Movie company Voltage Pictures has built quite a reputation in the past couple of years for its approach to those said to have downloaded and shared The Hurt Locker and Dallas Buyers Club without permission.

Rather than take the soft approach, the company has sued thousands of individuals across the United States and has also tested the waters in Canada, Europe and Australia.

Litigation in the latter region is reaching a critical point, with Voltage affiliate Dallas Buyers Club LLC (DBCLLC) attempting to force several local ISPs (iiNet, Wideband Networks, Internode, Dodo Services, Amnet Broadband and Adam Internet) to hand over the identities of individuals said to have downloaded the movie of the same name.

The ISPs have been putting up a fight in Sydney’s Federal Court this week in order to protect their customers and thus far DBCLLC and their piracy tracking partners have been given a rocky ride.

Flown in from Germany especially for the hearing, Daniel Macek of BitTorrent monitoring outfit Maverick Eye was given a particularly hard time. On Monday under cross-examination by iiNet barrister Richard Lancaster, SC, the 30-year-old admitted that he did not prepare his own affidavit.

“It was provided [by Dallas Buyers Club],” Mr Macek said.

Since Macek was appearing as an expert witness, the revelation was pounced upon by Lancaster.

“You provide affidavits and statements in lots of litigations all around the world,” Mr Lancaster said. “Is it your practice just to sign what is put in front of you?”

“No,” Macek replied.

During yesterday’s hearing things only appeared to get worse for Macek, as both his expertise and Maverick Eye’s evidence was called into question. The company provided “.pcap” files to the Court which contained timestamps of alleged infringements but when questioned about their contents, Macek fell short.

“Are you familiar with the information in the .pcap files themselves?” Lancaster asked Macek.

“Not in detail,” Macek admitted.

Lancaster’s questioning was aimed at casting doubt on the timings of alleged infringements logged in the Maverick Eye system. Were the times logged in the .pcap files representative of when a file was uploaded by an infringer’s computer to Maverick Eye’s system, or of a later point when further processing had occurred?

“I don’t understand this .pcap [file] in this detail,” Macek said. “I know how the Maverick software works in general but I’m not aware of the .pcap [files],” he added.

The Judge agreed with Lancaster on the importance of his questioning.

“If the IP [address] switched midway through one of these transmissions it just occurs to me that change would have some impact on your cross-examination,” Justice Perram said.

Also appearing this week was Vice-president of royalties for Voltage Pictures, Michael Wickstrom. The Voltage executive said that piracy was eating away at his company’s profits and had become far too easy. Lawsuits helped raise awareness of the problem, he said.

Under cross-examination Wednesday, Wickstrom denied that the letters sent out to customers in the United States were “threatening”, noting instead that they are a statement of facts.

“There are facts stated [in the letter] that [the customer’s] IP address was identified [as having downloaded the film illicitly],” he said.

“Any settlement amount that is disclosed [in the letter]; that was the attorney’s decision and is done on a case by case basis.”

However, while the company has no real idea of the nature of the people they’re targeting, Wickstrom said his company had limits on who would be pursued for cash demands. According to SMH, the executive said that his company “would not pursue an autistic child, people who were handicapped, welfare cases, or people that have mental issues.”

Some compassion from Voltage perhaps? Not exactly – the company seems more interested in how that would look on the PR front.

“That kind of press would ruin us,” Wickstrom said, adding that “the majority” of piracy was in fact occurring at the hands of vulnerable groups.

If that’s truly the case and any “vulnerable” people inform the company of their circumstances, Voltage stands to make very little money from their Australian venture, despite all the expense incurred in legal action thus far. Strangely, they don’t seem to mind.

“This is truly not about the money here, it’s about stopping illegal piracy,” Wickstrom said.

The case continues next week.

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

Two weeks ago The Pirate Bay returned online and millions of users have been finding their way back to the popular torrent site since.

While the site is currently up and running, Pirate Bay’s comeback hasn’t been without trouble. On Friday the site went offline for roughly 12 hours after a hosting provider pulled the plug.

TF reached out to Pirate Bay admin Winston, who informed us that “getting stable hosting” is one of the main challenges the site faces at the moment.

TPB is currently using CloudFlare’s CDN services which means that the hosting location is well hidden. However, Cloudflare does forward takedown notices to hosting providers and most are not very eager to have TPB as a customer.

The site continues to look for a safe alternative but that is proving to be a troublesome process. When we discussed the topic with the site’s admin TPB went offline again, causing yet more downtime.

“Another ISP killed it,” Winston told us yesterday. “So yeah. It will take a long time until it’s stable.”

While the hosting issue has priority, there’s also a spam problem TPB has to deal with. Despite deploying “FakeSkan” robots there are still many scammy comments and malicious torrents on the site.

The Pirate Bay initially launched without moderators due to security concerns. This resulted in a mutiny among TPB staff, some of whom wanted to start their own version of the site.

While the locked-out staffers managed to revive a copy of the Suprbay forum a few days ago, launching a TPB alternative will prove to be much harder. Winston now says that TPB is open to welcoming some of the old staffers back in the near future.

“After hosting issues are resolved I’ll talk to some old mods,” Winston tells us. “If they want to continue then it’s okay, but I won’t look for new mods. Someone from the old team will have to be in charge of that.”

After the initial disappointment of being locked out, several admins are indeed showing willingness to return to their former home.

“The conditions do not need to change from our side,” long time TPB moderator Agricola told TF. “All we want to do is keep the site clean.”

In addition to dealing with the pollution problem, TPB registrations should also open up again in the future. At the moment new users are unable to sign-up and publish content.

“There are just some security issues that have to be resolved first,” Winston says. “Plus, the hosting has to be stable.”

Speaking of hosting, a few hours before this article was published The Pirate Bay was forced to leave another ISP. That brings the total to four thus far, and the end is not yet in sight.

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

After scaling considerable heights during much of 2013 and 2014, overt operations to reduce online copyright infringement tapered off in the UK at the end of last year.

The first six weeks of 2015 also remained quiet, with the now-famous Police Intellectual Property Unit (PIPCU) holding a lower profile. Today, however, there is news of fresh action by local authorities.

Following an investigation by the Hollywood-affiliated anti-piracy group Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT), this morning detectives raided individuals said to be involved in the operations of a movie and TV show download site.

The men, aged 24, 25 and 26, all from the Southwark area of London, were arrested at 06:45 on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and copyright infringement offenses. Equipment and financial documents were also seized.

Speaking with TorrentFreak a few moments ago, FACT said that they weren’t able to name the site “for operational reasons.” Nevertheless, police say it was popular among users.

“The site was extremely popular. It was viewed about 70,000 times a day and, internationally, it ranked thousands of places higher than a well-known and legitimate film download site,” said investigating officer Detective Sergeant Neil Reynolds.

Similar raids in recent times have been carried out by PIPCU but today’s operation is being accredited to the London Regional Asset Recovery Team.

LRART is a Home Office-funded team comprised of officers and financial investigators from City of London Police and Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, among others. The unit carries out financial investigations aimed at seizing criminal assets under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.

“It can be difficult for people to care about copyright laws being broken but the money made from such sites is often spent on funding other crime,” said DS Reynolds. “We are looking at how much money was made from advertising on this website and where that money went to.”

FACT say that the site was registered to one of the suspects in the UK but was then re-registered to a second suspect at an address in Romania. Advertising revenue was paid into a London-based bank account.

Director General Kieron Sharp said that unauthorized sites undermine legitimate businesses and warned that people running such ventures face stiff penalties.

“Websites which set out to direct users to illegal copies of films and TV shows are engaged in criminal activity which not only reaps huge financial benefits for the individuals involved but also undermines the fundamental business model which allows for future investment in the creative industries,” Sharp said.

“As these latest arrests show, this type of criminal enterprise will not go without action, and those involved face severe penalties.”

If anyone has any further information please contact us in confidence

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

BitTorrent networks are online venues where anyone with an Internet connection can obtain almost limitless content for free. They’re also places closely monitored by copyright holders looking to protect their interests.

While some monitor for analysis reasons, others aim to boost profits. The most recent to venture down this latter path are the rights holders behind the Jim Carrey / Jeff Daniels movie Dumb and Dumber To.

In motions filed at the United States District Court in Oregon, DDTO Finance, LLC explains that it needs to obtain the identities of at least five individuals said to have downloaded and shared the comedy without permission.

“The Doe defendant is a BitTorrent user, or ‘peer,’ whose computer is interconnected with others and was used for illegally copying and distributing plaintiff’s motion picture to others,” one motion (pdf) reads.

“Plaintiff is suing the Doe defendant for using the Internet, specifically the BitTorrent file distribution network, to commit copyright infringement.”

While conceding that the subscriber may not necessarily be the actual infringer, DDTO Finance calls on the Court to force Comcast to reveal the subscriber details quickly so that ongoing infringement can be brought to an end.

“[It] is the experience of counsel that parties generally promptly terminate infringing activity and further distribution as soon as they have notice of an actual suit pending,” motion for discovery adds.

In one copyright infringement complaint DDTO notes that Dumb and Dumber To is currently one of the top 10 most downloaded movies on BitTorrent networks “with over 1,000 confirmed infringing Internet Protocol (‘IP’) addresses in Oregon alone.”

Also of interest is how DDTO takes its IP-address evidence and uses it to build a wider picture of infringement against the subscriber.

“Defendant’s IP address has been observed as associated with the peer-to-peer exchange of a large number of copyrighted titles through the BitTorrent network,” the complaint reads.

“The volume and titles of the activity associated with defendant’s IP address indicates that the defendant is likely the primary subscriber of the IP address or someone who resides with the subscriber, as such activity indicates the defendant is an authorized user of the IP address with consistent and permissive access.”

Continuing with its assumptions, DDTO ventures that based on the quantity and type of content being transferred, the infringer is not a minor.

“The volume and titles of the activity associated with defendant’s IP address indicates that the defendant is not a young child, but an adult with mature tastes,” the company says.

The suit goes further still, suggesting that by downloading the movie the subscriber contributed to the illegal activities of torrent sites which generate “hundreds of millions” from “sales and advertising”. Not only that, he or she may even have been rewarded for doing so.

“Many parties, and possibly defendant, have been compensated with increased access to other content, faster download speeds, or other forms of compensation for their participation in expanding the availability of pirated content, including plaintiff’s movie,” the complaints adds.

In conclusion, DDTO seeks a permanent injunction against the defendants, costs and attorney fees, statutory damages of up to $150,000, and a trial by jury.

It is much more likely, however, that Comcast will hand over the subscribers’ details and a cash settlement will be reached in private.

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

Founded February 2007, Tumblr now processes huge amounts of traffic. According to latest figures from the site it currently hosts more than 223 million blogs containing almost 104 billion posts.

In common with all sites of a similar size, keeping on top of what every user posts is a formidable and near impossible task, even with the 300+ employees Tumblr has at its disposal.

Nevertheless, effort does have to be made and when it comes to copyright issues the law demands it. The DMCA requires Tumblr to respond to copyright holder complaints by removing infringing content in a timely manner. According to the site’s users, however, a more aggressive response is now being pursued.

A large number of recent complaints suggest that music group IFPI is making a renewed effort to target Tumblr in order to weed out users who post copyright music to the site. Since several users have posted Tumblr copyright notices citing IFPI complaints, it seems like a reasonable assumption.

But what is really spooking users is Tumblr’s policy of terminating those who have three complaints lodged against their account. It’s been in place for some time but with enforcement against the site seemingly being ramped up, more people are falling into the trap.

“As outlined in previous emails, we implement a strict three-strike policy against repeat copyright infringement. Your blog has received three strikes in an 18 month period. Consequently, your account has been terminated. In addition, any new accounts you create will also be terminated,” Tumblr told one user.

Of course, anti-piracy bots don’t discriminate between content posted today or 18 months ago so any tracks they find can result in a notice to Tumblr and a subsequent “strike” against a user’s account. As a result, many users are now desperately trying to clear up their post history (using sites like trntbl.me) to avoid getting three strikes all at once.

To find out what changes may have contributed to the panic TorrentFreak contacted Tumblr for further details. We’re yet to hear back (we’ll update this article when we do) but in the meantime its worth noting that the company updated its copyright notice policy last month.

“After removing material pursuant to a valid DMCA notice, Tumblr will immediately notify the Subscriber responsible for the allegedly infringing material that it has removed or disabled access to the material,” it reads.

“Tumblr will terminate, under appropriate circumstances, the Accounts of Subscribers who are repeat copyright infringers, and reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate any Subscriber for actual or apparent copyright infringement.”

In order for users to be able to contest copyright complaints, Tumblr operates a counter-notification system. However, users including Stewardessme complain that on the third strike she was simply locked out. Her story also highlights the importance of contesting invalid claims early on.

“Since the IFPI sent takedowns for two songs, that was two strikes, and I had a previous strike months earlier due to being erroneously accused of a copyright violation by Harper-Collins (the photo in question was not theirs),” she writes.

“In my case, the time period between getting the two strikes for music and my account being terminated was zero time; I found out something was wrong when I tried to log into my account.”

Since Tumblr is yet to publicly respond to the concerns of its userbase, TorrentFreak asked the company to comment on any changes that could have triggered what is now being perceived as a piracy crackdown. We’ll update here in due course.

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