Italian authorities are reporting that officers of the Special Privacy Protection and Technological Fraud Unit of the Guardia di Finanza of Rome have carried out a new operation against pirate IPTV.

Acting on a decree issued by the Public Prosecutor at the Court of Milan, 12 Italian nationals and one person of Albanian origins, living in several regions of Italy and Germany, were targeted on suspicion of operating social media channels dedicated to pirate IPTV subscription sales/resales.

While the announcement itself offers no specifics in respect of the suspects’ locations, a police video published today contains a slide showing maps of Italy and Germany and various marked locations.

“In Frankfurt, Germany, the operations were conducted against two Italian subjects, through international judicial cooperation channels coordinated by Eurojust with the collaboration of the State Police of Hesse – Police Headquarters of Frankfurt – through a European Investigation Order issued by the Judicial Authority of Milan,” the announcement reads.

620K Euros in Cash/Crypto Seized, 60 Telegram Channels Shut Down

Police say that the decree issued by the Public Prosecutor allowed them to shut down 60 resources/channels on Telegram and a website used to sell the subscriptions. None of these channels were mentioned by name, so trying to confirm shutdowns or otherwise is impossible.

However, police did reveal that the organizers used a Telegram channel called ‘Impero IPTV’ (Empire IPTV) as a meeting point.

While we can’t rule out the police having another channel in mind, as far as we can see the Impero IPTV channel hasn’t been shut down and still has almost 250 members. Whether any have any cash to hand is up for debate.

Police say that a detailed investigation allowed financial experts to identify accounts opened by the suspects on digital payment portals, money transfer services, and cryptocurrency exchanges. As a result they were able to seize assets worth over 620,000 euros.

“It should be noted that the criminal proceedings still concern the preliminary investigation phase and that the responsibility of the suspects will be definitively ascertained only in the event of an irrevocable sentence of conviction,” police conclude.

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

The wheels of justice in the Megaupload case may have moved at a glacial pace over the last 11 years but there’s no doubt they continue to move.

After entering into a plea deal with New Zealand authorities, last week former Megaupload coders Mathias Ortmann and Bram van der Kolk were sentenced at the High Court in Auckland to a total of five years in prison , to be served in New Zealand.

Kim Dotcom is still wanted in the United States but seems more comfortable fighting extradition than cutting a deal that requires him to admit guilt. Ortmann and van der Kolk had held out for many years, but the prospect of not being imprisoned in the United States was too good to refuse.

Whether former Megaupload programmer Andrus Nomm negotiated his fate is still unknown. After being indicted along with the others in 2012, the Estonian was reported as living in the Netherlands. In February 2015, Nomm suddenly surfaced in Alexandria, Virginia, the district where the Megaupload indictment had been filed three years earlier. Within days he was serving a one-year prison sentence but was a free man within months .

Julius Bencko, Graphic Designer

In the United States government’s superseding indictment dated February 16, 2012, Julius Bencko is described as a citizen and resident of Slovakia. A talented graphic designer, Bencko was responsible for Megaupload’s logo and ensuring that other sites in the group looked good and accommodated advertising properly.

According to the United States government, this work earned Bencko more than $1 million in 2010 alone. Even for the guy responsible for integrating Megaupload’s Flash player, that was still pretty good money.

The important context here is that Bencko was the director and sole shareholder of Basemax International Limited and through that entity, he effectively held 2.5% of Megaupload’s shares. For someone who supposedly played a key role in the most significant piracy conspiracy of all time, the allegations against Bencko were underwhelming and, at times, borderline comical.

Around October 4, 2007, Bencko sent an email to van der Kolk asking for a favor. “Can u pls get me some links to the series called ‘Seinfeld’ from MU?” Less than two weeks later an apologetic Bencko emailed again. “Sorry to bother but if you would have a second to find me some links for the ‘Grand Archives’ band i’d be very happy.”

If being polite was a crime, Bencko had been caught in the act at least twice but the indictment offered even more. In at least two emails sent by Dotcom to Bencko and his colleagues, all were roundly criticized for deleting too much content in response to copyright holder complaints.

“I told you many times not to delete links that are reported in batches of thousands from insignificant sources,” Dotcom wrote, according to the indictment. “I would say that those infringement reports from MEXICO of ‘14,000’ links would fall into that category. And the fact that we lost significant revenue because of it justifies my reaction.”

Fugitive on the Run?

Unlike his colleagues, Bencko didn’t fly to New Zealand to celebrate Dotcom’s birthday in January 2012. That meant he also missed out on a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to be targeted by dozens of armed officers from the Special Tactics Group, New Zealand’s elite anti-terror force.

With his former colleagues’ names rarely out of the media for long, Bencko spent much of 2012 and early 2013 retweeting news about the Megaupload case. “I miss my MEGA friends / colleagues,” he declared in a rare personal tweet in July 2013. A year later, Bencko was posting videos of car restorations under his Pixelhood brand, but showing no obvious concerns about his fate in the Megaupload case.

At this point, various explanations seemed potentially reasonable. Had designing logos and making websites look pretty begun to look less attractive to prosecuting authorities than they had done a couple of years earlier? Maybe Bencko had agreed to sing like a canary in exchange for the ‘freedom’ depicted in this January 2016 tweet?

While that seemed unlikely, almost anything seemed more likely than the Slovakian freely walking around Europe being polite to people, because nobody cared about the indictment anymore.

It was more than 11 years in the making but earlier this month, authorities in Europe organized a smaller armed raid just for Bencko.

Czech Police Executed International Arrest Warrant

The announcement on the Czech police website does not name Julius Bencko as the person of interest but supporting information makes it extremely unlikely it could be anyone else.

The statement reveals that after obtaining information relating to the movements of a wanted man, officers from the Department of Foreign Police (which handles illegal migration, crimes involving foreigners, and cross-border crime) arrested a 46-year-old man in Prague.

Police report that the man was the subject of an international arrest warrant issued in Virginia, United States, after being “convicted of several crimes such as extortion, copyright infringement, or money laundering.”

Police Arrest Bencko at Prague Hotel

The authorities say that police received information that their target was staying at a hotel in the Prague 1 district. Bodycam footage shows armed police approaching a hotel room marked ’43’ at 01:19 on June 7, 2023. A man responds to a quiet knock on the door before the officers immediately push inside to restrain him.

“A sleepy man opened the door for [officers] in the middle of the night, and the police immediately arrested him,” the official report reads. Police say the man “was armed with several knives” but thanks to the “very quick intervention of the police, he was unable to put up any resistance.”

Nothing in the video indicates that Bencko was armed with a knife or that he even considered any kind of struggle. At one point the officers ask Bencko for documents, but at least 13 minutes pass before the graphic designer is handcuffed and led outside to a waiting police car.

“After the arrest, the forty-six-year-old foreigner was taken to the police station, from where he was escorted to the issuing custody after all police actions had been performed,” Czech police continue.

“Upon request, he will travel back to the United States, where he will serve out his many-year sentence.”

The full video can be downloaded here (.mp4)

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

With over 142k members, the ‘AI Hub’ Discord server is a thriving community that opens the door to lots of AI-related content.

There’s a wide variety of information available, including voice models of major musicians such as Bruno Mars, Frank Sinatra, Rihanna, and Stevie Wonder.

All of this information can be used to make homebrew AI tracks that mimic the sound of one’s favorite artists. This is a highly controversial topic in the music industry, with many insiders suggesting that commercial use of these models could breach copyright law.

Exactly what is allowed and what isn’t is a topic of legislative debate. In the United States, for example, Congress is actively looking into the matter through a series of hearings.

RIAA Targets ‘AI Hub’ Discord Server

The RIAA , which represents the rights of American music companies, is keeping a very close eye on the AI landscape. In a letter sent earlier this month, the anti-piracy group effectively asked Discord to shut down the AI Hub server.

Whether the voice models are the main issue here is unclear. It’s certainly possible that the music group views the complete datasets of music posted by some users as more problematic.

The letter to Discord simply states that AI Hub is dedicated to copyright infringement of its members’ works.

“We have learned that Discord is operating and/or hosting the below-referenced Discord server(s) on its network. This server(s) is/are dedicated to infringing our members’ copyrighted sound recordings by offering, selling, linking to, hosting, streaming, and/or distributing files containing our members’ sound recordings without authorization.”

Shut Down Server, Ban Repeat Infringers

The anti-piracy group wants the server taken offline and warnings issued to its operators. Specifically, the RIAA asks Discord to take the following steps:

(i) remove and/or disable access to this Discord server
(ii) remove the files or links from your system, including any mirrored or duplicate copies of those files or links, and/or that you disable all access to the infringing files and associated links
(iii) inform the server operator/s and the uploader/ to that server(s), as applicable, of the illegality of their conduct.

In addition, repeat-infringers should be permanently booted from the platform, the group notes, which would be in line with Discord’s copyright policy .

This strongly worded letter is a follow-up to a similar request sent in late May. At the time, the AI Hub server had 82k users but in the space of just a few weeks, that number has grown to a massive 143k and counting.

Infringing Voice models?

Discord hasn’t taken the complete server offline, as the RIAA requested, but several messages have since disappeared. The letter came with a list of URLs that are going nowhere now.

The reported links don’t reveal the nature of the content. TorrentFreak asked the RIAA for more detail on their takedown notice and whether it sees voice models as copyright infringements, but the group couldn’t go into detail citing “pending litigation”. More on that later.

We can’t independently confirm that voice models were targeted but some suggest that this could be the case. A few hours ago, Discord user StakenS reuploaded a Frank Sinatra model, which was originally posted by another user.

“Reupload because I am not scared to go to jail,” they write, adding that the takedown request likely came from a Frank Sinatra rightsholder that doesn’t appreciate the AI model.

It’s easy to jump to conclusions based on this post, but it’s likely that this voice model, and others, were removed because they included links to full datasets. This is what AI Hub admin “.tea” believes is what happened.

Speaking with TorrentFreak, .tea notes that despite RIAA’s takedown letters, Discord didn’t reach out to the server’s operators directly.

“The admins were informed about [RIAA’s takedown letter], not through Discord though, we heard from the people who actually got the letter. Discord has not contacted us as of yet,” .tea says.

The admin hasn’t seen voice models being targeted in isolation either and believes that datasets with infringing tracks from RIAA members are the real problem. This content isn’t allowed on the AI Hub server, so the operators don’t mind seeing that removed.

As for the users who posted the content, there’s nothing to suggest that prison sentences are on the horizon. That being said, the RIAA did go to court a few days ago hoping to learn more about the alleged infringers.

DMCA Subpoena Targets AI Hub Users

At the federal court for the District of Columbia, the anti-piracy group obtained a DMCA subpoena that requires Discord to identify the alleged infringers. The subpoena was sent to Discord on June 14th with an accompanying letter.

“[Y]ou are required to disclose to the RIAA information sufficient to identify the infringers. This would include the individuals’ names, physical addresses, IP addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, payment information, account updates and account history, as available,” the letter reads.

Discord has until the end of the month to comply with the request, if it doesn’t formally oppose it.

In response to our questions, RIAA didn’t go into detail on the potential repercussions of this action. However, it stresses that AI itself isn’t the problem. Their enforcement efforts are focused on those who exploit the work of artists without consent.

“The creative community supports AI that is ethical, follows the law and respects creators’ rights. But when those who seek to profit from AI train their systems on unauthorized content, it undermines the entire music ecosystem – harming creators, fans, and responsible developers alike.”

“This action seeks to help ensure that lawless systems that exploit the life’s work of artists without consent cannot and do not become the future of AI,” the RIAA spokesperson added.

Meanwhile, the AI Hub server remains online. In a public announcement, the admins reiterated that uploading entire datasets containing copyrighted content directly to Discord is not allowed.

“Please do not upload datasets to the server or any copyrighted material. We have 0 tolerance for this kind of stuff”,” the announcement reads.

—-

A copy of all the documentation referenced in this post, which was obtained by TorrentFreak, is available here (pdf)

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.”

Many ISPs have been reluctant to take such drastic measures, which triggered a wave of copyright infringement lawsuits in recent years.

The driving force behind a series of these lawsuits is a group of independent film companies, including the makers of the movies The Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard, London Has Fallen, Rambo V, and Hellboy. Represented by attorney Kerry Culpepper they sued several Internet providers including RCN and Grande .

The movie companies claim that the providers haven’t done enough to stop subscribers from pirating on their networks. Instead of terminating the accounts of persistent pirates, the Internet providers looked away, the complaints alleged.

Reddit Users as Evidence

Earlier this year, the filmmakers turned to Reddit after they found public comments by site users that could help their case. As part of the RCN lawsuit, they identified several potentially relevant comments and requested a DMCA subpoena, ordering Reddit to identify the anonymous users.

The Redditors in question discussed issues such as RCN’s handling of copyright infringement emails. The filmmakers could use this information to their advantage, but only if they could obtain the identities of the commenters first.

Reddit was unhappy with the subpoena, characterizing it as overbroad and more akin to a fishing expedition than regular evidence gathering. Reddit only handed over the details of one user whose comment mentioned RCN, denying other ‘less relevant’ ones, while citing the users’ First Amendment right to anonymous speech.

The court eventually agreed with this defense, concluding that Redditors’ First Amendment right to anonymous speech outweighs the interest of rightsholders. According to U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler, the filmmakers have other options to obtain this type of information., including through RCN itself.

Filmmakers Subpoena Reddit Again

The court’s denial was a setback for the film companies, but they are not letting all Redditors off the hook. As part of their evidence gathering in the related Grande lawsuit, they filed a motion to compel Reddit to comply with a subpoena that again targets a group of anonymous users.

The comments in question are several years old and were posted by “robowiener”, “SquirtyBottoms”, “Aikidi”, “kelsoATX”, “xBROKEx”, and “Schadenfreude_Taco”. The Grande references appear in the images below.

The subpoena was filed in late April, a week before the court denied the previous motion to compel. On May 8th, Reddit responded, again refusing to hand over the requested information, citing the right to anonymous speech.

While this places the camps back in their previous positions, this time around the filmmakers believe they have a stronger case supporting their motion to compel.

Other Ways to Get Information Failed

In its objection, Reddit pointed out that the anonymous speech rights of its users shouldn’t be violated, as long as the filmmakers have other ways to obtain the information. This was also highlighted by the court as a reason to deny the earlier motion to compel.

Responding to this critique, the new motion mentions that the documents provided by Grande during discovery haven’t resulted in any usable documents that discuss the motivation of its subscribers to use its service for piracy.

Also, following an earlier legal procedure, the plaintiffs were able to contact several Grande subscribers whose IP-addresses were frequently showing up in piracy-related BitTorrent swarms. However, they don’t believe this will result in any “substantive response” that can be used as evidence.

“Plaintiffs have sent letters to most of the subscribers of the 118 IP addresses but have had limited success establishing dialogue with most of them due to time constraints and refusals to respond to Plaintiffs’ counsel’s communications,” the motion reads.

Directly and Materially Relevant

In the earlier dispute, the court found that most comments from the targeted Redditors were not directly and materially relevant to the underlying lawsuit. This was particularly true because they didn’t always mention which Internet provider they referred to.

In this case, the comments respond to “Grande” threads and repeatedly mention the ISP by name. As such, the filmmakers believe that the balance tips in their favor.

“[T]here is no question that the comments are referring to Defendant as they directly mention Defendant’s name and are comments to a thread discussing Defendant,” the motion to compel reads.

The filmmakers say the comments are relevant to the Grande lawsuit because they show that the ISP failed to implement a proper repeat infringer policy. In addition, the apparent lack of piracy repercussions acted as a draw to potential subscribers.

“Reddit commentators ‘Aikidi’; ‘kelsoATX’; ‘xBROKEx’; and ‘Schadenfreude_Taco’ make comments emphatically stating that they prefer Defendant because they can use Defendant’s service to pirate copyright protected content without any consequences.

“‘Schadenfreude_Taco’ admits to having ‘downloaded about 1tb…from torrents and uploaded just under 2tb…’. Aikido states that ‘I have torrented like a motherf*cker all over grande and never seen anything’,” the filing adds.

Piracy Admission?

Adding to these arguments, the motion also highlights a 12-year-old comment from the user “xBROKEx”, who specifically mentions that they pirated the movie Expendables. This admission is valuable in itself, the filmmakers argue.

“Plaintiffs do not have any other reasonable way to prove that Defendant’s subscriber pirated Expendables because the data provider that provided the evidence did not track this film,” the motion reads.

The fact that this activity took place more than a decade ago may explain why it wasn’t tracked. In any case, it’s quite unique to see that comments on Reddit can come back to haunt people, even after all these years.

Whether the filmmakers will have their way has yet to be seen. It is ultimately up to the court to decide whether these arguments are sufficient to unmask the anonymous Redditors, or if their right to anonymous speech remains protected.

—

A copy of the motion to compel, filed at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, is available here (pdf)

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

While nothing stands in the way of a single rightsholder taking on one or more pirate sites, in recent years there has been a noticeable shift towards pooling resources.

For the Hollywood studio members of the MPA, anti-piracy teamwork is nothing new, but for other members of the highly successful Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, collaborating with rival companies is likely to be a relatively new concept. In light of the growing threat posed by online piracy and few better options, it’s clearly one they’re happy to explore.

In March, South Korean broadcasters, including KBS, MBC and JTBC, the Korea Film and Video Copyright Association (film producers and distributors), plus streaming platforms TVING and Wavve, announced the formation of a similar anti-piracy coalition dedicated to protecting local content. Its connections with ACE are likely to prove invaluable.

Noonoo TV in the Crosshairs

Under Video Copyright Protection Council (이하 영보협) branding, the coalition’s immediate target was Noonoo TV, a hugely successful pirate streaming site receiving dozens of millions of visits from Koreans every month. At least in theory, an ISP blocking program should’ve prevented that from happening, but Noonoo’s deployment of dozens of new domains meant the campaign couldn’t keep up.

Surprisingly, Noonoo’s successful circumvention program was eventually self-terminated – along with the site itself – just a few weeks later. In an April announcement, the site’s operator said that the “outrageous” cost of bandwidth and “pressure on the site from all directions” had culminated in a decision to shut Noonoo down. Around April 14, Noonoo said nighty night for the last time and gave one last piece of advice before turning off the lights.

“Please be careful of impersonation sites…”

Left in no doubt that any remaining value in the Noonoo brand would be immediately extracted by opportunists, we began monitoring fresh domain registrations when the site went down. These included noonoo.app, noonootv.live, noonoo2023.xyz and noonootorrent.com in April, a whole bunch ending in .click in May, and then a couple more in early June – noonoo.art and noonoo.lol.

Initially, just one of these domains showed signs of picking up the baton but then noonoo.lol stepped on the gas and surged into the lead.

The site introduced itself as ‘Noonoo TV Season2’ on June 12. It had the same layout, most likely the same or similar content library, but more importantly, the same set of ads that appeared on the original site ( screenshot ) featuring exactly the same gambling companies.

After just four days online, the site was subjected to a large-scale DDOS attack. That was reportedly handled in 30 mins, but the site still wanted to clear something up.

“Noonoo TV Season 2 has no connection to the original Noonoo TV,” the site announced. A business address in the site’s footer claimed that a company called Digisn Mowanda was now running the site from an office in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Whether anyone plans to pay a personal visit anytime soon is unknown, but it might be best to call ahead first, just in case.

Korean Government Not Thrilled By The Resurrection

In an announcement dated June 18, the Ministry of Science and ICT said the appearance of ‘Season 2’ warranted a “strong response.”

“As the damage caused to the domestic online video service (OTT) industry and others due to the [original] illegal free streaming site ‘Noonoo Tv’ grew day by day, last year the Ministry of Science and ICT, together with the domestic online video service industry, ISPs, and the Radio Association of Korea (RAPA), persistently blocked the illegal service by shortening the frequency; such as once a week, twice a week, and once a day, leading to the termination of Noonoo TV’s service in April,” the statement reads.

“The Ministry of Science and ICT plans to actively respond to illegal online video service (OTT) distribution sites such as ‘Noonoo TV Season 2’ based on its experience and capabilities in blocking access to Noonoo TV.”

The Ministry says it has already asked the Korea Communications Commission to expedite its decision on the “illegality and copyright infringement of Noonoo TV Season 2” and once that has been received, enhanced blocking measures will be put in place to disrupt the service.

“During the response [to the original site], we were able to block access once a day, but this time, we will streamline the response system so that we can block multiple times a day,” the Ministry says.

Piracy vs. Artificial Intelligence

Alongside a promise to work closely with the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, the Korea Communications Commission, and the National Security Agency to protect ‘K’ content from unlawful distribution, the Ministry of Science says the time is right to enhance manual work carried out by humans with automated systems better suited to the job.

“Since the detection and response to illegal sites is currently centered on manual work based on human resources, to overcome this limitation, we plan to develop technology that can automatically detect and verify new versions and substitute sites,” the Ministry said.

“Online video service (OTT) content is a precious asset created with the blood and sweat of many people. It’s a growth engine that will be responsible for the future of our country, so it is very important for mature citizens to refrain from using these illegal sites.”

Season 2 Ends Prematurely

Calls for citizens to act responsibly are not unusual in South Korea and in the right circumstances, can be highly effective too. However, on this occasion a national boycott of ‘Season 2’ will not be required after the following announcement (translated from original) .

On the Season 2 Telegram channel , the shutdown is yet to be mentioned.

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

Last year, the US Copyright Claims Board went live . Through this Copyright Office-hosted venue, copyright holders can try to recoup alleged damages outside the federal court system.

The board aims to make it cheaper for creators to resolve disputes. There’s no attorney required and the filing fee is limited to $100 per claim. Accused parties also benefit as the potential damages are capped at $30,000. Those who prefer traditional lawsuits can choose to opt-out.

The benefits of the board are clear to many rightsholders. Opponents, however, feared that the system could be used by opportunistic rightsholders to extract ‘easy money’ from less law-savvy individuals.

One Year Anniversary

The CCB celebrates its one-year anniversary this month so that presents a good opportunity to take stock of the results achieved thus far. From June 2022 to the end of last year, 281 claims were filed at the CCB, with a further 221 cases filed in the first half of 2023.

That means 502 claims were submitted to the Copyright Claims Board in the first twelve months of operation. That’s a significant number, but it doesn’t mean that all of these cases ended with an award for damages. In fact, quite the opposite is true.

Our review of CCB dockets indicates just one case where a final verdict was handed down. In February, the board awarded $1,000 to a photographer who discovered that his work was being used on the website of a California-based law practice. The award was significantly lower than the $30,000 initially requested.

Dismissals and Opt Outs

The vast majority of all cases at the CCB are dismissed or resolved without damages, often due to deficiencies in the filings. A claim against Cloudflare, for example, was not a proper copyright complaint according to the board .

Meanwhile, UFC distributor Joe Hand Promotions settled several of its copyright infringement claims against bars and restaurants. These cases were taken off the dockets as well.

At the time of writing, 305 cases have been closed. This includes 40 claims where the defendant chose to opt out. A total of 197 cases are pending and yet to be resolved. This includes several where default judgments are on the horizon after defendants failed to respond.

Where are the Trolls?

When the Copyright Claims Board was first introduced, there was quite a lot of pushback. Several opponents feared that “copyright trolls” would abuse the system to launch a wave of claims against alleged online pirates. That fear didn’t materialize.

While there are many types of copyright trolls, there hasn’t been a single file-sharing piracy case submitted to the CCB. This makes sense, as the board is not meant to issue third-party subpoenas, meaning that rightsholders can’t file a case against a John Doe who’s only known by an IP address.

In theory, rightsholders could try to use a traditional DMCA subpoena to obtain the personal details of an alleged pirate and then go to the CCB. However, this hasn’t happened yet and if it ever did, the CCB has a cap on the number of cases that can be filed per year.

With 20 claims, Joe Hand Promotions is the most prolific filer. The company requests damages from establishments that stream UFC content without permission. The company also files cases in federal courts but the small claims board is a cheaper option, also for defendants.

Thus far, trolling behavior is noticeably absent. Instead, many claims come from smaller creators and rightsholders, who often accuse larger companies such as Instagram, Amazon, UMG, Sony Music, Warner Music, and YouTube of copyright infringement. Whether any of these claims will ultimately result in damages has yet to be seen.

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

Straight answers in response to straight questions is far from the default position in Hollywood where piracy is concerned. The topic is always controversial, and most of the interesting questions have answers that have the potential to make it even more so.

Whether the details will ever see the light of day is unclear, but the discussions that led to Hollywood ending theatrical releases in Russia in response to the invasion of Ukraine must’ve been fascinating.

Corporations are rarely considered worthy recipients of sympathy votes, but tearing down a patiently-built market that had overcome many piracy challenges over the previous decade won’t have been easy, even if it was necessary.

Can’t Buy It Legally? Someone Will Sell It Illegally

The developing legal content market in Russia has always faced stiff competition from pirates. Improvement in content availability gave consumers choice beyond the ‘piracy’ default, but with no new Hollywood content available to buy, there was never any doubt that pirates would attempt to pick up the slack.

That some Russian cinemas were able to screen major Hollywood movies in perfect quality still came as a surprise. By December 2022, alongside the screenings of Avatar: The Way of Water, people spoke of major movies being supplied complete with Russian dubbing by sources in Kazakhstan .

While welcomed by Russian movie fans, these releases faced inevitable and immediate competition from pirates. A high-quality telesync copy of Avatar 2, presumably recorded from an unlicensed screening in Russia, was among other titles that exploited the growing theatrical pirate market in Russia, or at least for as long as it lasted.

WesternRus: Russia’s Hollywood Movie Supplier

After being referenced in the media regularly but rarely by name, last week an announcement made by Kazakhstan-based company ‘WesternRus’ leaked from its private Telegram channel and into the hands of journalists. Cinema industry publication ProfiCinema identified WesternRus as the main supplier of Western movies to Russian theaters.

ProfiCinema said that WesternRus had been supplying new Hollywood releases that had already undergone localization. Transactions took place on WesternRus’ Telegram channel, where the company would hand out keys to theatrical distributors for use in cinemas for a limited number of days.

“The cost of such keys averaged 100 thousand rubles during the ‘premiere’ period. From week to week, the price proportionally decreased depending on the relevance and freshness of the content,” ProfiCinema revealed.

It appears that price-cutting and piracy quickly took their toll on a collapsing market.

WesternRus: Too Much Piracy, We’re done

In a message posted to its Telegram account obtained by ProfiCinema, last week WesternRus announced the end of its theatrical venture.

“We are suspending the release of all previously announced releases,” WesternRus’ message reads. According to the company, the main reason for closing down is that too many groups are illegally recording (camming) ‘WesternRus’ releases and distributing them online. The company says that the main culprits are domestic cinema chains and other third-party companies.

“An anonymous source in the cinema community confirmed that the struggle of pirates for the ‘treasure island’ – the Russian film market – has been going on for more than one month. In particular, the domestic dubbing studio Red Head Sound was in serious competition with the Kazakh company, and their first step was dumping. WesternRus supported this game by offering a flexible system of discounts for regular customers, but, nevertheless, could not stand it,” ProfiCinema reports.

With little to no new Western content being made available in Russia legally, demand for pristine copies of movies is only likely to increase. Whether WesternRus will reemerge as a supplier is unknown.

At least for now, it appears that despite having zero production costs, WesternRus cannot make piracy pay because too many pirates give content away for free. It’s a claim as old as piracy itself.

Image credit: Pixabay/ Conmongt

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

Over the past decade, mobile applications have become the standard platform for most people to consume content online.

Whether it’s for shopping, news, or entertainment, there is an app available for any type of content.

This shift in consumption patterns is not limited to legal content; movie and TV piracy has gone mobile as well. In some cases, these pirate streaming apps can be found in official app stores, reaching an audience of millions of users.

The App Piracy Problem

Copyright holders are not happy with these ‘unauthorized’ apps, which are big business. In a recent publication by the Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance (AAPA), NOS ‘ Head of Content Protection Pedro Bravo provides a detailed overview of the problem.

App piracy includes legitimate apps that are copied but we reserve our reporting to those that are advertised as a gateway to pirated content or live streams. While these apps lure users with free stuff, they don’t necessarily offer pirated content .

The ultimate goal of the developers is the same though. They want to convert users into a revenue stream, one way or another. Some apps may monetize user data, for example, but for the vast majority advertising is the income stream of choice.

Stealing Ad Dollars

That can be quite a lucrative business model and poses yet another problem for legitimate content creators. In addition to ‘stealing’ content, these pirate apps ‘steal’ their potential advertising revenue too.

“Ad words campaigns are the most lucrative for Pirates. Yes, not only are rights holders losing money from the lack of legitimate App downloads, but Pirates steal what should be their ad revenue as well,” Bravo notes.

In the past, some pirate sites and services have embraced the Robin Hood image, in the sense that they distribute content from wealthy corporations to the public at large. However, the AAPA piece notes that it is naïve to think that pirates are well-intended folk heroes.

“[Pirates] are not charities, handing out access to content to ease the economic pressures. Quite the opposite. Pirates are in it for the money. They are often large, international organizations spread across different jurisdictions, with IT infrastructure and sizeable resources.”

This sentiment is not new. While pirate sites and services exist in all shapes and forms, these operations have to make money; they wouldn’t survive otherwise. And for many shady piracy operations, money is the main driver, which can come at the expense of privacy or security.

How to Tackle Piracy Apps

The big question is how piracy apps can be tackled. Here, the AAPA article lists some concrete suggestions, starting with closer cooperation between rightsholders and the operators of app stores, such as Apple and Google.

These platforms already remove copyright-infringing apps if they’re reported but rightsholders say they could be more proactive, sharing research and information that can help to detect apps early on. For example, by pointing out known identifiers such as pirate logos and names, so associated apps can be recognized more easily.

This implies that app stores should do more than simply respond to takedown notices. On this front, Bravo suggests that it’s key to ensure that piracy apps don’t simply resurface. Verifying the identities of app publishers could be a good start.

“From an App Store perspective, implementing a robust process around the Digital Services Act ‘Know Your Business Customer’ could eliminate a lot of Pirate organizations slipping through.”

App stores could also collaborate with “trusted flaggers” to set up faster and more streamlined removal procedures while ensuring that repeat infringers are permanently banned.

Finally, proactive filtering might also go a long way to address app piracy. While hash filtering isn’t suited for unique apps, Apple and Google could use automated detection tools to flag piracy-related keywords, to spot potentially problematic content.

“Another way for App stores to remove Pirate Apps could be to leverage automatic detection, using defined keywords, such as Free IPTV or Free football, to highlight the illegal Apps quickly,” Bravo writes in his AAPA piece.

All in all, Bravo calls for more collaboration between stakeholders. That includes rightsholders, who can bundle their knowledge, but app stores also have a crucial role in solving the piracy puzzle.

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

The World Cup only takes place every four years so when the opportunity to see the world’s best players arrived again last year, an estimated 1.5 billion eventually tuned in to see the elite square off in the final.

Millions cheered on the French national team as the defending champions pursued glory against Argentina. After the French lost in a dramatic penalty shoot-out, for some it became a tournament to forget. For French telecoms regulator Arcom, the end of the competition signaled the start of research to determine how citizens consumed World Cup 2022 and how France benefited from it financially.

World Cup 2022 – Audiovisual Broadcasting Review

Published this week, Arcom’s study reveals that more than six out of 10 French people watched or listened to at least one live match during the World Cup, a figure that rose to 73% in respect of all content, including replays, match analysis, and behind-the-scenes reporting.

Of those who watched live matches, 90% did so from home, with television the medium of choice for 96% of respondents. Around one in five football fans watched at least one match on a smartphone, with 14% and 7% viewing on computers and tablets, respectively.

Most Fans Watched Matches for Free

Football is traditionally seen as a sport of the people, with national teams serving their countries and citizens rather than their usual corporate paymasters. For these and similar reasons, some countries have laws or regulations in place that prevent the whole of the World Cup from being locked away behind TV subscription packages.

In France, all matches played by the national team must be broadcast on a widely accessible system, at no charge to the public. The same applies to the opening match, semi-finals, and the final, regardless of which teams are playing.

Free TV broadcaster TF1 won the rights to air these games in 2022 and, as a result, 87% of those who watched live World Cup matches did so on TF1, legally and for free.

Paywalls Guarantee Piracy

Of the 64 matches played in the tournament, 36 matches were broadcast exclusively by beIN Sports. Since users of beIN must have a subscription, piracy of World Cup matches was effectively guaranteed when more than half the matches in the tournament were placed behind a paywall.

According to the study, 18% of live match consumers said they’d watched matches using a paid service. Of all live match consumers, 8% reported watching games using illegal platforms, with 5% using live sports streaming platforms or pirate IPTV applications, and 4% using social media, a figure roughly on par with illicit consumption during the rest of the year.

The conundrum for Arcom is that if it decided to crack down on the most prolific football pirates by demographic, it would also be cracking down on the fans most likely to spend money on legal content.

“The 15-34 age group, the leading group of illegal users (12%), are also the most inclined to use a pay option (26%),” Arcom reports.

Numerous studies have drawn similar conclusions over the years after finding links between the most engaged consumers and their consumption of content from both legal and illegal sources. A report from the EU last week found that 60% of pirates also buy content legally.

Paywalls = Profit

In the short term, the answer may lie in site-blocking measures. During the World Cup alone, France ordered the blocking of 83 domains in connection with football piracy.

Arcom hasn’t indicated if that had any effect on piracy levels but a small observation might be that if half the games weren’t behind a paywall, site blocking wouldn’t even be necessary. The flip side is that 15% of people who watched live matches took out paid subscriptions to do so and beIN Sports did very nicely out of that.

“Entirely dedicated to the 2022 World Cup, with daily coverage from 10 a.m. to midnight and all matches broadcast live, beIN Sports 1 benefited strongly from the competition from an advertising point of view. Total gross daily investment for the channel on match broadcast days amounted to around 16.1 million euros,” Arcom reports.

Arcom’s report can be found here ( 1 , 2 , pdf)

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