In 2021, Germany joined a growing list of countries that have an institutionalized pirate site blocking scheme in place.

Several large ISPs teamed up with copyright holders and launched the “Clearing Body for Copyright on the Internet” ( CUII ), which is responsible for handing down blocking ‘orders’.

While CUII doesn’t rely on court judgments, there is some form of oversight. When copyright holders report a pirate site, a review committee first checks whether the domain is indeed linked to a website that structurally infringes copyrights.

What Sites are Blocked?

If a website overwhelmingly hosts or links to pirated material, the site can be nominated for a blocklist entry. This can apply to torrent sites, streaming portals, and direct download hubs, as long as piracy is front and center.

Germany doesn’t publish an official overview of the domain names subject to blocking. The decisions are public and often mention the target ‘site’ by name; domain names, URLs, and even the requesting rightsholders’ names are all redacted.

This ‘secrecy’ is not an oversight but a feature that’s codified in the agreement between rightsholders and Internet providers.

“The domains of the blocked [pirate sites], other domains and mirror domains, the applicants and their violated rights, as well as the names of the auditors are not mentioned,” it reads .

Transparency ‘Leak’

Secrecy surrounding blocked domains is frustrating for journalists and others who have a watchdog function. After all, without knowing which domains are blocked, it’s impossible to check for errors and overreach.

While there haven’t been any obvious errors that we’re aware of, access to information related to blocking would provide much needed transparency. With no information available from official sources, Damian, a 17-year-old German student, got together with some friends and embarked on a mission to fill in the blanks.

After sifting through the data and running domains though extensive DNS resolver tests, Damian launched CUIIliste.de , effectively lifting the blocking veil by exposing all URLs without redactions.

“The CUII blocks domains. Which ones exactly? The CUII does not reveal this. But don’t worry – that’s why we’re here. We’ll do our best to collect and publish all blocked domains,” the site explains.

275 (sub)Domains Blocked

Thus far, CUII has published 21 blocking recommendations on its official website, without disclosing any domains. According to CUIIliste, this resulted in 275 blocked domains, including subdomains.

The blocking transparency portal offers a searchable list of the domain names, which will be updated after new blocks are discovered. For the shadow library Sci-Hub, for example, all main domains (sci-hub.se, sci-hub.st and sci-hub.ru) are off-limits.

The 275 number is a bit inflated, however, as it includes many subdomains such as ww11.kinox.to. ww14.kinoz.to and ww15.kinos.to, which likely exist to counter blocking measures. If we delete all duplicates, we end up with a list of 104 domain names .

Transparency & No Censorship

According to CUII, the blocking efforts don’t amount to censorship, as they only target structurally infringing domain names. However, without transparency, that claim is difficult to verify.

Damian and his friends make this task easier and their goal doesn’t stop there. In addition to providing transparency, they also advocate against censorship and for freedom of expression. The German blocking efforts go against this, they argue.

“CUII is a private organization that blocks websites that it believes violate copyright law – without any court orders. In addition, their approach seems very non-transparent in my opinion,” Damian writes.

To address the alleged censorship part, the site also links to various options available to the public to circumvent the blocking efforts. This includes switching to third party DNS resolvers.

Netzpolitik reports that Damian spent his summer holiday working on the site. While this was a fun project, it has a serious undertone and is regularly disregarded by the mainstream press.

While it’s understandable that CUII doesn’t want to offer a portal with clickable hyperlinks to pirate sites, keeping the URLs secret is far from ideal. Or as the German news site Tarnkappe puts it: ‘It’s only metadata’.

When it comes to transparency, Germany and many other countries can learn a thing or two from Uruguay, which offers dedicated and complete transparency when it comes to pirate site blocking.

—

The full list of all unique domain names blocked by German ISPs, as reported by CUIIListe, is available below.

astrotheque.net
bs.to
buffsports.me
buffstreams.sx
burningseries.ac
burningseries.tw
canna-power.to
canna.to
cine.to
filmfans.org
filmpalast.to
harleyquinnwidget.com
harleyquinnwidget.live
harleyquinnwidget.net
israbox-music.com
israbox-music.org
israbox.com
isrbx.com
isrbx.me
isrbx.net
jokerguide.com
jokerlivestream.net
jokerlivestream.org
jokerlivestream.vip
kinos.to
kinox.am
kinox.bz
kinox.click
kinox.cloud
kinox.club
kinox.digital
kinox.direct
kinox.express
kinox.fun
kinox.fyi
kinox.gratis
kinox.io
kinox.lol
kinox.me
kinox.mobi
kinox.pub
kinox.sh
kinox.space
kinox.sx
kinox.to
kinox.tube
kinox.tv
kinox.wtf
kinoz.co
kinoz.to
megakino.biz
megakino.cab
megakino.co
megakino.ink
megakino.com
megakino.vin
megakino.ws
newalbumreleases.net
newalbumreleases.unblocked.co
newalbumreleases.unblockit.app
newalbumreleases.unblockit.bet
newalbumreleases.unblockit.blue
newalbumreleases.unblockit.buzz
newalbumreleases.unblockit.cam
newalbumreleases.unblockit.cat
newalbumreleases.unblockit.ch
newalbumreleases.unblockit.club
newalbumreleases.unblockit.day
newalbumreleases.unblockit.dev
newalbumreleases.unblockit.how
newalbumreleases.unblockit.ink
newalbumreleases.unblockit.is
newalbumreleases.unblockit.kim
newalbumreleases.unblockit.li
newalbumreleases.unblockit.link
newalbumreleases.unblockit.ltd
newalbumreleases.unblockit.me
newalbumreleases.unblockit.name
newalbumreleases.unblockit.nz
newalbumreleases.unblockit.onl
newalbumreleases.unblockit.uno
newerastreams.com
nsw2u.com
nsw2u.in
nsw2u.net
nsw2u.xyz
nswgame.com
romslab.com
s.to
sci-hub.ru
sci-hub.se
sci-hub.st
serienfans.org
serienjunkies.biz
serienjunkies.eu
serienjunkies.info
serienjunkies.org
serienjunkies.us
serienstream.to
streamkiste.tv
taodung.com
tazz.tv
tennis.stream
ziperto.com

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

Free advertising-supported streaming television services, such as market leader Pluto TV, The Roku Channel, and Samsung TV Plus, offer a traditional linear TV viewing experience, via an app, at zero cost to the consumer.

Despite most internet users being constantly spoiled by the availability of free content, as a value proposition FAST services are undoubtedly impressive. Had something similar been available to the public a couple of decades ago, it would’ve been fascinating to see the effect on unauthorized content consumption. Thousands of TV shows and movies for free would’ve gone down a storm.

In reality, however, propositions like FAST take time to mature and need to make commercial sense. Whether FAST services will overtake subscription services as some are predicting remains to be seen, but the formula does seem to be working.

Yet among certain consumers, platforms like Pluto TV are even better when subjected to a few tweaks. These help a good product realize its potential to become something better, they suggest. Rightsholders disagree .

Pluto TV Plays On Pretty Much Any Device

Edge cases aside, Pluto TV does indeed play on pretty much all platforms but becomes much more pliable when iOS and Android apps are ditched in favor of an M3U8 playlist. Since Pluto TV doesn’t supply a playlist, using software such as TVHeadend , NextPVR Jellyfin , or Kodi to view channels, requires outside help.

Other solutions exist but none are as popular or stable as those offered by developer Matt Huisman. His software generates .m3u8 playlist files for many FAST services; all users have to do is copy the playlist’s URL from Huisman’s site, and then paste the URL into a device that can handle m3u8 playlists. By linking to a live remote file, any updates to the playlist are also updated locally.

Or at least that used to be the case. On Wednesday, Huisman revealed that his playlists for Pluto TV , Samsung TV Plus , Stirr , Plex and PBS , have run into trouble.

Copyright Complaint Filed at Cloudflare

Posted as an issue in the Pluto TV playlist repo on GitHub, the title reveals that after receiving a DMCA takedown notice, playlists for Pluto TV, Samsung TV Plus, Stirr, Plex and PBS, are no longer available.

No DMCA complaints were sent to GitHub. On this occasion, anti-piracy outfit Markscan, on behalf of Warner Bros., sent a DMCA takedown notice to Cloudflare. Despite the length of the notice and considerable attention to detail, Markscan appears to have omitted the basics.

The allegedly infringing URL appears clearly but, after detailing its relationship with Warner Bros. Discovery, Markscan’s “proof to show that our client is the owner of certain rights to the copyright work(s)” amounts to a link to the Warner Bros. website but no mention of any copyrighted works.

The anti-piracy outfit then asks Cloudflare to intervene “to get any infringing content removed,” and to ban Huisman from using Cloudflare ever again. The notice goes on to reference a URL that doesn’t exist and then swears (on penalty of perjury) that the information in the notice is accurate.

Huisman: I Can’t Be Bothered Trying to Fight This

Since the takedown notice failed to identify any infringing content, it’s impossible to know what specific content it intended to target, if that was ever the intention at all. Huisman is in the dark too.

“To be clear, this playlist only contained: image urls and the channel urls pointed to an external domain. You can see they don’t even mention what the copyright material is,” he explains.

“However, i cant be bothered trying to fight this. The playlist stuff is just a pain in the butt anyway and I don’t want to risk what I really enjoy (Kodi addons) for the sake of some playlists.”

After DAZN targeted the playlists in January , it appears that a deficient DMCA notice filed at Cloudflare has somehow managed to finish the job. Or maybe not.

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

Launched two decades ago, Webtoon Entertainment has established itself as one of the prime hosting platforms for short digital comics.

Partly owned by the South Korean company Naver , Webtoon rode the popular ‘webtoon’ wave all the way to the Nasdaq exchange, where it got a listing this summer.

With millions of creators on board, and roughly 170 million active monthly users, the webtoon company is seen as a growth story. While that may be the case, Webtoon’s first quarterly earnings report on August 8 wasn’t well received.

Webtoon’s Rough Start at Nasdaq

Instead of significant growth, revenues were more or less flat compared to a year ago. This was a disappointment to many investors and the stock price fell by more than 40%, ‘evaporating’ a billion dollars in market cap.

For the company’s management, it would’ve been easy to point at piracy as a contributing factor. However, piracy wasn’t mentioned once in the official earnings report. It did get a brief mention during the conference call; Webtoon CFO David Lee mentioned that piracy is a concern for all user generated content services.

Webtoon has a positive outlook on its future and attributed the ‘disappointing’ results to currency headwinds. When currency exchange rates are kept stable, the company noted that year-over-year growth was 11%, topping expectations.

Eye on Pirates

While Webtoon doesn’t use piracy as a scapegoat, the company certainly considers it as a serious challenge going forward. This was made apparent in a SEC filing published a few days ago.

“As the copying and distribution of content over the internet proliferates, the risk of piracy, gray market sales, illegal downloading, file-sharing or other infringement, misappropriation and other violation of our intellectual property is likely to continue to increase,” Webtoon Entertainment states.

“We take various measures to prevent and monitor unauthorized use of our content, including developing proprietary technology to detect piracy and other technological measures,” the SEC filing adds.

These mandatory statements don’t address any novel concerns. Piracy has always been a challenge for the company, which sends out millions of DMCA takedown notices every month in an effort to contain the problem.

Not all sites and services are receptive to these takedown requests, however. Webtoon occasionally has to step up its efforts and address ‘pirate’ threats more directly, through cease-and-desist letters accompanied by legal threats, for example.

Webtoon Subpoenas Cloudflare to ‘Expose’ Pirates

Most ‘pirate’ sites don’t share their full names and contact details online, so getting to these people can be a challenge. Luckily for Webtoon, DMCA subpoenas may be useful to gather additional information.

A few days ago, Webtoon filed a DMCA subpoena request at a Texas federal court, compelling CDN service Cloudflare to expose the personal details of customers connected to allegedly-infringing domain names.

The legal paperwork lists close to 200 targets. After merging several subdomains, we end up with roughly 170 unique domain names, including those related to popular sites such as Bato.to, Mangareader.to, and Mangas.in, which all have millions of monthly visits.

A declaration submitted by an attorney at Webtoon anti-piracy partner Remove Your Media, clarifies that the information requested will only be used to protect the publisher’s rights.

“The purpose of the accompanying subpoena is to obtain the identity of the alleged copyright infringer(s) in control of the internet domain(s)/website(s) listed in the subpoena. The information obtained will be used only for the purpose of protecting the rights granted to my client,” the declaration reads.

After reviewing the application, a court clerk signed the subpoena and Cloudflare now has until October 1st to respond. Judging from previous cases, the US-based Internet infrastructure company won’t contest the request for user details.

Effective, but Not Perfect

To what degree the information Cloudflare has on file will help Webtoon’s enforcement efforts has yet to be seen. Operators of pirate sites are known to use false identities and some are aware that their personal data can be discovered though DMCA subpoenas.

According to Webtoon’s previous experience, these legal efforts can certainly pay off. Last year, the company targeted 360 pirate domain names through a similar subpoena, which resulted in the shutdown of several sites.

Webtoon’s own reports suggested that 150 ‘sites’ went offline after they were targeted though the Cloudflare subpoena.

“After three months of hard work by Naver Webtoon, about 150 overseas illegal sites stopped operating. This is the result of Naver Webtoon’s action to issue a ‘Subpoena’ through a U.S. court, the first in the webtoon industry,” the company wrote in November.

Those shutdowns included many prominent pirate sites including Aquamanga.com, which had more than 60 million monthly visits at its peak.

Time will tell if the most recent subpoena produces similar results but as long as it leads to the shutdown of sizable pirate sites, Webtoon will likely continue these anti-piracy efforts moving forward.

—-

A copy of the subpoena application, as well as some key exhibits is available here (pdf) . A copy of the signed DMCA subpoena can be found here (pdf) . A full list of all included domains, minus some duplicates, is included below.

1manga.co
1manhwa.com
1stkissmanga.io
1stkissmanga.me
astrascans.org
asurahunter.com
asuratoon.com
bacakomik.my.id
bacakomik.net
bacamanga.id
bato.to
burningtoon.com
chapmanga.net
clover-manga.com
cn.webmota.com
coffeemanga.io
comic24hnn.com
cosmicscans.id
doombreaker.com
doombreaker.org
dsectcomics.org
earlym.org
emperor-scan.com
emperorscan.net
enryumanga.com
eztoon101.com
fecomicc.xyz
flamecomics.me
freecomiconline.me
freemanga.me
fcmanga.net
god-manga.com
haremscann.es
harimanga.com
hippo-manga.com
hivetoon.com
hwago.org
immortalupdates.com
infinitelevelup.com
jimanga.com
joji-manga.com
kaiscans.org
kanmanhuala.cc
kingofmanga.com
klikmanga.id
komik20.com
komikcast.cafe
komikcast.cz
komikdaily.my.id
komikid.com
komikindo.co
komikindo.moe
komiku.com
komikuwu.com
kumomanga.com
kunmanga.com
kunmanga.to
lectormiau.com
leerolymp.com
likemanga.io
lscomic.com
lami-manga.com
luminous-scans.com
luxmanga.net
mafia-manga.com
manga-lucky.com
manga-za.com
manga18.me
manga18fx.com
mangabtt.com
mangaclash.com
mangadass.com
mangadex.tv
mangadop.net
mangaeffect.com
mangaesp.co
mangaextreme.com
mangafire.to
mangafox.fun
mangagalaxy.me
mangahasu.se
mangaindo.org
mangakatana.com
mangakakalot.tv
mangakakalot.net
mangakakalot.nl
mangakomi.io
mangaku.io
mangamelo.tv
mangamew.com
manganelo.tv
mangapanda.in
mangapill.com
mangaread.org
mangareader.cc
mangareader.to
mangarolls.com
mangascan.cc
mangatale.co
mangatown.com
mangatv.net
mangatx.to
mangauwu.com
manhuafast.top
manhuazone.com
manhwa-thailand.com
manhwa18.cc
manhwabtt.com
manhwaclan.com
manhwafull.net
manhwanew.com
manhwatop.to
manhwatube.com
mcreader.net
mercenary-manga.com
miku-manga.com
manytoon.me
murim-manga.com
murimrpgsimulation.com
murimscan.run
nanomachinemanga.com
nanomachinenow.com
natsu.id
niadd.com
night-scans.com
ninemanga.com
nitroscans.online
oktoon.com
omniscient-readersviewpoint.com
paragonscans.com
ped-manga.com
popsmanga.com
quest-supremacy.com
questismmanga.com
ranker-manga.com
raw.senmanga.com
rawrmanga.com
read-lookism.com
readcomicmanga.com
readrealityquest.com
regressorofthefallenfamily.com
retsu.co
romantikmanga.com
rose-manga.com
shibamanga.com
solo-max.com
spy-manga.com
teamxnovel.com
templescan.net
tenshi.id
thebreakermanhwa.com
thegodofhighschool.online
thetowerofgod.com
thunderscans.com
toomtam-manga.com
toongod.cc
toonily.me
towerofgodmanhwa.com
tukangkomik.com
tusmangas.org
visortmo.ws
webtoonhatti.net
webtoonscan.com
weimanga.com
weakherochapters.com
windbreakermanga.com
xenon-manga.com
xn--72ca0fwcc.net
xn--vv4b11c.com
yaoiscan.com
zahard.xyz

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

For companies reliant on sales of digital products delivered via the internet, any level of success is likely to face not just unlicensed competition, but rivals offering identical products with a price tag marked ‘free’.

How to tackle this threat depends on the product, the audience, and the location and nature of pirate sites and services active in the niche. Current thinking suggests that companies with synergies can benefit by pooling resources, with the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment perhaps the most obvious example.

Kakao Entertainment’s approach to content protection is somewhat more bespoke. The company’s ‘P.CoK’ anti-piracy unit stands out for engaging pirates head-on. Most visible on social media, P.CoK claims to recruit webtoon fans as undercover operatives and recently offered rewards for those willing to blow pirates’ cover .

Kakao’s latest anti-piracy report reveals the results of various initiatives for the first six months of 2024.

P.CoK Anti-Piracy Whitepaper Vol.5

Having previously produced four comprehensive reports, Kakao’s fifth edition covers the period January to June 2024. During that period the company says that technical systems were enhanced while outreach to rightsholders, governments, and other stakeholders, helped in various ways.

“During the first half of 2024, Kakao Entertainment Illegal Distribution Response Team (P.CoK) expanded its monitoring countries and its scope, established its own identification system for illegal site operators, and engaged in more proactive initiatives to enhance copyright awareness,” the paper begins.

“P.CoK conducted various interviews with copyright industry stakeholders such as national governments, copyright agencies, content providers (CPs), investigative agencies, and creators.”

From these interviews, Kakao says it derived “important insights” regarding industry-level solidarity and the value of “collective responses to illegal distribution.”

Results for January-June 2024

During the first six months of the year, P.CoK says that its “sophisticated and tailored monitoring strategies” enabled it to identify the operators of 31 illegal sites/services with seven of those shutting down as a result.

One of those platforms was reader app Tachiyomi, interest in which soared when the project was initially taken down . The full report (available in Korean only) reveals communication from Kakao to Tachiyomi’s developer, apparently in response to what the company perceived as insufficient compliance.

Warning clarification….

The report also details actions currently underway against three major sites. None of are named in full, but for those desperate to know, the descriptions in the report should be sufficient to identify at least two.

Legal Action Pending Against Three Major Sites

Summary of key details/allegations contained in the report, including joint action featuring P.CoK and Japan-based anti-piracy group CODA:

Site ‘M’

• Site ‘M’ is the world’s No. 1 manga piracy site based on traffic and number of works
• Site ‘M’ has consistently failed to respond to warning letters from P.CoK
• P.CoK says it has identified three major operators, including the creator of Site ‘M’
• Joint Korea/Japan legal action in an unidentified country, targeting operator of Site ‘M’

***scans

• ***scans has an English-speaking translation group ranked in the top 5 in the world
• ***scans continuously carries out illegal translation / distribution
• Translated webtoons are often illegally distributed on YouTube and Facebook.
• ***scans has been taken over by an unnamed overseas comics company
• Company hired key managers of existing translation group, continues illegal distribution
• Legal action being prepared against ***scans and the company

***manhua

• ***manhua is a large Chinese site, distributing illegal translations throughout China
• Systematic illegal distribution through clone sites that are inaccessible in Korea
• ***manhua has ignored multiple warnings
• Civil lawsuit being prepared in cooperation with legal Chinese platforms

P.CoK’s Fifth Anti-Piracy White Paper is available here (pdf, Korean)

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

The inception and early years of The Pirate Bay are an intriguing chapter of the Internet’s history.

While most pirate site operators hid in the shadows, Pirate Bay’s founders were public figures who openly taunted the entertainment industries.

This chapter didn’t end as planned for Fredrik Neij, Peter Sunde, and Gotffrid Svartholm, who were eventually sentenced to prison . By then, however, they had already sparked a digital and political revolution, the impact of which is still felt today.

Some have argued that without the meteoric rise of the notorious torrent site, the entertainment industries would not have embraced services such as Netflix and Spotify so easily.

Pirate Bay TV Series

A few years ago, news broke that The Pirate Bay story was being turned into a TV series . Written by Piotr Marciniak and directed by Jens Sjögren, who also made the “I am Zlatan” documentary, production was in the hands of B-Reel Films, working for the Swedish broadcaster SVT.

American distribution company Dynamic Television scooped up worldwide rights. As far as we know, international deals have not yet been announced. The Swedish premiere on November 8 is coming closer, however, and a few days ago SVT released an official teaser.

The founders of The Pirate Bay – Anakata, Brokep and Tiamo – are played by Arvid Swedrup, Simon Greger Carlsson and Willjam Lempling. The teaser doesn’t give away much, but it’s interesting that one of The Pirate Bay’s infamous responses to legal threats features prominently.

The teaser quotes from Anakata’s response to a letter from DreamWorks, written twenty years ago. The movie company sent a DMCA takedown notice requesting the removal of a torrent for the film Shrek 2, but the reply was not what they had hoped for.

“As you may or may not be aware, Sweden is not a state in the United States of America. Sweden is a country in northern Europe. Unless you figured it out by now, US law does not apply here,” Anakata wrote.

“It is the opinion of us and our lawyers that you are ……. morons, and that you should please go sodomize yourself with retractable batons.”

TPB Founders Not Involved

The response was public information and made it into the series. Whether there will be any new revelations has yet to be seen, however, as none of the site’s founders were actively involved in production.

Instead, the producers used interviews with other people involved, plus the vast amount of public information available on the Internet. That includes the infamous responses to legal threats.

Time will tell how the producers and director have decided to tell this story. Production took place in Stockholm, Sweden, but also ventured to other countries, including Chile and Thailand, where Fredrik Neij was arrested and paraded in front of the press in 2014.

Pirating The Pirate Bay?

One interesting side story is the fact that the “rights” to the Pirate Bay series are now being ‘sold’. As mentioned earlier, Dynamic Television has the global distribution rights but they have yet to announce any international deals.

For now, it seems that ‘pirate’ releases may beat the official channels in quite a few countries, as unauthorized copies of the series are likely to surface on The Pirate Bay this fall; if only to make a point.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise to the makers and rightsholders, of course. We don’t expect many complaints either. After all, The Pirate Bay’s notorious track record is why these rightsholders are generating revenue today. And to bring things full-circle, they’re not sharing any of the money.

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

For many traditional newspapers reliant on sales of a physical product, the rise of the internet as an integrated publishing, distribution, and content consumption platform, disrupted almost everything.

With new opportunities came new challenges. Popularity of free-to-consume digital versions had a tendency to cannibalize print sales. Advertising revenue that once kept digital publications online, later began to diminish. That was partly explained by the rise of browser-based ad blocking software, itself a response to the rise of aggressive and intrusive advertising.

When publications of all kinds began putting content behind paywalls, accessible only by those with a paid subscription, that helped some publications to survive, even thrive in some cases. For readers unable or unwilling to commit to a subscription, technical solutions were available. Bypass Paywalls Clean (BPC) is probably the most famous of them all.

Publishers Run Out Of Patience

Available for Chrome and Firefox, BPC is an easily-installed browser extension that enables users to bypass paywalls and access content without paying for the privilege.

For publishers hoping to increase revenue where advertising had previously failed, the extension is seen as financially problematic. In April, a takedown notice targeted BPC on developer platform GitLab; the main repo was taken down and never reappeared.

On Monday, another takedown notice targeted BPC’s repo on GitHub. Unlike the GitLab notice, full details of who sent the complaint and the legal basis cited for BPC’s removal, we made available under GitHub’s transparency policy.

News Media Alliance (NM/A), an organization that represents the interests of 2,200 publishers of various kinds, initially wrote letters to GitHub. The organization explained that its complaint wasn’t a straightforward copyright infringement matter actionable under Section 512 of the DMCA.

Credit: News Media Alliance

The notification published yesterday signaled the end of that process and explains the basis for NM/A’s complaint.

“The NM/A represents over 2,200 news, magazine, and digital media publishers in the United States and internationally on all matters affecting the publishers’ ability to provide essential services to their communities,” the notice reads.

“N/MA’s members publish copyrighted content on websites protected by paywalls which the technology identified below [BPC] circumvents. NM/A submits this notice to further the interest of its members and to inform GitHub that the identified technology violates Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which prohibits circumvention technology.”

The N/MA Complaint Against BPC

N/MA’s correspondence identified a total of four “unlawful products” titled bypass-paywalls-chrome, bypass-paywalls-firefox, bpc_updates, and bypass-paywalls-clean-filters , each in their own repository. While most takedown requests claim that the targeted content is an infringing copy of a copyrighted work, the N/MA complaint centers on software that facilitates access to copyrighted content, by circumventing technological measures.

“The precise paywall technology deployed by N/MA members differs from member to member, and from site to site, with some using [redacted by GitHub] and others using hard paywalls (where content is not available until such authentication),” N/MA explains.

“Regardless, N/MA members deploy password-protected sign-in technology to allow subscriber-only access to its protected content, either for all content or after a user has accessed a certain number of articles. These password requirements clearly suffice as technological protection measures within the meaning of the DMCA.”

N/MA goes on to claim that BPC provides access to paywalled content in one of two ways, depending on paywall type. One method seems to have been redacted while the other is left intact.

“For hard paywalls, it is our understanding that the identified Bypass Paywalls technology automatically scans web archives for a crawled version of the protected content and displays that content,” N/MA writes.

“Unlawful Anti-Circumvention Technologies”

The legislation at the root of the N/MA complaint is also detailed in the takedown notice.

“The ‘Bypass Paywalls’ technologies that GitHub, Inc. offers on its site are unlawful anti-circumvention technologies under the DMCA. See 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1) . As the DMCA makes clear, any technology or product designed to ‘circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a [copyrighted] work’ is a prohibited anti-circumvention tool,” the notice states.

Under 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(3)(B) , a technological measure “effectively controls access to a work” if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.

“The ‘Bypass Paywalls’ technology, by its own terms, is a technology created to ‘bypass’ our members’ paywalls. The technology, moreover, falls within the precise category of technologies that motivated the enactment of anti circumvention provisions in the first place.”

Anti-Circumvention Claim Taken as Valid

When rightsholders allege violations of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provisions, GitHub carefully reviews those claims and where appropriate, provides repository owners with a time-limited opportunity to make changes to ensure compliance with the law.

While that included the owner of the four repositories mentioned earlier, GitHub determined that a total of 3,879 repositories were affected by the same claims.

In the absence of changes being made, GitHub processed the takedown notice against the entire network, which disabled 3,879 repositories, inclusive of the parent repository.

While this means there’s unlikely to be a future for BPC on GitHub, its future in general is unknown. Some projects are able to continue on other platforms but since BPC requires maintenance to function at its best, that may limit its options moving forward.

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

Creative Content Australia (CCA) has just released the 2023 edition of its Australian Piracy Behaviors and Attitudes survey.

Research for ‘wave 15’ was carried out nationally between October 3 and October 9, 2023, among 1,293 adult respondents (18+). The results of the survey arrive just a few months after the publication of broader research carried out on behalf of the Australian government.

Both reports broadly agree that around four-in-ten Aussies pirate (or have pirated) small to large amounts of content with varying frequency. The CCA survey reports a “continued downward piracy trend in recent years, noting that frequency was also down in 2023.

Reasons For Pirating Less: Convenient Access to Legal Content

A question directed at the 52% of respondents who claim have pirated less during the last year, reads as follows: Which of the following reasons best explain why you think you are downloading or streaming pirated content less than 12 months ago?

Source: CCA Piracy Behaviors and Attitudes Survey 2023 ( pdf )

Cited by 64% of respondents from the ‘pirating less’ category, “I have access to enough content via paid services” predictably takes the top slot, showing that meeting or exceeding consumer demands is the most effective anti-piracy mechanism there is.

In second position, “It takes too much time and effort to find pirated content these days” was cited by 36% of respondents. This suggests that when having “enough content via paid services” (#1, 64%) is combined with frustrated access to pirated content (#2, 36%), all respondents who pirated less over the last year responded positively when presented with easily accessed legal content.

Does Site-Blocking Have an Effective Counterpart?

The fifth most-cited reason for pirating less is directly related to “too much time/effort to find pirated content” mentioned above. Pirated content has only become harder to find due to outside interference and in Australia, site-blocking is persistent. That 19% of the ‘pirating less’ group cited site-blocking as a reason isn’t a particularly big surprise.

However, since respondents were able to select more than one reason from the list, if the 19% who cited site-blocking responded consistently, they likely would’ve selected “too much time/effort” as well. The figures show that 36% selected the latter, while site-blocking alone managed just 19%, or close to half the number claiming that piracy fails the time/effort test.

Given that unblocked pirate streaming portals are easy to find, tend to carry all content, and don’t require payment or an account, even services like Netflix would struggle to compete on the ‘time and effort’ front. So if we rule out extra convenience offered by legal platforms, that raises the possibility of other anti-piracy measures accounting for the 17% gap between 19% (blocking) and 36% (time/effort).

Removal of blocked sites from Google search results may be a candidate, likewise anti-piracy measures on social media. Here, however, the data is too limited to draw any firm conclusion.

Before moving on, the third most popular reason cited by the ‘pirating less’ group is “I felt bad about pirating.” That 22% felt guilty about some aspect of not paying for content seems perfectly reasonable; at least if we ignore the fact that they didn’t feel guilty enough to stop altogether.

Cybersecurity: Hacking, Malware, and….Poor Viewing Quality?

Creative Content Australia operates its main site , Content Cafe , and also The Price of Piracy , which carries messaging that dovetails perfectly with StreamSafely in the United States, and BeStreamWise in the UK.

In addition to promoting its ‘Spin the Pirate Wheel’ campaign, a conclusion drawn from the survey also features on the front page.

Image credit: The Price of Piracy ( homepage )

Since “2 million” appears nowhere in the survey, we have to assume this is an extrapolation of the responses provided by pirates.

According to the footer of slide 45, which covers “pirates experiencing cyber security issues such as hacking,” the base was those who experienced a blocked site, of which 92 were ‘persistent pirates’ (one or more pirate activities per week) and 143 were deemed ‘casual’ (one or more activities monthly or less often) – 235 pirates in total.

The question asked was actually quite specific: “Have you ever experienced any of the following when you have accessed pirated content on any device via apps / add-ons?”

In this context the inclusion of ‘poor viewing quality’ as a cybersecurity issue is bewildering on so many levels it’s difficult to know where to begin. Devices running slowly (#2 most popular response) can be attributable to anything, and the same goes for #5 ‘Your device crashing’, and #6 ‘Another internet device crashing’.

If we accept that age-inappropriate content made available on pirate sites is a cybersecurity issue, we can see that roughly a third said they’d seen such material playing on their device. Yet the closest option to answer doesn’t seem to take into account that ‘age-inappropriate’ content playing on a users’ device may be result of the user requesting it.

In any event, the option applies to none of the respondents in the survey because every last one is an adult. The content may very well be inappropriate, but not on age grounds.

Hacking, Malware, ID Theft, Fraud, Botnets

Seeing ‘poor viewing quality’ appearing here as the leading cybersecurity issue faced by the greatest number of pirates, isn’t a surprise. In an earlier report from the UK, which we had to fight to obtain, popups were included to push general malware claims over the line. For reference, EU law forces popups on most EU internet users every day.

Surveys, research, and similar studies are currently going to huge lengths to construct a framework of fear around the threats associated with app-based piracy services. The purpose, of course, is to stop people from pirating content.

The truth is that scare campaigns will only ever enjoy limited success, while cold hard facts can be more terrifying and only need to be read once. When presented by a neutral security company like ESET, the impact of specific facts is obvious.

Click to enlarge

In the final slide, a comparison is made between the cybersecurity issues pirates say they have experienced, versus the security issues faced by non pirates.

Campaigns to steer people away from pirate sites and services due to security risks are reaching saturation point and that could carry a risk of desensitization.

Other than telling consumers of pirated content to simply avoid pirate sites, there’s still no harm prevention component, despite many governments having been briefed on various threats but no obvious signs of anything being done.

There’s no need to overcomplicate things. Name the apps, version numbers and hashes, have a neutral security vendor analyze and then report the harms in terms everyone can understand, and publish the evidence online for everyone to consume and discuss openly.

The 2023 Australian Piracy Behaviors and Attitudes survey is available here (pdf)

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

In recent years, rightsholders of major sports events have repeatedly complained that piracy of live sports is getting out of hand.

Ideally, they would like to see updates to current legislative frameworks, so the problem can be targeted more efficiently. Site-blocking is high on the list of preferred options, particularly in the United States.

While ISP blocking is still a debated issue among U.S. lawmakers, the country’s enforcement authorities have a more direct option; domain name seizures. With the appropriate legal paperwork, the DoJ’s Homeland Security Investigations ( HSI ) has sporadically targeted ‘pirate’ domain names for more than a decade.

Streameast Domain Names Seized

This weekend, the feds appear to have carried out another round of seizures, this time targeting the pirate sports streaming website Streameast. This site, which has a strong focus on ‘American’ sports, has over 15 million monthly visitors, who were all sidelined by surprise.

Instead of the usual homepage with links to the latest streams of sporting events, Streameast’s visitors – most of which come from the U.S. – were welcomed by a domain seizure banner.

“This domain name has been seized by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) pursuant to a warrant issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana,” the banner reads.

“It is unlawful to reproduce or distribute copyrighted material including sporting events, television shows, movies, music, software, or games without authorization. Individuals who do so risk criminal prosecution under Title 18.”

The seized domain names include the main one; thestreameast.to, as well as popular backup domain options such as streameast.io, streameast.xyz, and streameast.live.

Streameast Makes ‘Instant’ Comeback

The authorities have yet to officially confirm the action, which can typically take a few days. However, all available signs suggest that this is a legitimate law enforcement action. For example, the nameservers were all changed to “seizedservers.com”.

Whether the seizures will be effective in shutting down the Streameast operation is up for debate, however.

Soon after the domain seizures started to populate across DNS servers, the site’s operators informed their followers on Discord that the site has no intention of throwing in the towel. Quite the opposite, the site remains available though alternative domain names.

“As you may know, many of our domains were seized by the US government last night. As the only free streaming site in the world that truly values user experience and quality, it was no coincidence that this happened to us,” Streameast admin ‘Quick’ writes.

There are many fake, fraudulent, and scammy alternatives that remain online but only ‘legitimate’ Streameast domains were targeted, according to the site’s operators. While this came as a disappointment, there was a backup plan in place.

The Streameast team says that it has hundreds of domain names ready to deploy, some of which came into play this weekend. More domains will follow, and the team vows it will continue until ‘affordable’ sports streaming options are available for everyone.

“They need to see that they can’t stop us this way. We own over 400 domains in total, and we will be activating and sharing most of these with you throughout the week,” they write.

“We will never give up the fight. Our fight will continue until sports become affordable for everyone. We promise that once this is achieved, we will permanently shut down all Streameast services,” Streameast adds.

Why, and Why Now?

The Streameast team kept their word and in addition to streameast.co, they also activated streameast.ec, streameast.fi, streameast.ms, streameast.ph, streameast.ps, streameast.sh, and streameast.sk. These domain names may also be seized in the future, but for now, they remain online.

Why Streameast was singled out as a target on this particular weekend is unknown. Typically, U.S. law enforcement plans their domain seizure operations around major sporting events, as happened with the Super Bowl and the FIFA World Cup . There was a big UFC PPV event over the weekend, but those take place each month.

With the Paris Olympics, there was a major sporting event earlier this month, but these seizures are a bit late for that.

As far as we know, there are no indictments against people associated with the site. That said, it is still early days and more information may come out later in the week. With Streameast being as defiant as it is, we don’t expect this to be the end of the enforcement efforts.

—

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

If 2009 sounds like it happened half a lifetime ago, many 30 year-olds would likely agree.

At the time the UK government was taking advice from the entertainment industries on how to tackle surging piracy via the BitTorrent protocol.

Presented as an entirely proportionate and reasonable response for dealing with habitual downloaders, disconnecting entire households from the internet loomed ominously on the horizon.

Yet in 2007, the band Radiohead had ventured quite bravely in the opposite direction, arguing that piracy shouldn’t be punished and file-sharing should be embraced. When the band released the album ‘In Rainbows’ online, its price tag competed with ‘free’ on terms that even pirates could understand.

The debate over Radiohead’s ‘pay-what-you-want’ model went global. Praised by some for allowing everyone to afford music, it faced heavy criticism from those who felt that the price devalued music, and would lead to artists – especially less successful ones – suffering the financial consequences of competing with free. Despite the polarized views, Radiohead hadn’t quite finished.

Music Industry & Government Had it All Wrong

In May 2009, Brian Message, a partner in Radiohead’s management company, did the unthinkable. After describing the plan to kick file-sharers (and their families) off the internet as unworkable, Message suggested a radically different approach.

“We believe file-sharing by peer to peer should be legalized. The sharing of music where it is not for profit is a great thing for culture and music,” Message said.

That wasn’t what the labels wanted to hear, to put it mildly. With the benefit of hindsight, legalization probably wasn’t the right solution to support what eventually followed, but anyone could see that the status quo simply wasn’t working.

Was It Really Happening?

In early August 2009, after Radiohead’s Thom Yorke had dropped hints about a “great idea” and a secret distribution plan, things were about to start get interesting again. Whether it was the band, people working for them, or someone else, when the yet-to-be-released Radiohead track ‘These Are My Twisted Words’ was uploaded to private torrent site What.cd, Radiohead and file-sharing were suddenly back in the news again.

For many file-sharers, Radiohead’s approach felt like someone was actually listening; an outreach of sorts, acknowledgement from people who mattered that things needed to change. In the end, changes implemented by the music industry were a revelation. Not only did the industry prove itself wrong by successfully competing with free, it had managed to do so without resorting to brute force.

The idea that file-sharers, fans, will only return to buying any type of content if there’s a credible threat of force, has never made sense to us here at TF. Loyal consumers are happy consumers; happy with the product, happy with the service, and happy with the price. Get any one of those wrong and consumers become unhappy; any plan to cheer them up by a) not fixing the problem and b) resorting to threats, will fail – period.

Radiohead not only understood this better than most, the band actually dared to try something different. Less than a week after the ‘leak’ of ‘These Are My Twisted Words’ on What.cd, Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood took to the band’s Dead Air Space blog.

The Air Space blog, saved from extinction by the Internet Archive

In his post, Greenwood announced ‘These Are My Twisted Words’ officially for the first time. He then invited people to download it for free, including via a torrent hosted on Mininova, once one of the world’s most popular torrent sites.

And Back to Reality

For Mininova, the Radiohead release symbolized hope. Legal troubles with Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN meant that the site needed to change drastically or face extinction. In our 2009 article, co-founder Erik Dubbelboer celebrated Radiohead’s use of the site’s fledgling content distribution service and called on more artists to do the same.

By November 2009, the only content that remained on Mininova was content uploaded to the new distribution service. After losing its dispute with BREIN, Mininova was ordered to delete all other content , which in time led to the site’s demise. In common with similar sites, Mininova already had a policy of responding to rightsholders’ takedown notices but when a Dutch court found that insufficient, the end was nigh.

TorrentFreak also has a takedown policy. Our policy is to create all of our own content, obtain licenses for images where applicable, and if required, adhere to fair use norms. Because the policy works and nothing is infringing, nothing ever needs to be taken down. Unfortunately, some rightsholders and anti-piracy outfits occasionally disagree; on the plus side, on every occasion they are always wrong.

Wrongfully Targeted Yet Again

Around eight years ago, an industry shake-up saw Radiohead’s back catalog move from Parlophone to XL Recordings, which now operates as part of Beggars Group Digital. With assistance from anti-piracy company MUSO, attempts are now being made to purge Google’s search indexes of all links to unauthorized copies of Radiohead’s music.

A single notice dated August 8, 2024, presented here courtesy of the Lumen Database , is huge. Weighing in at over 9,600 URLs, hidden deep inside is one of our URLs which, according to the notice, should be disappeared by Google for the remainder of eternity, for violating copyright law.

That article contains no copyrighted material apart from our own, and doesn’t link to any infringing content either.

Coincidentally, the same generally applies to the takedown notice itself. Despite claiming to contain close to 10,000 pirate URLs across 1,643 domains, Google’s assessment indicates that just 4.5% are actually infringing.

Rightsholders never got to target individuals in the manner suggested 15 years ago, and that is a good thing; a very, very good thing considering the complaint detailed above. More importantly, people without internet can’t access YouTube, for example, which now generates billions of dollars in revenue for the music industry.

Instead, the focus today is on making life difficult for pirate sites, via site-blocking measures and by generating takedown notices on an industrial scale. When it comes to the latter, all people can do is try not to get caught in the crossfire, pray occasionally, and put faith in Google to shield your own copyrighted works from being rendered unfindable.

That’s exactly what Google did here, having done so many times before .

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