The Pirate Bay has had its fair share of domain issues over the past several years.

The notorious torrent site has burnt through half a dozen domains and currently uses four different ones to avoid a single point of failure.

Today, the site’s official SuprBay forum, which is separately operated by the site’s moderators, has also run into trouble. The forum has been offline for more than a day returning incomplete DNS records.

TF hasn’t been able to reach the person in charge of the forums but domain registrar eNom informs us that the platform’s domain was suspended following an ICANN complaint.

The domain was apparently registered using inaccurate information and the owner did not respond to repeated requests to address the problem.

“This domain (pirates-forum.org) was placed on hold yesterday due to an ICANN complaint of invalid Whois contacts. We did not receive a response to our inquiries within the required 15-day period,” eNom says.

pirates-forum.org is not available

While the issue doesn’t impact the Pirate Bay site, it does make it harder for users to communicate with moderators. Among other things, the forum was frequently used to report spam and other malicious torrents.

The domain name registrar did not mention the source of the ICANN complaint, but it’s not unlikely that a copyright holder group is behind it.

SuprBay also allowed users to discuss and promote torrents but wasn’t particularly known for distributing pirated content. However, rightsholders certainly have an interest in knowing who’s operating the site.

Since the issue is limited to the domain name, it’s expected that the moderators will switch to a new one, which should resolve the problem. Alternatively, they can update their Whois information to get the original domain reinstated.

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

Pirates of the UK have this morning been issued with a stern warning. Walking into a cinema next month with the intent of recording the latest Bond film ‘Spectre’ and uploading it to the Internet will prove a particularly hazardous occupation.

That’s according to the Federation Against Copyright Theft, the anti-piracy group that looks after Hollywood’s interests in the UK and had a key hand in the arrest of a ‘cammer’ just last Friday.

Due to the national and international importance of Bond’s latest outing, FACT have issued a somewhat unusual proactive anti-piracy statement, presumably to deter would-be pirates from leaking the movie.

“James Bond is a big risk and we will be working with cinema operators and the distributors making sure we will keep that as tight as possible. We really don’t want to see that recorded,” says FACT director general Kieron Sharp.

“The bigger the film and the more anticipated it is, the higher risk it is. We have staff on extra alert for that. They are on alert, particularly with the bigger films like James Bond, to really drill down to who is in the auditorium and who might possibly be recording.”

One of the measures being employed is the use of night-vision goggles. The devices have been in use in the UK, US and elsewhere for several years and are extremely useful when trying to spot the telltale ‘glow’ and other lighting that emanates from mobile phones, camcorders and other recording devices.

Even when most of the glow is obscured, night vision goggles still allow suspicious seating arrangements and cloaking mechanisms to be observed at a distance and then tackled, either during the performance or when a suspected pirate attempts to leave.

While FACT are always keen to deter pirates, why the special fuss over Bond? The profile of the movie and its commercial importance are obviously key factors since Spectre is likely to be one of the biggest box-office hits this year. Bond is also something of a British icon, so protecting that image will be important to the filmmakers. But there is another element that isn’t being discussed.

Spectre is enjoying its world premiere at London’s Royal Albert Hall on Monday October 26. With stars Daniel Craig and Christoph Waltz attending alongside the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry it’s probably a safe bet that it won’t be pirated then. However, on the very same day the movie will be released nationwide and other locations will provide much greater opportunity.

The real surprise here is that UK pirates are being given almost two weeks to record Spectre and begin online distribution before it hits cinemas in the United States and the rest of the world on October 6. That probably goes a long way to explaining why FACT are being forced to implement extraordinary security measures – a U.S. pre-release is exactly what the anti-piracy group is trying to avoid.

But why take the chance that someone slips through the net? Hollywood knows that these windows fuel ‘camming’ yet MGM and Columbia are apparently prepared to risk “the most damaging form of piracy” by leaving the entire world dangling for 12 days while potentially millions of illicit copies of Spectre float around the Internet.

It makes very little sense. Why not have the premiere in London immediately followed by a worldwide release, thereby fulfilling customer demand and soothing notoriously impatient pirates? Of course, other scheduling factors could be at play, but if ‘cam’ piracy is as serious as the studios claim, why take unnecessary risks?

“Security measures are adopted for all new releases to protect from piracy,” a FACT spokesperson told TorrentFreak.

“Together with industry we work towards heightening awareness for films that are predicted to be of higher risk and sometimes additional security measures are put in place.”

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

Starting today everyone is free use “Happy Birthday” without having to pay a license fee, as a California federal court ruling just entered the popular song into the public domain.

The ruling comes from District Court Judge George King in a dispute between several artists and publisher Warner/Chappell, which claimed to own the copyrights.

Warner made an estimated $2 million per year in licensing fees from the melody that was originally written before 1893, by sisters Mildred and Patty Hill. The rights to the song were later transferred to Summy Co., which was later acquired by Warner/Chappell.

For decades, Warner continued to demand licensing fees from filmmakers and other artists who used the song in their works.

In 2013 a group of artists including musician Ruypa Marya sued Warner’s music division claiming that the company doesn’t hold the rights to the song. Aside from missing agreements, the filmmakers alleged that it’s not clear what the true origins of the song are.

Before even reaching a trial, Judge George King awarded a groundbreaking victory to the plaintiffs. After a careful review of several agreements the court concluded that there is no evidence that the Hill sisters ever transferred their rights to Summy Co.

“Defendants have no evidence a transfer occurred, whether by oral statement, by writing, or by conduct. The Second Agreement was for piano arrangements. The Third Agreement was for copyrighted works, like Song Stories and the piano arrangements, that did not cover the lyrics,” Judge King writes (pdf).

According to the court there is no evidence available to conclude that the copyrights to the lyrics now belong to Warner.

“In fact, Defendants cannot even point to evidence showing that the Hill sisters transferred their rights in the lyrics to the Hill Foundation, such that the Hill Foundation could, in turn, legitimately transfer them to Summy Co.”

As a result, Judge King ruled that Warner/Chappell doesn’t own the copyright to Happy Birthday, which means that the company can’t demand licensing fees for its use.

“Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion is DENIED, and Plaintiffs’ Motion is GRANTED as to the issue of whether Summy Co. ever received the rights to the Happy Birthday lyrics from the Hill sisters.”

At this point it’s still unclear whether any of the artists will be compensated for the licensing fees they previously paid. Ruypa Marya, whose band paid $455 because the audience sang “Happy Birthday” on a live album, hopes that the ruling will trigger a more artist-centric copyright law.

“I hope we can start reimagining copyright law to do what it’s supposed to do — protect the creations of people who make stuff so that we can continue to make more stuff,” Marya told AP.

Warner/Chappell says it’s still evaluating the judgement and hadn’t decided yet on a possible appeal.

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

There can be little doubt that Adobe products are popular with pirates. Variants of the company’s Photoshop software, for example, having been appearing on computers illegally for a quarter of a decade.

Then, whenever Adobe launches a new piece of software, there’s a mad panic to obtain ‘cracked’ versions, mainly so that users can avoid paying hundreds to thousands of dollars for the privilege of ownership.

To help combat this situation, two years ago Adobe announced that it would move away from boxed ‘retail’ products with a switch to a cloud-subscription model. Rather than demanding large up-front sums, the company presented their services for a few dollars per month, to help even the most budget-restricted not to pirate.

Last July 2014, Adobe reported success with the strategy, noting that piracy had fallen albeit by “hard to measure” amounts. In a conference call with investors, the company is again reporting success.

According to Adobe, at the end of Q3 2015 it had amassed 5.3 million subscribers of Cloud, up from the 2.3m subscribers reported in Q2 2014. In the last quarter alone overall revenues topped $1.21 billion.

“[Do] you feel like you’re recapturing maybe….casual pirates with Cloud, especially around that hobbyist level? I was just kind of curious on your thoughts there,” one investor questioned.

Adobe President and CEO Shantanu Narayen responded, noting that while new customers were coming on board, pirates who find lower prices more appealing were also being converted.

“The new seat adoption is definitely being driven both by creators who are entering the market as well as casual pirates who existed for whom the lower price of entry is far more attractive way to have legal software than not,” Narayen said.

“There’s no question about that, we hear that anecdotally all the time that people are pleased with the fact that they can have legitimate software.”

It’s often said that price and accessibility aside, one of the best ways to cope with piracy is to offer a superior service. Narayen says Adobe is doing just that with Cloud by offering unique features unavailable in ‘cracked’ software.

“As we’re delivering more Cloud based services, as you know the only way to use the mobile apps and share content between the mobile apps as well as our Creative Cloud, is by having a subscription. So I think that’s also why we see more creative sync and creative profile being used, that’s certainly driving that,” Narayen added.

While it is indeed quite difficult to measure the scale of piracy of Adobe products post retail, the company’s popularity with pirates is still very visible. As can be seen from the screenshot below of The Pirate Bay’s top 100 most popular software downloads, Adobe leads the list and takes four out of the top seven places.

The top spot is taken by Adobe Photoshop CS6, a product that was launched three years ago but is still proving a smash hit. However, Adobe feels that it’s CS6 users that are the prime candidates for migration to Creative Cloud.

“The CS6 base continues to be a base that we think is ripe for migration to the Creative Cloud and we’re clearly seeing signs of success in transitioning them from Creative Suite to Creative Cloud,” Narayen concludes.

With few competitors at the high end of the market, it’s likely that Photoshop CS6 will remain the most popular image editing software with pirates for the foreseeable future. For casual users it may even remain the most downloaded for a few years to come but for those desperate for cutting-edge power features, migrating to Creative Cloud may be the only viable option moving forward.

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

Monday morning, Kim Dotcom arrived at court dressed in his trademark black attire. After ten delays the hearing to determine whether the Megaupload founder will be extradited to the United States on copyright infringement charges got underway.

Almost immediately the case became bogged down in legal argument, with the defense insisting that various submissions should be heard before the extradition hearing gathered full steam. Due to Dotcom’s funds being seized by the FBI, unfair restrictions had been placed on the ability to mount a defense, they argued.

Christine Gordon QC, countering for the Crown, said that the claims of Dotcom’s team were “speculative” and would only serve to delay proceedings by several weeks. Any applications should be part of the main hearing or included at trial in the United States, Gordon argued.

This morning Judge Nevin Dawson handed down his decision and it represents an early setback for Dotcom and his former Megaupload colleagues.

“The interlocutory applications now before the Court are such that they would best be heard and considered by the Court during the eligibility hearing as they are largely contextual in nature,” Judge Dawson begins.

“The Court would be better placed to rule on these applications, having had the benefit of hearing the evidence of the eligibility hearing.”

Judge Dawson said that all matters would be fully heard and both parties would have a right of appeal in the event they were dissatisfied with the outcome.

“If [Dotcom et al] are successful in their applications that might lead to an adjournment or conclusion of the hearing. The respondents would suffer no prejudice if either of these outcomes should come about. All parties ultimately have their rights of appeal,” Judge Dawson concludes.

The eligibility hearing will now go ahead on Thursday morning.

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