Signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1998, the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) aimed to ready copyright law for the digital age.

The law introduced a safe harbor for Internet services, meaning that they can’t be held liable for their pirating users as long as they properly process takedown notices and deal with repeat infringers.

Today, the DMCA is perhaps more in the news than ever before. Just last month Internet provider Cox Communication was ordered to pay $25 million because it failed to disconnect subscribers whose connections were repeatedly used to pirate content.

In addition, millions of takedown notices are sent out every day while copyright holders and Internet services openly debate the effectiveness of the current DMCA takedown procedures.

To hear the growing concerns from all sides the U.S. Copyright Office has launched a public consultation in order to evaluate the impact and effectiveness of the DMCA’s safe harbor provisions.

“Among other issues, the Office will consider the costs and burdens of the notice-and-takedown process on large- and small-scale copyright owners, online service providers, and the general public. The Office will also review how successfully section 512 addresses online infringement and protects against improper takedown notices,” the Copyright Office writes.

Various stakeholders, including the public, are invited to answer a wide variety of questions. How effective takedown notices are in deterring piracy, for example, how costly the process is, and whether more should be done to assure that links don’t reappear elsewhere.

The latter issue was brought to the forefront recently when Google rejected the idea to ban entire domain names from its search results, or implement a system that would prevent content from reappearing under a new URL.

The consultation also mentions the “repeat infringer” issue which is a major concern for ISPs. At the moment it’s not common for Internet providers to disconnect subscribers who repeatedly pirate content, as there’s no clear definition of what a repeat infringer is.

Demanding a tougher stance, several copyright holders argue that notices without any repercussions are not going to be very effective.

The automated takedown tools which often lead to incorrect removals are raised as well. The same is true for more serious forms of abuse, where takedown notices are used to silence critics or stifle free speech.

“Service providers and advocacy groups have raised concerns about fraudulent and abusive section 512 notices that may restrain fair use, free speech, or otherwise misuse the notice-and-takedown process,” the Copyright Office notes.

“Some of the concerns arise from takedown notices for content that appears to constitute an obvious fair use of a copyright work. Others relate to efforts to remove criticism or commentary—such as negative reviews—under the guise of copyright.”

For their part, copyright holders believe that many Internet services are simply hiding behind their safe harbor protections. A more proactive stance to deal with various forms of piracy is required, they argue.

Considering the parties involved and the stakes at hand, copyright holders, Internet services and ISPs will leave no resource untapped to have their views heard. In any event, the Copyright office will have to plow through a lot of contrasting opinions.

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

As the brains and machinery behind uTorrent and the Mainline BitTorrent clients, BitTorrent Inc. is the market leader in consumer focused, peer-to-peer file-sharing tools.

Combined, these clients enjoy around 170 million active users per month, a massive userbase that’s unrivaled in the marketplace. In total, BitTorrent Inc. serves a cool 200 million adverts to its users every single day.

But despite these impressive numbers, revenues for BitTorrent Inc. remain modest. As previously reported, the company sells its worldwide traffic for just 7 cents per 1,000 views, one of the lowest tiers in the ad industry.

While the situation is complex, one of BitTorrent Inc’s problems is how some view the company as being closely tied to piracy. For many, when people download a pirate movie or album using BitTorrent, that means that somehow BitTorrent Inc is involved, but that has parallels with holding Mozilla to account when people use Firefox for nefarious purposes.

In response, BitTorrent Inc has tried extremely hard to reposition itself not only as a software vendor but also as an artist development and promotion platform. A successful play here could help to boost those low-cent views to something carrying more value. The company hopes that a new appointment will play a part in that.

In a job listing posted a few hours ago, the San Francisco based company reveals it’s searching for a new Sales Director to drive media demand across Western Europe.

Responsible for the company’s publishing network across desktop, mobile and web-based platforms, the successful candidate will be expected to establish and develop relationships across the advertising spectrum and “grow company presence across all geos.”

But perhaps of most interest is the requirement for the individual to put in place a strategy to “optimize revenues” by getting a better return on available advertising space.

Part of that will be achieved by meeting with agencies and trading desks but the underlying strategy here is to attract reputable companies or, as BitTorrent Inc puts it, “drive demand from major brands.”

And when targeting major brands, BitTorrent Inc. wants to go straight to the top.

“Inclusive activities are meeting with all agencies for major holding companies for relevant brands, industry events, trade shows, ad clubs and social participation,” the company explains.

But while branding is an excellent way to get more for a product, it is very likely that the BitTorrent ‘brand’ will have already appeared on advertisers’ radars, and not in a good way either.

Despite the company’s efforts to distance itself from piracy, the entertainment industries are putting significant resources into ensuring that big companies do not pump money into the piracy ecosystem, whether that’s by placing ads on blatant piracy sites or via platforms that help to enable infringement.

And it’s very clear that groups such as the RIAA view BitTorrent Inc. as an enabler of such infringement. Last summer Brad Buckles, Executive Vice President of Anti-Piracy at the RIAA wrote to the company with a plea for it to get serious over piracy.

“The software client applications developed, marketed and distributed by BitTorrent Inc. facilitated approximately 75% of at least 1.6 million torrent based infringements in the United States upon which a notice was sent in 2014,” Buckles wrote.

“[If not endorsing piracy] is indeed your business philosophy, then we believe it is only right and proper for BitTorrent, Inc to take steps to reduce their facilitation of infringement.”

So the company is left with somewhat of a dilemma. Should major brand advertising be secured, that will soon appear in uTorrent alongside infringing downloads being carried out by tens of millions of users. As a result it won’t take long for the entertainment industries to pile pressure on the brands to withdraw.

On the other hand, if BitTorrent Inc implements some kind of anti-piracy system to inspire confidence with the brands, a large portion of its 170 million userbase will get very serious about moving to other platforms. That will drastically reduce both eyeballs and revenue while ensuring that current advertisers reach fewer people than they do at the moment.

There’s a tipping point in there somewhere but either way, it’s clear that whoever takes on the new role at BitTorrent Inc. will have their work cut out to bring on the brands in today’s climate.

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

It took an awful long time to arrive but late 2014 the movie and music industries eventually reached agreement with the UK’s leading ISPs to send warnings to subscribers suspected of downloading content from file-sharing networks.

The warning scheme (which is currently notable only by its absence) is part of the Creative Content UK (CCUK) initiative which marries the ‘stick’ of direct-to-door warnings with a broader educational campaign focused on deterrence.

As previously reported the first campaign titled “Get It Right from a Genuine Site” used a colorful cartoon to encourage viewers to boycott ‘pirate’ sites in favor of those which pay licensing fees supporting the entertainment industries.

And now, at the start of a new year, CCUK’s latest initiative can be found on the Intellectual Property Office’s education site, which was launched under the ‘Cracking Ideas‘ brand last November.

Fronted by clay animation stars Wallace and Gromit, ‘Cracking Ideas’ is offering a lesson plan which asks 14-19 year old students to consider “the impact and ethics of film piracy, the consequences of downloading a film illegally and the impact of film piracy on the creative industries.”

Produced in partnership with The Industry Trust, The Intellectual Property Office and the Federation Against Copyright Theft, the lesson (titled “Vin Diesel’s Socks”) is built around a student-created anti-piracy PSA of the same name which questions who will fund the action star’s footwear if people pirate rather pay.

When placed side-by-side with ‘classics’ such as “You Wouldn’t Download a Car“, the change of tone is notable.

The lesson is centered around 18 slides with accompanying notes encouraging teachers and other educators to question students on issues including illegal uploading.

“Why do you think people distribute and upload films illegally? What do you think are the consequences of this activity?” one slide asks. Students are given time to think but are then offered these reasons.

Slide

It’s no real surprise that cash is put forward as the prime motivator, even though the country’s most recently jailed pirates made not a single penny from their activities. It is interesting, however, that the slide balances this with the honest statement that pirates often beat legitimate providers to the market, with pricing and availability.

Mirroring similar campaigns underway in the United States, the lesson also reinforces the notion that ‘pirate’ sites are dangerous places. It also falls back on the controversial ‘disappearing money’ argument that money not outlaid on movies is somehow not spent elsewhere in the economy.

But credit where it’s due. A later slide concedes that people who pirate content online are often the same people who pay to visit the cinema, buy DVDs and stream content from legitimate sources.

Slide

Later, students are asked to consider “Should things that are online be free?” and “Should you do things just because they are technologically possible?”

But what if students believe that piracy generates free buzz, that if they download something and rave about it to their friends, that will boost sales? The lesson’s covering notes provide guidance for teachers on how to respond.

“You may like to explain that creators of films, music or any other product should be in control of how they distribute their product. If they want to share it for free that is their choice, but illegal distribution removes that choice from the creator,” the notes suggest.

And, if students think that plenty of people still go to the cinema and film companies continue to make lots of money, the suggested response is as follows.

“You can suggest that it can take a long time for many films to make a profit and that unless people pay for the film at the cinema, online, on DVD etc, films will not cover their costs or make a profit, this will affect the quality and range of films that are made, and the career opportunities available in the film industry.”

But what if students get really tricky by suggesting that the film industry “is behind the times” by not serving those who want to watch movies as soon as they become available?

“You can suggest to students that some films are available online and on DVD at the same time as they are in the cinema, but that watching a film in the cinema is a different experience to watching it at home and many filmmakers and studios want their films to be an experience, and viewed in the optimum conditions. How a film is released and how much the creators charge for their product is their choice.”

In a later slide students are advised about being monitored online by copyright holders and the subsequent ISP warnings their activity might generate. Notably there is no mention of any punishments or references to breaking the law. The warnings are mentioned solely as a way to direct alleged infringers to legitimate content. This is a big change from past campaigns.

Finally, students are shown slides detailing the work of the Federation Against Copyright Theft but again there is little for them to feel threatened over. Instead, teachers are encouraged to explain that even pirates love movies.

“Explain that many people who access pirated film actually love film and want the industry to continue making great movies. If students love film, they should look for legal providers through Find Any Film next time. Play the Moments Worth Paying For/Star Wars: The Force Awakens trailer and ask students why they think film is worth paying for,” the notes to teachers conclude.

The Vin Diesel’s Socks lesson plan can be downloaded here.

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

Last November several pirated copies of 4K videos started to leak from both Netflix and Amazon. These leaks were unusual as online 4k streams were always well protected against pirates.

While it’s still not clear how these videos were copied, a new lawsuit from Warner Bros. and Intel’s daughter company Digital Content Protection (DCP) suggests that HDFury devices may be involved.

The companies have filed a lawsuit at a federal court in New York against the maker of the devices, technology company LegendSky.

Starting a few weeks ago the Chinese company launched a range of new devices which allow users to strip the latest HDCP encryption. This hardware sits between a HDCP-compliant source device and another device, allowing it to pass on a “stripped” 4K signal.

The Hollywood studio and DCP argue that these devices violate the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provisions and should no longer be sold to prevent further damage.

One of the HDFury devices

TF obtained a copy of the complaint in which Warner Bros. allege that the hardware threatens copyright holders because it enables users to render 4K video “in the clear,” making it easy for pirates to share it online.

“The HDFury Devices harm copyright owners like Warner Bros. because they enable Digital Content to be displayed without the protections of HDCP, thereby enabling users to access copyrighted works, make and/or distribute copies of copyrighted works […] all without the permission of the copyright owner,’ they write.

DCP, on the other hand, is harmed because it owns and controls the HDCP standard. When this copy protection is easily circumvented it loses much of its value and potential licensing revenue.

“The HDFury Devices harm DCP because, among other things, they undermine the effectiveness of HDCP, lower the value of HDCP, and thereby jeopardize DCP’s ability to license HDCP to Digital Device manufacturers and Digital Content owners,” the complaint reads.

Both Warner Bros. and DCP accuse LegendSky of violating the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provisions. In addition, they claim that the company violated the Lanham Act by falsely stating that the HDFury devices comply with HDCP’s license requirements.

The plaintiffs ask the court to prohibit these devices from being sold and advertised. In addition, they want to be compensated for the damages they’ve suffered.

In discussions with TorrentFreak, someone who recently purchased an HDFury 4K ‘stripper’ confirmed that the product does indeed work. The first devices were shipped from China early November, a few days before the first 4K rips appeared online.

For Warner Bros. it is essential that 4K copy protection remains strong. The company just announced that it will release several dozen 4K Blu-ray movies this year and would like to keep these out of the hands of pirates.

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

This week we have two newcomers in our chart.

The Martian is the most downloaded movie for the second week in a row.

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 BD/DVDrips unless stated otherwise.

RSS feed for the weekly movie download chart.

Ranking	(last week)	Movie	IMDb Rating / Trailer
torrentfreak.com
1	(1)	The Martian	8.2 / trailer
2	(…)	The Big Short (DVDscr)	8.1 / trailer
3	(2)	The Revenant (DVDscr)	?.? / trailer
4	(7)	Spectre (DVDscr)	7.1 / trailer
5	(3)	The Hateful Eight (DVDscr)	9.1 / trailer
6	(5)	Bridge of Spies (DVDscr)	7.9 / trailer
7	(4)	Creed (DVDscr)	8.2 / trailer
8	(…)	Burnt	6.7 / trailer
9	(8)	The Intern (Web-DL)	7.4 / trailer
9	(2)	The Peanuts Movie (DVDscr)	7.7 / trailer
10	(10)	In The Heart of The Sea (DVDscr)	7.1 / trailer

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