There’s little doubt that many entertainment industry insiders see online piracy as an existential threat.

The film business has been hit particularly hard, with movies still the most pirated entertainment category.

Several anti-piracy forces are working hard to address the challenge. This involves concrete actions to shut down piracy sites and services, for example, while stakeholders lobby for stricter legislation and harsher enforcement.

Luckily, some progress is being made as well. For example, earlier this year the UK-based Film Content Protection Agency ( FCPA ) handed out 25 awards to people who helped prevent film piracy incidents in movie theaters.

90% Pirated in Movie Theaters

According to FCPA Director Simon Brown, the sharp eyes of cinema staff prevented several piracy incidents. In fact, not a single leaked film could be traced back to UK or Irish movie theaters.

This makes UK cinemas a relative safe haven when compared to the rest of the world, where piracy is reportedly rampant. “90% of films pirated worldwide are sourced from cinemas,” FCPA reported .

It’s easy to gloss over these kinds of statistics but, in this instance, a few alarm bells could be heard. With a streaming-dominated movie industry, only a fraction of new films are shown on the silver screen. So how could it possibly be true that 90% of all pirated films come from theaters?

A short review of several pirate sites reveals that camcorded films are relatively rare today. The 90% figure is therefore grossly inaccurate, with the real number probably (just a guess) closer to 9%. That applies both to the number of releases and the volume of pirated downloads and streams.

To understand where this mistake originated we asked FCPA’s parent organization, FDA, for their source. Unfortunately, the group didn’t respond and another UK-based anti-piracy group was not able to provide more context either.

The MPA, meanwhile, said that it’s keeping an eye on the camcording problem but doesn’t have any recent data on the percentage of pirated films recorded in movie theaters.

Not a New Claim

Without an official response, we searched for other clues that might signal the origins of the claim. Luckily we didn’t have to look far to find relevant references as the “90%” statistic is regularly cited by rightsholders.

For example, UK anti-piracy group FACT mentioned it in a news release in 2016.

“With 90% of pirated films sourced directly from cinemas around the world, the Fight Film Theft programme is a vital element in protecting the UK film industry,” the group wrote.

That press release didn’t mention a source either. FACT’s statement was made in conjunction with the FDA, which frequently repeats the same statistic without further context.

2023, 2020, 2016, 2012, 2008, 2004…

The 90% figure didn’t suddenly appear in 2016 either. Follow-up searches took us back much further, including this reference from two years prior, where The Hollywood Reporter noted that, “MPAA president Bob Pisano said 90% of pirated films worldwide are the result of camcording.”

Again, it’s not clear where this number originates, but we’re getting closer. Back in 2004, the Motion Picture Association’s Regional Director, Dara MacGreevy, reportedly said that 90% of online films come from camcorder copies.

MacGreevy headed the European branch of the MPA and most 90% of references seem to point to the UK, which may be where the fire is. While we can’t reveal a specific source, it’s clear that statistics from two decades ago are no longer relevant today.

Chinese Whispers

And it gets more confusing too….

One of the earlier reports from 2004 is more specific than others. That statement, which comes from UK anti-piracy group FACT, doesn’t reference the 90% figure in the context of online piracy. It mentions it as a percentage of seized counterfeit DVDs instead.

“According to the Federation Against Copyright Theft, 90% of all pirate pre-release DVDs seized this year were filmed with a camcorder from the back of a cinema,” The Guardian reported.

Needless to say, “seized DVDs” is entirely different from “all pirated movies online”. Yet, both versions appeared in the media two decades ago, and the second one is still cited as an accurate statistic today.

Chinese whispers anyone?

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

For the last 40 years the Motion Picture Association has regularly highlighted the damage caused by in-theater recordings of the latest movies. And quite rightly so.

So-called ‘cam’ copies appear online within hours of movies first appearing in theaters, yet as piracy releases go, cams are unique in their ability to disappoint just about everyone. Not only do these often potato-quality copies somehow eat away at the box office, but filmmakers’ work is often reduced to a smear, and that disappoints pirates too.

The fact that unlicensed gambling ‘companies’ continue to use cams as a promotional vehicle leaves few obvious grounds to argue that the majority of cams benefit anyone at all. Yet camming persists in a number of countries, despite intense pressure from the United States demanding meaningful action against it.

In-theater camming contributed to India being placed on the USTR’s Priority Watch List and the question now is whether a long-running legal amendment process can even begin to address it.

Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill 2019

The Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill 2019 was introduced to amend the Cinematograph Act, 1952 , which contained provisions for the certification of films for exhibition and for regulating exhibitions of those films.

Certain amendments proposed to the 2019 bill ( pdf ) recognized the growth of piracy in India and specifically targeted ‘cam’ piracy. It stated that “ no person shall, without the written authorization of the author, be permitted to use any audiovisual recording device in a place to knowingly make or transmit or attempt to make or transmit or abet the making or transmission of a copy of a film or a part thereof. ”

The proposals stated that violations would be punishable by a prison term of up to three years, a fine, or both

The bill was the subject of a Standing Committee Report published in March 2020. A copy available via PRS Legislative Research ( pdf ) shows that the committee heard evidence from the Motion Picture Distributors Association, Viacom 18, the Film and Television Producers Guild of India, and others.

Amended Amendments

The Standing Committee Report referenced 18 U.S. Code Section 2319B , the United States’ anti-camcording provision, which also provides for up to three years in prison for a first ‘camming’ offense.

The Committee felt that since movies are expensive, punishments should be reviewed in an upwards direction. Somewhat remarkably, the Committee also raised doubts over the bill’s ability to counter the piracy that takes place inside India’s Censor Board.

Throughout the process, concerns were raised over a number of issues. They included fears of potential overreach in the statement that “no person shall be permitted to use any audio-visual recording device…,” which could include the use of a mobile phone, for example. Other debates centered on whether broadly defining recording “in a place” or more specifically an “exhibition facility” would be better or worse, or vice-versa.

A clear definition for the word “knowingly” was sought to establish mens rea while the reference to recording a movie “or a part thereof” raised questions over punishing behavior that should be protected under fair use exceptions.

Calls for tougher sentencing were addressed with proposals for a minimum three-month prison sentence, a minimum fine of roughly US$3,600, and a maximum fine of 5% of the audited gross production cost of the recorded movie. Not even the United States has ventured that far.

Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill, 2023

The Union Cabinet, the supreme decision-making body in India, approved the Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill, 2023 ( pdf ) in April.

Anurag Thakur, Minister for Information and Broadcasting, predicted the bill would meet the needs of all.

“This Bill will live up to the expectations of the industry,” the minister said. “This Bill is going to satisfy each and every one without any controversy.”

The bill was introduced in the Rajya Sabha (upper house of parliament) on July 20, 2023 . It includes provisions for film certification and the prospect of films being denied any kind of exhibition at all. For our purposes here we will not venture into that political quagmire, but it’s fair to say that controversy is rarely far away.

A PRS India summary of the section relevant to camming reads as follows:

The Bill prohibits carrying out or abetting: (i) the unauthorized recording and (ii) unauthorized exhibition of films. Attempting an unauthorized recording will also be an offense. An unauthorized recording means making or transmitting an infringing copy of a film at a licensed place for film exhibition without the owner’s authorization. An unauthorized exhibition means the public exhibition of an infringing copy of the film for profit: (i) at a location not licensed to exhibit films or (ii) in a manner that infringes upon the copyright law

When accompanied by the fines mentioned earlier, which include up to 5% of a movie’s audited gross production costs, it seems likely that the United States would’ve been quite pleased with India’s latest attempt at anti-camming legislation. And then this;

Certain exemptions under the Copyright Act, 1957 will also apply to the above offenses. The 1957 Act allows limited use of copyrighted content without owner’s authorization in specified cases such as: (i) private or personal use, (ii) reporting of current affairs, or (iii) review or critique of that work.

That fair use-style exemptionsFpurp, available under the Copyright Act 1957, will also apply to in-theater recording scenarios, seems unlikely to be viewed in the same positive light. The IIPA previously urged India to “swiftly enact legislative amendments to outlaw unauthorized recording of all or part of an audiovisual work in a cinema.”

Image credit: Pixabay / igorovsyannykov

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

When movies are recorded directly from cinema screens, the resulting pirate copy is known as a ‘cam’, regardless of the device used – camcorder or otherwise.

The terms camming, camcording, cammer, and other variations are not exclusive to movie piracy circles though; those paid to monitor and crack down on pirates use them a lot too.

In a report to the USTR in early 2022, the International Intellectual Property Alliance used similar terms more than 130 times when calling out China, Ecuador, India, Mexico, Russia, Brazil, and other countries for not doing enough to prevent in-cinema recording ( pdf ) .

While camming is clearly an ongoing problem for some countries, enhanced security and tough legislation in the United Kingdom should deter even the most determined pirates. In theory, at least.

Arrest in the UK

Early October, the UK’s Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit announced the arrest of a man in Liverpool “in connection with an investigation into film piracy.” The involvement of the Film Content Protection Agency (FCPA), the Film Distributors’ Association anti-piracy group, left little doubt this was related to camming.

Over the weeks that followed, TorrentFreak was able to link the arrest with an industry report claiming that at least four movies, recorded in two UK cinemas during the summer, had appeared online.

Our report published late November provides more detail and last week an FDA/FCPA newsletter dated December 20 ( pdf ) confirmed events as reported.

Aside from being recorded in the UK, where an intent to distribute copies online can carry a 10-year prison sentence, the copies were notable for another reason – their extraordinary quality.

This isn’t mentioned by FCPA and we’re still unable to confirm which movies are linked to the case, but the period cited – June to August 2022 – coincides with surprisingly high-quality cam copies suddenly appearing online around mid-June before stopping around mid-August.

Double-whammy events like these aren’t exactly common in the UK, especially given the alleged quality and the obvious threat to the market. However, records show that camming ‘incidents’ in UK cinemas are extraordinarily common, yet receive almost no press.

Other Camming Incidents in 2022

Camming incidents appear to be covered more comprehensively in annual reports, meaning that overall data for 2022 won’t be available for another few months. In the meantime, the four movies cammed in Liverpool can be added to other incidents recorded elsewhere in 2022.

At Cineworld Dundee (Scotland) on an unspecified date, a staff member identified a customer camming a movie. The title hasn’t been published but in line with FCPA policy, the diligent staff member received an award for her anti-piracy work.

Along with staff in hundreds of other cinemas in the UK, she is likely to have received training and detailed instructions on how to respond to a camming event ( pdf ) .

In another incident earlier this year, a ‘cammed’ copy of Spider-Man: No Way Home appeared online soon after its theatrical release. Forensic investigators linked the copy to a cinema in Leeds, West Yorkshire.

The image below was circulated to cinemas in the UK following the arrest of a suspect. It later appeared in a FCPA newsletter in redacted form. We’ve concealed the suspect’s identity in the original but the text clearly shows that preventing any repeat behavior remained a priority for FCPA.

The image on the right appears to be a still from surveillance footage, one of the key weapons in the fight against camcorder piracy. Data from camming incidents in 2021 shows evidence can also be obtained from less obvious sources.

Camming Incidents Break Records in 2021

The Film Distributors’ Association Yearbook 2022 notes that PIPCU, MPA, The Industry Trust, and the Alliance for Intellectual Property, all partner with FCPA in its fight against piracy. The level of camming incidents reported in 2021 shows that the FCPA needed all the help it could get.

“During 2021 the FCPA was directly involved in the professional investigation, intelligence gathering and research of 125 copyright theft incidents in cinemas,” the FDA publication reads ( pdf ) .

Due to COVID-19 lockdowns, the 125 incidents actually occurred over just seven months, the highest number ever reported by the FDA.

“The majority of these incidents led to the offenders being confronted and excluded from screenings by the cinema management. However, the more serious occurrences required swift police assistance, and resulted in five people being arrested and a further seven receiving recorded police cautions for illegal in-cinema activity,” the report adds.

Detail on Specific Cases

Details on some individual cases can be found in a report published by the UK Cinema Association (UKCA). It notes that online global piracy release groups struggled to obtain content in early 2021 due to COVID-19-enforced closures of cinemas around the world. When cinemas began to open up, pirates picked up where they had left off – including in the UK.

“Two high-impact cases occurred in particular immediately as UK cinemas began re-opening in May [2021], with two publicly available copies of a new film traced via film forensics to two London cinemas only six miles apart,” the report reveals.

“Subsequent investigations revealed that the same offender was responsible in both instances, plus another case in December 2020. Having been identified and traced, he was arrested in July.”

Pirates Tracked and Traced, One Literally

When the UK came out of lockdown, visitors to cinemas and other venues such as pubs and clubs, were required to fill in so-called ‘track and trace’ documents. In the event of an infection, government ‘track and trace’ teams were then able to directly contact people who were in the vicinity and ask them to isolate to prevent the spread.

According to UKCA, the suspected cammer arrested in July completed one of these forms with his details and signed it.

From July 2021, another three cammed movies appeared online and were subsequently traced back to cinemas in London. All of the offenders were identified but efforts to locate them are reported as “ongoing”. Interestingly, the report claims that these cases were linked in some way, despite none of the individual offenders knowing each other.

“In one unusual case, film theft returned to an East London cinema which had experienced high-impact piracy in 2019, albeit this time through a different offender, something which serves as a reminder that this activity can happen at any cinema, no matter how unlikely a target site might seem,” the report concludes ( pdf ) .

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

After two decades of perpetual battles with pirates, rightsholders and their anti-piracy partners are showing momentum.

There’s no victory on the horizon, but a recent surge in collaborative efforts shows that pooled resources and combined skillsets are much more effective than costly lone missions.

When law enforcement agencies support these initiatives thanks to direct government backing, opportunities for action can open up signficantly.

Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit

Significant rightsholders facing challenges in the UK can seek help from the fraud specialists at the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit. Subsequent actions such as raids, arrests and investigations, are publicized to boost deterrent messaging.

Other announcements carry too little information to warrant an article.

Unlike PIPCU’s press releases, the tweet doesn’t offer an instant story on a plate. However, any mention of the Film Content Protection Agency (FCPA) is significant and all but confirms the arrest of a specific and important type of movie pirate.

Cammers vs. Film Content Protection Agency

By recording the latest movies directly from the silver screen using concealed devices, ‘cammers’ fuel the illicit piracy market that thrives during the first few days of a film’s initial release. Hollywood believes that these ‘cam’ copies cause significant damage to the cinema industry, an opinion shared by the UK’s Film Distributors’ Association .

The Film Content Protection Agency (FCPA) mentioned by PIPCU is the FDA’s big-screen anti-piracy unit. It works hard to prevent UK camming incidents, but with over 4,500 screens nationwide, it’s impossible to monitor them all, all of the time. Events during the summer seem to have taken everyone by surprise

An industry report seen by TorrentFreak reveals that in a three-month period starting in June, at least four movies were recorded in the UK during their theatrical release windows. We cannot confirm the titles of these movies but where they were recorded is more straightforward.

Sources confirm that the copies were traced back to two multi-screen cinemas, both of them in Liverpool, the location mentioned by PIPCU.

Movies Were Shared on TorrentGalaxy

TorrentGalaxy (TGx) is among the top 10 most-visited torrent sites online today. TGx is an open platform with an active and lively community, a relative rarity in today’s streaming-dominated market. Competition among uploaders ensures that most content is uploaded quickly and since TGx is easy to navigate, many users consider it their online home.

The issue facing the site today concerns the movies recorded in Liverpool. Whether every film recorded in those cinemas appeared on TGx first is unknown, but the site is clearly named as a key source for the cammed movies. Considering the potential for even more movies to appear, identifying the cammer was always the top priority.

FDA & FCPA Call For Backup

To assist anti-piracy groups, movies shown in cinemas are protected by forensic watermarks that persist in pirate copies. They can identify the cinema’s location, the screen where the recording took place, and a specific time.

Some specifications claim to calculate recording distance and angle to identify where the camming pirate was sitting, but matching the recording time with CCTV footage or matching online booking records with pre-booked seats can also be effective.

We’re informed that the suspected pirate in Liverpool was caught on security cameras with support from evidence obtained from ticketing/payment records. The FDA/FCPA investigation received support from PIPCU/City of London Police, the UK Government’s Intellectual Property Office, and unidentified cinema operators. The suspect never stood a chance.

PIPCU & Organized Crime Unit Make Arrest

The PIPCU tweet announcing the arrest was dated October 5, 2022, but we believe it occurred weeks earlier, around September 7th/8th/9th. Officers from PIPCU and the North West Regional Organised Crime Unit (NWROCU) arrested a man in his mid-twenties at an address just a few miles from Liverpool city center.

How long the man has been in the UK isn’t clear but we’re informed that he was born in Eastern Europe. The suspect is further described as a professional videographer, an obvious eye-catcher under the circumstances, but other details are even more curious.

We’re unable to go into specifics but we understand that a piece of recording hardware with wireless functionality raised suspicions of a connection to rogue online casino 1XBET. At this early stage, any allegations are no more than that, and no evidence is available to us to show any 1XBET links to the suspect, direct or otherwise.

What can be easily verified is the huge number of 1XBET-branded releases indexed on TorrentGalaxy, the site identified as offering the movies recorded in Liverpool cinemas. To put things mildly, 1XBET is an extremely controversial brand in piracy circles but that’s just a small part of a much bigger story.

1XBET’s Links to Piracy

Over the past few years, 1XBET has become the star of its very own Netflix-worthy thriller. Russian authorities identified one of its operators as a former head of the Internal Affairs Directorate, a government department with responsibility for preventing cybercrime.

Today, 1XBET remains synonymous with movie piracy. Advertising for 1XBET has appeared in thousands of pirate releases, most of them first-run movies. In one six month period alone, 1XBET ads appeared on 1,200 pirate sites and in 2019 the company was identified as having the third-largest advertising spend in Russia.

The achievement was carefully noted by Hollywood and considering the MPA’s direct links to the UK’s FDA, yet more reports to the US Government seem likely.

Three men connected to 1XBET remain international fugitives with Russian authorities still keen to discuss an estimated 63 billion rubles, more than US$1.1 billion at today’s rates, generated between October 2014 and May 2019 without appropriate licensing.

High-Quality Cams Surprise Pirates

The names of the movies allegedly recorded in Liverpool are currently unknown, so further research into their quality is impossible. What we can confirm is a relatively recent and surprising upturn in cammed copies with exceptional image quality. Some say these could be the best copies that have appeared, not just in years, but since camming began.

Opinions are inherently subjective but there’s little doubt that Hollywood panic is directly linked to the quality of first-run pirate copies, and that quality is directly linked to the scale of any response.

In the meantime we understand that the camming suspect has already appeared in court and is currently out on bail. Until he’s informed otherwise, he must stay away from every cinema in the country.

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