In 2020, the RIAA infuriated many players in the open source community by targeting YouTube-ripping tool youtube-dl.

The RIAA sent a takedown notice to GitHub, alleging that the software bypassed technological protection measures, in violation of the DMCA.

GitHub initially complied but later changed course. After consulting legal experts, including those at the EFF, it restored the youtube-dl repository. GitHub also launched a million-dollar defense fund to assist developers in similar disputes.

Targeting Youtube-dl’s Host

This episode was a massive setback for the music industry, which had been fighting stream-ripping tools for years. However, instead of laying down their arms, Sony Entertainment, Warner Music Group and Universal Music went after Uberspace , youtube-dl’s website hosting company in Germany.

Last year, the music companies prevailed in this lawsuit . The Hamburg Regional Court ruled that youtube-dl violates the law as it bypasses YouTube’s anti-circumvention measures.

Going one step further, the court also concluded that as a host, Uberspace can be held liable for youtube-dl’s activities. The hosting provider received a takedown notice for the website in the past but continued to host it. According to Uberspace, the software wasn’t clearly illegal, but the court ruled that the company should have known better.

Disappointed with the outcome, Uberspace owner Jonas Pasche swiftly appealed the ruling. According to Pasche, the court made a big mistake that could have far-reaching consequences for the hosting industry.

Court Rejects Appeal

While Uberspace hoped to overturn the lower court’s judgment, the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg decided to reject the appeal in full. A copy of the order has yet to be made public, but the German Federal Music Industry Association ( BVMI ) describes it as a clear victory.

“This confirms the judgment of the regional court, which already required the defendants to stop providing the stream ripping software YouTube-DL. At the same time, the general liability for damages was established,” BVMI writes .

René Houareau, the music group’s Managing Director of Legal & Policy, notes that the court sends yet another clear signal that hosting companies of ‘infringing’ services can be held liable too.

“This is another judicial clarification and warning. Not only to the providers of stream ripping tools and the operators of the corresponding services, but also to the hosting providers: violations of the law have consequences and no one should benefit from them,” Houareau says.

Following the unfavorable ruling, Uberspace expressed disappointment with the court’s decision. Owner Jonas Pasche indicated that he is currently consulting with legal counsel to evaluate the viability of further appeals, but a final determination has not yet been reached.

Uberspace’s owner previously informed us that he was willing to fight the matter up to the highest court possible. If the current verdict stands, it’s a threat to all hosting companies, he argued.

“The consequences of this will be that hosting providers receiving complaints will most likely kick out their customers without a court ruling, for things that might be perfectly legal,” Pasche previously told us.

GitHub Hosts Youtube-dl Now

Interestingly, youtube-dl remains online. Uberspace was required to take the website offline last summer , facing a potential a fine of €250,000 or jail time.

At the moment, the YouTube download tool uses GitHub as its main hosting location. In addition to the code repository, the developers also have a GitHub hosted website on the platform.

The current youtube-dl website doesn’t differ much from the one that was hosted by Uberspace . Both have a rather minimalist look, as Tarnkappe notes. Whether the record labels intend to go after GitHub now is unknown. But that won’t be an easy fight.

GitHub previously concluded that the code doesn’t violate the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provisions, so it’s not likely to take any action without the involvement of a U.S. court.

“We are taking a stand for developers and have reinstated the youtube-dl repo. Section 1201 of the DMCA is broken and needs to be fixed. Developers should have the freedom to tinker. That’s how you get great tools like youtube-dl,” GitHub CEO Nat Friedman said at the time.

—

Update: A redacted copy of the order has been published in German . We will write a follow-up article next week, when Uberspace’s owner has gathered all his thoughts. A follow-up will have to wait until the potential appeal decision is made.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Pirates who are into Asian drama and anime were hit hard over the past week.

On Wednesday, Dramacool announced that it would shut down its Asianc, Watchasia, Dramanice and Runasian websites, facing pressure from copyright holders.

These sites catered to millions of users, as is exemplified by the shutdown message on X, which has been viewed more than five million times already . While alternatives still exist, pressure is mounting.

Yesterday, the Spanish-language anime streaming portal AnimeFenix announced that it will also close its doors indefinitely. According to the team, the domain will be terminated following pressure from copyright holders. While exact details are lacking, the operators point a finger at Sony.

“Sony now owns more than 60% of the anime industry with the purchase of Funimation and now also Kadokawa. The call is for you as consumers to be aware of the monopolies that the big companies are creating and through local regulations in your countries,” AnimeFenix writes.

The pirate site is concerned that, by monopolizing the anime industry, legal content will become increasingly expensive. The creators themselves are not necessarily bearing the fruits of this. AnimeFenix’s role is finished, but the operators caution that piracy will prevail as long as the anime industry puts profits before its key assets; the creators and fans.

“Piracy will never go away as long as there are companies with more greed than heart,” the site’s operators warn.

With over 12 million monthly visits, AnimeFenix will certainly be missed by many. However, there are even darker clouds forming on the horizon as another anime juggernaut appears to be in trouble. Over the past few days, GogoAnime, also known as Anitaku, has stopped adding new content.

Together, GogoAnime and Anitaku have well over a hundred million monthly visits, making it one of the largest piracy portals to ever exist. While both sites are still accessible today, fresh content is no longer being added.

So far, the site’s operators remain silent. The sites have been linked to Dramacool, which means that it may face similar copyright pressure. However, even the main moderators of the Discord channel, who are typically in the know, haven’t heard from the site’s operators in days.

“No words from operators,” Discord moderator Undo wrote yesterday, dismissing rumors that the operators have formally thrown in the towel.

On the surface, GogoAnime’s downtime is reminiscent of the FMovies troubles that started earlier this year. At the time, FMovies simply stopped updating as well and, after a few weeks, the site shut down completely, together with many other piracy portals. We later learned that the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment helped Vietnamese authorities to topple the ‘piracy ring’ .

Regardless of the reasons for GogoAnime’s troubles, they are being felt at many other anime streaming sites that use it as a primary content source. All sites that scrape or mirror GogoAnime face the same dry spell today.

Seeking Alternatives

Rightsholders hope that these enforcement actions will drive people to legal alternatives. While these may get a boost, many former Dramacool, AnimeFenix, and GogoAnime users will simply look for new pirate homes.

As a result, sites that remain online have seen an influx of new traffic over the past few days. This will undoubtedly increase the legal pressure on these alternatives, starting the cycle all over again. After all, an ‘invincible’ pirate site has yet to be invented.

On that topic, it’s interesting to note that the relatively unknown file-sharing software Tribler reportedly saw an influx of Asian content last week. This includes many Korean drama series.

Tribler is a BitTorrent client that’s been around for nearly two decades, developed by a research group at Delft University of Technology. The software uses decentralized search, removing the need for torrent sites, and has implemented ‘anonymity‘ by adding an onion routing layer to file transfers.

This technical setup makes the file-sharing network resilient to external pressure. While we can’t draw any direct connections, the fact that Tribler’s userbase more than doubled this week suggests that the recent Asian troubles drove some people to the software.

TorrentFreak spoke to Dr. Johan Pouwelse, leader of the university’s Tribler Lab, who confirmed that interest in the project surged over the past few days.

“Our network is running red-hot, but thankfully it is fully operational,” Pouwelse says. “We’re completely in the dark why we’re suddenly a hit as we are blind to the anonymous downloads on the network.”

Pouwelse notes that Tribler also witnessed a massive boost in users twelve years ago when Megaupload was pulled offline. At the time, Fox News touted Tribler as ‘invincible’ and the software has survived the rise and fall of many pirate sites since.

Whether any of these alternatives will ‘stick’ has yet to be seen, but the recent shutdowns and disruptions show that anti-piracy tensions remain elevated.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Nintendo is doing everything in its power to stop the public from playing pirated games on the Switch console.

This involves sending a steady stream of cease and desist letters and takedown notices. If those don’t work, Nintendo is prepared to go to court as well.

Nintendo Sues r/SwitchPirates Mod

In July, Nintendo filed a lawsuit at a Washington federal court against Arizona-resident J. Williams, known online as ‘Archbox’. Nintendo accused Archbox of being involved in several ‘pirate shops’ through which copies of unauthorized games are distributed.

“Defendant is the operator, overseer, and driving force behind several Pirate Shops, through which Defendant has offered massive libraries of pirated Nintendo Switch games,” the complaint read.

Nintendo specifically named ‘Jack-in-the-Shop’, ‘Turtle in the Shop’ and ‘NekoDrive’, which were shut down following a cease and desist letter Nintendo sent in March. A fourth shop, LiberaShop, remained on Telegram, but shut down soon after the complaint was filed.

In addition to running these pirate shops, the defendant allegedly helped people to obtain and use circumvention software, so they could play pirated games. Nintendo says that this activity was boosted through the SwitchPirates subreddit, where Archbox was a moderator.

“Defendant became a leading (if not the primary) moderator of the SwitchPirates Reddit community, which he helped grow to nearly 190,000 members,” the complaint read.

According to Nintendo, the moderator used Reddit to direct people to pirate shops, show them how to download and install circumvention software, and guide them on playing pirated Nintendo Switch games.

Nintendo Seeks Info From Reddit, Discord, Google, and Others

After filing the lawsuit, Nintendo had trouble serving the defendant, but it eventually managed to do so in August. However, Mr. Williams didn’t file an answer to the complaint, which led to an entry of default earlier this month.

In the absence of a defense, Nintendo can now request a default judgment, ideally based on additional evidence not yet in its possession. As a result, Nintendo is requesting a subpoena to obtain information from Reddit, Discord, Google, GitHub, Namecheap and other third party services.

These companies may hold evidence to strengthen the claims against Mr. Williams and may be able to help identify additional defendants, including members of the r/SwitchPirates subreddit who were also involved in the pirate shops.

“[W]ithout third party discovery it will be impossible for [Nintendo] to ascertain the identity of the unnamed individuals who worked with Mr. Williams in operating the Pirate Shops or otherwise making available to the public pirated Nintendo games,” the company writes.

Nintendo says that it’s looking for limited information that can help to identify account holders and payment streams, as well as traffic and access statistics for the pirate shops.

Identifying More Reddit Users?

In addition to revealing the owners of various accounts, some companies can likely provide more detailed information. GitHub, for example, may know how often ‘circumvention’ software was downloaded, and Google can share Gmail data and traffic statistics for the files it stored.

Reddit may also hold key information, as the SwitchPirates subreddit plays a central role in the accusations. Nintendo believes that the defendant was a moderator there and may have controlled other user handles, or collaborated with other potential defendants.

Through the requested subpoenas, Nintendo hopes to get more clarity and potentially identify any additional defendants.

“Reddit is therefore likely to be in possession of information that will aid in preparation of Nintendo’s anticipated motion for a default judgment against Defendant, and that will assist in identifying any other individuals appropriate to name in an amended complaint.

“Reddit is also expected to have information pertaining to the growth of, and traffic to, the SwitchPirates subreddit during the relevant period of Defendant’s activities,” Nintendo adds.

At the time of writing, the court has yet to grant the motion. If Nintendo is allowed to proceed, it’s possible that additionally defendants will eventually be added to the lawsuit.

—

A copy of Nintendo’s ex parte motion for leave to take limited early discovery is available here (pdf)

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Founded over a decade ago, Dramacool became a go-to destination for pirated copies of Asian dramas and related content.

The site was originally started by a group of ‘students’ who wanted to share their passion for this entertainment niche. But what started as a hobby, eventually became a multi-site streaming operation with tens of millions of users.

Most recently, Dramacool operated Asianc , Watchasia , Dramanice , and Runasian . The domain names used by these sites switched regularly due to blocking efforts and other problems.

Updates on these domain changes, as well as news about the latest dramas, were disseminated through Asianwiki.co, which functioned as an unofficial communication channel for Dramacool followers.

Dramacool Shuts Down

Earlier this month, several Dramacool domains ran into trouble again, becoming unreachable. Making matters worse, the Asianwiki.co information portal went offline too, leaving many users in the dark.

These issues didn’t come out of nowhere. The Dramacool sites have been under legal pressure for a while and yesterday, the site’s operators decided that they’ve seen enough drama.

“We are sorry to announce that we will be closing all 5 websites: Asianc, Dramanice, Watchasia, Runasian, Asianwiki. Due to the copyright, we cannot run the sites anymore. We apologize to every fan that always supported and loved DRAMACOOL,” the operators wrote on X.

The surprise shutdown came as a major disappointment to the many people who had made these sites a regular visit. This triggered an outpouring of responses on social media, mourning the sites’ demise.

“Oh nooooooo this is such a shame, because dramacool holds such an extensive archive of Asian media, it’s wonderful, stuff you couldn’t find anywhere else. I feel so sad that this will all be lost,” one fan wrote.

Recent Legal Troubles

The shutdown message doesn’t provide any detail on the “copyright” issues, but there have been a few recent developments that likely played a role. For example, three months ago the Delhi High Court in India granted a dynamic blocking order ( pdf ) that affected several Dramacool domains.

Domain blocking orders are not new. However, Indian court orders have done a lot of damage this year, also internationally. In this case, the order was requested by movie industry players including Warner Bros, Disney, Netflix, and Korean major content companies, which adds additional weight.

Following the order, local ISPs blocked domains including dramanice.la, asianc.sh, and runasian.net. The order also applies to all new domains these sites register going forward.

While the legal paperwork doesn’t mention domain registrars as a party, previous blocking orders have . As a result, even international domain registration companies such as Namecheap have suspended the targeted pirate domains.

It’s possible that something similar happened here, as many of the Dramacool domains were indeed suspended. The Watchasia.to and Asianwiki.co domains, for example, now use the blockedforabuse.pleasecontactsupport.com nameserver associated with previous Namecheap suspensions.

Dramanice.la, Runasian.net, and Asianc.sh, meanwhile , were put on “ clientHold status “, which is another way for Namecheap to suspend domain names.

With Namecheap taking a clear stand, Dramacool’s troubles grew, which likely factored into their shutdown decision. There may be much more going on behind the scenes, but it’s a clear signal that legal pressure was building.

Many of the movie companies that obtained the blocking order are part of anti-piracy coalition ACE . While this group hasn’t taken credit for or shared any in-depth information about Dramacool’s demise, we are informed that it will continue to crack down on pirate sites in the region.

“The Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment is aware of these developments and will continue to take firm action against operators running illegal streaming services across the region, including operators based in Vietnam,” a spokesperson said.

Update: Gogoanime and related sites also appear to have issues, as they haven’t been updated for days. It’s not clear what the reason is.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office ( EUIPO ) regularly conducts studies to see how piracy develops over time.

These studies help the public to understand local piracy trends and can be used as input for future policy decisions.

This week, EUIPO released another in-depth piracy report titled “Online Copyright Infringement in the European Union.” The research is part of a recurring series which has tracked European piracy rates since 2017.

Last year’s study, for example, revealed after years of declining piracy volumes, there was a small uptick of 3.3% in 2022. This rise was primarily driven by a surge in illegal TV streaming, which accounted for nearly half of all online piracy.

The latest report finds that in 2023 the piracy numbers have somewhat stabilized in the EU. However, it’s hard to make generalized statements as piracy habits differ greatly from country to country.

New EU Piracy Report

As in previous years, the research is based on data purchased from piracy tracking firm MUSO. This doesn’t measure piracy consumption directly. Instead, it is based on estimated visits to pirate sites.

The main findings can be summarized in one chart (pictured below). This shows that, similar to last year, there were an average of 10 piracy visits per user per Internet month across the EU.

In Latvia, Estonia, Cyprus, and Lithuania, the number of visits was more than double the EU average (20+). On the other end of the spectrum, we see that Italy, Germany and Romania are the three countries with the least piracy visits per Internet user, between 7 and 8 per month.

The chart also reveals the most popular content categories per country. Across the EU, 50% of all pirate site visits go to TV content. In Malta, this goes up to 61%, while it’s ‘only’ 42% in France.

Software and movies piracy are relatively popular in Croatia, while Ireland has the highest percentage of music pirates. Finally, in France publishing piracy, which includes manga, is relatively popular with 37% of all visits.

Unemployment and Income Inequality

For those interested, the research delves much deeper into these content categories. However, our attention was drawn to the econometric analysis that aims to find drivers of the various piracy habits.

EUIPO reports that countries with higher average incomes and those where people are more aware of legal options tend to have less piracy. This suggests that, when people have more to spend, they pirate less.

On the flip side, factors such as youth unemployment, a larger youth population, and overall income inequality are linked to higher piracy volumes.

Digging more into the details, we see that these broader conclusions don’t always hold up. For example, the impact of youth unemployment on piracy varied depending on the type of content. For TV and music piracy, higher youth unemployment was surprisingly linked to lower piracy rates.

The study suggests this might be because unemployed young people may live with parents who pay for legal subscriptions. However, for film and live sports events, higher youth unemployment was still associated with higher piracy rates.

IPTV Surge?

Finally, EUIPO’s report makes an effort to capture some IPTV related trends as well. This has long been a gap in the reporting, as MUSO’s data is based on website visits. However, the research now uses visits to IPTV subscription signup pages as a proxy.

It finds that, in 2023, there was a 10% increase in visits to pirate IPTV registration pages, with an average of 2.14% of internet users visiting these websites each month.

Although the actual number of users who subscribe to pirate IPTV services is unknown, a simulation indicates that, even with conservative assumptions, 1% of EU internet users could have subscribed to illegal IPTV services in just two years.

These percentages are hard to interpret without a historical reference. Previously, research commissioned by Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance (AAPA), estimated that 4.5% of the EU population used pirate IPTV services in 2021. This number presumably went up in the following years.

All in all, the research provides a detailed overview of the piracy landscape. The year-over-year comparisons will help to evaluate policy and to determine where more progress can be made.

—

A copy of the “Online Copyright Infringement in the European union title-level study: Film, Music, Publications, Software and TV (2017-2023)” report, is available here (pdf) .

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Law enforcement operations targeting pirate sites and services are often enthusiastically described as ‘large-scale’ or ‘major’.

If reports emerging from authorities in Italy hold true, describing the international operation that culminated early this morning as massive, wouldn’t be an exaggeration.

Operation Takendown is said to have targeted what may be the largest pirate IPTV network serving Europe, authorities say, and the numbers involved are some of the largest ever seen.

The District Attorney’s Office of Catania, a Sicilian city with strong links to organized crime, claims that the network served 22 million subscribers and generated an estimated €3 billion per year, causing €10 billion in damages to subscription TV broadcasters.

Operation Takendown: International Cooperation

The operation was carried out through a collaboration between law enforcement agencies, including Europol and Eurojust, and the Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance (AAPA).

A total of 14 searches were executed in the UK, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Romania, and Croatia. Servers and IPTV panels were traced to the UK and the Netherlands during searches that reportedly took place on Tuesday. In Croatia, police executed precautionary custody orders against 11 suspects.

Across all of these countries, 102 people are suspects in the investigation, including administrators of the IT infrastructure. The authorities say that the main servers in the network were located in the Netherlands, Romania, and China (Hong Kong), although no enforcement was reported there.

The action, which received funding from the European Commission, reportedly took down 2,500 illegally streamed TV channels, plus a number of servers used to manage the IPTV operation. Police also seized cryptocurrency valued at €1,650,000 and an estimated €40,000 in cash.

Prosecutor’s Office Provides Additional Detail

“On the basis of the evidence collected and to be verified in court, it appeared that the subjects from Catania and the Netherlands, with the participation of numerous other Italian and other European countries under investigation, through IT structures spread throughout the world, had carried out the conduct deemed illicit by this Office for a long period of time,” the Prosecutor’s Office explained in a statement this morning.

“These illicit activities were interrupted thanks to the seizure of these structures.”

The authorities describe a transnational organization, operating as a pyramid of suppliers, distributors, sellers, and resellers. The two-year investigation, which also involved intense monitoring of various social media platforms, identified two offices in Romania and Hong Kong, and nine servers said to be responsible for the supply of the illegal streams into Europe.

Three administrators of the service’s IT infrastructure and 80 IPTV panels used to manage subscribers, were traced to the UK and the Netherlands.

Fake identities and false documents were used to register phones, obtain credit cards, subscribe to TV channels, and rent servers. Police monitoring of IPTV forums and various profiles used to advertise the availability of streams, played a part in identifying the suspects.

Andrea Duilio, CEO of Sky Italia, the company that triggered the investigation with an initial complaint, thanked those involved.

“I would like to thank the Catania Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Postal Police, Europol, and the Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance for this extraordinary operation in which we are proud to have collaborated,” Duilio said.

“These results are the fruit of great synergetic work that has allowed us to dismantle a criminal organization that operated on an international scale. Actions like this, together with the systematic contribution of Piracy Shield, that allows us to block pirate sites in real time, make the fight against a phenomenon that damages the audiovisual industry by destroying thousands of jobs, much more effective.”

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

After Donald Trump was elected the 47th president of the United States earlier this month, the world’s largest democracy confirmed a big win over Kamala Harris and a second term in the White House for the Republican.

Over in New Zealand, Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom had spent much of November 5/6 posting to his account on X. Despite never having set foot in the United States, the outcome of the election had become increasingly important .

A Trump win would not only represent defeat for Dotcom nemesis Joe Biden, but also a slither of hope that his extradition to the United States wouldn’t necessarily be seen as a foregone conclusion by the Republicans.

As Dotcom became increasingly confident of a Trump win and excitement continued to build, in his own inimitable style, Dotcom decided to call it.

“It’s over!”

In the hours that followed, Dotcom celebrated Trump’s win, the rising value of Bitcoin, Biden’s demise, the apparent forthcoming demise of leaders in Europe. Only then did he sign off.

After that November 6 post, Dotcom’s account fell silent for the next three weeks.

Kim Dotcom Suffers “Serious Stroke”

On Monday, a post made in Dotcom’s name but most likely not by him personally, revealed that Dotcom had been hospitalized.

“UPDATE: I am recovering from a serious stroke. I have the best health professionals helping me to make a recovery. I will be back as soon as I can. Please be patient and pray for my family and I,” it reads .

According to NZ Herald , Dotcom suffered a stroke on November 7 and was taken to a local hospital. From there he was rushed to Dunedin Hospital for urgent treatment and remained there for more than two weeks. He’s now said to have been moved to a different hospital where his rehabilitation will continue.

Dotcom’s lawyer Ron Mansfield KC predicted that Dotcom is likely to remain in hospital for some time.

“It’s been very serious and we honestly did not know whether he would survive or what that looks like and we still don’t,” Mansfield told NZ Herald.

“Very little is known by us. We’re waiting for reports to come through, but we’re just taking everything day by day at the moment.”

Dotcom’s US Lawyer Confirms News, Declines to Elaborate

When reached by Newsweek, Dotcom’s US lawyer, Ira Rothken, confirmed the accuracy of the statement posted to X but declined to provide additional information. Rothken wouldn’t or couldn’t say whether Dotcom himself published the statement but during the last few hours, the question was answered by Dotcom’s New Zealand lawyer, Ron Mansfield KC.

“Kim’s health prevents him from communicating effectively,” Mansfield said . “Liz, his wife, is with him and she released the tweet.”

Mansfield said that further recovery “is likely” but what recovery will look like is currently unknown.

“Obviously we’re shocked by what’s happened. Hence why the legal team, but more importantly his young family, have been dealing with the health issues before we made it public,” Mansfield added.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

In 2019, Internet provider Cox Communications lost its legal battle against a group of dozens of record labels, including Sony and Universal.

Following a two-week trial, a Virginia jury held Cox liable for its pirating subscribers. The ISP failed to disconnect repeat infringers and was ordered to pay $1 billion in damages .

This case is one of many . Other ISPs have been accused of being similarly lax in their stance against alleged piracy. Rightsholders believe that ISPs are motivated by profit while the ISPs typically argue that they shouldn’t be held liable for the alleged wrongdoing of subscribers.

Landmark Piracy Battle

Cox challenged the verdict through several routes and in August, filed a petition at the U.S. Supreme Court asking it to hear the case. The Internet provider stressed that the current verdict ‘jeopardizes’ internet access for all Americans.

Around the same time, the music companies filed their own petition , hoping to strengthen the verdict at the Supreme Court. Specifically, the record labels argued that the ISP should also be held liable for vicarious copyright infringement.

Both petitions essentially boil down to questions on liability. Are ISPs liable for copyright infringement if they don’t disconnect subscribers accused of copyright infringement? And can ISPs be held liable for infringing subscribers, even if they don’t directly profit from their activities?

Supreme Court Shows Interest

These writs of certiorari ask the Supreme Court to clarify how current law should be interpreted. The Supreme Court typically has a high barrier to accept new cases but, once greenlighted, they could shape the law for decades to come.

Yesterday, the Supreme Court suggested that it is indeed interested in the questions. In an order where dozens of petitions were denied, those submitted by Cox and the music companies were referred to the Solicitor General.

“The Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in these cases expressing the views of the United States,” the brief comment reads.

The Solicitor General is a high-ranking official in the U.S. Department of Justice who serves as the federal government’s primary lawyer before the Supreme Court. In the present cases, it can express the government’s position on the presented legal questions.

The referral signals that the Supreme Court considers the case to have significant implications for the federal government or federal law. If the Department of Justice agrees, it is more likely that the Supreme Court will take on these cases.

What’s the U.S. Government’s View?

While it’s clear that the Supreme Court is interested in these cases, the Solicitor General’s view is unknown. Thus far, the government has mostly stayed on the sidelines in these matters.

The most concrete suggestion came in 2020, when the U.S. Copyright Office released a report calling for clearer standards on what constitutes “reasonable implementation” of a repeat infringer policy. The perceived lack of clarity has led to inconsistent practices and legal uncertainty.

Those types of legislative changes are typically something that Congress should determine, but the Supreme Court can help to shape the legal interpretation of the DMCA as we know it today.

With hundreds of millions of dollars in damages on the line, a Supreme Court opinion is poised to provide some additional clarity in the ongoing DMCA “repeat infringer” controversy.

—

Update: A Cox spokesperson shared the following statement in response to the Supreme Court decision.

“We are pleased the Supreme Court has sought the views of the Solicitor General in this landmark copyright infringement case. We asked the Supreme Court to take this case because the lower court ruling would hold internet service providers liable for the conduct of their users, inadvertently harming non-infringing users, and jeopardizing internet access for all Americans.”

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Under U.S. copyright law, Internet providers must terminate the accounts of repeat infringers “in appropriate circumstances”.

This legal requirement remained largely unenforced for nearly two decades but a series of copyright infringement liability lawsuits, with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, have shaken up the industry.

RIAA Labels vs. Altice

These piracy liability lawsuits have targeted large and small Internet providers across the United States. This includes Altice, which was sued by various parties in recent years both directly and indirectly as the owner of ISP Optimum.

This summer, Optimum settled its lawsuit with some music industry giants, including BMG, UMG, and Capitol Records, but that doesn’t mean its legal woes are over.

Last December, a group of nearly 50 music labels filed a similar yet separate ‘mass-infringement’ lawsuit against Altice. All members of the RIAA, these music companies claim the ISP is liable for copyright infringement, alleging that it failed to take action against repeat infringers on the “Optimum” network.

“Despite Altice’s stated policies and despite receiving tens of thousands of infringement notices concerning Plaintiffs’ works […] Altice knowingly permitted repeat infringers to continue to use its services to infringe,” the complaint read.

RIAA Denies Discovery Requests

Nearly a year has passed since the complaint was filed. Both parties are currently conducting discovery, seeking relevant evidence to support their arguments. For Altice, the RIAA is a key target, as the music industry group was involved in events that led up to the lawsuit.

To find out more, Altice subpoenaed the RIAA for what it believes is relevant information. The RIAA responded to the request, but refused to produce several documents, so Altice filed a motion at the federal court, asking it to compel the RIAA to comply.

The ISP is particularly interested in the RIAA’s dealings with anti-piracy vendor OpSec Online. The company was responsible for tracking subscribers’ piracy activity on BitTorrent networks and alerting the associated Internet providers, including Altice. These piracy notices were then used as evidence in the current lawsuit.

“According to Plaintiffs, OpSec’s system was used to detect all of the alleged downloads by Altice’s subscribers that serve as the basis for Plaintiffs’ secondary copyright infringement case against Altice,” the motion reads.

RIAA’s Dealings with OpSec

The RIAA reportedly responded with standard rejections to many of these requests. The music group agreed to hand over a copy of its 2019 agreement with OpSec, but rejected to share any other communications related to it.

According to Altice, this missing context is vital to its defense. It may reveal more about the accuracy and reliability of the piracy notices, for example, including details of potential errors and inaccurate notices.

In addition, the RIAA should also be required to share reports and other details that provide more insight into the scope and purpose of the piracy notice efforts.

“[T]he broader reports are relevant to, for example, (1) how many notices were sent to other ISPs, (2) how the RIAA directed OpSec to gather evidence of piracy from other ISPs, and (3) whether the RIAA had a strategy for bringing suits against the entire ISP industry, and, if so, its motivations for doing so,” Altice writes.

Along the same lines, the RIAA should also disclose about how much it paid OpSec for its services. The music industry group already shared payments between 2020 and 2023, but it should hand over older data too. That will help to establish OpSec’s credibility as a witness, Altice notes.

RIAA’s Other Enforcement Efforts

The remaining information mostly relates to other enforcement efforts. The RIAA is asked to explain how it selects the copyrighted works that are used as evidence in lawsuits, for example, and whether it chose to extend the protection of certain titles, while discarding others.

The RIAA has so far refused to share this information. The same also applies to details of any other enforcement options it considered, including actions against torrent sites and potential lawsuits against providers of file-sharing software.

“These requests are directly relevant to the RIAA’s motivations for pursuing actions against ISPS, like Altice, instead of taking action themselves to address online copyright infringement such as sending notices of infringement to torrent site aggregators […] or taking legal action against providers of peer-to-peer file-sharing technologies.”

Finally, Altice brings up the Copyright Alert System (CAS). This now-defunct voluntary agreement between rightsholders and Internet providers was previously used in an effort to deter infringement. Notably, this industry sanctioned model did not require ISPs to terminate subscriber accounts.

The music labels have sued Altice for its alleged failure to terminate accounts of repeat infringers, so this information is highly relevant to its defense, the company notes. Through the motion to compel, Altice hopes that the court will order the music group to comply.

At the time of writing, the RIAA has yet to respond to the motion. After that, the court is expected to issue a decision.

—

A copy of the motion to compel, as well as an associated request to transfer it to the Eastern District of Texas, is available here (pdf) .

Instant update: The motion is transferred to Texas (pdf) .

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.