On May 23, 2013, five unmarked cars containing 10 police officers and representatives from the Federation Against Copyright Theft tracked down UK-based Philip Danks.

From Walsall in the West Midlands, then 24-year-old Danks had cammed Fast and Furious 6 at a local Showcase cinema before uploading it to the Internet. A year later the computer programmer was handed an unprecedented 33 months in prison.

Following a successful appeal to the Ministry of Justice, Danks is now on home detention after serving one year and 18 days of his sentence. Earlier this week he read a TF piece which covered FACT’s warning to potential cammers of the upcoming Bond film ‘Spectre’. We suggested that releasing the movie in the UK almost two weeks before the U.S. launch was a recipe for piracy. Danks agrees.

“The movie industry do staggered releases to build up suspense with a movie but I for one know this does not work. As you know movies are (usually) released in the company they are created in, hence James Bond and Fast 6 being released here in the UK first,” Danks told TF.

“However, this just creates an unnecessary window for pirates to grab the film before anyone else. It gives them the opportunity to obtain maximum results from being the first group or person to leak the movies online because people who cannot watch it at the cinema will be wanting a pirate copy to give them their movie fix.”

That escalated quickly

That urge to be first was what put Danks on the radars of FACT and then the police. After his arrest and subsequent conviction Danks was initially sent to HMP Hewell, a Category B prison in Worcestershire, later being transferred to the low-to-medium risk HMP Oakwood. But despite committing only white-collar crime, Danks was placed alongside those with a thirst for violence.

“I was locked up with all sorts of people, including murderers, bank robbers etc. I remember one guy who I worked with in the kitchens who had been sentenced to 18 years for killing someone. He got out and within six hours was arrested again for killing his victim’s friend,” Danks explains.

Easy prison life…..for a celebrity

Given comments made last week by Pirate Bay’s Peter Sunde who said that he’d been asked to sign autographs in prison, it’s interesting that Danks enjoyed a similar reception.

“To be honest I was somewhat of a celebrity in prison, amongst both prisoners and staff alike. Not one person (including my offender manager) thought the punishment fit the crime,” he reveals.

Overall, however, Danks says that prison itself wasn’t that bad.

“Personally I believe locking people up will not work, prison is easier now than ever. I had (which everyone gets) a 22in Sharp TV with 135 channels, a phone in my cell, a kettle, and my own shower and bathroom facilities.

“In all honesty prison was comfortable, I was never scared or even worried about the people around me. So no, prison does not work. Prison isn’t a deterrent for the most heinous acts of crime, let alone ‘copyright theft’.”

Worth it then? Absolutely not…

Despite having an easy life in prison, Danks told TF that the whole punishment package amounts to something a lot more than just being denied freedom for a while. The personal costs outside the prison walls were considerable.

“Prison has affected my life dramatically. I lost my home due to not being able to keep up with rent, I lost my car, job, and everywhere I go I’m not recognized as someone who does good things, I’m just ‘that guy who’s been in prison’,” he explains.

“I applied for a job at a sports shop last week, where I have worked before and known the manager for 13 years. His response was ‘we do not employ ex-cons’. So it’s even difficult to gain employment.”

Family strain

Having no way to make real money, Danks said that his family were always under pressure to send cash for things like phone credit – and then found themselves worrying when he didn’t manage to call them.

“Life was more of a strain on my family then on me,” he notes. Tragically, his family became significantly smaller during his time in prison.

“Whilst I was in prison I sadly lost two of my uncles and my grandad, all of whom I never got to say goodbye to because I was refused leave to go to funerals. I am not a religious man but was forced to pray at the chapel because it was the only way to say goodbye.”

Just not worth it

Overall, it’s clear that Danks is still upset about what happened to him. He admits that he’s done wrong but blames FACT for an aggressive prosecution and a court system ill-equipped to deal with cases like his.

“Crown Courts are meant for criminals, those who hurt people or are a danger to the public, not for civil cases brought to a criminal trial because the government are in the back pocket of the movie industry. They have their priorities all wrong and favor corporations over consumers,” he says.

Not even Danks’ lawyer escapes criticism.

“My solicitor never actually defended me. He simply sat back and let the prosecution bludgeon me to the point of no return,” he explains.

Thinking of camming? Think again

“People really need to think twice. Going to prison is an extremely tough strain not on yourself, but on your family. You will lose respect from loved ones, friends and work colleagues. Prison never has a happy ending, it will always hang over you wherever you go.”

“Simply put, prison isn’t worth the kudos you get from being the first to leak a movie, stay away from it all and be happy with your family!”

One last thing

The work of movie cammers is often talked about in the media but how they operate is often shrouded in secrecy. Join us next week for an A to Z reveal of Danks’ activities, from selecting movies, locations and equipment, to staying undetected in the cinema and making a clean getaway.

To get a year’s worth of things of his chest, Danks has taken to YouTube. His rant is embedded below.

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

Aside from promoting copyright reform, Pirate parties worldwide are fierce defenders of online privacy.

Their position is no different in Austria where local politicians are slowly trying to increase state surveillance. Through the new State Protection Act which will increase monitoring, for example.

With elections coming up in the Linz region next week the party decided to advertise their policy, but not on the regular outfits most political parties prefer. The Austrian Pirates picked YouPorn as their prime adverting platform instead.

Personal preferences aside, people generally prefer not to be snooped on while they’re viewing porn sites. However, in this case they can’t escape the prying eyes of Johanna Mikl-Leitner, Austria’s Minister of the Interior

“Johanna wants to watch you!” the banner ad alerts YouPorn visitors.

“Johanna wants to watch you!”

The advertisements are written in German and targeted at Austrians, many of whom were surprised to see the Minister ‘snooping’ on their private moments. Exactly the effect the Pirate Party was looking for.

“We want to prevent the Orwellian dystopia – 1984 was not a guide to action,” says Claus-Peter Wiesinger, top candidate of the Pirates in Linz.

“We are aware that political issues are uncommon on sites like YouPorn. But as a young party we want to seize the opportunity to break into the comfort zone of Internet users there, to address the threat of mass surveillance,” he adds.

Visitors who click on the YouPorn banner are directed to a dedicated campaign site with more details and other useful tips against surveillance.

The party says it chose the minister’s image because she is the driving force behind the escalating surveillance efforts in Austria, through the new State Protection Act and by backing the reintroduction of data retention, for example.

The Pirates encourage people to speak out against these developments by voting for the party in the municipal elections in Linz or by signing the petition against the new State Protection Act.

“Strengthened by a council mandate in Linz, we want to continue our fight against the surveillance state. With 1.7% of the vote we are in,” Wiesinger says, referring to the upcoming election.

After this week’s successful campaign the Pirates are hoping to continue their advertising efforts on porn sites. They have already started a crowdfunding drive for the next round of ads which is on its way to reach the €600 goal.

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

In recent years various copyright holder groups have adopted a “follow-the-money” approach in the hope of cutting off funding to so-called pirate sites.

Thus far this has resulted in some notable developments. In the UK hundreds of advertising agencies are actively banning pirate sites and similar initiatives are popping up elsewhere.

This week came another breakthrough when GroupM, the world’s largest advertising media company, adopted a set of anti-piracy guidelines. As a result it now requires media partners to agree to strict standards and ban pirate sites.

The MPAA applauded the initiative and expressed hope that other stakeholders in the ad industry will follow suit.

“The issues of ad-supported piracy is an important one for creative industries everywhere, and it is an important one for businesses whose brands are being hurt by having their advertisements associated with these illegal activities,” the MPAA’s Howard Gantman wrote.

GroupM’s announcement will definitely have an impact on the higher echelons of the ad industry. However, at the bottom and outside the public gaze, several companies are fighting for the grace of pirate sites.

Most regular visitors of pirate sites are probably familiar with the adult advertisements, gambling promotions and other dubious offers that are sometimes bordering on fraud.

These brands have a hard time finding banner space on legitimate sites but not on file-sharing services. The added benefit is that the cost per 1000 impressions is much lower on pirate sites, not to mention the opportunities for intrusive ad formats such as popunders and interstitials.

There are several ad companies that specialize in this area. They act as the middlemen between pirate sites and advertisers in return for a significant stake of the proceeds.

At TorrentFreak we have seen several emails from ad networks advertising their services. Instead of being wary of pirate partnerships, these companies proudly promote their cooperation with these sites hoping to convince others to join.

Below is an example of a company that offers “amazing results” with its popups, mentioning KickassTorrents as one of its top clients.

Email sent by ad company A

Another advertising outfit already assigned an account manager, boasting streaming sites Watchseries, Movshare and Videoweed as partners.

Email sent by ad company B

The above shows that the anti-piracy efforts are not going to stop money from flowing to these sites. What it will do is limit the already minimal presence of mainstream brands, trading them in for more dubious ones.

Whether that will have a significant impact on revenues is unclear, but it does make visits to pirate sites without an ad-blocker more risky.

That leads to a rather grim conclusion that the anti-piracy measures are helping the vendors and advertisers who peddle shady and malicious ads, instead of really hurting pirate sites.

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

Considering its massive rise to fame in the past 18 months it’s little wonder that Popcorn Time is still causing controversy. With millions of users in dozens of countries the ‘Netflix for Pirates’ is firmly on the radar of Hollywood.

Just lately, however, Popcorn Time has attracted the attention of copyright trolls, the anti-piracy enforcers that inhabit the very bottom of the rightsholder food chain.

Infamous U.S. studio Voltage Pictures recently began targeting Popcorn Time users who downloaded the movie Dallas Buyers Club and in recent weeks troubled piracy monetization outfit Rightscorp launched its own questionable anti-Popcorn service.

Now users of the software in Scandinavia are coming under fire, with hundreds of Danish Internet account holders being hit with cash demands after their connections were linked with infringements of the Michael Douglas movie ‘And So It Goes‘.

The demands for compensation are being issued by lawfirm Opus Law acting on behalf of the Denmark division of Scanbox Entertainment. They appear to average around $320, a much lower sum than is usually demanded in the United States, for example, but still a considerable amount for a single movie.

Of course, in the background of what is portrayed as a generous initial offer, trolls often indicate that worse could be round the corner if Internet users don’t agree to settle. This case is no different.

“It’s clear that we did not start the case with the intention of ending up in court, but at the same time it is also clear that when we are ultimately faced with a case where we can not agree [to settle], then we need to go to court,” Opus lawyer Niels Hald-Nielsen told DR.dk.

As the publication notes, there have been no file-sharing related civil actions in Denmark since 2011, which means there is no precedent to indicate what kind of punishment a court might settle on in such a case.

Nevertheless, Hald-Nielsen feels that the settlement offer is a generous one and even suggests that Popcorn Time users are more damaging than users of other file-sharing software.

“The reason why I think that the amount I suggest – [$320] – is reasonable, is that when you distribute a film through Popcorn Time, it goes out to a much wider circle of people and the harm is just so much bigger,” the lawyer says.

These legal threats come on the heels of other recent Popcorn Time related events in Denmark. In March a local producer threatened to target users of the software and during August two men running Popcorn Time information websites were arrested by police.

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

Twitter’s live streaming app Periscope is causing headaches among copyright holders.

Every week the company received hundreds of takedown notices, mostly from sports organizations including NFL, NBA, WWE and the Premier League, who don’t want the public to rebroadcast their events for free.

Musicians appear to be less concerned by Periscope, except for Taylor Swift. In recent weeks Twitter has received dozens of notices asking the company to stop and remove live streams of Swift’s concerts.

The videos, often shared by some of the most passionate fans, are seen as copyright infringement. Swift has surrounded herself with a dedicated enforcement team called TAS Rights Management who swiftly take them offline.

Below is an example of a takedown notice that was sent to Periscope earlier this week, but there are dozens of other examples targeting ‘periscoped’ footage of recent live concerts.

As far as we know, Swift is the only artist with a dedicated takedown team. The first letters of TAS Rights Management stand for T(aylor)A(lison)S(wift) and aside from targeting Periscope the group is also enforcing other online infringements.

While the takedown requests are legitimate, one can seriously doubt whether they are needed.

Most Periscope videos have terrible video and sound quality and can hardly be considered a threat. They are often shared by fans who simply want to give the rest of the world a glimpse of their experience, and after 24 hours the videos are automatically deleted.

Meanwhile, many HD recordings of Taylor Swift concerts remain readily available on torrent sites and websites such as YouTube.

Taylor Swift is the only artist sending takedown notices to Periscope, from what we’ve seen.

The vast majority of other complaints are sent on behalf of sports organizations such as the NFL, NBA, WWE, Premier League, Die Liga and the Rugby World Cup, which sell subscriptions and access to their live events.

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