Posts by Prophet

Perfect 10 must pay $5.6m in legal fees following a failed copyright battle with Usenet provider Giganews . On the heels of a February ruling in which a California Court heavily criticized the adult publisher, this week Perfect 10 was described by a Judge as a serial litigator intended to function as a "tax write-off".

576e4c10bae82.png

Adult publisher Perfect 10 has developed a reputation for making a business out of suing Internet services for alleged copyright infringement.

In recent years the company has targeted Google, Amazon, MasterCard and Visa, RapidShare and Depositfiles, plus hosting providers LeaseWeb and OVH.

Perfect 10 has secured private settlements from several of these companies but has never succeeded in a contested court case. The company hoped that a new suit against Usenet provider Giganews would provide a much-needed victory, but the whole thing has turned into a disaster.

In November 2014 a ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California found that Giganews was not liable for the infringing activities of its users and last month Perfect 10 was roundly criticized for multiple failings by the same Court.

“Perfect 10 failed to produce any evidence supporting its claim of direct
infringement,” the Judge wrote, adding that it also “failed to produce any evidence supporting its claim of indirect infringement.”

While that was a particularly poor way to lose a case, a punishing costs ruling handed down yesterday rubbed salt into Perfect 10’s wounds. The United States District Court for the Central District of California ordered the publisher to pay Giganews $5.6m in attorney’s fees and costs.

Outlining his perception of Perfect 10’s business model, Judge Andre Birotte Jr said that the company hadn’t behaved like a wronged copyright holder.

“Perfect 10’s undisputed conduct in this action has been inconsistent with a party interested in protecting its copyrights. All of the evidence before the Court demonstrates that Perfect 10 is in the business of litigation, not protecting its copyrights or ‘stimulat[ing] artistic creativity for the general public good’,” the Judge wrote.

But that was just the beginning.

“Perfect 10 has never been a self-sustaining business, and to date, has lost more than $50 million dollars, if not more. However, this loss appears to be largely intended by Perfect 10’s President and CEO Norman Zada, who described Perfect 10 [..] as a ‘tax writeoff’,” Judge Birotte added.

“In fact, Zada [said] that he ‘needed [Perfect 10] to offset money he made in the market’ and ‘needed the loss’ to represent how small businesses couldn’t make money because of piracy on the Internet.”

Just how far Perfect 10 has immersed itself in copyright litigation is made in clear in the ruling, with the Judge noting that more than half of the company’s revenues had been derived from settlements and default judgments, with Zada spending “eight hours a day, 365 days a year” on litigation.

“Indeed, Zada admitted that, in the past, Perfect 10 has expressly purchased copyrights from other copyright holders ‘because [Perfect10] thought they would be helpful in [its] litigation efforts’,” the Judge added.

Also of note is that in many of its cases Perfect 10 criticized online service providers for not responding adequately to its complaints under the DMCA, but in Tuesday’s ruling the Judge makes it very clear that Perfect 10 is the party at fault.

“Perfect 10 has a long, documented history of sending service providers inadequate takedown notices under the DMCA that fail to identify specific infringing material, and then bringing suit for the service providers’ failure to respond to deficient DMCA takedown notices,” the Judge wrote.

While the victory will be sweet for Giganews, the company will be particularly pleased with Judge Birotte’s recognition of Perfect 10’s attack on its business model.

“Perfect 10’s unmeritorious claims against the leading Usenet service provider in the country posed a serious threat to the public’s access to free and competitive expression,” the Judge wrote.

In a statement sent to TorrentFreak, Giganews co-Founder Ron Yokubaitis welcomed the ruling.

“This judgment is a complete victory for Giganews, a validation of Usenet as one of the foundational protocols of the Internet, and a recognition of the users who rely on it every day,” he said.

“Online service providers and Internet companies are under assault from copyright trolls like Perfect 10, but we have followed the DMCA since its inception, and are proud to have stood up to the meritless claims of a serial litigator who was hoping for an easy pay day.”

The big question now is where Perfect 10 goes from here. With its business strategy now a record of the Court it seems likely that potential future targets will be less intimidated and settlements less forthcoming.

Could you try disabling all your other shares and try it with just that Finland share, to see if something else is conflicting with it in some way ?

I just had a quick try of MTV Sport HD (Finland channel) and seems fine

Could there be any other reason? Internet issue, router ?

Five key operators of the cyberlocker site Ryushare.com have this week been jailed for spreading "depraved content". After making available masses of pornographic videos the popular file-hosting site is said to have illegally generated close to $7m in profits. Site founder Nguyen Duc Nhat was sentenced to 3.5 years behind bars.
610b0ff4b97306f6.jpg
Three years ago file-hosting site Ryushare was a rising star in the so-called cyberlocker scene. Operating healthy affiliate and rewards schemes the site became a magnet for those looking to upload popular content.

After mere months online the site was already pressing the market leaders and by early 2013 was looking to break into the Alexa 500. Progress continued for another year but in April 2014 the site suddenly disappeared without explanation.

Rumors began to circulate that the site’s operators had been arrested but it took weeks for the arrival of an official announcement. The Vietnamese government eventually delivered the news that Ryushare had been closed down following the arrest of site owner Nguyen Duc Nhat plus three of his associates. Cars, motorcycles, and around $350,000 were seized.

While arrests are not a particularly unusual development in file-sharing cases, copyright issues weren’t at the heart of the site’s problems. It transpired that the authorities had taken offense at the huge amounts of “depraved content” being made available via the site.

Following the arrest of another individual, five men stood trial in Vietnam this month for their crimes.

THE RYUSHARE DEFENDANTS ON TRIAL
95a1319c1dbfc718aa6ad5d5.png

The court heard that the vast majority of the site’s 803,000 users didn’t pay a cent to access Ryushare, but around 77,500 VIP members paid between 10 euros per month and 60 euros per year for special access to the service. And it paid to introduce new VIP members to the site, with up to 60% of the sign up fee paid back to referrers.

The authorities claim that this system of commissions, VIP accounts and access to free (largely pornographic) content was the driving force behind the operation and the reason that people took the time to upload so much to the site. And it was profitable to do so, the prosecution said.

The Court was told that since Ryushare’s inception in 2012, 32-year-old site creator Nguyen Duc Nhat generated profits of around $7m, collected via payment processing company OnePAY. Around $230,000 was paid out to four individuals who uploaded around 18,000 porn titles to the site.

The numbers aren’t particularly surprising considering the size of the Ryushare operation. According to a local report the site hosted more than 11.3 million files hosted on 700 servers hired from companies located in France and the Netherlands.

This Monday the five defendants – Nguyen Duc Nhat, 32, Huu Hieu Le, 29, Ty Le Van, 27, Vu Ich Nguyen, 30, and Vinh Quoc Doan Van, 32 – were found guilty and handed custodial sentences ranging from nine months to three and half years. The five also received relatively small fines totaling a few thousand dollars.

But while the original Ryushare operators are now behind bars, the site itself returned several months ago and remains online today. While it hasn’t yet retained its former standing in terms of traffic, its business model appears untouched and currently charges exactly the same rates for premium membership.

Major UK Internet providers must now block more than 100 piracy related websites after a new High Court order. The latest blocking round was issued on behalf of the major record labels and targets several MP3 download sites such as stafaband.info, rnbxclusive.se and plixid.com, as well as a search engine for the cloud hosting service Mega.co.nz.

Following a series of High Court orders six UK ISPs are required to block subscriber access to many of the largest pirate sites.

The efforts started in 2012 and the list continued to grow in the years that followed.

In a new wave the BPI, which represents the major record labels, has teamed up with music licensing outfit Phonographic Performance Limited to obtain an order targeting a series of MP3 download sites.

This latest round expands the UK blocklist by 17 MP3 download sites, including stafaband.info, rnbxclusive.se, plixid.com and mp3.li. It brings the total number of blocked sites over a hundred, 110 to be precise.

Nearly all of the newly blocked sites are so-called MP3 search engines. However, the list also includes megasearch.co, a website that allows users to find files on the Mega cloud storage service founded by Kim Dotcom.

9fa77e9e99.jpg

A few days ago several providers including Sky, BT and Virgin implemented the new changes, making it harder for their subscribers to reach these sites. The other ISPs are expected to follow suit during the days to come.

Thus far the sealed Court order hasn’t been released to the public but the list of 17 sites was confirmed to TorrentFreak by one of the major ISPs, which preferred not to comment on the latest blocking round.

Because the ISPs have given up on defending their position in court, it is now a mere formality for copyright holders to have a pirate site banned. However, the blocking efforts are not without cost.

Leaked information previously revealed that even an unopposed application for a blocking order costs copyright holders around £14,000 per website. This brings the total costs of the requesting parties well over a million pounds.

TF approached the BPI for a comment on the latest blocking efforts, but we have yet to hear back.

—-

The full list of sites that are currently blocked in the UK is as follows:

—

New: Bursalagu, Fullsongs, Mega-Search, Mp3 Monkey, Mp3.li, Mp3Bear, MP3Boo, Mp3Clan, Mp3Olimp, MP3s.pl, Mp3soup, Mp3Truck, Musicaddict, My Free MP3, Plixid, RnBXclusive and STAFA Band.

Previously blocked: watchseries.lt, Stream TV, Watchseries-online, Cucirca, Movie25, watchseries.to, Iwannawatch, Warez BB, Ice Films, Tehparadox, Heroturko, Scene Source,, Rapid Moviez, Iwatchonline, Los Movies, Isohunt, Torrentz.pro, Torrentbutler, IP Torrents, Sumotorrent, Torrent Day, Torrenting, BitSoup, TorrentBytes, Seventorrents, Torrents.fm, Yourbittorrent, Tor Movies , Demonoid, torrent.cd, Vertor, Rar BG, bittorrent.am, btdigg.org, btloft.com, bts.to, limetorrents.com, nowtorrents.com, picktorrent.com, seedpeer.me, torlock.com, torrentbit.net, torrentdb.li, torrentdownload.ws, torrentexpress.net, torrentfunk.com, torrentproject.com, torrentroom.com, torrents.net, torrentus.eu, torrentz.cd, torrentzap.com, vitorrent.org.Megashare, Viooz, Watch32, Zmovie, Solarmovie, Tubeplus, Primewire, Vodly, Watchfreemovies, Project-Free TV, Yify-Torrents, 1337x, Bitsnoop, Extratorrent, Monova, Torrentcrazy, Torrentdownloads, Torrentreactor, Torrentz, Ambp3, Beemp3, Bomb-mp3, Eemp3world, Filecrop, Filestube, Mp3juices, Mp3lemon, Mp3raid, Mp3skull, Newalbumreleases, Rapidlibrary, EZTV, FirstRowSports, Download4all, Movie2K, KickAssTorrents, Fenopy, H33T and The Pirate Bay.

In a response to the draft code tabled to deal with the Australian online-piracy problem, some of the world's largest music publishers have presented a set of draconian measures. ISPs should not only use technology to spy on their own customers, but also to proactively block access to infringing content and websites.

Following intense pressure from the Australian government, ISPs were warned that they had to come up with a solution to online piracy or face a legislative response.

In collaboration with some rightsholders, last month a draft code was tabled by ISPs which centered on a three-strikes style system for dealing with peer-to-peer file-sharers using systems including BitTorrent.

In a response to the code just submitted by the Australasian Music Publishers Association (AMPAL) – which counts EMI Music Publishing, Sony/ATV Music Publishing, Universal Music Publishing and Warner/Chappell Music among its members – the companies accept that the proposals are moving in the right direction but suggest boosting them in a number of ways.

Firstly, in an attempt to plug the so-called ‘incorporation’ loophole, the publishers say that all Internet subscribers should be subjected to the graduated response scheme, not just residential customers. While that suggestion could cause all kinds of problems for businesses and providers of public wi-fi systems, that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

AMPAL says it recognizes that the code requires rightsholders to do their own online monitoring of file-sharers. It’s a practice employed around the world in every jurisdiction where “strikes” systems are in place. However, the publishers would prefer it if the draft code was amped up to the next level.

“The Code does not place a general obligation on ISPs to monitor and detect online copyright infringement,” the publishers write. “AMPAL submits that ideally the Code should include such a duty using ISPs’ monitoring and filtering techniques.”

The publishers don’t elaborate on their demands but even in this form they are troubling to say the least.

While rightsholders currently monitor only file-sharers distributing content without permission, in theory and to meet AMPAL requirements ISPs may have to monitor the activity of all customers. Not only that, the ‘filtering’ aspect would mean that ISPs become much more than mere conduits of information, a real problem for those seeking to avoid being held liable for infringing activity.

But AMPAL’s plans for ISPs go further still. Not only should they be pro-active when it comes to monitoring and warning subscribers, ISPs should also use technology to actively block access to infringing content on other levels.

“The Code does not require ISPs to block access to infringing material. AMPAL submits that ideally the Code should include provisions obliging ISPs to take such action following provision of the relevant information by Rights Holders and/or following discovery of copyright infringing websites by ISPs’ monitoring and filtering techniques,” the publishers write.

Again, AMPAL provides no elaboration, but on face value these suggestions will horrify ISPs. The premise is that after being told by a rightsholder that specific content is infringing, ISPs should use filtering technology to stop its subscribers from sharing that content. Difficult – if not impossible.

Furthermore, ISPs should be both responsive to rightsholder request and pro-active when it comes to the practice of blocking ‘infringing’ websites. Who decides the criteria for such blocking isn’t detailed, but presumably AMPAL feels well placed to do so and that the ISPs should do its bidding.

When it comes to dealing with subscribers, AMPAL is also seeking penalties for those who persistently disregard infringement notices. The current proposals allow rightholders to request the details of errant subscribers after they get caught sharing content three times, smoothing the way for legal action. But AMPAL wants more.

“AMPAL submits that ideally additional options should be available to Rights Holders in the form of sanctions or mitigation procedures to be imposed on Account Holders,” the publishers write.

“Rights Holders are severely limited in the realistic damages that they can recover. Litigation in this area is costly and difficult particularly for the small to medium enterprises that make up a large proportion of all rights holders.”

Describing the draft code as “an important initial step”, AMPAL says that a revised code to incorporate its demands should be implemented in the future.

“Only with a concerted effort by ISPs, Rights Holders and government can the damaging effects of online copyright infringement be addressed,” the trade group concludes.

Finally, in its submission to the draft code the BBC expresses concern that subscribers could use VPN technology to circumvent the whole system.

“The code is ill equipped to deal with consumers who spoof or mask their IP addresses to avoid detection, behaviour that we believe will increase as a result of an introduction of a notice scheme,” the BBC said.

The world's leading record labels are targeting Grooveshark with an unprecedented level of copyright complaints. According to Google, during the past month the streaming service became the 7th most complained about site in the world, something that has caused Grooveshark's search engine traffic to nosedive.

0b05905d5ea12adcb5c5.jpg

It would be fair to say that the relationship between the world’s major recording labels and streaming music service Grooveshark is a rocky one at best.

Founded in 2006 as a site where users could upload their own music and listen to streams for free, friction with record companies built alongside Grooveshark’s growth. EMI first filed a copyright infringement suit against the company in 2009 but it was withdrawn later that year after the pair reached a licensing agreement.

Since then there have been major and ongoing disputes with the labels of the RIAA who accuse Grooveshark of massive copyright infringement. Those behind the service insist that Grooveshark is simply a YouTube-like site which is entitled to enjoy the safe harbor protections of the DMCA.

Part of Grooveshark’s DMCA responsibilities is to remove infringing content once a copyright holder asks for it to be taken down. Grooveshark doesn’t publish any kind of transparency report but there is nothing to suggest that in 2015 it doesn’t take that responsibility extremely seriously.

However, Google’s transparency report reveals that the world’s major recording labels are currently hitting Grooveshark particularly hard. In fact, between the RIAA, IFPI and several affiliated anti-piracy groups, Google handled 346,619 complaints during the past month alone, with up to 10,000 URLs reported in a single notice.

groovesharkWhile the labels have always complained about Grooveshark to Google, the big question is why the game is being stepped up now. Both the RIAA and Grooveshark tend to remain tight-lipped on such matters, but in recent times Google’s transparency report has become a convenient barometer for rightsholders to illustrate how ‘infringing’ any particular site is.

According to the report, last month those complaints made Grooveshark the 7th most-complained about domain in the world, just one position behind 4Shared, a site the USTR declares a “notorious market”. It should be noted that Grooveshark is definitely not on that list, but there are other reasons for Google to be sent as many complaints about Grooveshark as possible.

Around October 2014, Google tweaked its search algorithm so that sites receiving the most takedown notices were placed lower in its search results. The move not only hit torrent sites hard, but also affected many cyber-locker type domains too. As show in the Alexa chart below, Grooveshark’s traffic has also been largely on the decline since October.

8c09e8bd1beb372f4839c6bf.png

While there could be other factors at play for the downturn in traffic, perhaps the most obvious sign that a recent and massive surge in DMCA notices sent to Google is having an effect on Grooveshark’s visibility can be seen below. Early February the site’s traffic from search fell off a cliff and is currently just half of what it was seven weeks ago.

49e317dd0c6996de33120b2c.png

While results are currently being removed from Google in their hundreds of thousands, Grooveshark is far from on its knees. The site services millions of happy users who are currently enjoying a fully redesigned platform which looks and performs better than its predecessor.

One thing is for certain; if the current pressure continues Grooveshark’s own search engine will work much better than Google’s when it comes to finding music on the service.

There are persistent rumors going around that some file-sharers are doing everything they can to fly under the radar but when ruining privacy is so much easier, why bother? For those who couldn't care less about online security and have a burning desire to turn their online lives into a public free for all, here's our essential guide.

Every single day one can hear do-gooders banging on endlessly about staying private on the Internet. It’s all encryption this and Edward Snowden that. Ignore them. They’re lunatics involved in a joint Illuminati / Scientologist conspiracy.

No, what Internet users need is a more care-free approach to online surveillance, one that allows them to relax into a zen-like state of blissful ignorance, free from the “Five Eyes” rantings of Kim Dotcom.

And there are plenty of real people already following this advice. Real events reported here on TF (and investigated by us over the past few months) have shown us that while operating in the world of file-sharing (especially if that involves releasing content or running a tracker) it is absolutely vital to lay down an easily followed trail of information. Here are some golden rules for doing just that.

Naming convention

If at all possible, file-sharers should incorporate their real-life names into their online nickname. Dave Mark Robinson should become DaveR at a minimum, but for greater effect DaveMR should be used. As adding in a date of birth allows significant narrowing down of identities, DaveMR1982 would be a near perfect choice.

This secret codename can then be used on any torrent site, but for best effect it should be used across multiple trackers at once so the user is more easily identified. But let’s not think too narrowly here.

As an added bonus, Dave should also ensure that the same nickname is used on sites that have absolutely nothing to do with his file-sharing. EBay profiles and YouTube accounts are perfect candidates, with the latter carrying some personally identifying videos, if at all possible. That said, Dave would be selling himself short if he didn’t also use the same names on…..

Social media

If Dave doesn’t have an active Facebook account which is easily linked to his file-sharing accounts, he is really missing out. Twitter is particularly useful when choosing the naming convention highlighted above since nicknames can often be cross-referenced with real names on Facebook, especially given the effort made in the previous section.

In addition to all the regular personal and family information readily input by people like Dave, file-sharing Facebook users really need to make sure they put up clear pictures of themselves and then ‘like’ content most closely related to the stuff they’re uploading. ‘Liking’ file-sharing related tools such as uTorrent is always recommended.

File-sharing sites

When DaveMR1982 signs up to (or even starts to run) a torrent site it’s really important that he uses an easy to remember password, ideally one used on several other sites. This could be a pet’s name, for example, but only if that pet gets a prominent mention on Facebook. Remember: make it easy for people, it saves so much time!

Dave’s participation in site forums is a must too. Ideally he will speak a lot about where he lives and his close family, as with the right care these can be easily cross-referenced with the information he previously input into Facebook. Interests and hobbies are always great topics for public discussion as these can be matched against items for sale on eBay, complete with item locations for added ease.

Also, Dave should never use a VPN if he wants his privacy shattered, with the no-log type a particular no-go. In the event he decides to use a seedbox he should pay for it himself using his own PayPal account, but only if that’s linked to his home address and personal bank account. Remember, bonus points for using the same nickname as earlier when signing up at the seedbox company!

Make friends and then turn them into enemies

Great friendships can be built on file-sharing sites but in order to maximize the risks of a major privacy invasion, personal information must be given freely to these almost complete strangers whenever possible.

In an ideal world, trusting relationships should be fostered with online ‘friends’ and then allowed to deteriorate into chaos amid a petty squabble, something often referred to in the torrent scene as a “tracker drama”. With any luck these people will discard friendships in an instant and spill the beans on a whim.

Domain registration

Under no circumstances should Dave register his domains with a protected WHOIS as although they can be circumvented, they do offer some level of protection. Instead (and to comply with necessary regulations) Dave should include his real home address and telephone number so he is easily identified.

If for some crazy reason that isn’t possible and Dave is forced to WHOIS-protect his domain, having other non-filesharing sites on the same server as his file-sharing site is always good for laying down breadcrumbs for the anti-privacy police. If the domains of those other sites don’t have a protected WHOIS, so much the better. Remember, make sure the address matches the home location mentioned on Facebook and the items for sale on eBay!

Conclusion

As the above shows, with practice it’s easy to completely compromise one’s privacy, whether participating in the file-sharing space or elsewhere. In the above guide we’ve simply cited some genuine real-life techniques used by people reported in previous TF articles published during the last year, but if you have better ideas at ruining privacy online, please feel free to add them in the comments.

Floyd Mayweather's bout with Manny Pacquiao set to be screened on Sky after broadcasters beat BoxNation to mega-fight
Sky had been in fierce competition from Frank Warren’s BoxNation channel but are believed to be on the brink of clinching British broadcasting rights
Warren is understood to have offered the higher upfront fee of guaranteed payment
But Sky are thought to have prevailed by offering the promoters a share of their pay-per-view revenue in addition
It remains to be seen if they need to mark another first by raising the pay-per-view cost to their subscribers through their psychological £20 barrier

Sky Sports are expected to be declared the winners of the bidding war for the right to the mega-fight between Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao.
Sky has been in fierce competition from Frank Warren’s BoxNation channel but are believed to be on the brink of clinching the British broadcasting rights for the richest fight in ring history
Warren is understood to have offered the higher upfront fee of guaranteed payment.

However, Sky are thought to have prevailed by offering the promoters a share of their pay-per-view revenue in addition.
That represents a break from tradition for Sky, who normally keep the UK revenue.
It remains to be seen if they need to mark another first by raising the pay-per-view cost to their subscribers through their psychological £20 barrier.
Box Nation had been expecting to add up to two million extra regular viewers to their £12 per-month subscribers.

Sky will certainly need to break the pay-per-view record of 1.2m viewers here for Ricky Hatton’s crushing defeat by Mayweather in 2007.
Those numbers suggest that Sky will have guaranteed in excess of £10m.
US networks HBO and Showtime are sharing the broadcast in America, where Pacquiao’s promoter Bob Arum is predicting a record-shattering four million buys.
If he is right, at $99.95, then the evening of May 2 at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas is set up to become the half a billion dollar fight.

Azureus Software has released a brand new version of its Vuze client which allows users to merge swarms. The swarm merging feature can increase the number of download sources, bringing dead torrents to life and speeding up others.

Vuze_bw_logoVuze is one of the most recognized BitTorrent brands. The client is used by millions of people each day and has a steadily growing user-base.

In recent years Vuze’s BitTorrent client has evolved into an all-in-one download solution, with built-in search, DVD-burning capabilities and device integration

While it’s certainly not the most lightweight client around, Vuze has some interesting options for more demanding BitTorrent users. With the latest 5.6 release the new “swarm merging” feature stands out.

The new feature allows users to find duplicate files shared elsewhere via BitTorrent, and combines the seeds and peers from multiple sources.

“Vuze automatically detects when two or more of your incomplete downloads share one or more files of identical size and will attempt to merge the torrent swarms to download the file faster or, possibly, complete an existing file with bad availability,” Vuze explains.

For example, if you download a copy of LibreOffice, Vuze can search for torrents that have the same files and combine these swarms. This is particularly useful when a torrent has no seeds or very few active ones.

Below is a screenshot of one download being pulled from two swarms. In this case it’s downloading 1.2MB per second from the original torrent and an additional 1.0MB per second from the merged swarm.

503d4f5b.png

The merging feature makes use of Vuze’s swarm discovery tool and finds files through the Distributed Hash Table (DHT). It’s relatively primitive and based on file-sizes, but can be a life-safer nonetheless.

Another new feature that’s worth mentioning is improved support for the anonymous I2P network. While not mentioned in the official 5.6 release announcement, users who download a torrent with an I2P tracker are now prompted to install the corresponding plugin.

5e34721.png

This I2P plug will likely increase the number of users on the network, increasing the download speeds as well. Vuze believes that it makes sense to support I2P as many of its users are interested in communicating anonymously.

“I2P is used by many people who care about their privacy: activists, journalists, as well as the average person. The Vuze user can fall into all of these categories,” a Vuze spokesperson informs TF.

The latest stable release of Vuze for Mac, Linux and Windows is available at the official website. More details on the swarm merging feature can be found in the Vuze wiki.

Thread closed !!

Quote from natlee1

won bonus ball last week, just wondering when do I get my prize I won, as no one has contacted me. thanks

Send a pm to master G or mckee25 and they will sort for you

Quote from smooch

Hi Completely new to this. I bought an nbox 5800sx. Converted the cline from ccam to oscam Got as far as transferring the ecm.info file via ftp Using dcc. I load the file on the satbox restart oscam but i still only have free view? Can anyone help please?

Did the C line come pre loaded on the box or have you bought it afterwards ?

The popular movie release group YTS, also known as YIFY, has switched to a new domain name. The French domain registry FRNIC has informed the site's operators that YTS.re will be suspended by the end of the month, an outcome most likely the result of pressure from copyright holders.

YTSOperated by the popular ‘YIFY’ release group, YTS has become one of the most popular pirate brands.

The group releases its movies on various popular torrent sites and its home base YTS.re has also become increasingly popular.

Over the past year YTS gathered fame as the movie source for the “pirate Netflix” app Popcorn Time. Pretty much all popular Popcorn Time forks get their movie releases from the YTS API.

This connection further raised YTS’s profile and turned it into a prime target for various copyright holder groups. Even the U.S. Government chimed in, labeling YTS a notorious pirate site.

Apparently this pressure has paid off. YTS is now being forced to switch to a new domain after being advised by French domain name registry FRNIC that its .re domain is doomed.

“We got a warning from FRNIC that the domain is frozen and will be suspended by the end of March,” a YTS admin informs TorrentFreak while announcing YTS.to as their new domain.

It’s unclear where the complaint originates from, but the MPAA and BREIN would be on top of the list if YTS has to take a guess. The admin is happy, however, that FRNIC informed them in advance so they have time to inform users about the transition.

“It was very nice of FRNIC to give us more than a week prep time. I see too many cases were the registrar closes an account without warning,” the YTS admin says.

The MPAA and other anti-piracy groups are increasingly pressuring domain name registrars and registries to cut off “pirate” domain names. While not all organizations are as eager to comply as FRNIC, YTS doesn’t blame them for the suspension.

“I don’t blame them for caving into threats. After all, 10 to 50 USD per year is not enough to warrant the hassle of dealing with lawyers and 3rd party law enforcement bodies. It’s easier and cheaper to just drop the client,” the admin concludes.

Despite the unforeseen move, YTS will continue to release the latest movie torrents from its new YTS.to domain.

For its users the implications are limited to updating their bookmarks. The various Popcorn Time forks will have to update their API links to point to the new domain name, but other than that things should work as usual.

Viacom is set to give Channel 5 a rebrand before the end of year and introduce new programming as the new owners of the UK's fifth network make their mark.

Not everything will change though: Channel 5 will continue to show Big Brother and Celebrity Big Brother, first acquired by the channel under its previous ownership, for another three years.

Broadcast quotes David Lynn, president of Viacom International Media Networks UK, Australia and Central and Eastern Europe, as saying:

“We will refresh the C5 look later [this year] and also reshape the content output, bringing in a broader range of programming that isn’t traditionally thought of as C5.”

It's currently not known if the rebrand will mean a name change for the channel.

Viacom, who also operate pay TV channels MTV, Comedy Channel and Nickelodeon, are meanwhile preparing to launch new Freeview channel Spike next month.

Quote from jenseneverest

In the case of the wetek play, i ordered direct from them yesterday and they delivered 10 minutes ago. The plug and batt issue is a pathetic complaint. I would not have expected anything else when ordering from outside UK.

I too would prefur WOS over lava as like many have also had issue's with the latter in the past. So hope they (wetek) go the WOS route.

Unfortunately, some associates of the WOS team,forum members or pet, or whatever you want to call it, tarnish what is otherwise a good reputation.

Excellent post jensen :40_002:

In recent weeks customers of UK ISPs have received letters from copyright trolls demanding settlement for alleged downloading of movies. Today they can fight back. London-based lawyer Michael Coyle informs TorrentFreak that if the accused make a charitable donation in support of his London Marathon run, he will provide his time for free.

trollEarly March, US-based company TCYK LLC began demanding cash from customers of the UK’s second largest ISP, Sky Broadband. In 2014 TCYK monitored BitTorrent swarms for individuals sharing their movies without permission and eventually forced Sky to hand over the alleged file-sharers’ personal details.

Virgin Media customers were targeted by an almost identical wave of letters shortly after, this time sent by well-known copyright troll outfit Mircom. Representing several overseas porn companies, Mircom also want cash to make supposed lawsuits go away.

This week the latter case provided a sinister twist. After TF revealed that Mircom was trying to hide its identity from its domain WHOIS, a reader reported the company to domain registry Nominet. Soon after Mircom.co.uk revealed its true operator to be GoldenEye International, another copyright troll outfit that had featured in previous UK cases. Emails currently being sent to letter recipients also confirm that GoldenEye are handling their claims.

The apparent murkiness of these cases only adds to the anxiety of letter recipients, but today they have some good news. Michael Coyle of London-based Lawdit Solicitors informs TorrentFreak he will give his time for free to defend those accused.

Coyle is one of the most experienced UK-based solicitors in the file-sharing arena. Since 2008 he has spoken with or acted for more than 700 individuals who have received so-called Letters of Claim, including those involved in the infamous ACS:Law case that ended with solicitor Andrew Crossley being severely disciplined.

Coyle says he expected that affair to signal the end of ‘trolling’ in the UK but recent events have sadly proven him wrong.

“I am a Copyright Solicitor and regularly enforce copyright where it has been infringed. People should respect the copyright of third parties. However, are some copyright holders abusing the great British public?” he questions.

The general consensus to that proposition is yes, most likely. And according to Coyle there is serious money involved.

“The amounts are quite staggering. In the most recent campaign 2500 letters were sent out. Typical sums demanded are in the range of £500 to £1000. If everyone pays say £700.00 this would generate £1,750,000 which is not bad even for the porn industry.”

“The tactic is to scare people into paying the sums by threatening to issue court proceedings. If this does not work, proceedings are not normally issued,” says Coyle quoting Justice Arnold who dealt with previous cases.

“This is because the economic model for speculative invoicing means that it is more profitable to collect monies from those who pay rather than incur substantial costs in pursuing those who do not pay in court. Where proceedings are issued, they are not pursued if a default judgment cannot be obtained.”

By now this strategy is relatively common knowledge to those following these cases, but for those targeted the experience can be a painful one.

“The whole process is indiscriminate and causes immense worry and suffering. It’s frustrating and brings the whole concept of protecting your copyright in to disrepute,” Coyle says.

So, with this in mind, he’s stepping up to help level the playing field.

“I’ve decided to act [by offering time for free] and hopefully my small input along with consumer groups can persuade the Courts to prevent such conduct. However I suspect that it will require parliament to effect any change,” he adds.

So, faced with the dilemma of whether to go it alone, pay up, or seek legal advice, those in receipt of a letter can now take the latter option for free, albeit it with a minor string attached.

Coyle is a regular runner of the London Marathon and has raised thousands for children’s charities while doing so. If people want his help in these cases they’re going to have to get generous via this year’s donation page, located here.

It’s a rare thing to be able to fight trolls and support a charity all at once so anyone with a desire to contribute to the fun is invited to do so, letter recipient or not.

Michael Coyle can be contacted on michael.coyle[at]lawdit.co.uk.

The results of a new poll published today in Iceland indicates that the Pirate Party has just become the country's most popular political party. According to the results, almost a quarter of all citizens would vote Pirate today. Speaking with TF, movement founder Rick Falkvinge describes the result as an "extraordinary accomplishment."

7381e93a7ea48.jpg

On January 1, 2006, Rick Falkvinge founded the Swedish and first Pirate Party. The party has survived more than nine turbulent years while provoking heated discussion on copyright reform, privacy and freedom of speech.

The party is currently enjoying its second term in the European Parliament and in January 2014 Julia Reda MEP released her draft report for the overhaul of EU copyright. As pointed out by Falkvinge himself, that fact is worthy of a double take.

“A Pirate Party representative is writing the European Union’s official evaluation of the copyright monopoly, and listing a set of necessary changes,” he wrote in a TF column.

And today brings yet more news which prompts a second look at a surprising headline. According to a poll carried out in Iceland over the past week, the Pirate Party is now the country’s most popular political party. For a party founded locally less than two and a half years ago, that’s an astounding achievement.

Run between the 13th and 18th of March by MMR, a company experienced in measuring support for local political parties, the survey places the Pirates ahead of even the most established of political movements.

According to Visir, total public support for the Pirate Party is currently riding at 23.9%, that’s up from the 12.8% reported in the last MMR survey.

The Pirates have snatched the lead from the Independence Party, who led during the last poll with 25.5% but have now dropped to 23.4%. While that is a slim lead of just 0.5%, it is a lead nonetheless, and the gap between the Pirates and other parties is even more pronounced.

The Social Democratic Alliance polled at 15.5% and the Progressive Party now sits at just 11.0%, marginally ahead of the Green Party with 10.8% of the support.

Today’s results are an improvement over those reported in a separate survey published last week which put the Pirates in a marginal second place. That prompted cautious excitement from Pirate MP Helgi Hrafn Gunnarsson.

“I’m happy to see such a reception, but you also need to keep this in mind. Firstly, it’s not self-evident that this will be the result of the elections and not self-evident that this will go on. It’s important not to become arrogant because of this,” he said.

Speaking with TorrentFreak, Pirate Party founder Rick Falkvinge says the results of the poll are inspiring.

“This is an extraordinary accomplishment. Where we had the proof-of-concept in Sweden in 2009, and additional sparks of success in Germany in the following years, I didn’t really anticipate a Pirate Party measuring as its country’s very largest within a decade of founding the first one in 2006,” Falkvinge says

“The suddenly-within-reach prospect of actually taking up a prime ministry in the near term shows what you can accomplish when you’re calling out stale policies and governmental backroom shadiness for what they are. It also shows how the net generation just won’t stand for the holier-than-thou attitude that’s still being displayed by an old self-appointed elite toward the young future.

“Still, to get to this point requires extraordinary hard work, commitment, and dedication. Far more than just congratulations are in order. The Icelandic Pirate Party is an inspiration for the net generation of the entire world,” Falkvinge concludes.

Voltage Pictures, the company behind the Oscar-winning Hurt Locker movie, must pay $21,557 to expose 2,000 alleged pirates. Canada's Federal Court ruled on the long running dispute between the movie studio and Internet provider Teksavvy this week, a decision that's crucial for future 'copyright trolling' efforts.

hurt-locker-lawMore than two years ago movie studio Voltage Pictures took its legal crusade against pirating BitTorrent users to Canada.

After targeting tens of thousands of people in the US, the company hoped to expose 2,000 Internet subscribers of Canadian ISP TekSavvy. The studio behind “The Hurt Locker” argued that they have a solid case under the Copyright Act.

The efforts led to objections from the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) who demanded safeguards so Voltage wouldn’t demand hefty fines from subscribers without oversight. The court agreed on this, but allowed the customers to be exposed.

The only matter that remained were the costs associated with identifying the alleged pirates. According to Voltage these would only be a few hundred Canadian dollars, but Teksavvy claimed more that $350,000.

This week the Federal Court ruled on the matter (pdf), settling the costs at $21,557. This includes $17,057 in technical administrative costs and $4,500 in legal fees associated with the IP-address lookups.

The total sum translates to roughly $11 per IP-address, which is a tiny fraction of the thousands of dollars in settlements Voltage usually requests.

The Court decided not to award any assessment costs, noting that both parties are intent on disparaging each other’s business practices. Taking claims from both sides into account it concluded that neither party should be rewarded for its conduct.

“TekSavvy, without justification, has greatly exaggerated its claim, while Voltage has unreasonably sought to trivialize it based on unreliable and largely irrelevant evidence,” Judge Aronovitch writes.

In the future it would be wise to agree on a fixed rate for linking IP-addresses to the personal details of subscribers before taking the matter to court, the Judge further notes.

“The best practice, in my view, would be for the rights holder to ascertain, in advance, with clarity and precision, the method of correlation used by the ISP, as well as the time and costs attendant on the execution of the work based, to begin, on a hypothetical number of IP addresses.”

The verdict opens the door for more of these cases in Canada. The question is, however, whether the costs and the restrictions still make it worthwhile.

University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist, who followed the case closely, believes this troll-type activity may not be as financially viable as Voltage has hoped.

“With the cap on liability for non-commercial infringement, the further costs of litigating against individuals, the actual value of the works, and the need to obtain court approval on demand letters, it is hard to see how this is a business model that works,” Geist notes.

Voltage, however, appears to be determined to continue its actions against the subscribers. The studio’s lawyer is happy with the verdict and says the decision “confirms the court’s commitment to facilitate anti-piracy and allow companies like Voltage to pursue pirates.”

Perfect for all those with new boxes and wanting keyboard/touchpad

97a8db10680550494d.jpg

http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B005LDLQXG/

Ideal for easy and carefree PC to TV navigation from the comfort of your couch
10 m reliable, wireless range - ideal for the living room
Large 3.5 inch, multi-touch touchpad for easy navigation
Easy set up with the Logitech Unifying receiver
Low profile keys in a compact design
Works with Windows 7, Windows 8 through a USB port

Box Contains
1 x Keyboard
1 x Manual
1 x USB Dongle
Batteries