Posts by Prophet

bee669.jpg

DIRECTV has launched a new 4K set-top that makes it possible to view the satcaster’s 4K content on virtually every 4K set in the market.

The new 4K Genie Mini, described as “about the size of a paperback book” and as far away from the beast of a box previously seen in the US as you can get. It also supports Dolby Digital Plus audio decoding.

“Customers who want the best picture quality are creating more demand for 4K,” said Henry Derovanessian, senior vice president Consumer Premise Engineering, DIRECTV, part of the AT&T family. “The new 4K Genie Mini allows us to meet that demand by expanding 4K access to more of our customers nationwide.”

DIRECTV launched 4K UHD programming in November 2014 through its Genie HD DVR, but subscribers found the content could only be viewed through a limited number of TV displays. The receiver initially supported Samsung 4K models, with plans to extend this to LG and Sony models later.

The new model extends DIRECTV 4K viewing to devices that don’t include the DirecTV RVU technology that allows viewers access DirecTV services without an external receiver.

Source : http://www.broadbandtvnews.com…ectv-launches-4k-for-all/

0c69c9c39b.jpg

The Polish DTH platform nc+ has suffered a major blow to its sports coverage.

According to Press, it has after 18 years lost the rights to the French (Ligue 1), Spanish (La Liga) and Italian (Serie A) football leagues.

In the case of Ligue 1 and Serie A, they have been acquired by Eleven Sports Network, which has just launched in Poland, while La Liga has been secured by beIN Sports.

As the latter has not indicated it plans to launch any sports channels in Poland, nc+ hopes it may be able to reach an agreement with the Qatari company to still show La Liga.

The DTH platform still retains rights to the Champions League and Premier League, as well as Poland’s Ekstraklasa.

Source : http://www.broadbandtvnews.com…sports-rights-blow-to-nc/

1864d7606ea2b4b8e8135d11.jpg

CBS Drama, which is owned and operated by the CBS AMC Networks UK Channels Partnership, is expanding its reach by launching on Freeview, on September 1.

This carriage deal means CBS Drama will be available to over 90% of UK households on Freeview.

CBS Drama has also acquired from CBS Studios International three series as part of the new Autumn line up: Sex and the City, Californication and Nurse Jackie.

Other series on the channel include the contemporary British dramas Waterloo Road and Clocking Off, US soaps Knots Landing and Dallas and retro classics Beverly Hills 90210 and Taxi.

“CBS Drama offers some of the best in British and American drama and we look forward to sharing this popular content with the Freeview audiences, said Tanya Gugenheim, Chief Business Development and New Media Officer, AMC Networks International – Zone.

CBS Action and CBS Reality launched on Freeview in 2014 while Horror Channel joined the DTT platform in April this year.

Source : http://www.broadbandtvnews.com…ama-launches-on-freeview/

The makers of "The Cobbler" movie have filed a lawsuit at a federal court in Oregon directed at 11 users of the popular Popcorn Time software. According to the filmmakers Popcorn Time doesn't have any reasonable legitimate use, something the users should have been aware of.

4ce630523.jpg

Over the past several years hundreds of thousands of Internet subscribers have been sued in the United States for allegedly sharing copyrighted material, mostly video.

The cases are generally targeted at “BitTorrent” users in general, not focusing on any client in particular.

However, this week the makers of the 2014 comedy “The Cobbler” decided to single out Popcorn Time users.

Popcorn Time also uses BitTorrent under the hood but unlike traditional clients it allows users to browse through a library of films and stream these from within the application.

Popcorn Time is by no means private as users connect to public BitTorrent swarms, which makes it easy for monitoring firms and copyright holders to track down pirates.

This also happened to 11 Popcorn Time users who allegedly viewed and shared “The Cobbler.” The makers of the movie filed a complaint (pdf) at a Oregon District Court requesting a subpoena to compel Comcast to hand over the personal details of the associated account holders.

“Each defendant’s IP address has been observed and confirmed as both viewing and distributing plaintiff’s motion picture through Popcorn Time,” the complaint explains.

f3ebb6e3fe7e8efab8dabb1.jpg

The reason for singling out Popcorn Time users is unclear. The same filmmakers have launched lawsuits against BitTorrent users before, but they may believe that the infringing image of Popcorn Time bolsters their case.

“Popcorn Time exists for one purpose and one purpose only: to steal copyrighted content,” they write, adding that the defendants should have been well aware of this.

The Popcorn Time website and application repeatedly informs users that its use may be against the law. For example, the Popcorn Time website has a clear warning on its homepage and in the FAQ.

“Without a doubt, each user of Popcorn Time is provided multiple notices that they are downloading and installing software for the express purpose of committing theft and contributing the ability of others to commit theft by furthering the Bit Torrent piracy network,” the complaint explains.

b342b.png

The filmmakers demand a permanent injunction against the defendants ordering them to stop pirating their movies. In addition, they request statutory damages of up to $150,000.

In reality, however, they are likely to approach the defendants for a settlement offer of a few thousands dollars, as is common in these type of “copyright troll” cases.

The developers of the Popcorn Time app that was targeted inform TF that users are indeed repeatedly warned that using their application to download pirated films can lead to legal trouble.

“Popcorn Time isn’t illegal. However, the use people make of the application can be illegal, depending on their country and local laws,” they tell TF.

“You’d think with all our warnings, the anti-piracy laws, the explanations given in the media and the common sense, users would be aware of their actions by now. Pinning a a ‘Popcorn Time’ label over such a lawsuit seems a little inflated,” they add.

The Court has yet to issue an order following the subpoena request. Based on previous cases the account holders connected to the 11 IP-addresses listed above can expect a settlement offer in the mail soon.

After promising a strong response to piracy for several years, Indonesia has finally taken action against The Pirate Bay. Along with fellow torrent index IsoHunt.to, the site is among almost two dozen others now ordered by the Ministry of Communications to be blocked at the ISP level.

4027a1695ad6cb.png

After being accused of doing little to stop piracy both on and offline, in 2009 Indonesia was placed on the USTR’s Priority Watch List for failing to protect US intellectual property rights.

In 2011 the Indonesian government announced that it would begin to take tough measures, including having local ISPs block the most-visited sites.

“The plan is to block famous sites, like 4shared for example,” Communication Minister Tifatul Sembiring said at the time.

Four years later (and after blocking sites including Reddit, Imgur and Vimeo on decency grounds) Indonesia is finally taking action against sites that infringe copyrights.

Following the signing last month of a Joint Ministerial Decree intended to protect film producers, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology has ordered almost two dozen domains to be blocked at the ISP level.

While there is a nod to U.S. concerns with a blockade of both ThePirateBay.se and Isohunt.to, the remainder (list below) are sites frequented mainly by locals. 4shared is not among them.

Certainly, the tone of the government’s announcement during a press conference this week indicated that local producer interests are behind the blocking order. Famous (and outstanding) martial arts movies The Raid and The Raid 2 were mentioned specifically.

“What is offered in the virtual world is not according to the law. In order to protect the intellectual property rights of our art we must block these sites,” said Rudiantara, Minister of Communications and Information Technology.

“The government wants to protect the work of artists in Indonesia. The damage suffered by the creators of content in Indonesia has been great.”

According to Director General of Intellectual Property, Ahmad M. Ramli, future complaints will be sent to him and will be actioned within 24 hours. Protection of movies will be the priority.

“The most at risk of piracy and violations of intellectual property rights on the internet are movies. If songs are heard [people will listen to them again], but if a downloaded movie is viewed, then people won’t watch them anymore,” Ramli said.

Minister of Human Rights and Justice, Yasonna Laoly, said that action needed to be taken but due to the elusive nature of site owners, blocking was the only solution.

“It’s really not good for industrial development and innovation in the film industry, music industry, and with respect to copyright. This is our creative economy,” the minister said.

“We are taking care of the websites because finding the people behind the websites is complicated. We do not know where to find them.”

Some of the domains on the blocklist are now down internationally too, although the reasons for that remain unclear.

In the meantime (and alongside Algeria, Argentina, Chile, China, Ecuador, India, Kuwait, Pakistan, Russia, Thailand, Ukraine, and Venezuela), Indonesia remains on the USTR’s Priority Watch List 2015.

The full list of blocked domains is: Ganool.com, Nontonmovie.com, Bioskops.com, Ganool.ca, Kilasan.to, Thepiratebay.se, Downloadfilmbaru.com, Ganool.co.id, 21filmcinema.com, Gudangfilm.caa.im, Movie76.com, Isohunt.to, Cinemaindo.net, Bioskop24.net, Ganool.in, Unduhfilm21.net, Bioskopkita.com, Downloadfilem.com, Comotin.net, Movie2k.ti, Unduhmovie.com and 21sinema.com.

New version uploaded to the site as requested

Police in Denmark have arrested the alleged operators of two Popcorn Time guide websites. The domains of both operations have also been seized by the authorities. The case is controversial in that both sites were Popcorn Time information resources and neither linked to copyright-infringing material.

47dff.png

More than a year after its 2014 launch and the popularity of the now famous Popcorn Time video streaming application is showing no signs of fading away.

However, since millions of people use the various forks of the software every day, Popcorn Time is increasingly attracting the attention of copyright holders, anti-piracy groups and law enforcement agencies.

While neither of the main forks have yet been targeted, others around them are feeling the heat. In fact, the latest news coming out of Denmark suggests that the authorities are even prepared to hit those barely on the perimeter.

Following a court order dated June, local police report that yesterday morning they arrested two men in their thirties said to be the operators of a pair of Popcorn Time related websites. Popcorntime.dk and Popcorn-time.dk have now been shut down, with their domains placed under the control of the state prosecutor.

“The Danish State Prosecutor for Serious Economic and International Crime is presently conducting a criminal investigation that involves this domain name,” reads the seizure notice.

“As part of the investigation the state prosecutor has requested a Danish District Court to transfer the rights of the domain name to the state prosecutor. The District Court has complied with the request.”

While arrests of file-sharers and those running sites that closely facilitate infringement are nothing new, this week’s arrests appear to go way beyond anything seen before. The two men are not connected to the development of Popcorn Time and have not been offering copyrighted content for download.

Both sites were information resources, offering recent news on Popcorn Time related developments, guides, FAQ sections and tips on how to use the software. The screenshot below shows PopcornTime.dk.

6faad0ad35c3c293d5d.png

Those looking for a clearer (and live) idea of what the site looked like before it was taken down should check out getpopcorntime.co.uk, which was previously promoted by PopcornTime.dk as an English language version of their site.

Importantly, neither site hosted the Popcorn Time software, instead choosing to link to other sites where the application could be downloaded instead. Nevertheless, this doesn’t appear to have saved them from the Danish authorities.

Both stand accused of distributing knowledge and guides on how to obtain illegal content online and are reported to have confessed.

In fact, according to court documents the pair are suspected of such gross violations of copyright law that they could warrant punishment under section 299b of the penal code – offenses which carry a maximum prison term of six years.

Inspector Michael Hellensberg from the Danish police Fraud Squad told local media that the case is a significant one in a number of respects.

“The case is important because, firstly, it shows that [site operators] can be revealed by the police. This has consequences and it also conveys the message that this behavior is illegal,” Hellensberg said.

“Thus there is hopefully a deterrent effect against feeling confident that you can sit wherever you want and try to implement such things.”

Earlier this year, six websites setup as Popcorn Time “fan pages” were shut down by anti-piracy outfit BREIN. None were affiliated with the official project and all reached a financial settlement with the group.

The U.S. Government has informed the Court of Appeals that the civil forfeiture case against Megaupload and Kim Dotcom was launched as a last resort. The authorities feared that Dotcom and his colleagues would regain possession of the millions in seized assets and argue that they are properly labeled as "fugitives."

555f87ad85e0c6.jpg

Earlier this year the U.S. Government won its civil forfeiture case against Megaupload and Kim Dotcom.

As a result the authorities now claim possession of Kim Dotcom’s bank accounts, cars, art and other property worth dozens of millions of dollars.

Last month Megaupload’s legal team appealed the District Court’s decision, pointing out that the court denied the defendants’ basic rights and violated due process.

According to the defense team the court was wrong to label Dotcom and his colleagues as fugitives, an argument that received support from several prominent legal experts.

A few hours ago the U.S. Government responded to the claims. In a lengthy 59-page response brief United States Attorney Dana Boente argues that the District Court rightfully labeled Dotcom and his colleagues as fugitives.

The brief also explains why the Department of Justice decided to file a civil forfeiture case against Megaupload and Dotcom, while the criminal proceedings were still ongoing.

The U.S. feared that Dotcom would get his money back if the DoJ failed to file a civil case. Under New Zealand law foreign restraining orders are only valid for two years, with a possible one-year extension. This extension would have run out on April 18th of this year.

“Therefore, the United States had no realistic alternative to filing its civil forfeiture action if it was to obtain any financial relief for the victims of the Mega Conspiracy,” Boente writes.

Tucked away in a footnote United States Attorney Boente describes the case as a last resort to keep the money safe.

“…this civil forfeiture case was filed as a last resort, over two years after the Fugitive Claimants were indicted when it became clear that they would fight to delay any extradition proceedings, while depleting the proceeds of their crimes to the detriment of their victims and to their own unearned benefit”

“Had the defendants simply appeared to face the criminal charges, the civil forfeiture case would not have been necessary,” the footnote adds.

The crux of the appeal is whether or not the District Court’s order to forfeit an estimated $67 million in assets was right. According to the Government it was, as the defendants’ due process rights were not violated.

In the response brief the U.S. notes that Dotcom and his colleagues avoided the United Stated on purpose, which makes it proper to label them as fugitives.

Megaupload’s defense previously argued that they avoided the U.S. because they were exercising their legal right to fight the extradition. However, the U.S. Attorney noted that Dotcom his colleagues had their chance to get due process, if they’d decided to come to the United States.

It’s now up to the Appeals Court to decide whether the U.S. forfeiture order was indeed rightful, or if Dotcom and his Megaupload colleagues should regain control over their assets.

Even if the U.S. wins, the assets will not be available freely. Over in New Zealand, the court granted Dotcom interim relief from having the forfeiture order recognized locally.

b797a.jpg

German commercial TV channel RTL Nitro will drop the encryption of its HD signal during three qualifier games for the UEFA European Football Championship 2016.

RTL Nitro HD for which viewers normally have to pay a reception fee will be available free-to-air via cable, satellite and IPTV during this period.

The free period will comprise the matches Netherlands vs. Iceland on September 3, 2015 at 20.15 CET, Spain vs. Slovakia on September 5, 2015 at 20.15 CET and the Netherlands vs. Turkey on September 6, 2015 at 17.30 CET.

b2175b375377ee4967.jpg

The football programmes will be presented by former MTV host Markus Kavka (pictured) and former German national player Steffen Freund (e.g. Borussia Dortmund, Tottenham Hotspur).

RTL Nitro acquired a comprehensive rights package from European football association UEFA in May 2015 which contains at least 20 qualifier games for the European Football Championship 2016 in France and for the Football World Championship 2018 in Russia.

Source : http://www.broadbandtvnews.com…yption-for-uefa-football/

BT Sport 1
BT Sport 2
BT Sport Europe HD

Can now be found on 11974 - V - 3/4 - 29500 - qpsk

A game studio that admitted to uploading a rigged copy of its own game to torrent sites informs TF that the positive feedback has been 'overwhelming'. NoodleCake's special version of Shooting Stars! features an unbeatable boss as a marketing stunt, a move that's a million miles better than the anti-piracy schemes of yesteryear.

d6ebb0b0829043f57.jpg

“What the fuck do you think you are doing?”

While a chillingly familiar phrase to anyone who has dismantled an oily motorcycle engine on a family kitchen table, that’s actually the scolding voice of Madonna preaching to her fans more than a decade ago.

It’s been 12 long years since those infamous words were first heard by shocked would-be pirates of Madonna’s album American Life. But even today the decision to embed the singer’s anger into MP3 tracks on early file-sharing networks makes little sense.

Aggressive lecturing of pirates has never worked and is never likely to. Whether entertainment companies like it or not, pirates are human beings. Talking to them like children and/or thieving scum might be tempting, but befriending, nurturing and entertaining (even through gritted teeth) is a much better strategy.

This week came news of another effort at converting pirates into paying customers, with NoodleCake Studios confessing that it uploaded a special version of its game Shooting Stars! to torrent sites. The game was playable for a while but had an unbeatable boss which preceded a message to support the developers and buy the game.

Of course, these kinds of scheme aren’t new and it’s a path well-trodden by many software developers in recent times. However, what NoodleCake brought to the table this week were huge helpings of honesty and a desire to use inevitable piracy as a point of leverage.

First off, the studio made it clear up front that the whole thing wasn’t designed to piss off Android pirates. It was a straight up and good-humored marketing stunt.

“Being spiteful really isn’t our style to be honest. We know that piracy exists and is an issue, but it is also something that we have just come to accept as part of the digital age,” NoodleCake’s Ryan Holowaty informs TF.

“So instead we thought it would be fun to embrace piracy and see if we could turn it into something positive from a press stand point. The overwhelming response we have gotten from media on this approach has proven the experiment a success, far beyond driving any additional sales via the in-game messaging to purchase the premium version.”

Intrigued by the positive approach to a decades old problem, TF asked the company about its views on people who download their content for free.

“Pirates come in all shapes and sizes and because of that, we don’t classify them as really anything but pirates. Some will become future customers if they like our products, others can be considered a wash and never will purchase anything,” Holowaty explains.

“But even just having someone play our games, be it paid or not, is a small victory in itself. We aren’t here to lecture anyone on the ethicacy of pirating. Instead we wanted to tell a fun story using piracy as the medium.”

And the studio appears to have done just that, thankfully without the kind of aggressive stance employed by Madonna all those years ago.

“I think there is a fine line you can walk and perhaps aggressively calling out fans of your music isn’t the best way to do it. In our case we poke fun at the situation by parodying the music industry and using less aggressive messaging by saying that piracy sucks and if you want, please support us,” Holowaty notes.

“I believe strongly in karma and that the world gives back what you put into it. So if you are throwing vitriol at you fans because they wanted to experience your product, odds are they might send it right back at you. Then you end up in a flame war and no one wants that.”

While refraining from lectures and bitter rhetoric, in the end NoodleCake are pragmatic about their anti-piracy marketing efforts.

“I think doing stunts like we did show that we are aware of piracy but aren’t here to try and change how DRM or anti-piracy policy works in any way. Just like our fans who pay for our games, we want to build a relationship with anyone playing our games, paid or not,” Holowaty adds.

“If even one person buys the game because they appreciated or ‘got’ what we were doing with the fake pirated version, then that is a win for us. I have seen a number of people commenting on the story saying that they purchased the game because of what we did.

“The positive feedback has been kind of overwhelming to be honest,” he concludes.

762e87eff.jpg

Two weeks ago the RIAA wrote a letter to BitTorrent Inc, asking the company to block "infringing" downloads in its popular client uTorrent. While it's technically feasible the request treads on a slippery slope. Will the RIAA ask web browsers to block copyright infringing URLs next?

40cb8ce97.jpg

With more than 150 million active users per month uTorrent is without a doubt the most popular file-sharing application.

Many people use the software to download pirated material, which worries copyright holder groups such as the RIAA.

Earlier this month the music group sent a letter to uTorrent’s parent company BitTorrent Inc. urging it to do something about this unauthorized use. Ideally, the RIAA would like infringing hashes to be banned so that users can no longer share these files.

“We are willing to establish a process to share the hashes with BitTorrent Inc. on a regular basis so that BitTorrent Inc. can use the information to deter further infringement of those files via its goods and services,” the RIAA wrote in a letter to the company.

Technically speaking it’s quite easy to block hashes. Several BitTorrent trackers already do this to keep copyright holders appeased, but thus far this has been a bridge too far for the company behind uTorrent.

BitTorrent Inc. hasn’t responded to our repeated requests for comment, but in a brief statement provided to Venturebeat the company notes that the protocol is open source, legal and that they themselves don’t host any infringing content. This is true, but the response also misses the main point.

The RIAA’s request isn’t about the protocol or the technology. It’s about adding a piracy prevention mechanism to a neutral piece of software. Should BitTorrent be obliged to do that?

Legally speaking BitTorrent Inc isn’t required to take any action. Browser developers don’t have to block infringing URLs either, even though hundreds of millions of people use their software to download or stream pirated content.

However, the RIAA’s letter shows that the music group is trying to shift this obvious boundary, and they are not only focusing on BitTorrent.

TF has learned that the RIAA and MPAA are pushing for automated pirate site blocking/warning technology. Outright takedown requests to browser vendors are not going to happen anytime soon, but subtle changes may appear.

The RIAA previously noted that it would like Google to expand Chrome’s malware warning system to cover pirate sites. This would mean that users see a red warning screen when they attempt to visit known piracy sites.

For its part the MPAA is actively lobbying for “site scoring” tools behind closed doors. A leaked copy of the group’s anti-piracy strategies lists site scoring services, which identify pirate sites, as a high priority.

The Hollywood group writes that these pirate site lists can then be used as a blocking tool by advertisers, payment processors, domain name registrars, hosting providers and search engines. Web browsers are not mentioned specifically, but it’s not hard to imagine these also appearing on the MPAA’s wish list.

In any case, the efforts outlined above show that copyright holders would like to extend anti-piracy measures beyond traditional service providers to software vendors. Today it’s BitTorrent clients but browser vendors may be next.

Very nice find mate, thanks for sharing this

As part of a settlement with anti-piracy group BREIN, three leaders of a piracy release group have agreed to cease and desist their online activities. In addition to paying a cash amount the trio have also agreed to provide information on other group members. BREIN chief Tim Kuik informs TorrentFreak that info on accomplices is always welcome.

Back in April, Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN obtained ex parte court orders (defendants didn’t appear) against members of a piracy release group.

Known online as ‘Dutch Release Team’, the group specialized in making available subtitled films and TV shows. In their absence the courts ordered three leaders of the group to stop their infringement or face the consequences – a fine of 2,000 euros per day or 2,000 euros per infringing upload, to a maximum fine of 50,000 euros.

According to BREIN the group members not only moderated their own website where they uploaded their latest releases, they were also involved in uploading content to torrent sites including The Pirate Bay and KickassTorrents.

In the wake of the April rulings it now appears that the trio have come to a settlement agreement with BREIN. Not only have they removed their torrents from KickassTorrents and agreed to pay a cash settlement, they have also promised to hand over information about other group members to BREIN.

While it’s unclear what details have been handed over, it’s fairly unusual for ‘snitching’ to be publicly revealed as part of a piracy settlement deal. It’s not unheard of (it happened in the United States last year) but it certainly piqued our interest. Is this a common thing for BREIN?

“The bulk of what – and who – we get is a result of our own investigations, but it is true that once we have identified an offender we are interested to hear about accomplices,” BREIN chief Tim Kuik informs TorrentFreak.

Interestingly, the anti-piracy boss also implies that those looking for an easier ride could get more favorable settlement terms if the information they hand over to BREIN proves to be of value.

“Depending on circumstances, useful information may be reflected in the terms of settlement,” Kuik explains.

But it’s not only those looking to get themselves out of trouble who pass information to the anti-piracy group. In some cases the tip-offs come from rivals in the piracy scene.

“Also we do get anonymous tips regarding offenders and from time to time it is clear that a tip comes from a ‘competitor’,” Kuik says. “It’s just like with other crime on any turf.”

While instances of ‘snitching’ are most certainly under publicized, some anti-piracy groups thrive on this kind of intelligence gathering. The UK’s Federation Against Software Theft runs a so-called “grass hotline” where people can inform on companies for using under licensed software.

FAST rely on two human traits to gather information on targets – greed (informants get paid) and a desire for revenge. According to FAST, many of their snitches are ex-employees with a grudge against their former bosses.

There can little doubt that snitching on fellow Internet users is frowned upon by many file-sharers but at the same time intense pressure from copyright holders and threats of punishing legal action have the ability to force most hands. It’s an intelligence conduit that will always remain useful to groups like BREIN, even if most cases aren’t made public.

New research shows that BitTorrent clients and BitTorrent Sync can can be exploited for Denial of Service attacks. With the help of the popular file-sharing protocol an attacker can reflect and amplify traffic through fellow file-sharers, boosting the original bandwidth 120 times.

b6bc76fba4939ffbd.jpg

With dozens of millions of active users at any given point in the day the BitTorrent protocol is a force to be reckoned with.

While BitTorrent swarms are relatively harmless, a new paper published by City University London researcher Florian Adamsky reveals that there’s potential for abuse.

The paper, titled ‘P2P File-Sharing in Hell: Exploiting BitTorrent Vulnerabilities to Launch Distributed Reflective DoS Attacks’, shows that various BitTorrent protocols can be used to amplify Denial of Service attacks.

Through various experiments Adamsky has confirmed that the vulnerability affects the uTP, DHT, Message Stream Encryption and BitTorrent Sync protocols.

The attacks are most effective through the BitTorrent Sync application where the original bandwidth can be increased by a factor of 120.

For traditional torrent clients such as uTorrent and Vuze the impact is also significant, boosting attacks by 39 and 54 times respectively.

Speaking with TF, Adamsky states that it’s relatively easy to carry out a distributed reflective Denial of Service (DRDoS) attack via BitTorrent. The attacker only needs a valid info-hash, or the “secret” in case of BitTorrent Sync.

“This attack should not be so hard to run, since an attacker can collect millions of possible amplifiers by using trackers, DHT or PEX,” he explains.

“With a single BitTorrent Sync ping message, an attacker can amplify the traffic up to 120 times.”

BitTorrent Inc has been notified about the vulnerabilities and patched some in a recent beta release. For now, however, uTorrent is still vulnerable to a DHT attack. Vuze was contacted as well but has yet to release an update according to the researcher.

For users of BitTorrent-based software there is no security concern other than the fact that people are participating in a DDoS attack without their knowledge. The vulnerability mostly leads to a lot of wasted bandwidth.

Sky Sports pundit Gary Neville left red faced after discovering Salford City had "dodgy" satellite box

“It’s not going to look good, is it? Gary Neville of Sky Sports with a dodgy Sky box!” the pundit said at a club meeting

76d489c1e.jpg

Sky Sports pundit Gary Neville was left caught out after it emerged the football club he co-owns had a dodgy satellite box.

The former Manchester United legend has bought into non-league side Salford City along with brother Phil, Ryan Giggs, Nicky Butt and Paul Scholes.

And he was left aghast when he learned that the satellite subscription in their bar was not exactly above board.

The revelation was captured on camera for a BBC documentary, Class of 92: Out Of Their League, which follows the United legends’ first season in charge.

“Have we still got a dodgy Sky box?” Neville asks chairman Karen Baird during a meeting.

Baird admits that the box was bought for a set fee off someone as they could not afford the subscription, which she estimated to be £600-a-month.

And Neville added: “It’s not going to look good, is it?

“Gary Neville of Sky Sports with a dodgy Sky box!”

Salford City’s subscription was eventually sorted along with the dilapidated toilet block which Neville takes one look at and gasps.

The programme also shows Neville asking Scholes to come out of retirement and play for the Evo-Stik League side if they progress in the FA Cup.

“I will if you will,” he says. “Give me a one word answer.”

Scholes replied: “Shambles.” Then he elaborated with: “I’m fat as f***.”

Neville, 40, is currently mourning the death of father Neville, 65, after he suffered a heart attack in Australia.

And Salford will mark the tragic news with a minute’s silence ahead of their season opener Marine on Saturday.

He has just taken up his role with Sky for this season and both he and Phil, now assistant manager at Spanish side Valencia, were not at the screening of the first episode of the three-part series.

However, he makes clear his ambition for Salford City, who are currently six divisions below the Premier League.

“What does the dream look like now?” he adds in the show. “A 25,000 seater stadium in the Football League. We can do it.”

Source :http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/…ndit-gary-neville-6256469

Legal experts and activists are protesting a UK Government proposal to increase the maximum jail term for online piracy from two to ten years. The proposed extension is disproportionate, ineffective and puts casual file-sharers at risk of long jail sentences, they argue.

The UK Government plans to increase the maximum prison sentence for online copyright infringement to ten years.

The current maximum of two years is not enough to deter infringers, lawmakers argue.

The new proposal follows a suggestion put forward in a study commissioned by the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) earlier this year.

The study concluded that the criminal sanctions for copyright infringement available under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988) could be amended to bring them into line with related offenses, such as counterfeiting.

Before implementing the changes the Government launched a public consultation, asking for comments and advice. While the responses have yet to be made public, TF has heard from two prominent groups that are speaking out against an extension.

The British and Irish Law, Education and Technology Association (BILETA) shared a copy of their recommendations with TF. The group’s main conclusion is that changes to the current law are not needed.

According to the group the prison term extension is not acceptable because the punishment would be too harsh.

“…legitimate means to tackle large-scale commercial scale online copyright infringement are already available and currently being used, and the suggested sentence of 10 years seems disproportionate,” the group writes.

In addition, BILETA argues that the proposal is not affordable, not feasible and incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.

“The freedom of expression may be interfered with if there is a ‘pressing social need’ and is proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued,” the group notes, adding that the standards for a pressing social need are often not met in piracy cases.

If the Government decides to move forward with a change of law, the legal scholars suggest limiting the sentence for both online and offline copyright infringement to four years maximum.

Another organization speaking out against the proposal is the Open Rights Group. Executive Director Jim Killock tells TF that the Government inaccurately suggests that only large scale commercial infringers will be affected by the change.

“The proposal wraps up businesses and people who ‘affect prejudicially’ a copyright owner,” Killock says.

“There is no requirement of intent to harm, merely that the user should have known that they were violating copyright law. This makes the offense a ‘strict liability’, which is rare.”

According to the Open Rights Group the vague “affect prejudicially” definition means that heavy Pirate Bay uploaders or even those who merely share files could potentially be targeted.

“We believe it creates scope to abuse the law. It is hard to know what ‘prejudicial affect’ is. It is hard to estimate damages from online sharing or access. The fact that someone did not seek to harm a copyright owner is no defense.

“The result is that people who are not really criminals, but are rather just naive users, may face punitive claims. At the very least, the risk of criminal claims means naive infringers can be pushed into accepting heavy punishments to remove the risk of long jail sentences,” Killock tells us.

Thus far we have not seen any comments from groups supporting the proposal, but UK entertainment industry organizations such as FACT and BPI are likely to weigh in later.

The consultation is open until this coming Monday and the Government will release the individual responses and publish a summary report afterwards.

Millions of users lost access to their personal files when Megaupload was raided and soon this data loss may be permanent. Carpathia Hosting's new parent company has asked the court's permission to wipe the servers clean, arguing that it should not bear the high financial costs. Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom disagrees and says his legal team will do its best to prevent any data from being destroyed.

ee2dbc8f447e.jpg

When Megaupload was raided early 2012, the U.S. Government seized 1,103 servers at Carpathia’s hosting facility in the United States.

More than three-and-a-half years have since passed and it still remains uncertain if former users will ever be able to retrieve their files.

A reporter who used Megaupload to store work-related data did take legal steps to secure his files. However, despite six requests asking the court to find a solution for the return of his data, there is still no progress.

Hosting provider Carpathia previously estimated that it cost them $9,000 a day to keep the hardware in storage. Nonetheless, the court urged the company to preserve the evidence and the hardware is still gathering dust at a Virginia warehouse.

If it’s up to Carpathia’s new parent company this will soon change. The company submitted a motion at a Virginia federal court this week asking for permission to destroy all data on the servers.

Carpathia Hosting was acquired by QTS which now owns all assets of the hosting company. This includes the Megaupload servers.

According to QTS the company shouldn’t be required to preserve the servers, not least because they have not been used in the ongoing lawsuit in recent years.

“As the successor-in-interest to Carpathia, QTS now requests judicial relief from the physical and financial burden of storing and maintaining the 1,103 computer servers at issue,” QTS’ lawyers write.

“As the servers have not been used for the purposes of any litigation since the filing of Carpathia’s Motion for Protective Order on March 20, 2012, QTS seeks an Order from the Court allowing for disposition of the servers and data,” they add.

After the servers were moved to a storage facility the costs of maintaining them has been reduced to $5,760 per month, but QTS sees no reason why it should continue to pay this.

Carpathia Hosting submitted a similar request to delete Megaupload data in 2012 but this was turned down by the court.

Kim Dotcom is not happy with the renewed request. Two years ago hosting company Leaseweb wiped hundreds of Megaupload servers so he believes that the remaining ones must be preserved at all costs.

“Obviously we will try to keep the data safe. Not only because it contains important evidence but also because we want to return the digital property to millions of Megaupload users,” Dotcom tells TF

“The Department of Justice has allowed the deletion of all Megaupload servers in Europe. We will try to stop them from doing the same in the United States,” he adds.

This view is shared by Megaupload’s lead global defense counsel Ira Rothken who plans to submit an opposition brief. According to Rothken the U.S. has to preserve the Megaupload data, as evidence and to allow former users to access their files.

“The Department of Justice is supposed to protect consumers. They are the department of justice for everyone not just Hollywood,” Rothken notes.

One option could be to let one of the other parties store the data, which has been suggested before. Soon after the raid Megaupload and Carpathia even came to an agreement to hand over the servers, but the Government blocked the plan in court.

The fate of Megaupload’s data is now in the hands of District Court Judge Liam O’Grady who will rule on the motion when all parties have had a chance to have their say.

BT TV and UKTV have announced a new deal to make UKTV’s full portfolio of channels available to BT customers for the first time.

From this month, UKTV channels Eden, Good Food and Home, will be available via BT set top boxes, joining Gold, Alibi, Watch, Dave, Really, Yesterday and Drama already on the service. In addition, BT subscribers will be able to catch up on programmes from across UKTV’s pay channels for seven days after transmission, via a UKTV Play branded service.

The new deal also extends to Internet and mobile streaming for UKTV’s ten channels via BT’s TV Everywhere app, available on smartphones, tablets and PCs. This includes seven day catch up rights for all ten UKTV channels, enabling BT subscribers to watch UKTV shows they may have missed, whenever they want and wherever they are.

Delia Bushell, managing director of BT TV and BT Sport, said: “BT TV is rapidly expanding and these three great new channels will help us to offer the breadth and quality of programming that our customers want. UKTV is a key partner for BT TV and we are delighted to have extended the relationship to offer the full span of UKTV’s popular comedy, drama, natural history & lifestyle channels, and to add these to our BT TV Everywhere service, as well as launching the excellent UKTV Play on demand service. This further supports our vision for providing customers with a range of great quality TV at affordable prices.”

Darren Childs, CEO, UKTV said: “UKTV’s continued investment in original content has made our channels more popular with viewers than ever before. I’m delighted BT’s customers will now be able to enjoy programmes from across our network and watch great entertainment on demand with UKTV

http://advanced-television.com…-uktv-channels-for-bt-tv/

WARNER BROS. OBTAINS INJUNCTION AGAINST 16 TORRENT SITES

Warner Bros. has obtained a blocking injunction against 16 Russia-based torrent sites, including RuTor.org, one of the country's largest. The injunction, which aims to limit the unauthorized distribution of the movie Entourage, is the first of its kind to be granted directly to a U.S. movie company by a Russian court.

d513fcaa91.jpg

For the past several years Russia has been making increased efforts to protect content creators. This includes a legal process through which copyright holders can obtain a blocking injunction against sites that are unresponsive to takedown demands.

On August 6, 2015, Warner Bros. filed such a lawsuit at the Moscow City Court in an effort to stop (or at least limit) the unlawful distribution of the movie Entourage. The action targeted 16 separate torrent sites including one of Russia’s most popular, Rutor.org.

The sites had previously been approached to delete the infringing content as Russian law requires but according to a source close to Warner cited by Vedomosti, all failed to respond.

A day later on August 8, the Court upheld Warner’s claims and initiated provisional interim measures against the pages of the sites from where Entourage was being distributed.

This represents the first time that a U.S. based movie company has used Russia’s anti-piracy blocking system directly without enlisting the assistance of a local rightsholder. Nevertheless, Warner did get some help in court from local anti-piracy outfit WebKontrol.

“Warner wants viewers who want to see the movie, to see it in theaters in the best quality, not via a poor-quality illegal copy,” WebKontrol lawyer Lina Gevorgyan told Vedomosti.

“Ultimately, we hope that these sites will comply with Russian law and remove the illegal content.”

The full list of sites affected by the Warner injunction is Bobfilm.net, Kinozadrot.net, Kinokrad.net, Kinomassa.net, BigCinema.tv, My-hit.org, NNM-Club.me, Tushkan.net, Kino-Serial.net, Kinozal.tv, Kinoprosmotr.net, Kinogo.co, Wood-Film.ru, Zerkalo-Rutor.org, 8films.net and Rutor.org.