Posts by Prophet

Developers considering adding a torrent search engine to their portfolio should proceed with caution, especially if they value their income streams. Following a complaint from the MPAA one developer is now facing a six month wait for PayPal to unfreeze thousands in funds, the vast majority related to other projects.

fa622a1e1f2bab0b83.jpg

For several years PayPal has been trying to limit how much business it does with sites involved with copyright infringement. Unsurprisingly torrent sites are high up on the payment processors “do not touch” list.

For that reason it is quite rare to see PayPal offered as a donation method on the majority of public sites as these are spotted quite quickly and often shut down. It’s unclear whether PayPal does its own ‘scouting’ but the company is known to act upon complaints from copyright holders as part of the developing global “Follow the Money” anti-piracy strategy.

This week Andrew Sampson, the software developer behind new torrent search engine ‘Strike‘, discovered that when you have powerful enemies, bad things can happen.

With no advertising on the site, Sampson added his personal PayPal account in case anyone wanted to donate. Quickly coming to the conclusion that was probably a bad idea, Sampson removed the button and carried on as before. One month later PayPal contacted him with bad news.

“We are contacting you as we have received a report that your website https://getstrike.net is currently infringing upon the intellectual property of Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.,” PayPal began.

“Such infringement also violates PayPal’s Acceptable Use Policy. Therefore your account has been permanently limited.”

17b11530833804f4d45e.png

It isn’t clear why PayPal waited for a month after donations were removed from Strike to close Sampson’s six-year-old account but the coder believes that his public profile (he doesn’t hide his real identity) may have led to his issues.

“It seems someone at the MPAA realized I took donations using PayPal from some of my other LEGAL open source projects (like https://github.com/Codeusa/Borderless-Gaming) and was able to get the email of my account,” the dev told TF.

While Sampson had regularly been receiving donations from users of his other open source projects, he says he only received $200 from users of Strike, a small proportion of the $2,500 in his personal account when PayPal shut it down.

“That money was earned through legitimate freelance work and was going to be used specifically for my rent/car payment so it kind of sucks,” he says.

While it’s going to be a painful 180 day wait for Sampson to get his money back from PayPal, the lack of options for receiving donations on his other projects could prove the most damaging moving forward. Sampson does accept Bitcoin, but it’s nowhere near as user-friendly as PayPal.

Of course, this is all part of the MPAA’s strategy. By making sites like Strike difficult to run, they hope that developers like Sampson will reconsider their positions and move on. And in this case they might just achieve their aims.

“I’ve allowed someone else to manage the site for the time being. It will operate as it normally does but I need a bit to clear my head and don’t want anything to do with it as it’s become quite stressful,” Sampson says.

“I think the MPAA is playing low ball tactics against a developer who just wanted a better search engine. I don’t condone piracy, but I sure as hell understand why it happens.”

Demonii, the largest standalone BitTorrent tracker on the Internet, has been forced to ban more than 10,000 'copyright-infringing' torrent hashes. The blocking measures follow pressure from a music industry lawfirm applied to both the tracker and its hosting company. The tracker disagrees with the "bullying" tactics being employed.

1dea833cc28e.png

At any given point in time, millions of people are sharing files via BitTorrent. The most used trackers process millions of requests per minute, serving between 15 and 30 million people at once.

Demonii is one of these top BitTorrent trackers. The standalone tracker offers no torrents but merely coordinates communication between people who share files via sites such as The Pirate Bay.

Technically speaking a tracker is similar to a DNS provider, it’s a ‘phone book’ which points people to content without knowing what it is. However, according to German lawfirm Rasch, trackers have a responsibility to block infringing hashes if they are asked to.

Earlier this year the lawfirm took action against the hosting companies of several standalone trackers after they failed to block “infringing” hashes. The operator of Demonii, currently the most used BitTorrent tracker, informed us that they were contacted too.

“First we received an email from Rasch asking us to remove about five torrent hashes for one music artist. Since the firm is merely an agent and not the actual copyright owner, I asked for proof that he is the lawful agent,” Demonii’s operator explains.

The lawfirm provided the requested paperwork and to avoid problems with the hosting company, Demonii blocked the five hashes. This was the first time that Demonii had ever blocked content, which is nothing more than filtering a piece of HEX string.

However, it soon became clear that Rasch was just getting started. In the weeks that followed the company filed complaints against 10,000 allegedly infringing hashes which pointed to content from various copyright holders.

Again, Demonii requested proof that the firms was acting as a lawful agent, but this time Rasch declined. Instead, Rasch lawyer Mirko Brüß told the operator that anyone can report copyright infringements.

“Anybody can notify you of an infringement, even if they are in no way affiliated with the rights owner. Please understand that we will not go above and beyond what is provided by the law in order to satisfy your personal requests,” Brüß wrote in an email.

“It is your decision to act upon the information sent to you. But with regards to blocking content wrongfully, the content owners could approach us with claims for damages for sending a false notice to you,” he added.

The Demonii operator disagrees with this assessment and calls out the claim as incorrect.

“If what he is saying is right, in theory, I can go send an email to his hosting provider to remove their site? After all I am not the owner and no way legally affiliated, but I can still claim the take down?! — No.. I can’t, and neither should he,” he tells TF.

However, with pressure shifting to the tracker’s hosting service (which had given the tracker 24 hours to comply), Demonii was eventually forced to block all reported hashes.

Describing the lawfirm’s tactics as “bullying”, the operator decided to move away from its hosting company to one that may be more resistant to this type of pressure.

“We have moved to a different hosting provider, one which we hope will take the matter more seriously and not just bend over backwards for any outrageous claim and takedown request where ownership can not be proven,” Demonii’s operator says.

The previous hash blocks have also been lifted, so Demonii is starting over fresh and uncensored again. The move hasn’t stopped the lawfirm from sending more blocking requests, but for the time being the tracker is opting to ignore these.

The tracker stresses that it respects copyright law. However, it will only respond to correct takedown notice and not to “bullying” tactics.

Following their SOPA defeat three years ago, the MPAA, RIAA and ESA are again arguing that registrars need to take action against domains being used for infringing purposes. The groups told the House Judiciary Committee’s Internet subcommittee that dealing with anonymous domain registrations is also an urgent matter.

stopstopOne of the key aims of the now infamous SOPA legislation that failed to pass several years ago was the takedown of domains being used for infringing purposes. The general consensus outside of the major copyright groups was that this kind of provision should be rejected.

However, within the movie and music industries the spirit of SOPA is still alive, it’s just a question of how its aims can be achieved without giving alternative mechanisms the same name. Yesterday, during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee’s Internet subcommittee, domains were firmly on the agenda.

One group in attendance was the Coalition for Online Accountability. COA’s aim is to improve online transparency and to encourage “effective enforcement against online infringement of copyrights and trademarks.”

No surprise then that its members consist of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), Entertainment Software Association (ESA) and the Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA).

COA counsel Steve Metalitz’s testimony called for domain name registrars to deal with complaints effectively.

Domains

“In recent months, there have been increasing calls from many quarters for domain name registrars to recognize that, like other intermediaries in the e-commerce environment, they must play their part to help address the plague of online copyright theft that continues to blight the digital marketplace,” Metalitz said.

“Under the 2013 revision of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA), domain name registrars took on important new obligations to respond to complaints that domain names they sponsor are being used for copyright or trademark infringement, or other illegal activities.”

However, according to Metalitz, registrars are not responding. The COA counsel said that the RAA requires registrars to “investigate and respond appropriately” to abuse reports and make “commercially reasonable efforts” to ensure that registrants don’t use their domain names “directly or indirectly” to infringe third party rights. But there has been little action.

“Well-documented reports of abuse that are submitted to registrars by right-holders, clearly demonstrating pervasive infringement, are summarily rejected, in contravention of the 2013 RAA, which requires that they be investigated,” he said.

As an example, Metalitz highlighted a Romanian-hosted ‘pirate’ music site using the domain Itemvn.com.

“By August of last year, RIAA had notified the site of over 220,000 infringements of its members’ works (and had sent similar notices regarding 26,000 infringements to the site’s hosting providers). At that time, RIAA complained to the domain name registrar (a signatory of the 2013 RAA), which took no action, ostensibly because it does not host the site,” he explained. A complaint to ICANN was also dismissed, twice.

It’s clear from Metalitz’s testimony that the MPAA, RIAA and ESA are seeking an environment in which domains will be suspended or blocked if they can be shown to be engaged in infringement. But the groups’ demands don’t end there.

WHOIS

WHOIS databases carry the details of individuals or companies that have registered domains and registrars are required to ensure that this information is both accurate and up to date. However, since WHOIS searches often reveal information that registrants would rather keep private, so-called proxy registrations (such as Whoisguard) have become increasingly popular.

While acknowledging there is a legitimate need for such registrations (albeit in “limited circumstances”), the entertainment industry groups are not happy that pirate site operators are playing the system to ensure they cannot be traced.

As a result they are aiming for a situation where registrars only deal with proxy services that meet certain standards on issues including accuracy of customer data, relaying of complaints to proxy registrants, plus “ground rules for when the contact points of a proxy registrant will be revealed to a complainant in order to help address a copyright or trademark infringement.”

In other words, anonymity should only be available up to a point.

In a letter to the Committee, the EFF warned against the COA’s proposals.

“As advocates for free speech, privacy, and liberty on the global Internet, we ask the Committee to resist calls to impose new copyright and trademark enforcement responsibilities on ICANN. In particular, the Committee should reject proposals to have ICANN require the suspension of Internet domain names based on accusations of copyright or trademark infringement by a website,” the EFF said.

“This is effectively the same proposal that formed the centerpiece of the Stop Online Piracy Act of 2011 (SOPA), which this Committee set aside after millions of Americans voiced their opposition. Using the global Domain Name System to enforce copyright law remains as problematic in 2015 as it was in 2011.”

An angry YouTuber says he has had enough of the way YouTube handles the DMCA and allegations of copyright infringement. In a lawsuit filed against Google, Viacom and Lionsgate, Benjamin Ligeri complains of restrictive practices which favor copyright holders using YouTube's Content ID system, even when claims are invalid.

While in previous years people were simply grateful to have somewhere to host their own vides, these days a growing number of YouTube users rely on the site to generate extra cash.

Earning money with YouTube is now easier than ever, with some ‘YouTubers’ even making enough to invest in a mansion.

For others, however, the environment created by the Google-owned video platform is far from perfect, with complaints over the company’s Content ID anti-piracy system regularly making the news. Now YouTuber Benjamin Ligeri is adding his name to the disgruntled list.

In a lawsuit filed at the US District Court for the District of Rhode Island which lists Google, Viacom, Lionsgate and another YouTuber as defendants, Ligeri bemoans a restrictive YouTube user contract and a system that unfairly handles copyright complaints.

Ligeri says that he has uploaded content to YouTube under the name BetterStream for purposes including “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and/or research,” but never in breach of copyright. Nevertheless, he claims to have fallen foul of YouTube’s automated anti-piracy systems.

One complaint details a video uploaded by Ligeri which he says was a parody of the film The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. It was present on YouTube for a year before a complaint was filed against it by a YouTube user called Egeda Pirateria.

“Defendant Pirateria is not the rightful owner of the rights to The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, nor did the Plaintiff’s critique of it amount to copying or distribution of the movie,” Ligeri writes.

However, much to his disappointment, YouTube issued a copyright “strike” against Ligeri’s account and refused to remove the warning, even on appeal.

“YouTube, although Defendants Pirateria or Lion’s Gate lacked any legal claim
to any copyright to The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, denied the Plaintiff’s appeal pertaining to his account’s copyright strike,” the complaint reads.

Ligeri says Viacom also got in on the action, filing a complaint against his “critique” of the 2014 remake of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

“A claim was made with YouTube on behalf of Defendant Viacom. Defendant Viacom does not have a legal or valid copyright to TMNT. Defendant YouTube allowed Viacom the option to mute, disable or monetize the Plaintiff’s Fair Use content,” Ligeri adds.

Although the fair use argument could be up for debate, in 2009 Nickelodeon acquired the global rights to the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles brand. Nickelodeon’s parent company is Viacom-owned Paramount Pictures.

“Content ID is an opaque and proprietary system where the accuser can serve as the judge, jury and executioner,” Ligeri continues.

“Content ID allows individuals, including Defendants other than Google, to steal ad revenue from YouTube video creators en masse, with some companies claiming content they don’t own deliberately or not. The inability to understand context and parody regularly leads to fair use videos getting blocked, muted or monetized.”

Noting that YouTube exercises absolute power through its take-it-or-leave-it user agreement, Ligeri says the agreement and Content ID combined result in non-compliance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

“Normally, under DMCA, there would be a process where the reported content
would be removed for 10-14 days so any dispute could be resolved by way of notice and counter-notice,” Ligeri writes.

“Content ID and YouTube’s adhesion contract are not compliant with DMCA
because, at a minimum, the software’s algorithm fails [to] recognize when content may or may not be violating copyright.”

Ligeri says that rather than acting as a neutral party, YouTube favors larger copyright holders using Content ID over smaller creators who do not.

“This software and YouTube’s terms of use circumvent DMCA by creating a
private arbitration mechanism. Further, a party claiming copyright infringement has no burden of proof under this private arbitration mechanism,” he notes.

In conclusion, Ligeri is demanding an injunction which compels Google/YouTube to restore the content taken down via the allegedly bogus complaints and “otherwise comply with the DMCA.”

Ligeri also seeks declaratory judgments that he did not infringe the copyrights of the defendants and that YouTube’s terms of use are void on several counts, including that they ignore or fail to comply with the DMCA.

A claim for nominal damages of $10,000, ‘special’ damages of $1,000,000 plus unspecified punitive damages and costs conclude the filing.

This is not the first time Ligeri has personally targeted YouTube. In 2008 he unsuccessfully sued the company in an effort to obtain a 1/500th share in the revenue generated by the video site.

The self-styled “#1 Most Viewed YouTube Icon” also appears to enjoy representing himself. In addition to the current case his Linkedin profile describes him as a “human rights activist private litigator” with previous experience working in a public defender’s office for the criminally insane.

b7494.jpg

Sling Media has launched Slingbox M1, which features WiFi connectivity, in the UK and Europe.

First introduced in the US last year, it is being offered with a UK manufacturer’s suggested retail price of £129.

Slingbox M1 has a number of features including dual-band 2.4/5GHz Wi-Fi connectivity and Ethernet port; quick and easy set-up and playback via PC/Mac desktop apps as well as iPhone, iPad and Android phone apps; watch and control live TV on a tablet, smartphone, PC or Mac; play and schedule PVR recordings; watch on a second TV anywhere via Apple TV, Amazon Fire TV Stick, Google Chromecast or Roku; component and composite input/output; and international power supply, which supports 230/110V and has changeable pins to support both UK and European plugs.

It also does not require the payment of monthly fees.

Commenting on the launch, Michael Hawkey, senior VP and general manager of Sling Media, said: “Given its strong reception in the US, we are excited to introduce the Slingbox M1 into the European market.
“The Slingbox M1 sets a new standard for ease of set-up and use, while delivering incredible value for the pay-TV satellite subscribers that we have always targeted with our products and services. With a Slingbox M1 that has been completely localised for customers, we’re delivering the most affordable Slingbox packed with the most robust set of features that we believe will significantly expand the mobile TV and video market.”

Source : http://www.broadbandtvnews.com…gbox-m1-debuts-in-europe/

Quote from ldp

i seen something about that they said from next yr its not free with broadband etc

Yuup, i posted about it here http://linuxsat-support.com/showthread.php?t=82544 a week or so back

1e462791.jpg

New evidence suggests that Anonymous has begun using malware-infected home routers to launch DDoS attacks against various targets, particularly in the last few months. That’s the conclusion of a new report from the security firm Incapsula, which began detecting infected systems in December, 2014.

643d940479d5bd3c4da.jpg

According to Incapsula, the attacks it has logged have come largely from ARM-based SOHO (small office/home office) routers based on Ubiquiti designs. Back in 2013, Ubiquiti devices were found to have a significant security flaw that allowed passwords and other data to be snooped from the hardware, but this exploit appears to have required a physical connection to the router. What Incapsula found is more serious — many Ubiquiti routers appear to have enabled HTTP and SSH logins by default and are using vendor-provided standard credentials. The company targets developing countries for its hardware, which explains the heavy concentration in East Asia.

(This is a good place to note that you should always change your router’s default login and password.)

71563e6ddd7219.jpg

The routers Incapsula examined were loaded with an average of 4 variants of MrBlack, a DDoS tool (137 variants of MrBlack were observed in total). Other software loadouts included DoFloo and Mayday (also DDOS tools) as well as Skynet, a backdoor program. In this case, the US is serving as the command and control center, with the majority of the routers launching the attacks located in Thailand and Brazil (85% of them). The command and control servers were located mostly in China, but the US accounted for a significant minority share, at 21.7%.

The self-replicating botnet tied to Anonymous

One interesting facet of the MrBlack infection is that infected routers have been tasked with spreading their infection to other devices. At least some of the routers scan for open SSH ports and then attempt to access them using default credentials.

b04755b378e74.jpg

Here’s a fun tidbit. When I saw this story flash across the DailyDot, I noted that the publication had chosen to embed the original report from Incapsula in Scribd. Interestingly enough, the version of the report preserved on Scribd doesn’t match the current version on Incapsula’s own webpage. Specifically, the Scribd version refers to command and control servers reporting to AnonOps.com, a known IRC channel for the organization. This information is missing from the current online report.

It’s not clear why this was redacted or what the link between Anonymous and the MrBlack malware package is suspected to be. It’s certainly possible that elements within Anonymous are just one group that’s exploiting router security for its own gain.

Either way, change the admin login/password combo on your router. Between this, GPU malware, and hard-driving killing Rombertik, old-fashioned pencil and paper are starting to look like a decent computing alternative.

The Internet Security Task Force, an anti-piracy initiative launched by several independent movies studios, is calling for an end to the "six strikes" Copyright Alert System. According to the group the voluntary agreement does nothing to stop piracy. Instead, the group is promoting the Canadian notice-and-notice model as a much more effective alternative.

pirate-runningTo counter the ever increasing piracy threat a group of smaller movie studios launched a new coalition last month, the Internet Security Task Force (ISTF).

ISTF, which includes Voltage Pictures, Millennium, Bloom, Sierra/Affinity and FilmNation Entertainment among its members, is poised to be more aggressive than the MPAA.

Today the group unveils its first point of action. According to the group it’s time to end the voluntary “six strikes” Copyright Alert System, the voluntary anti-piracy agreement between the RIAA, MPAA and several large U.S. Internet providers.

ISTF presents data which reveals that the six strikes warnings are not getting the desired result, describing the system as a “sham”.

According to Millennium Films President Mark Gill his studio sent numerous piracy notices directed at ‘Expendables 3′ pirates under the scheme, but only a tiny fraction were forwarded by the participating ISPs.

“We’ve always known the Copyright Alert System was ineffective, as it allows people to steal six movies from us before they get an educational leaflet. But now we have the data to prove that it’s a sham,” Gill comments.

“On our film ‘Expendables 3,’ which has been illegally viewed more than 60 million times, the CAS only allowed 0.3% of our infringement notices through to their customers. The other 99.7% of the time, the notices went in the trash,” he adds.

As part of the Copyright Alert System ISPs and copyright holders have agreed to send a limited number of notices per month, so anything above this threshold is not forwarded.

ISTF’s data on the number of ‘Expendables 3′ infringements suggests that the Copyright Alerts are in fact less effective than the traditional forwarding schemes of other providers.

Cox and Charter, two ISPs who do not participate in the Copyright Alert System, saw a 25.47% decrease in reported infringements between November 2014 and January 2015. However, the ISPs who sent six strikes notices saw a 4.54% increase over the same period.

“These alarming numbers show that the CAS is little more than talking point utilized to suggest these five ISPs are doing something to combat piracy when in actuality, their customers are free to continue pirating content with absolutely no consequences,” Voltage Pictures CEO Nicolas Chartier notes.

“As for its laughable six strikes policy, would any American retailer wait for someone to rob them six times before handing them an educational leaflet? Of course not, they call the cops the first time around,” he adds.

While it’s clear that ISTF is not happy with the Copyright Alert System, they seem mistaken about how it works. Customers don’t have to be caught six times before they are warned, they get an educational notice the first time they’re caught.

The “six strikes” terminology refers to the graduated response scheme, in which customers face stronger punishments after being caught more times.

Interestingly, the filmmakers promote the Canadian notice-and-notice system as a better alternative. Since earlier this year, Canadian ISPs are obligated to forward infringement notices to their subscribers, and ISTF notes that it has been instrumental in decreasing piracy.

Since the beginning of 2015, Bell Canada has seen a 69.6% decrease in infringements and Telus (54.0%), Shaw (52.1%), TekSavvy (38.3%) and Rogers (14.9%) all noted significant reductions.

The data presented is collected by the monitoring outfit CEG TEK. This American company sends infringement notices paired with settlement requests on behalf of copyright holders, sometimes demanding hundreds of dollars from alleged pirates.

Needless to say, these threats may in part be the reason for the reported effectiveness.

In the United States, ISPs are currently not obliged to forward copyright infringement notices. Some ISPs such as Comcast do so voluntarily, but they also strip out the settlement demands.

ISTF hopes this will change in the near future and the group has sent a letter to the MPAA, RIAA and the major ISPs urging them to expire the Copyright Alert System, and switch to the Canadian model instead.

David Cameron pledges to deliver party’s election manifesto in full as he chairs first Conservative-only cabinet since 1997

Plans to decriminalise the non-payment of the BBC licence fee are to be revived by the government, Downing Street said as it mapped out part of David Cameron’s second-term agenda.

As the prime minister chaired the first Conservative-only cabinet in 18 years, his spokesman said Cameron still favoured the proposal which could cost the corporation £200m a year.

The changes could be introduced during the negotiations over the BBC’s next licence fee settlement which begins in April 2017. This would be led on the government side by John Whittingdale, the Thatcherite new culture secretary, who has previously expressed doubts about the licence fee’s long-term viability.

Downing Street declined to fuel criticism of the BBC that followed Whittingdale’s appointment. The prime minister’s spokesman said simply that the BBC’s royal charter would be reviewed as planned next year.

No 10 was keen to focus on the prime minister’s opening remarks to the cabinet, filmed by the TV cameras, in which Cameron said that his administration would deliver the party’s manifesto in full. He pledged to focus “on down-to-earth bread and butter issues we were elected to deliver on”.

The prime minister showed his determination to deliver what is being described as “blue-collar Conservatism” by appointing MPs from modest backgrounds to senior posts. Robert Halfon, the MP for Harlow who campaigns on the cost of living, has been appointed as the Tory deputy chairman and as a minister in the Cabinet office.

Sajid Javid, the son of a Pakistani-born bus driver, was promoted on Monday from his post of culture secretary to succeed Vince Cable as business secretary. On Tuesday morning, Javid ran into an immediate confrontation with trade union leaders after he said that he would prioritise changes to strike laws.

The Tories pledged in their manifesto to change the law to ensure that at least half of the workforce vote in a strike ballot. In “essential services”, such as health, education, fire and transport, industrial action would have to be supported by at least 40% of those entitled to vote.

The new business secretary told The World at One on BBC Radio 4: “That’s something we’ll give more detail on in the Queen’s speech, but it will be a priority. I think it’s also something that needs to be done. We need to update our strike laws and we’ve never hidden away from the changes we want to make.”

But Frances O’Grady, the TUC general secretary, said: “The government’s proposals on union ballots will make legal strikes close to impossible. Union negotiators will be left with no more power than Oliver Twist when he asked for more. After five years of falling living standards, the prospects for decent pay rises have just got a whole lot worse.”

Oliver Letwin, the Cabinet office minister, laid out the beginnings of the government’s programme at the cabinet meeting. The prime minister also dusted down plans for a new communications bill and steps to tackle extremism within the UK, measures that had previously been blocked by the Tories’ former coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats.

The decriminalisation of non-payment of the BBC licence fee will feature in the negotiations over the licence fee settlement. In February, peers narrowly voted that there should be no move to decriminalise the non-payment of the licence fee before 2017.

The BBC has said decriminalisation could cost it up to £200m a year and warned that channels may have to be closed as a result. Last year, MPs backed plans to give the government the power to decriminalise the non-payment of the licence fee, which is £145.50 a year for a colour television. Licence fee evasion is an offence that can incur fines of up to £1,000 and result in a criminal record.

However, in the House of Lords, a cross-party amendment preventing any change before the next licence fee settlement begins in April 2017 was approved by 178 to 175.

Chris Bryant, the new shadow culture secretary, tweeted that he faces a “big job ahead fighting for public service BBC”. But the most recent report by the commons culture select committee in the last parliament, signed off by Whittingdale as its chairman, reached more nuanced conclusions on the licence fee than the culture secretary himself who has compared it to the poll tax.

The committee concluded: “There currently appears to be no better alternative for funding the BBC in the near term other than a hypothecated tax or the licence fee.”

The report added that the next charter renewal negotiations “should not rush profound changes such as the abolition of the licence fee model”. But it said that change would have to be introduced in the 2020s.

“The principle of the licence fee in its current form is becoming harder and harder to sustain given changes in communications and media technology and services, and changing audience needs and behaviours. Given this is the case, we do not see a long-term future for the licence fee in its current form.”

BMG Rights Management and Round Hill Music want Cox to reveal the identities of hundreds of subscribers whose accounts were frequently used to pirate music. The request is part of an ongoing lawsuit where the ISP is accused of failing to disconnect repeat copyright infringers.

n the United States most large Internet providers forward DMCA notices to subscribers who’re accused of downloading copyrighted material.

Cox Communications is one of the ISPs that does this. In addition, the ISP also implemented a strict set of rules of its own accord to ensure that its customers understand the severity of the allegations.

According to some copyright holders, however, Cox’s efforts are falling short. Last year BMG Rights Management and Round Hill Music sued the ISP because it fails to terminate the accounts of repeat infringers.

The companies, which control the publishing rights to songs by Katy Perry, The Beatles and David Bowie among others, claimed that Cox has given up its DMCA safe harbor protections due to this inaction.

The case revolves around the “repeat infringer” clause of the DMCA, which prescribes that Internet providers must terminate the accounts of persistent pirates. Both parties are currently conducting discovery.

In order to make their case the copyright holders have sent a long list of demands to Cox, but court records show the ISP is reserved in the information it’s willing to hand over.

The company refused, for example, to reveal the identities of roughly 150,000 subscribers who allegedly downloaded infringing works from BMG and Round Hill Music. According to the ISP, the Cable Privacy Act prevents the company from disclosing this information.

The music groups, however, aren’t taking no for an answer and are now asking the court to compel Cox to hand over their personal details. According to them, this information is crucial to proof the direct infringement claims.

The copyright holders are willing to accept a more limited number of accounts to begin with. In a motion to compel, they ask for the personal details of 500 account holders whose accounts were repeatedly used to share pirated material.

“In an effort to narrow the dispute, Copyright Holders only request the identity of and contact information associated with 500 of what appear to be the most egregious infringers,” they write.

“Specifically, Copyright Holders seek the identity of subscribers associated with 250 IP addresses that have infringed the copyrights at issue since the complaint was filed in this case, and the identity of subscribers associated with 250 IP addresses that have infringed in the six months prior to the Complaint being filed,” the companies add.

While the current request is limited to 500 IP-addresses, the music groups reserve the right to request more at a later stage and ask the court to grant permission to do so.

“Copyright Holders also request that the Court issue an open Order requiring Cox to produce the contact information for additional direct infringers of the copyrights at issue in this case, if the need arises,” they write.

There is a hearing scheduled for later this week when the copyright holders will further detail their request, if needed. Cox has yet to respond but it’s unlikely that the company will hand to hand over the requested information without putting up a fight.

Customs authorities in Hong Kong say they have shut down a "well organized" TV show piracy operation. Two men aged 25 and 46 were placed under arrest and a third key member is said to be at large. At this stage the group remains unnamed as their United States-based site is still online and proving difficult to shut down.

old-tvWhen it comes to content being made available on file-sharing networks, TV shows have certainly stamped their position as one of the leaders in recent years.

Often enjoying their premiere in the United States, TV shows are illegally downloaded all over the world just minutes after they air, disrupting local licensing and marketing strategies in an instant but giving fans want they want – without the premium price tag.

Until these issues are fully addressed piracy will continue, with dedicated TV show releasing groups happy to fill in the gaps on availability and/or price – until they’re tracked down and stopped of course.

To that end, Hong Kong customs authorities are this morning reporting success in shutting down what they describe as a “well organized cross-border” TV show piracy “syndicate”.

Following an investigation carried out over the past three months, yesterday authorities arrested two men in two areas of the autonomous territory. One, a 25-year-old living in the Southern District, is said to be the group’s founder. Another, a 46-year-old, is being described as a “key member”. A third, said to be the group’s ‘capper‘, is believed to be at large.

According to a government release, four sets of computers were seized and TV shows were discovered stored on the equipment. Overall the group is suspected of distributing around 2,500 shows.

Of interest, however, is that Hong Kong authorities are currently refusing to name the group or their site URL. That’s because the server is located in the United States and at the moment remains fully operational. Nevertheless, the operation is being declared a success.

“This is virtually our first case in which we have discovered such a large quantity of television programs being uploaded to the Internet for downloading,” a Customs officer said.

Under local copyright law anyone distributing an infringing copy of a TV show or other copyright work commits a criminal offense if that negatively affects the copyright owner. The maximum penalty is four years in jail and a fine of around US$6,500 per infringing copy.

Without prior warning the popular file-hosting service Netload.in disappeared about a week ago. The sudden shutdown came after a German court issued an injunction against the site's operators. While this appeared to be a victory for the copyright holders, Netload has now made a comeback under a new domain name.

866406051.png

For several years copyright holder have branded Netload a piracy haven.

A few months ago the MPAA reported the site to the U.S. Government as a “notorious market” and in Germany several music groups have taken the site to court.

Back in 2011 record labels started legal proceedings against the site’s operator, demanding the names and addresses of uploaders. The site owner initially refused to do so, but eventually caved in when faced with a prison sentence.

Now, three years later, trouble continues for Netload. Music industry lawfirm Rasch recently obtained an injunction from a Hamburg Court ordering Netload to stop the distribution of a pirated music album.

“The District Court of Hamburg decided on Netload’s obligation to cease and desist from aiding their users to make a certain album available to the public,” Rasch lawyer Mirko Brüß informs TF, adding that he couldn’t name the album in question.

Under German jurisprudence this means that Netload will have to monitor external forums and search engines to make sure that these are not linking to the infringing work. If the site fails to do so the service faces a fine of hundreds of thousands of euros.

“If we find another (working) link to the album, Netload faces punitive fines of up to 250,000 euro per infringement,” Brüß notes.

The lawfirm served the operator of Netload with this injunction last week, and soon after the site vanished. Initially the lawyers and their clients believed that the site had shut down, but the assessment came too quickly.

30240a8.jpg

While Netload.in is still offline a copy of the site has reappeared at Netload.me. This site is allegedly operated by the same people and the old logins are functional.

“It appears Netload is going to relaunch using the .me-domain. It’s the same company in the imprint and the old user logins are working. Uploads are not working so far,” Brüß tells TF.

Despite the change of address the injunction still stands, so the music industry lawyers will keep a close eye on the site to see if the infringing album appears.

Netload was contacted for a comment on the recent troubles but the company has yet to respond to our inquiry.

Anti-piracy monetization firm Rightscorp has failed in its bid to unmask alleged Internet pirates. The company attempted to use the DMCA to force ISP Birch Communications to expose its customers' identities but the company stood strong. A federal judge in Atlanta has now ruled in favor of the ISP by quashing Rightscorp's subpoena.

rightscorpWorking on behalf of various copyright owners including Warner Bros. and BMG, last year anti-piracy company Rightscorp began sending subpoenas to dozens of smaller ISPs in the United States. The aim, as usual, was to unmask alleged file-sharers so that they could be pursued for cash settlement.

While many ISPs complied with the requests, the practice was controversial. Such subpoenas aren’t considered applicable in file-sharing cases and largely avoid scrutiny since they can by signed by a court clerk and are not reviewed by a judge.

In 2014, telecoms company Birch Communications kicked back by refusing to hand over customer details of subsidiary ISP, CBeyond. The company filed a motion to quash Rightscorp’s subpoena arguing that the anti-piracy outfit had embarked on a fishing exercise with no legal basis.

“CBeyond contends that the section does not apply to service providers that act only as a conduit for data transferred between other parties and that do not store data. The court agrees,” Magistrate Judge Janet King said.

Faced with this setback Rightscorp filed objections to the ruling and sought to have it overturned. The company has now failed in that effort. Last week the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia adopted the earlier ruling and quashed Rightscorp’s subpoena.

“We safeguard our customer information and take privacy issues seriously,” Birch President and Chief Executive Officer Vincent Oddo said in a statement.

“The U.S. District Court did the right thing by backing our view, and we’re very pleased to see that this case will serve to help protect our customers’ private information.”

Birch Senior Vice President and General Counsel Christopher Bunce says the company’s first response is to always protect subscriber privacy.

“Our first order of business when anyone requests access to a customer’s private information is to refuse, absent a valid subpoena or court order, which we then scrutinize as we did with Rightscorp’s illegal subpoena in this matter,” Bunce says.

According to Gardiner Davis who acted as lead litigation counsel for Birch, Rightscorp’s interpretation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was far too liberal.

“They had not even filed a copyright infringement lawsuit,” Davis said. “So this attempt was essentially a fishing expedition and I think this ruling was correctly and wisely decided. The court interpreted the statute as Congress intended.”

The defeat represents another blow to an embattled Rightscorp. The company’s latest financial report reveals a company hemorrhaging cash, despite substantial year-on-year growth.

A broad coalition including Google, Mastercard, Microsoft, ISPs and anti-piracy organization Rights Alliance have signed a Memorandum of Understanding on the issue of online infringement. The agreement, which is the result of efforts by Denmark's Ministry of Culture, will see the companies working together to defeat piracy, promote legitimate content, and make the Internet a safer place.

While action against online infringement takes place on many levels, parallel large-scale initiatives with broader aims are increasingly being employed by entertainment industry companies.

Outside of “three strikes” style programs, “follow the money” is perhaps the next best well-known. This type of initiative, carried out with the assistance of big brands, advertising companies and payment processors, aims to strangle the finances of ‘pirate’ sites.

As seen last week, there are also tandem efforts to portray unauthorized sites as “unsafe” places for netizens to frequent. The overall message is that pirate sites are run by criminals, consumers should not support them, and money is best spent with legitimate content providers.

Denmark has become the latest country to embrace these ideals via a Memorandum of Understanding titled ‘Code to Promote Lawful Behavior on the Internet’ signed by some of the world’s biggest online players.

Google and Microsoft are the most recognizable international technology signatories and all the big Hollywood studios make a proxy appearance via anti-piracy group Rights Alliance. Broadcasters and cinema companies are also represented.

The interests of more than 40,000 composers, songwriters and music publishers are served by rights group Koda and payment companies including MasterCard and Diners Club are also on board. Local ISPs have signed through the Tele Industrien group.

484daf.png

According to the Ministry of Culture the MoU represents the beginning of a collaborative mechanism designed to tackle digital challenges on five key issues.

1. To help make the Internet a safe and legal platform for consumers and businesses.
2. To stress that copyright is an important cornerstone for growth and innovation.
3. To work together to reduce financial crime, based on copyright violations.
4. To work together to promote the dissemination of legal products.
5. To contribute to efficient processes that can help to reduce copyright violations and associated crimes.

In keeping with voluntary anti-piracy initiatives currently underway in other countries, signatories will also participate in discussion aimed at identifying new areas of cooperation.

The shape of this Danish initiative looks familiar, with rightsholders applying the pressure and search engines, ISPs, payment processors and advertisers falling into step. While the emphasis is on consumer safety, it is clear that companies are being advised to do everything they can to disassociate themselves from “criminal enterprises” on the Internet.

As part of the MoU, signatories agree not to “finance criminal activities” by offering support of any kind including giving them “exposure”, providing advertising revenue or payment processing services.

“The companies and organizations that are part of this Code want to counter that their companies are associated with economic crime, based on copyright violations,” the code reads.

In a statement announcing the signing of the MoU, the Ministry of Culture stressed the aims and importance of the broad agreement.

“The code reflects a common desire to make a determined effort to ensure that the Internet is a safe and economically sustainable marketplace. It will help to create better conditions for growth and innovation for legitimate businesses and security and transparency for the users,” the Ministry said.

Time will tell how far each signatory will be prepared to go and on what basis, but the companies involved are the biggest players around and having them all at the same table will be a powerful tool.

An intriguing case dating back more than 3.5 years ended this week when two men went on criminal trial in Sweden. One was the former sysop of a 26,000 member private BitTorrent tracker. The other provided the site with web hosting and allegedly refused to take the site down when copyright holders asked.

In 2009 during the wake of the original Pirate Bay trial and the jail sentences for its operators, Swedish anti-piracy group Antipiratbyrån sent out a batch of warnings to other sites hosted in Sweden.

One of the sites that initially decided to shut down was known as The Internationals, or TTi for short. In the event the closure was short-lived and just a month later the 26,000 member site was back online and operating largely as usual. The return lasted for more than two years, but then it all fell apart.

A police investigation led to November 2011 raids against TTi in two locations in Sweden, Borås and Växjö. In addition to the seizure of servers housing the site’s tracker and community data, two men were also arrested.

The man detained in Borås was the alleged operator of TTi but interestingly the second individual, Patrik Lagerman from Växjö, was the person providing TTi’s webhosting.

The owner of local web-hosting outfit Patrikweb, Lagerman previously gained worldwide attention for being involved in bandwidth supply to The Pirate Bay.

In the TTi case, Lagerman was handed a demand by Antipiratbyrån to disconnect the tracker. He requested a court order but none was forthcoming. The reaction almost a year later was an 06:30am alarm call carried out by five police officers followed by several hours of questioning.

“Trying to prosecute the hosting provider for assisting [in infringement] shows just how stupid they are,” Lagerman said at the time.

But this week that’s exactly what happened when Lagerman and the as-yet unnamed TTi sysop went on trial for their alleged crimes. The hearing lasted for two days.

“Two men were prosecuted,” prosecutor Fredrik Ingblad informs TorrentFreak.

“The alleged main administrator of the TTi site and the second one – Lagerman – was prosecuted for aiding and abetting the infringement, by renting out server space, Internet services etc, and helping the administrators in some other ways (as an intermediary).

“The rights holders contacted [Lagerman] and informed him of the site and the infringement, but he still continued with his services to the site owner,” the prosecutor notes.

Although the site tracked many more titles including plenty of Hollywood blockbusters, the case itself now involves just 28 Swedish films.

TorrentFreak spoke with Lagerman who said he’d hold back on a comment until the verdict is handed down in two weeks time. Fortunately for both defendants he should be able to do that as a relatively free man since the prosecution are not pressing for custodial sentences.

“Due to the long time that has passed since the crimes (the investigation unfortunately took a bit too long), I didn´t request for an unconditional imprisonment,” Ingblad says.

“I requested for a conditional sentence and community services for the alleged main administrator, and a conditional sentence plus fines for Mr. Lagerman.”

The case is an intriguing one and the eventual decision will be of great interest to other local ISPs in similar positions.

0feb0e0155f2e710.jpg

John Petter, head of BT’s consumer division, has revealed that the company plans to launch a FTA version of BT Sport.

Since its launch in August 2013 BT Sport has been free for its broadband subscribers, while other viewers pay £13.50 a month. However, the arrival of the Champions League and Europa League, which is costing the company £897 million over three years, means BT Sport will no longer be free from next season.

Speaking to the Evening Standard, Petter commented: “It will be a very reasonable price. And some games will be free as well. There’ll be a free-to-air version of BT Sport.”

He continued: “Sports that go exclusively pay-TV are not good for the long-term health of any sport because you narrow the base over time. We can bring something here through a model that doesn’t depend on such high subscription fees, that gives the sport access to a very large viewership through free-to-air. This, combined with a low pay threshold, is potentially a good model to adopt for sustainability in the long term.”

Speaking on his perceived success of BT Sport, Petter said: “What we set out to do was give sport back to the people because, relative to other markets, the take up of premium sports in the UK has been low. Around half the five million households that view BT Sport did not watch any premium sport before our entry into the market in 2013. Our proportion of viewers under 25 is noticeably higher than for either Sky Sports or Eurosport. We are now the biggest sports channel in the nation’s pubs and clubs, which were previously being choked by the high prices demanded by Sky.”

Source : http://advanced-television.com…-to-launch-fta-version-2/

Well the results are in, another 5 years of the Tories

Thanks to everyone that contributed to this thread and poll and more importantly for keeping it civil :14_002:

Closing the thread now as the purpose has been served

The makers of the Indian movie "Piku" have obtained a blocking order against several popular websites including Vimeo, The Pirate Bay and KickassTorrents. The order issued by the Indian High Court prohibits the sites and various ISPs from linking to pirated versions of the movie, but may not be as effective as it sounds.

76278f75e52fa0c.jpg

Today sees the theatrical premiere of the highly anticipated Bollywood blockbuster “Piku.”

As is the case with most movies, unauthorized copies the film will eventually end up being made available from various websites. However, the makers of Piku hope that a recent High Court order will limit the fallout.

Multi Screen Media, one of the companies behind the movie, has obtained a restraining order against 13 websites and a blocking order against some of the country’s largest Internet providers (pdf).

Similar orders have been granted in the past, but this one stands out because of the sites it targets.

The order lists the following domain names: Vimeo.com, Thepiratebay.org, Torrentz.eu, Thiruttuvcd.biz, Merotv.net, Novamov.com, Videotanker.co, Cloudy.ec, Vidto.me, Zuzvideo.com, Video.tt, Kickasstoreents.com and Torrentfunk.com.

The owners of the domains are restrained from “making available” or otherwise distributing Piku without a proper license. In addition, India’s largest Internet providers are ordered to block access to the sites.

a3d03bab686bf1.png

The most surprising target is the popular video sharing platform Vimeo, a site mostly used by independent filmmakers to share their work. While Piku’s makers describe the site as a piracy hub, the site rarely hosts infringing material.

However, there even more worrying issues with the order that will severely limit its effectiveness.

For example, it lists Pirate Bay’s .org domain even though the site is currently operating from thepiratebay.se. Similarly, the domain name of KickassTorrents is both outdated and misspelled as kickasstoreents.com.

bce1a66c6f55066.png

As a result, the blocking order may not be as successful as the filmmakers would have hoped.

According to the order ISPs must block the mentioned domains within 24 hours. A new hearing is scheduled for July 31 where it will be decided if the measures can be lifted, or if they must stay in place.

At the time of writing no pirated copies of Piku have leaked online yet, but if one surfaces this current order will do very little to stop it from spreading.

Barcelona v Bayern Munich (Champions League Semi Final) - FTA HD Feed

7 east - 11153 - V - 7200 - S2 HD

The feed wil come up as GCP PCO HD1 (feed for Canal+ France)

UKIP almost doubled Labour in the poll here now, doubt it will be that close in the real world though sadly