past twelve months is Chomikuj, a Cyrus-incorporated file-hosting site that is the 34th most-visited site in Poland. Overall, the UK’s BPI has shown the most interest in the site, having sent more than 4.5 million notices since 2011. More recently, however, a much wider spread of copyright holders have targeted the site.

Perhaps unsurprisingly a website unblocking service is also up there with the front runners. Unblocksit.es has had almost 7 million complaints filed with Google, mostly by anti-piracy outfit Rivendell who boast being the “world Leader on Google’s transparency report for removal illegal links.”

In fifth and sixth place respectively sit file-hosting giants Rapidgator and Uploaded with around 6.5 million complaints each. A wide range of copyright holders focus on both sites with an emphasis on the music sector. Rapidgator and Uploaded have experienced a decline in traffic since the start of the year but neither are showing signs of going away any time soon.

From there, all remaining sites in the top 10 are dedicated to offering free music. None seem particularly popular with English-speaking users. GoEar gets quite a lot of Spanish eyes and for some reason Gooveo is rocking it in Guatemala. Viciomp3 and Esamusica both appear to be defunct although copyright holders are continuing to send complaints to Google.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Over the past two decades the Business Software Alliance (BSA) has represented major software companies, including Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, Oracle and Symantec, in their fight against under-licensed businesses.

This has resulted in audits at thousands of companies worldwide, whose computers are carefully inspected to see if the business owner has failed to pay his or her dues.

While companies are often contractually obliged to comply with such audits, BSA’s selection procedures are raising eyebrows.

Since a few years the industry group has been actively soliciting tips from the public about potentially infringing companies. Promising hard cash rewards, it asks “whistleblowers” to expose any wrongdoing.

BSA generally follows up these tips with a threatening letter to the business owner in which it requests an audit, something they are contractually obliged to agree to.

If unlicensed software is found during an audit, the group generally follows up with a demand for damages, which can run into hundreds of thousands of dollars for some companies.

To find out more about the process TorrentFreak spoke with Robert J. Scott, managing partner at Scott & Scott, LLP., who has represented hundreds of defendants in BSA related cases over the past couple of years.

According to Scott a typical audit request comes after “a tip by a disgruntled employee or former employee, often seeking to recover advertised reward money.”

Many of Scott’s clients liken BSA’s tactics to a form of extortion, but he prefers not to use this term. In principle he believes that software companies have the right to protect their work. However, he certainly doesn’t agree with BSA practices.

The reward money in particular is problematic as it tends to attract disgruntled people who have a history with the company. For example, a fired employee who hopes to cash in while getting back at a former boss.

“I challenge the payment of reward money to disgruntled employees,” Scott says. “I also have been opposed to the method of calculating damages in BSA cases as being contrary to law.”

The damages awards demanded in these cases are typically three times the regular licensing fee, and can easily run to hundreds of thousands of dollars depending on the number of computers that are in use.

In a recent article for TechCrunch Scott shares the story of Fuzzy’s Radiator, a Texas automotive repair company. In a threatening letter the BSA accused the company of running unlicensed Microsoft products, stating that it could owe millions of dollars for the alleged infringement.

The timing of the letter was interesting, as it came in shortly after Fuzzy’s Radiator’s in-house IT person left the company. “I think the disgruntled former employee was trying to bring down the company,” Fuzzy Radiator’s Trinda Lopez said.

Facing a potential bankruptcy, the company decided to freeze employee salaries and postpone the purchase of new equipment. Eventually, the dispute was settled for a fraction of the initial demand.

While some business owners may run unlicensed software on purpose, this is certainly not always the case. Sometimes the software is installed by relative outsiders, or IT personnel who decide to skip the licensing part on their own accord.

Intentional or not, if the BSA comes knocking it’s bound to get costly. Scott hopes that small business owners will become more aware of the potential risk and ensure that their licenses are in order.

“After handling over 250 cases by BSA, what I have learned is that small business owners can’t trust IT to manage software license compliance,” Scott tells us.

Finally, it’s worth keeping in mind that BSA uses the prospect of excessive penalties to intimidate companies and elicit fear. With a proper defense the actual settlements turn out to be much lower.

Too bad for the disgruntled employee, who gets a stake of the settlement.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

While Internet piracy has thrived on desktop machines for decades, it is now quite common to find the activity taking place in the living room. Expensive equipment is no longer needed and bulky machines have been replaced by much smaller HDMI-capable devices.

There are several types around but the most common have Android under the hood. Typically in small set-top or dongle format, these products can be loaded with media software from Google’s Play Store or invariably “side-loaded” with more unofficial products such as customized versions of Kodi, Showbox and Popcorn Time.

These cheap IPTV systems can provide users with access to a bewildering array of free content, from movies and TV shows to live sports and other PPV events. As a result, copyright holders around the world are mounting aggressive crackdowns on those who sell such devices for infringing uses.

Some of the most prominent actions have involved the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT), who together with police have conducted a number of raids in the UK in recent months. Most have taken place in England but news is now emerging of a large scale anti-IPTV operation underway in Scotland.

According to local police, two premises were raided in Glasgow this week as part of what they describe as the “world’s largest” investigation into pirate IPTV boxes which has been underway for the last 16 months.

While movie companies have shown an interest in these devices it appears the focus in Scotland is on the streaming of live sports broadcasts. These are officially offered by FACT partners the English Premier League (soccer) alongside distributors Sky and BT but individuals and pubs are obtaining them illegally.

Speaking with STV, police say that initial estimates of the scale of infringement are now being dwarfed.

“As of today we estimated about 500 pubs might be involved, but today’s investigation has suggested it could be thousands,” a spokesman said.

“This is undoubtedly the biggest operation of its kind in the world in terms of recovery. It’s a process that’s been done elsewhere but not on this scale, this is the biggest.”

In a comment FACT director general Kieron Sharp said that his organization is committed to working with law enforcement to crack down IPTV-related piracy, wherever it may be.

“Pub landlords, as well as the general public, need to be aware that IPTV and set-top boxes with apps and add-ons allowing the streaming of pirated TV, sports and films are very much illegal,” Sharp said.

“FACT will continue to work with police forces across the UK to crack down on the illegal sale of these boxes.”

In other action, police in Scotland say that in conjunction with FACT they have taken down three “major” torrent sites operated from the Edinburgh, Kilmarnock and Falkirk areas.

“We’ve been successful in removing these sites and work is ongoing to remove several more that we have identified, in what is undoubtedly a growing problem,” said Police Constable Andy Law.

“Hosts often believe they leave no footprint, but in reality we can trace sites back to an address and from there it leaves little scope for the culprit to hide their actions.”

Police have not revealed the names of the sites and there has been no indication in torrent circles of any large indexes or trackers going down. It therefore seems more likely that these are lower level sites rather than the “major” ones suggested by the police.

“Websites offering illegal access to films, music, games and books are threatening our creative industries and the 1.8 million people in the UK working in them,” said FACT’s Kieron Sharp.

“FACT is committed to tackling online piracy and together with our partners at the police and within industry, we will continue the fight to clampdown on anyone operating these sites within our own territories.”

These latest announcements come alongside news that FACT has lost the support of its movie studios partners alongside an estimated 50% of its budget. The MPA says it will carry out its own investigations from regional hubs in future.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

To make it harder for pirates to get their hands on the latest blockbusters, all popular Blu-rays and HD streams have content protection.

HDCP is the standard in the field. The technology, which is owned by Intel daughter company DCP, makes it hard to rip HD content, but not impossible.

Earlier this year DCP and Warner Bros. filed two lawsuits against companies that sell hardware which can effectively bypass HDCP 2.2 content protection.

The first lawsuit against a Chinese company was settled last month, with the rightsholders on the ‘losing’ end. However, this week DCP and Warner Bros. have something to celebrate.

The two companies signed a settlement with the California-based hardware seller Ace Deal, which admits to violating their rights under the DMCA. Ace Deal sold so-called HDCP strippers, devices that allow users to render protected video content in the clear, circumventing the copy protection.

The parties have submitted a joint proposal for a final judgment and a permanent injunction at a California federal court. According to the documents (pdf) Ace Deal sold 2,078 circumvention devices in recent years.

Not only does the hardware seller admit guilt, it has also agreed to a hefty damages amount of $5,250,000, which is quite something for such a small company.

In addition to the money, the settlement includes a permanent injunction that prohibits Ace Deal and its employees from offering similar products in the future.

They are ordered to refrain from “importing, manufacturing, offering to the public, providing, selling, using, or otherwise trafficking in any technology, product, service, device, component or part thereof that is primarily designed or produced to circumvent HDCP…”

The court still has to sign off on the proposed orders but that’s expected to be a formality. Meanwhile, Ace Deal has already removed the offending products from its website.

While this case shows a lot of similarities with the one filed against the Chinese company LegendSky, the outcome is entirely different. LegendSky was also accused of “stripping” HDCP copy protection, but these claims didn’t stick.

LegendSky successfully argued their 4K splitter device does not “strip” any HDCP copy protection. Instead, it merely downgrades the higher HDCP protection to a lower version, which is permitted as an exception under the DMCA.

For Ace Deal this argument does not apply so they are left with millions in debt. At least on paper, which may not always be true.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Back in 2010, the major movie studios of the Motion Picture Association were pursuing a dream. Rather than deal with each individual file-sharer the companies decided that website blocking could be a solution to mass online piracy.

Their first target was Usenet-indexing site Newzbin, a somewhat soft target considering the site had already been declared as operating illegally in the UK.

Almost five years ago the High Court ruled in the studios’ favor, ordering ISP BT to block the site. This action set a precedent in the UK and in the years that followed a similar process was used to block hundreds of ‘pirate’ sites, with the recording, publishing and sports industries all getting involved.

Currently, sites are blocked on a regular basis as copyright holders are allowed to add new domains to existing court orders if the domains are considered to be closely associated with a previously blocked site. This covers new Pirate Bay and KickassTorrents proxy sites, for example.

However, during the past few days several sites became unavailable via UK ISPs that were not closely associated with sites already blocked, CouchTuner for instance. This was a fairly clear indication that a new High Court order had been obtained.

That confirmation has now arrived, with notification from ISP Virgin Media that it has blocked several streaming sites in compliance with an injunction obtained by the Motion Picture Association on May 5. The sites are Couchtuner.ag, Merdb, Putlocker.is, Putlocker.plus, Rainiertamayo.com (Rainierland), Vidics.ch, Watchfree.to and Xmovies8.tv.

From a traffic perspective, Putlocker is without doubt the largest target. According to Alexa the streaming portal is the 219th most popular site on the Internet, 166th in the United States and an impressive 35th in the UK.

Next up is Watchfree.to, a site that rocketed from relative obscurity this time last year to become the 1,369th most popular site on the Internet. In third place comes CouchTuner, a fan favorite that’s currently ranked 1,609th worldwide. The remainder are relative minnows, with Vidics barely able to break the 28,000 barrier.

As always the current injunction was obtained under Section 97a of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act but one has to go back more than a year to find a similar fresh order obtained by the MPA. That came in April 2015 when several PopcornTime, isoHunt, EZTV and sundry streaming sites were targeted.

But while the MPA’s applications are spread out, it’s likely their reach will continue to grow. Any sites that have a similar name and/or functionality to those in an existing order will be added to the injunction without having to obtain a new one. In an effort to thwart workarounds, that includes proxies, mirrors and even copycats too.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.