Minister Asks Indian ISPs to Permanently Block Hundreds of ‘Pirate’ Sites

blockedFor several years, filmmakers in India have sought to protect their content from unauthorized online distribution. That has mainly taken the form of so-called ‘John Doe’ orders.

Back in May 2015 one such order not only targeted The Pirate Bay, KickassTorrents, Torrentz and TorrentFunk, but also video streaming site Vimeo. As a result, local ISPs were given just 24 hours to stop their subscribers from accessing the sites.

While it seems relatively easy to obtain these kinds of court orders, they have to be obtained each time a film is released to the public. That clearly has cost implications for those obtaining the orders and in recent months there have been calls for a more suitable system to be put in place.

During a meeting yesterday between representatives from the film industry, government, police and ISPs, the discussion centered around the “grave threat” posed by online piracy and what actions can be taken against it.

Highlighting measures taken elsewhere, particularly in Europe, the notion of a national ‘pirate site’ blacklist was put on the table. Information Technology Minister K.T. Rama Rao was also briefed on the actions being taken by City of London Police and was asked to consider similar measures.

A slide shown in India yesterday

india-blocking

Industry figures told the minister that piracy carried out on a core 240 websites costs them millions of dollars.

“If government could take action against all these websites, then piracy could be controlled,” said producer Suresh Babu.

The appeal appeared to resonate with Minister K.T. Rama Rao who responded with a promise of government action. He also called on the ISPs present to block the offending sites, which according to one report could number 1000.

The ISPs are said to have responded positively with an indication that they wish to play no part in illegal activities. However, they also urged the government to provide clear official instructions detailing their requirements.

In response to the industry calls the Minister promised to react quickly, with the creation of a special police unit and action against the main sites within 30 days.

“Unlike before, piracy has taken new shape. Even educated professionals, engineering students are resorting to the crime of movie piracy which is not good for society. I’m happy that Mr KT Rao is seriously looking into the issue,” said producer Suresh Babu.

It will be interesting to see how the Indian government will push through tough anti-piracy measures in such a short time-frame and how it will do so without punishing sites such as Vimeo who are clearly engaged in legitimate business.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.


Source: TorrentFreak

Dotcom’s Bid to Halt Extradition Hearing Fails, Defense Begins

megaupload-logoIt was an extremely long road up until that point, with multiple successive delays hindering progress, but last month saw Kim Dotcom’s extradition hearing finally get underway.

The hearing was expected to take around four weeks but earlier this month it became clear progress would not be so swift. After the U.S. had made its case to extradite Dotcom and former colleagues Mathias Ortmann, Finn Batato and Bram van der Kolk, the defendants repeatedly claimed that the hearing was unfair.

The United States had done everything possible to stop the quartet from mounting a proper defense, they argued, so the whole thing should be paused or even thrown out altogether following submissions to that effect.

The hearing was due to end on October 16, despite Dotcom being absent due to pain from an existing bad injury. That didn’t happen and today the court revealed that efforts to have the hearing thrown out had failed.

In a ruling released today, Judge Nevin Dawson said he would not hear full argument of the applications to have the extradition hearing brought to a close.

The defense wanted to show that the New Zealand government had acted illegally when they arrested Dotcom in 2012 but that was disallowed. The Judge gave no reasons why, only indicating he would reveal all when the hearing was completed.

As a result the defense will now begin stating its case on Monday but that hasn’t stopped a clearly irritated Dotcom airing his opinions in public.

“We will identify why the United States case is flawed. Sadly because of the limited focus of such an extradition hearing I can’t call the required and planned expert evidence to simply answer the incorrect factual assertions by the United States. The United States won’t permit [experts] to be paid,” Dotcom explained.

“The case will now turn on important legal argument. We outline this on Monday. However, when we enter the ring we do so to win. The obstacles the United States has put up to stop us from fighting back won’t stop us. We won’t be silenced by bullies!”

Dotcom’s entire future could hang on the outcome of this extradition hearing. If extradited and found guilty in the United States, he and his co-defendants face the possibility of decades in jail. Nevertheless, Dotcom seems up for the fight.

“I wish you could all be at my court hearing on Monday. It’s going to be good,” he concludes.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.


Source: TorrentFreak

Legality of Voluntary ‘Pirate’ Site Blocking Regime Under Fire

In September 2013, a coalition of Portuguese copyright trade groups announced they would file for an injunction to prevent ISPs from providing access to The Pirate Bay. They argued it would not pose a problem, since ISPs already filter to prevent access to criminal content such as abusive images.

It took more than 18 months for the Association for Copyright Management, Producers and Publishers (GEDIPE) to get its way but eventually the Intellectual Property Court gave ISPs Vodafone, MEO and NOS just 30 days to block The Pirate Bay.

While GEDIPE had its victory, the battle was still not won. Each time the group needed a site blocked in future it would have to take ISPs to court, an expensive and time-consuming process. Warning that it would do so if necessary, GEDIPE advised ISPs to enter into discussions to form a voluntary site-blocking mechanism instead.

“It is time to sit down and negotiate blocking measures that don’t require the courts to get involved,” GEDIPE boss Paulo Santos said.

ISPs initially objected to the idea saying that legitimate content could become blocked without legal oversight. Nevertheless, by this summer they were singing a very different tune.

In July the Ministry of Culture announced the signing of a memorandum of understanding between its own General Inspection of Cultural Activities (IGAC), the Portuguese Association of Telecommunication Operators (APRITEL), various rightsholder groups, the body responsible for administering Portugal’s .PT domain and representatives from the advertising industry.

The agreement would see local anti-piracy group MAPINET filing copyright complaints with the Ministry of Culture which in turn would conduct an assessment and then order ISPs to block sites. Importantly, no expensive courtroom argument would take place and no legal judgments would be handed down.

This week the agreement began to bite when 51 domain names connected to sites including KickassTorrents (Kat.cr), ExtraTorrent, Isohunt, YTS and RARBG were ordered to be blocked. However, there are now concerns over the legality of the process.

Speaking with the Economic Daily, intellectual property law expert Leonor Chastre, a partner at the Cuatrecasas, Gonçalves Pereira lawfirm, says he has doubts over the agreement and the actions taken under it.

“There are a number of entities that have signed the memorandum but it does not legitimize the role of the two main entities [the government and MAPINET] so they will not be able to determine what is legal and illegal in this field. The latter is a private entity, susceptible to external influences. What is the representativeness of that association and what is its intention?” he questions.

The argument that only a court is able to decide on the legality of a site is a common one that has played out in countries across Europe. Prolonged legal battles on that very topic have taken place in the Netherlands, Austria and currently Sweden, to name a few, so concerns that Portuguese authorities might be overstepping the mark are hardly a surprise.

Interestingly, MAPINET has a rather different perspective. The anti-piracy group says that laws already exist in the EU for blocking content when it’s deemed to be infringing copyright.

“The implementation of the E-Commerce Directive already includes procedures for removing illegal content,” MAPINET’s Miguel Carretas argues, adding that the purpose of the memorandum is to “regulate the application” of this legal provision.

“[ISPs] already had the power to block access to sites where illegitimacy is demonstrated,” Carretas says.

In response, Vodafone says that it “acts in accordance with the provisions of the law and the Memorandum of Understanding.” Other ISPs, MEO and Cabovisão, declined to comment.

The question now is how these concerns will develop. The most logical route for an intervention is for a site subjected to blocking to take the matter to court. That would be an expensive affair though and could involve challenging not only the government but also copyright holders and ISPs.

Nevertheless, a challenge is not without precedent. In 2013 Rapidgator was blocked in Italy following a broad crackdown on copyright infringement. The company hired local counsel to object and eventually won its case.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.


Source: TorrentFreak

Spotify Helps to Beat Music Piracy, European Commission Finds

spotifyWhen Spotify launched its first beta in the fall of 2008 we branded it “an alternative to music piracy.”

With the option to stream millions of tracks supported by an occasional ad, or free of ads for a small subscription fee, Spotify appeared to be a serious competitor to unauthorized downloading.

While there has been plenty of anecdotal support for this claim, actual research on the topic has been lacking. A new study published by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre aims to fill this gap.

In the study researchers Luis Aguiar (IPTS) and Joel Waldfogel (NBER) compare Spotify streaming data to download numbers from the 8,000 pirated artists on torrent sites, as well as legal digital track sales.

Based on this data the researchers conclude that Spotify has a clear displacement effect on piracy. For every 47 streams the number of illegal downloads decreases by one.

This is in line with comments from Spotify’s Daniel Ek, who previously argued that the streaming service helps to convert pirates into paying customers.

“According to these results, an additional 47 streams reduces by one the number of tracks obtained without payment,” the paper reads (pdf).

“This piracy displacement is consistent with Ek’s claim that Spotify’s bundled offering harvests revenue from consumers who – or at least from consumption instances – were previously not generating revenue,” the researchers add.

While that’s good news for the music industry, it doesn’t necessarily mean that more revenue is being generated. In addition to piracy, streaming services also impact legal track sales on iTunes and other platforms.

According to the researchers, 137 Spotify streams reduce the number of individual digital track sales by one. Factoring in the revenue per stream and download, the overall impact is relatively neutral.

“Given the current industry’s revenue from track sales ($0.82 per sale) and the average payment received per stream ($0.007 per stream), our sales displacement estimates show that the losses from displaced sales are roughly outweighed by the gains in streaming revenue.”

“In other words, our analysis shows that interactive streaming appears to be revenue-neutral for the recorded music industry,” the researchers add.

More studies are needed to see how streaming services impact the music industry in the long run, but for now it’s safe to conclude that they do indeed help to beat online piracy, as often suggested.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.


Source: TorrentFreak