• chevron_right

      ‘£1m’ Pirate TV Box Seller Avoids Prison Due to Private Prosecution Delays

      news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Monday, 15 January - 11:45 · 5 minutes

    fact-iptv-court TV drama ‘Mr Bates vs The Post Office’ tells the story of the Post Office ‘Horizon’ scandal and the lives torn apart by 700 “successful” private prosecutions of entirely innocent self-employed subpostmasters.

    After the miniseries was seen by millions earlier this month, private prosecutions – which allow alleged victims of crime to prosecute their own criminal cases – are now a topic of national debate. As a result, the government is under pressure to act against what some believe is an emerging two-tier justice system.

    Where the state lacks prosecution resources, capability, or both, and in fraud cases in particular, those with significant financial resources can obtain justice privately. Regular citizens, on the other hand, can not.

    Private prosecutions are known for their high conviction rates; cases brought by the Federation Against Copyright Theft, the Premier League, and those involving Sky, are certainly no exception. While still controversial, Post Office-style scandals are largely avoided due to the nature of the cases; that doesn’t mean they always go to plan, however.

    Serial ‘Entrepreneur’ Tests Out Piracy Market

    A MEN report claims that 42-year-old Jordan Longbottom ran a ‘successful’ business selling pirate TV devices from his static caravan in Wales. By the time the case got to court, exactly how successful his venture had been was met with a significant difference of opinion.

    A private prosecution brought by the Federation Against Copyright Theft alleged that Longbottom’s operation ran from August 2015 to May 2017. Using Facebook to attract customers, it was claimed he sold pirate TV boxes to “thousands” of customers at prices ranging from £100 to £175 each. At Manchester’s Minshull Street Crown Court, the prosecution claimed that Longbottom’s venture brought in up to £1 million; he disputed that with his own estimate of roughly £300,000.

    Caravan Static, Longbottom On the Move

    Officers from Greater Manchester Police raided Longbottom’s caravan in January 2017, but the entrepreneur wasn’t home, or even in the UK. The Brit was on holiday in Florida and didn’t return to the UK for another three months. When his plane touched down in March 2017, police welcomed him back onto British soil by placing him under arrest.

    Successful private prosecutions in piracy cases are often reported in the tabloid media partly as a deterrent. Whether he read the stories, read them but didn’t believe them, or was simply indifferent, Longbottom’s March 2017 arrest had no effect on his pirate TV sales. With assistance from others that allowed him to take more of a back seat, sales continued until at least May 2017.

    Guilty Plea, Plea For Leniency

    Whether Longbottom’s business scheme generated £1 million or £300,000 or not; private prosecutions brought by FACT, including those involving in the Premier League, have seen people go to prison for much less than that. According to the defense, Longbottom was ‘terrified’ at the prospect of prison, but all things considered, this wasn’t actually the most serious of cases in the current climate, his lawyer argued.

    Just as police funding cutbacks and a failure to invest in fraud-specific training has led to a rapid rise in fraud and a rise in private prosecutions , failure to invest means Britain’s prisons are full. As a result, prisoners are being released early and courts are being advised to only hand down immediate custodial sentences in the “most serious of cases.”

    The judge’s comments suggest that he believed the conditions had still been met for a custodial sentence, but another factor tipped fortune in Longbottom’s favor. Having been arrested in 2017, it would be another five years before Longbottom was eventually summoned in June 2022.

    The explanation for the “significant delay” was partly down to the “small legal team” behind the FACT prosecution having other casework, the court heard. The judge concluded that Longbottom would likely have been sentenced to prison if the case had been brought in a “more timely fashion” but that wasn’t the case here.

    After pleading guilty to two offenses under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, and one offense under the Fraud Act, Longbottom was sentenced to 22 months in prison, suspended for 24 months, a Rehabilitation Activity Requirement (RAR) of 15 days under the Offender Rehabilitation Act, and 150 hours of unpaid work.

    Reality Check

    For a reality check, the Daily Mail’s latest scare story , part of a campaign that’s produced a series of stories since early December, claims that those who simply use illegal streaming platforms “could even face time behind bars.”

    Citing Section 11 of the Fraud Act 2006 which covers ‘obtaining services dishonestly’, a conviction could mean 12 months in prison, the article warns, adding that if the offense “is a serious one”, those involved “could face a maximum sentence of five years.”

    Scare Story? Yes. But Consider the Big Picture

    Surprisingly, the Daily Mail is correct; that’s exactly what the law says, and it could happen, at least in theory. In practice, there’s some terminology to review first.

    A ‘serious’ offense isn’t enough to warrant prison under the current advice, since only “the most serious” of cases qualify. Interestingly the judge had already noted that whether Longbottom had generated £1 million or £300K, the amount wouldn’t have made any difference to the sentence handed down.

    It would be extremely foolish to replicate in a real-life scenario, but the standard set here is surprising. Apparently, it’s possible to sell thousands of pirate boxes and generate up to a million, get arrested but carry on for another three months regardless, hope for a delay on the prosecution side, and then just stay out of trouble for a while.

    That being said, staying on the straight and narrow can be a challenge for some people.

    New Beginning, New Piracy

    In March 2017, the same month Longbottom was arrested, the self-professed entrepreneur launched a brand-new company. Companies House records reveal that Sat Tech UK (NW) Ltd was born on March 14, 2017, but just three months later was renamed to Smarterbuyz Ltd. After no accounts were ever filed for the company, it was dissolved via compulsory strike-off in April 2019 but not without controversy.

    Longbottom’s new venture saw him enter the retro-gaming market, selling video game consoles pre-loaded with up to 50,000 ROMs containing games from Nintendo, Sega, and Sony, among others, under the brand Pi Retro Gaming . According to Trust Pilot reviews , it’s reasonable to conclude that some expectations were not met.

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

    • chevron_right

      BeStreamWise: New IPTV Anti-Piracy Campaign Begins With Fake Site ‘Scam’

      news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Tuesday, 3 October - 06:42 · 5 minutes

    bestreamwise Dozens of large anti-piracy awareness campaigns have come and gone over the years and while approaches have differed, there’s no confusion when it comes to their common goal.

    With serious heavyweight backing, the new ‘BeStreamWise’ anti-piracy campaign aims to deter the use of pirate IPTV services in the UK. It deploys familiar techniques to shape public perception but right off the bat there’s an elephant in the room.

    At least as far as we can determine, there have been no press releases heralding BeStreamWise, or indeed any other mainstream media efforts that could ensure maximum penetration for what is obviously an awareness campaign.

    That being said, there are some indications that a short video produced by BeStreamWise has already been seen by hundreds of thousands of people. With a running time of just 15 seconds it’s certainly short, but if a campaign wanted to target social media and/or search engine users looking for something in particular, dropping in something like this would make perfect sense.

    Uploaded to YouTube on September 12, the clip above already has over 484,000 views but not even one person was moved to leave a comment. The BeStreamWise channel itself has only six subscribers, but it appears that the campaign didn’t begin online.

    People Love Offers Too Good to Be True

    To demonstrate how easily people will hand over their personal details, BeStreamWise hired Jenny Radcliffe, aka ‘The People Hacker’.

    Radcliffe lectures on topics including social engineering, frauds and con artistry. Here she plays a salesperson for a new streaming service called MalStreams, offering free lifetime subscriptions from a pop-up stand in London’s Paddington Station.

    The ‘con’ strategy deployed here is simple; First, commuters’ faith in the judgment of the management team behind one of the most famous stations in the country probably precluded the possibility of a brazen, broad daylight scam.

    Couple that with the unlikely scenario that scammers accepted the considerable expense and risk of selling an illegal product in a high-footfall location, the targets’ preconceptions most likely ruled an illegal product completely out. As a result, at least a handful of people liked the idea of ‘free streaming for life’ and went on to sign up to the bogus MalStreams service .

    Unsurprisingly, the number of people who rejected the too-good-to-be-true offer isn’t revealed; it’s a campaign to shape public perceptions after all, not a peer-reviewed study. Those who did fill in their personal details were subjected to a clip depicting some kind of hacker attack, followed by the message: “You’ve Just Let Criminals In.”

    “Streaming services offering free content from other platforms can be too good to be true and aren’t always legal. Illegal streaming can let criminals into your devices and network. Giving them access to your personal and financial information, exposing you to scams, fraud and even identity theft,” ‘subscribers’ were informed after the dust settled.

    “BeStreamWise and recognize the personal dangers of illegal streaming. Find safer ways to enjoy your favorite content on BeStreamWise.com.”

    The BeStreamWise Portal

    The campaign portal rigidly follows current anti-piracy messaging by focusing on the four pillars of danger established over the past few years (cited verbatim) .

    Viruses and Malware: When accessing illegal streams, whether through free streaming sites or via apps, add-ons or devices, you are at risk of receiving malicious software. This gives criminals access to your network or your device compromising your personal data.

    ID Theft, Scams, Fraud: Streaming via illegal methods puts you at risk of being exposed to fraud and data theft. This risk increases significantly when users exchange credit or debit card information to view content on unregulated and illicit websites.

    Inappropriate Content: Watching content via an illicit source can expose younger viewers to age-inappropriate content. These unauthorized websites, devices, apps, add-ons, and the content they can access have no parental controls.

    Funding Wider Criminality: When you use illegal streams, you risk letting criminals in. Illegal streaming services are increasingly operated by sophisticated criminal networks, often involved in other types of crime.

    Who Wants Brits to BeStreamWise?

    The campaign portal presents BeStreamWise as an organization made up of eight named members and possibly more. In the order they appear: Federation Against Copyright Theft, the UK government’s Intellectual Property Office, the CrimeStoppers charity, British Association for Screen Entertainment (BASE), Sky, Premier League, and free-to-air broadcaster, ITV.

    While Sky, Premier League and ITV are well known in their own right, BASE (which used to be a member of FACT) is particularly worthy of mention.

    BASE members include Universal, Disney, Warner Brothers, MGM, Paramount, Sony Pictures, StudioCanal, Sky Store, Virgin Media, BT TV, CrunchyRoll, Kaleidoscope, Lionsgate, Mattel, Freemantle Media, and Spirit Entertainment, the largest independent home entertainment sales and distribution company handling content for the BBC, Film4, and ITV Studios.

    Members of the Irish Industry Trust For IP Awareness include Sky, Warner Bros., and Sony Pictures, and it appears the BeStreamWise campaign has already taken to the streets of Belfast. The billboard in the image above was snapped by a Reddit user in the past few days.

    sky-cert While there are a number of campaign participants , Sky’s involvement stands out in a number of ways.

    Links in the footer of the BeStreamWise website link to terms and conditions and privacy pages on Sky websites, while the bestreamwise.com domain’s security certificate is directly linked to other Sky domains.

    This could simply mean that the broadcaster’s contribution includes technical assistance but Sky UK Limited is also listed as the owner of trademark application UK00003955720 . Dated September 2023, the BeStreamWise trademark covers the categories listed below.

    Facts From Studies Unavailable to the Public

    As one might expect, the portal also features claims from various studies , including 90% of Illegal Streaming Sites Are Classified as Risky , 32% of People Have Been Victims of Fraud , and 2.7 Million Devices Have Been Infected With Viruses .

    The names of the studies are cited but beyond the curated soundbites previously offered by the industry groups that commissioned the research, the studies aren’t openly published or even made fully available on request. As previously reported, requests to see underlying research have met with obstruction , which by default casts doubt on all claims, at least until properly evidenced.

    That doesn’t imply that threats don’t exist, they certainly do, but if an entire campaign is based on the existence of specific, ubiquitous threats, there can be zero harm in linking to the full studies, including the methodology.

    Until then, many of the companies listed above are facing the prospect of a new round of website blocking, this time featuring their own domain. Following an allegation of spreading misinformation, bestreamwise.com has been placed on a popular DNS blocklist which aims to “keep the internet clean.”

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

    • chevron_right

      Flawless IPTV: Men Behind UK’s Largest Pirate Service Jailed For 30+ Years

      news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Tuesday, 30 May, 2023 - 18:12 · 7 minutes

    flawless-logo1 Operating from 2016 until 2018, the Flawless IPTV service copied subscription TV broadcasts from official (and unofficial) sources and then restreamed that content to tens of thousands of customers, at a dramatically cut down price.

    For many UK football fans, Flawless granted access to the sport they love, at a price they could afford. Others viewed the service quite differently.

    From the Premier League’s perspective, Flawless was a fraudulent, criminal enterprise that stole potential revenue from the country’s leading football clubs. Through its illegal participation in the subscription TV market, Flawless had a direct impact on Sky and Virgin Media subscription package sales.

    More broadly, Flawless undermined the Premier League’s right to offer exclusive broadcasting licenses in the UK and that had the potential to affect how much broadcasters were prepared to pay for those licenses.

    Today’s Sentencing Hearing

    Following an extraordinarily deep and costly investigation, and a five-year Premier League private prosecution, five men behind the UK’s largest-ever piracy service were sentenced today at Chesterfield Justice Centre.

    Mark Gould, Steven Gordon, Peter Jolley, Christopher Felvus and William Brown were sentenced to more than 30 years in prison combined. A sixth defendant, Zak Smith, did not appear in court.

    In total, Flawless operated for just 22 months but still managed to generate an estimated £4.6 million in revenue. £3.7 million of that was profit, split very unequally between those sent to prison today.

    Mark Gould, 36, was the driving force behind Flawless. His share of the profit was around £1.7 million. Today he received an unprecedented 11-year sentence on two counts of conspiracy to defraud and contempt of court.

    Steven Gordon’s cut was significant too, roughly £1 million according to the prosecution. Two counts of conspiracy to defraud and contempt of court led to a sentence of five years and two months.

    Peter Jolley’s share of the profit was reported as £773,000. He received a sentence of five years and two months, on two counts of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering.

    Christopher Felvus’ share was a relatively modest £164,500. Two counts of conspiracy to defraud earned him a sentence of three years and 11 months.

    William Brown made just £15,000 but after pleading not guilty and then losing his case, today he was sentenced to four years and nine months, on two counts of conspiracy to defraud.

    Zak Smith appears to have made less than £5,000 from Flawless. He did not appear in court today and a warrant was issued for his arrest.

    What follows are just some of the events that led to the men being sentenced today, including why Flawless was so successful, and how it all fell apart.

    Flawless Won Fans By Exploiting a Restricted Market, Fraudulently

    Top-tier football matches in England take place in the Premier League, a league operated by a company of the same name, owned by the clubs that play in it.

    Premier League broadcasting rights cost billions, so when broadcasters like Sky and Virgin hand over their share of the cash for exclusive local rights, recouping that cash from UK football fans is reflected in costly subscription package prices.

    For cash-strapped football fans in the UK, pirate IPTV providers represent choice and affordability in a market where very little exists. Subscriptions available at a fraction of the official cost are a huge draw but the elephant in the room is unavoidable.

    Pirate IPTV services cost less and offer more, but that’s only because they pay nothing to rightsholders like the Premier League, while paying nothing to broadcasters whose transmissions they copy.

    The end result of an aggressive Premier League private prosecution spanning five years, the sentences handed down today show that undermining corporations worth billions has the potential to end in complete catastrophe for IPTV operators. It also ends badly for football fans and the public in general.

    While this was a private prosecution, the Premier League – and by extension Premier League clubs – will now recoup the costs of the investigation and prosecution from the Crown, meaning that tax paying football fans and taxpayers in general will pick up an incredibly large bill.

    Flawless IPTV

    Launched around August 2016, Flawless IPTV began as a three-way partnership consisting of Mark Gould, Steven Gordon, and Peter Jolley, all of whom had parted ways with another IPTV provider, known online as Overlords. Christopher Felvus, who was also active in the pirate IPTV scene, made up the quartet and for Flawless, it was game on.

    In common with licensed services, pirate IPTV providers have broadly two options for reaching the market. Selling subscriptions directly to consumers makes the most money on paper but also causes the most headaches. Selling to customers via resellers makes considerably less, but in many cases a 40% cut may be considered worth it.

    Flawless decided to cover both angles by selling direct from its own website and social medias, and also indirectly via a network of resellers.

    With a heavy focus on Premier League content, particularly matches broadcast during the UK’s ‘3pm blackout’, Flawless and success went hand in hand. A big hit with football fans, the IPTV service went from strength to strength with a comprehensive, mostly reliable product, for just £10 per month. For a while, everything went broadly to plan.

    Numerous behind-the-scenes dramas, some worthy of a TV series in their own right, kept the business on its toes in the months to come. Yet after signing up thousands of customers with no notable issues, a subscription purchased in 2017 sparked a massive criminal investigation and marked the beginning of the end for the entire service.

    Charity Received Complaints

    Crimestoppers, a UK charity famous for its anonymous tip lines, is said to have received complaints about Flawless in the summer of 2017. Instead of contacting the police, Crimestoppers alerted the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) which led to a covert purchase of a Flawless subscription in October of the same year.

    After concluding that Flawless offered streams broadcast by Sky and Virgin, among others, FACT leveraged its connections in government, law enforcement agencies, and civil authorities, calling for action to defend the Premier League’s rights.

    A report to GAIN, the Government Agency Intelligence Network, led to the allocation of significant public resources. With the support of a dedicated financial investigator, a senior Trading Standards officer took over the investigation and a little over six months later, Flawless was all but finished.

    Mark Gould Arrested First, Others follow

    In May 2018, search warrants were executed at two addresses in London. Gould was arrested at his home in Greenwich, an apartment on the river recently purchased for £600,000 – cash.

    Around a month later the authorities arrested Steven Gordon and Peter Jolley, and three weeks after that Christopher Felvus was detained. William Brown and Zak Smith were arrested early August 2018 but it would be another five months before the case was submitted to the court, and another three years before today’s sentencing.

    Profitable Business, But Not For All

    In total, Flawless operated for just 22 months but still managed to generate an estimated £4.6 million in revenue, £3.7 million of that in profit. As highlighted earlier, Gould is said to have made most from the operation, around £1.7 million.

    William Brown made almost nothing from Flawless yet today received a sentence roughly on par with that handed to Steven Gordon, who made more than £1 million from the operation and was also held in contempt of court. In common with all of the defendants sentenced today, Brown had no previous convictions.

    Warrant Issued For Arrest of Zak Smith

    This curious anomaly leads us to Zak Smith, his apparent absence from court today, and a warrant for his arrest. Smith made roughly three times less than Brown, around £5,000, but was expected to receive a similar sentence today. The reasons for that are extraordinary.

    The details of Smith’s involvement aren’t just interesting, they are arguably worthy of a Netflix drama series in their own right. Smith worked at anti-piracy company Friend MTS, known for working with the Premier League to ensure that pirate services are blocked by ISPs during match times.

    This type of blocking is authorized by High Court injunction, the finer details of which are closely guarded secrets. Or at least that’s the usual plan. In some cases blocking programs appear suddenly ineffective, with services like Flawless operating broadly as usual, with Flawless competitors not doing anywhere near as well.

    We’ll return to that story very soon and reveal how the dismantling of Flawless was interpreted as a prompt to launch more IPTV services that made even more money.

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

    • chevron_right

      Illegal Streaming Detector Cars Can’t Track Firesticks Wrapped in Tin Foil

      news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Thursday, 26 January, 2023 - 20:37 · 5 minutes

    police detector car Early January, anti-piracy group FACT and West Mercia Police announced they would be visiting addresses in the UK to warn people away from pirate IPTV services.

    Police had obtained a customer list from a service they raided last year and, since many people hand over their real details to pirate services, tracking down some subscribers would’ve been trivial. None were ever destined for prosecution but they did have an important purpose.

    Those visited are the physical proof that people who simply watch illegal streams risk a visit from the police. That’s a psychological step up, but not quite enough on its own.

    People also need to believe that punishments are criminally significant. More fundamentally, millions of people need to be exposed to that message first. Paid advertising is an option, but it can’t compete with free.

    UK Tabloids Need Clicks

    After failing to consider the finer details and broader implications of FACT’s carefully written press release, UK tabloid media outlets published sensationalized stories with zero context.

    The first claim – police were knocking on the doors of 1,000 suspected pirate IPTV subscribers – was a massive exaggeration. The second – two men had already been sentenced to months in prison for simply watching pirate streams – failed to mention that both ran their own piracy operations and received convictions for fraud. In just one of those cases, the prosecution estimated damages in excess of £10 million.

    Due to the footprint of mass media, other publications had little incentive to set the record straight. As a result, a substantially distorted ‘fact’ reached millions in the UK and audiences in dozens of other countries around the world. Comments on a Russian state-owned newspaper article described UK police as “extremists” – let that sink in.

    Since a reality check seems to be in order, in an upcoming report we’ll reveal the truth about those convictions for watching illegal streams, and compare them to the risks faced by ordinary consumers. In no small part, the motivation to reveal those details was provided by new and completely unsubstantiated claims published in the media during the last few days.

    Sports News, Subscription/PPV Promotion, Piracy Warnings

    Over the past few years, a new breed of articles has featured in UK tabloids.

    Typically published in advance of a big PPV boxing event, articles appear with three components – sundry news about the fights, “ stark warnings ” not to pirate the fight (or go to prison ), and then details of where the fight can be legally bought.

    The same format appears just before the start of a new football season, year after year .

    Eubank Jr vs. Smith: Big Fight, Even Bigger Warnings

    After reading hundreds of similar articles, the intended effect can wear off, but a few days ago something extraordinary appeared in not one, but two UK tabloids under different ownership. Both articles promoted the Chris Eubank Jr vs. Liam Smith PPV boxing event that took place last Saturday night and did so in almost identical ways.

    The Mirror ran with the headline, “Boxing fans sent prison warning over illegal Chris Eubank Jr fight stream.” The article itself made no mention of who issued the warning or what was actually said, but did have room for the following sequential paragraphs:

    Sky Sports Box Office is showcasing the grudge match, with the price for the first big British boxing card of the year set at £19.95.

    And new technology now enables sports’ rightholders and broadcasters to trace the unique IP addresses of users illegally streaming the fight – for up to six months.

    Mail Online ran with the headline, “Boxing fans handed PRISON warning ahead of Saturday’s highly-anticipated middleweight clash.” This time the article did cite a source for the warnings: “Police reissued warnings for those intending to illegally stream the fight.”

    No specific police unit or officer received credit for the warning, but Mail Online did repeat the same IP address claims published by The Mirror. Unfortunately, neither cited a source or attempted to explain how this “new technology” might work. How sports reporters got the best anti-piracy scoop of the last 20 years also remains a mystery.

    Remember TV Detector Vans? Meet Piracy Detector Tracking Cars

    If you aren’t wearing a tin foil hat right now, find something with equivalent protection and buckle up. The articles referenced above were written by two different people, and published in two separate publications under different ownership.

    Both articles are based on the same exclusive information, have the same structure, and make the same extraordinary claims. Some take scare tactics to a brand-new level.

    The Mirror : “Cars driving across the UK have also been fitted with tracking devices as police identity the households illegally streaming such events during the crackdown.”

    Mail Online : “It is part of a wider police attempt to decrease illegal streaming, and cars have been fitted with apparatus that will allow them to pick up and track streamers to their homes.”

    If this claim had substance – real substance – it would make for an irresistible tabloid headline, not something casually bumped between paragraphs in a boxing article. Then there’s the question of how it came to appear in there at all.

    Did two independent journalists simultaneously discover the existence of piracy spy vehicles driving all over the UK? On the balance of probabilities, the theory fails to convince. Equally unlikely is a scenario where one writer spotted the other’s work and thought that the claim was so generic, nobody would notice it being republished in a rival newspaper.

    Could it be possible, that by some coincidence, the articles relied on the same source? Without cooperation and full disclosure, that would be hard to prove. But if there was an aim, somewhere along the murky tip supply chain, to deter piracy by revealing the existence of Illegal Streaming Detector Cars, here’s the breaking news: it’s been tried before and it didn’t work.

    illegal streaming detector car

    DeepAI’s rendition of the new detection/tracking technology

    The BBC’s ‘ TV Detector Vans ‘ have been objects of ridicule in the UK for the last 60 to 70 years. The BBC refuses to discuss them in response to FOIA requests and the suspicion here is that ISDCs (all anti-piracy terms MUST have an acronym) will find themselves shrouded in similar mystery.

    In the meantime, all “hacked and dodgy Firesticks” should be immediately wrapped in tin foil and buried outside. For extra protection, make a tin foil hat and take two spoons of common sense every four hours.

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

    • chevron_right

      Premier League Celebrates “Success” as IPTV Pirate Walks Out of Court

      news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Thursday, 3 November, 2022 - 11:03 · 3 minutes

    marvelstreams This September, TorrentFreak was provided with information relating to Marvel Streams UK, a pirate IPTV service that suddenly disappeared in March 2022.

    Like many similar services, Marvel Streams offered subscription packages that included live TV channels and a movie/TV show VOD service, all for a cheap monthly price.

    The service’s operator, Peter Dilworth of Merseyside, was unaware that the Premier League had discovered Sky and BT Sport streams being made available on his service and that anti-piracy group FACT had launched an investigation in January 2021.

    Sources with knowledge of the service told TorrentFreak that the case was referred to NWROCU, the North West Regional Organised Crime Unit. This police unit had been involved in similar IPTV cases over the past couple of years and in March 2022, Dilworth was arrested.

    Eight-Month Suspended Sentence

    Documents shared with TorrentFreak indicated that Dilworth was initially expected to plead not guilty. When he appeared at Liverpool Crown Court this Tuesday, he’d already entered a guilty plea, something looked upon favorably by the courts. We understand that a custodial sentence was expected but in the event, Dilworth received an eight-month sentence, suspended for 18 months.

    Given that the Premier League, FACT, BT Sport, Sky, and a police organized crime unit had all been involved at some point, it seems unlikely that a suspended sentence was their ideal outcome. However, in a joint statement issued yesterday, the suspended sentence was welcomed by the police, with Premier League and FACT also expressing satisfaction.

    “We would like to thank Merseyside Police for all their work and support on this case. The successful prosecution would not have been possible without them acting on our intelligence and ultimately arresting the operator,” said Kevin Plumb, General Counsel for the Premier League.

    FACT Chief Executive Kieron Sharp thanked Merseyside Police for their work and described the outcome as “another step forward in the right direction in tackling the issue of illegal streaming.”

    Merseyside Police also provided an interesting comment – notable for what it included, and for what it left out.

    Important Details Left Out?

    “We welcome this sentence, which shows the value of working closely with our partners in law enforcement,” said Merseyside Police Detective Constable Gareth Jones.

    “Dilworth made a considerable amount of money from his dishonesty, and we are glad that this joint investigation has resulted in such a positive outcome.”

    When pirates are prosecuted in the UK, more often than not “considerable amounts of money” feature prominently in press releases announcing their convictions. In an earlier prosecution where three men made around £5 million, the amount was described as “significant” by the Premier League.

    The complete absence of any specific figure beyond “considerable” in Dilworth’s case is a departure from the norm, but documents seen by TorrentFreak in September do put a figure on the money he received – just under £19,500.

    No Details of What Dilworth Was Actually Convicted Of

    FACT’s press release is available here but there is no mention whatsoever of the crimes Dilworth actually committed.

    That is also a departure from tradition in these cases. Perhaps it’s a simple oversight but the details are interesting since we understand the prosecution took a different track. The Premier League and FACT are known for their aggressive private prosecutions in criminal courts but Dilworth’s case was a break from the norm.

    Somewhat unusually, his prosecution was handled by the Crown Prosection Service and where Premier League and FACT present charges of fraud, the CPS opted for offenses under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (296ZB(2)(a) and Proceeds of Crime Act (section 329(1) .

    Whether this case is an outlier or the start of a new trend is unknown, but prosecutions under copyright law carry significantly lower sentences than those alleging fraud, something that Peter Dilworth is certainly aware of right now.

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

    • chevron_right

      Pirate IPTV Operator Faces Prison Following Organized Crime Investigation

      news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Monday, 26 September, 2022 - 07:33 · 4 minutes

    marvelstreams Rightsholders seeking to crack down on pirate streaming services in the UK can do so under civil and criminal law but the former has mostly been abandoned.

    Rightsholders such as the Premier League, Sky and BT Sport, with support from the Federation Against Copyright Theft, now tend to conduct their investigations before referring them to the police.

    When cases are progressed, this usually means police-led raids, arrests, and seizures of key evidence. Then, based on a number of factors, subsequent prosecutions are handled by the state or via private prosecutions. According to sources familiar with the matter, a new criminal case will be heard in court next month, one that could lead to a custodial sentence for the suspect.

    Marvel Streams Goes Offline

    Early this year, UK-based IPTV service Marvel Streams appeared to be operating much like any other, offering live TV channels plus movies and TV shows as part of a cheap monthly subscription package. By the second week of March, the service’s Twitter account found itself dominated by complaints. The general theme was that the service had disappeared without notice and nobody knew what was happening.

    “Is your system down or is there another link?” one user wrote . “I’m trying to renew and haven’t been able to, is the website down?” added another.

    While some IPTV services manage to stay online for extended periods of time, others tend to come and go. While this means that customers lose any money paid in advance, it’s hardly an unexpected event and people move on. With Marvel Streams a fairly distant memory, earlier this month we were surprised to receive a tip offering information on the IPTV service’s demise.

    Alleged Marvel Streams Operator Arrested in March

    According to the source, Marvel Stream’s downtime in March was due to the service’s operator being raided in the UK. A second source familiar with the matter confirmed that was indeed the case, with one questioning why police hadn’t reported the arrest at the time, as is usually the case. Here’s what we know.

    As part of an investigation reportedly carried out by the Federation Against Copyright Theft on behalf of Sky and BT Sport, investigators purchased a Marvel Streams subscription and confirmed that the broadcasters’ content was being made available illegally.

    The case was later referred to NWROCU – the North West Regional Organised Crime Unit – which has been involved in similar cases over the past couple of years, including one that targeted three men in late March .

    NWROCU officers accompanied by FACT/Sky/BT Sport representatives subsequently targeted a man in Claughton, Merseyside, believing him to be the operator of Marvel Streams. No other arrests were made, our sources say.

    Relatively Rare Copyright Charge

    Documents seen by TF indicate that a man in his mid-thirties was subsequently charged with two sets of offenses, both covering the period February 2021 to October 2021. It is common for IPTV operators to be charged under the Fraud Act but as far as we can see, that’s not the case here.

    The first charge alleges offenses under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (CDPA) 1988, specifically section 296ZB(2)(a) .

    It’s alleged that in the course of a business, the suspect marketed a service (Marvel Streams UK) that enabled or facilitated the circumvention of effective technological measures.

    For cases normally handled under the easy-to-understand Fraud Act, the use of the CDPA in this matter is somewhat unusual. Charges related to circumvention of content protection measures are rarer still in IPTV cases, although in the United States they have been increasing in recent years.

    A person guilty of an offense under 296ZB subsection 2 is liable (on summary conviction) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or both, according to the CDPA. A conviction on indictment carries the possibility of a fine, a prison sentence not exceeding two years, or both.

    Charge Under the Proceeds of Crime Act

    The second charge relates to an alleged offense under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, specifically section 329(1) .

    Under Section 329, a person commits an offense if they acquire criminal property, use criminal property, or have possession of criminal property. In this case the alleged operator of Marvel Streams stands accused of possessing around £19,500, which appears to relate to revenue generated by the IPTV service during an eight-month period in 2021.

    Penalties available under Section 329 vary from a maximum prison sentence of six months, a fine, or both, to a maximum of 14 years imprisonment, a fine, or both.

    We’re informed that the alleged operator of Marvel Streams will appear in a magistrates’ court (district court) early October and from there the case will be referred to a Crown Court for an appearance no later than November.

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

    • chevron_right

      UK Govt. Prepares to Dissolve Anti-Piracy Group & Seize Its Assets

      news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Saturday, 2 July, 2022 - 14:25 · 7 minutes

    troll Most higher-tier anti-piracy groups are interested in taking down illegal sites, services and other commercial-scale pirates.

    Many of their targets are given multiple warnings before anything terrible happens because ending their piracy is the main goal. If that can be achieved without a legal battle, it’s better for everyone and it’s cheaper for everyone too.

    But there are also anti-piracy groups that don’t give warnings and don’t believe in second chances, no matter how small the infringement or how poor the alleged infringer might be. In fact, these groups deliberately target residential internet subscribers and demand hundreds, even thousands of dollars, euros or pounds in compensation – and feel entirely justified doing so because the law allows it.

    Public support for these enforcement schemes is comparable to that enjoyed by wheel clampers and ANPR-powered parking fine companies. Even some MPs have said they don’t like them , and they’ve even been criticized in the House of Lords.

    The common denominator is the obviously unhealthy power disparity between corporate giants and ordinary internet subscribers, something that is built-in and then reinforced by design. However, there is always someone bigger than the big guys and when they show up, the schadenfreude can be delicious. But before the main course, here’s a small hors d’oeuvre.

    The Power of the Limited Liability Partnership

    Hatton and Berkeley (H&B) and its partners have been demanding cash settlements from UK internet subscribers for years . Its settlement model was initially quite ordinary but when it began promoting Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) as an anti-piracy “ insurance wrapper “, the projection of power was obvious.

    The plan presented by H&B envisioned the use of LLP corporate structures to protect businesses involved in settlement campaigns, ensuring that if things went bad for them litigation-wise, any financial liability could be pre-planned and minimal.

    In short, fortified corporate trenches should be dug to defend against financially insecure and legally-unaware members of the public. H&B Administration LLP was ready to step up a gear but what followed next was perhaps more surprising.

    FACT Administration LLP

    In September 2019, FACT Worldwide Limited – a company operated by Federation Against Copyright Theft chief Kieron Sharp – became a member of H&B Administration LLP. Even to admiring critics, that came as a big disappointment.

    Due to its very nature, FACT’s work has at times been controversial but its solid reputation is built on decades of painstaking work in complex and high-profile commercial-scale piracy cases. Cash settlement models targeting the public with expensive ‘speeding tickets’ seemed a particularly poor fit.

    Nevertheless, in 2020 Sharp also joined the LLP as a named member and in 2021, H&B Administration LLP changed its name to FACT Administration LLP. It soon began pressuring internet subscribers for cash settlements on behalf of its movie company members and later added a scary payment portal warning of potential criminal action, as well as civil.

    Protective Wrappers Are Subject to the Law

    But while LLPs might have protective qualities, they aren’t encased in a lawless bubble. Operating an LLP triggers responsibilities including statutory reporting requirements. These are laid down by the government and when ignored, escalating levels of otherwise avoidable trouble can lie ahead.

    For example, should an LLP fail to submit its confirmation statement on time, the government doesn’t get immediately upset. If we use the document below as an example, the statement date is April 11, 2022, and it’s completely acceptable to submit one before April 25.

    Taking longer, however, means the addition of big red text on a previously clean record.

    Of course, it’s human to forget things so the government is very good these days in that it can send a reminder before the statement is actually due – a friendly ‘pre-infringement notice’ of sorts. It’s a very reasonable way to remind people that legal obligations aren’t being met.

    But even that isn’t enough to get some corporations going. Before they have time to shout “protective wrapper” and demand £800, several months have passed and perhaps the most basic and cheap of all company filings still hasn’t been done.

    Quite why that’s the case here is anyone’s guess. Anti-piracy groups always seem so particular about the law when it comes to the actions of other people. When alleging infringement, for example, they sometimes suggest that internet subscribers who aren’t the infringer failed in their “duty of care” by not anticipating what someone else might privately do on their connection, at some indeterminable point in the future.

    If they’d had the luxury of an official reminder in advance, detailing specific dates and legal requirements, and that was followed by several polite warnings after, you could probably see their point. But for settlement targets, that never happens. No warnings, no chances. Give us money.

    More Warnings Incoming

    Thankfully, people who run LLPs do get polite reminders and then warnings about their failure to comply with their legal obligations. Earlier this week a notice appeared on the FACT Administration LLP page on Companies House , announcing that if it persists with its non-compliance, things could get very serious indeed.

    “The Registrar of Companies gives notice that, unless cause is shown to the contrary, the Limited Liability Partnership will be struck off the register and dissolved not less than 2 months from the date shown above [28/06/2022],” it reads.

    “Upon the Limited Liability Partnership’s dissolution, all property and rights vested in, or held in trust for, the Limited Liability Partnership are deemed to be bona vacantia, and will belong to the Crown.”

    This notice represents yet another warning to comply with the law after months and months of non-compliance. But here we are several days later and still nothing has been done. Some ‘duties of care’ are less important than others, it seems.

    As a result, this week FACT Administration LLP was featured free of charge in Britain’s oldest newspaper – The Gazette. It’s much less ‘fun’ than the country’s tabloids but easily competes with the ‘red tops’ when it comes to scandals, even while striving for reporting accuracy.

    “Not filing your confirmation statements, annual returns or accounts is a criminal offense – and directors or LLP designated members could be personally fined in the criminal courts,” UK Government advice reads .

    “Failing to pay your late filing penalty can result in enforcement proceedings. Any criminal proceedings for not filing confirmation statements, annual returns or accounts is separate from (and in addition to) any late filing penalties issued by Companies House against the company.”

    But of course, despite all the loud words and threats of dissolving the LLP and giving the LLP’s assets to the Crown, it’s unlikely that anything terrible will happen. There are no immediate financial penalties for filing a late confirmation statement and no matter how badly things go, it’s nearly always possible to get a company back on track eventually.

    Another plus side is that filing a confirmation statement is both easy and ridiculously cheap – just £13. However, if people can’t spare 20 minutes and have money to burn (perhaps alleged pirates donated generously lately) a familiar company with an address in Mayfair, London, says it will do it for just £125 . Probably best to send a few reminders, though, just in case.

    Finally, reminders might also be needed in respect of US-based company TCYK LLC. Its movie – ‘The Company You Keep’ – featured in cash settlement letters initially sent out in 2015, including one sent to an 82-year-old grandmother .

    The problem is that despite being listed as an active member of FACT Administration LLP, corporate data in the United States shows that the company has been dissolved leading to the possibility that doesn’t exist. Companies House doesn’t appear to have been informed about that but in a few months, perhaps someone will let them know.

    ——-

    FACT Administration LLP structure facing strike off

    Current person/entity with significant control: Hatton & Berkeley Management Ltd (Director: Robert Croucher, 75%+ shareholder 1 )

    Members, countries of incorporation (where applicable), plus sources/connections

    Robert Croucher (UK) 1 , 2
    Kieron Sharp (UK) 1 , 2
    Oliver Williams (UK) 1 , 2
    After 2 Movie LLC (USA) 1 , 2
    After 34 Nevada LLC (USA) 1 , 2
    Azil Productions LLC (USA) 1 , 2
    Cinestate Run Hide Fight LLC (USA) 1 , 2
    FACT Worldwide Ltd (UK) 1 , 2
    H Films Inc. (USA) 1 , 2
    Hatton & Berkeley Management Ltd (UK) 1 , 2
    Icon Film Distribution Ltd (UK) 1 , 2
    Right Angle Productions LLC (USA) 1 , 2
    TCYK LLC (USA) 1 , 2 (dissolved)
    Voltage Holdings LLC (USA) 1 , 2
    Wonder One LLC (USA) 1 , 2

    Former member/notable resignation:

    Copyright Management Services Ltd ( Patrick Achache – also Maverickeye / Guardaley )

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

    • chevron_right

      Piracy, It’s a Crime: UK Govt. Ignored Warnings, Now Families Pay The Price

      news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Wednesday, 1 June, 2022 - 06:42 · 8 minutes

    crime pay fine The Digital Economy Act 2017 was the government’s attempt at creating a better, safer internet for citizens in the UK.

    It included an amendment to the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act that raised the maximum sentence for online infringement to 10 years in prison, with a basic threshold of simply exposing a copyright owner “ to a risk of loss “.

    This meant that anyone downloading and sharing a single song or a single movie using BitTorrent became criminals in the eyes of the law. For a country that routinely closes home burglary investigations within hours , criminalizing a few more million people was never going to end well.

    Government Ignored Warnings

    The UK’s Open Rights Group had tried to reason with the government, noting that none of the UK creative industries had advocated for pursuing individual file-sharers as criminals but by allowing that, the government would expose citizens to a specific risk.

    [A]busive copyright owners will be able to substantiate that file sharing is a criminal matter, punishable by way of a custodial sentence. This would in particular fuel the activities of “copyright trolls”.

    The term “copyright troll” is often applied to companies that monitor file-sharing networks, collect IP addresses they claim are sharing movies, and compel ISPs to hand over the identities related to those IP addresses. They then send letters claiming that legal action in the civil courts will follow, should the recipient (including innocent billpayers) refuse to pay a considerable financial sum.

    Similar operations have existed in the UK for over 15 years but more recently have abandoned pornography in favor of regular movies. In September 2021, we reported that US movie company Voltage Holdings had begun sending demands to Virgin Media customers, claiming they had infringed their rights in the movie ‘Ava’ via BitTorrent networks.

    While these letters are unpleasant to receive, under copyright law they are entirely legal and if the person named in the letter did indeed infringe the movie company’s rights, settling a case might be the sensible course of action. That being said, over time this particular project has taken several unusual turns that bring to mind the warnings of the Open Rights Group and the consequences of criminalizing petty file-sharers.

    FACT Administration LLP

    As detailed in our previous reporting , Voltage Holdings is a member of FACT Administration LLP , a UK corporate structure behind the latest settlement scheme.

    A division of the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT Worldwide) and FACT chief Kieron Sharp are officers in the LLP and are now playing a leading role. FACT, under various corporate structures, has built a reputation for pursuing large-scale infringers since the 1980s.

    They are also the creators of the classic yet mercilessly parodied ‘Piracy, It’s a Crime’ anti-piracy ad but their recent expansion into the cash settlement market is considerably less amusing.

    Virgin Customers Refuse to Settle, Pressure Increases

    When Voltage first went to the High Court requesting the identities of Virgin Media users, they were represented by Lewis Silkin LLP. Subsequent ‘pay up’ letters were also handled by the law firm which, for the protection of the public, is regulated by the Solicitors Regulatory Authority. Documents shared with TorrentFreak indicate that Lewis Silkin has now been removed.

    As part of communication with people who have thus far refused to pay a settlement, Virgin Media bill payers are being advised to communicate with Voltage Holdings directly, via FACT Administration LLP at their shared virtual office address in London. The letter reiterates that the matter relates to infringement of copyright under civil law.

    Since the file-sharing is unlawful, Voltage Holdings LLC is entitled to bring court proceedings against you if it can show on the balance of probabilities that you are the person who engaged in the file-sharing or if you authorised or allowed someone else to do so using your broadband connection. This claim would be brought in a specialist civil court called the Intellectual Property Enterprise court, where liability is determined on the balance of probabilities

    At this stage, only the removal of the law firm and related protections raises more concerns than those usually present in such cases. However, the letter also includes a link to a website that really steps up the pressure. It is run by FACT Administration LLP and its services are provided by FACT Worldwide Ltd, according to its ‘ Modern Slavery ‘ statement.

    Piracy is a Crime

    To be absolutely clear, the website linked in the letter seems to accurately state the law and the legal position of those encouraged to view it. However, it paints an extremely intimidating picture for ordinary members of the public dealing with scary letters that they are unlikely to fully understand, without help from an expensive lawyer.

    Right off the bat, people accused of piracy via BitTorrent (i.e the downloading/sharing of the movie ‘Ava’) are advised that “distributing intellectual property via bit torrent without the rights holders express permission is a criminal offence, it is now easily traceable back to the households that are involved in this style of theft.”

    The first key point is that the above statement is true, as per the Digital Economy Act. The second is that the statement is obviously directed at family homes, not commercial infringers. The government criminalized the sharing of one movie, therefore someone in your home is a criminal, it effectively reads.

    The third point is that many people can live in a household and the named bill payer is not necessarily the infringer. If, however, the bill payer can convince Voltage/FACT they did nothing wrong, they claim the matter will be dropped – good luck with that.

    But what if someone wants to admit civil liability and settle? Good luck with that too.

    Admitting Civil Liability: How About That Crime Again?

    Given that the main purpose of settlement letters is to get people to pay up, the next section on the Fact-Admin.org settlement portal covers a scenario where the recipient wants to accept civil liability. To a regular Virgin Media customer and letter recipient, it is likely to prove bewildering.

    “Admission of liability does not mean that you are not guilty of committing a crime. Digital piracy is illegal, and both joint civil and criminal proceedings are being taken against individuals in the United Kingdom,” it reads.

    The clear message here is that people who are prepared to settle a civil claim can still be prosecuted under criminal law too – i.e paying money in a civil matter does not make a crime go away. But what of the government’s assurances, before the passing of the Digital Economy Act, that the police would not be knocking on the doors of file-sharers?

    BitTorrent ‘Criminals’ Could Be Prosecuted Privately

    The reality is that police won’t be kicking down doors over a movie but FACT Administration and the various companies of the Federation Against Copyright Theft have an answer for that too.

    If the Crown Prosecution Service feels that pursuing a criminal case over one movie isn’t in the public interest, that’s just fine. Because FACT have the option to do what they regularly do against commercial-scale pirates – pursue a private criminal prosecution, run by them, funded by them.

    “Settling a claim out of court is at the discretion of the rights holder, whom may choose to prosecute criminally, depending on the flagrancy of the infringement,” the settlement portal reads.

    “Civil copyright infringement claims will be heard in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court, a division of the High Court. Private criminal prosecution court summons will be made in a Magistrate Court.”

    It’s also worth mentioning that Hatton and Berkeley, a business entity that is also involved in this settlement project, previously advertised the usefulness of an LLP structure (i.e FACT Administration LLP) to mitigate risks to rightsholders, should copyright litigation go badly for them.

    Heads they win, tails alleged file-sharers lose? Possibly.

    Who Better To Deal With Criminals Than Former Police Officers?

    While the above might sound scary, it’s important to note that every detail of this settlement scheme appears to be both accurate and entirely legal, and there are good reasons for that. For example, take the letters being received by people who, up until now, have declined to settle their case in respect of the movie Ava.

    They are signed by Tony Nash, who identifies as the Managing Partner of FACT Administration LLP. Nash is a former police commander of the London borough of Newham who later launched My Private Bobby , a subscription-based private police force in the UK.

    Kieron Sharp, the head of FACT and a named member of FACT Administration, is a former senior City of London Police detective and former head of the economic crime team at Interpol. Other FACT employees with police careers behind them can be found on the company’s website .

    FACT is also closely affiliated with the City of London Police’s, Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU), something regularly documented in hundreds of news reports. Given these connections, the pressure on letter recipients to settle is bound to increase, especially given the liberal references to criminal law, private prosecutions, and a direct link to PIPCU on the portal’s ‘About’ page .

    It’s important to stress that letters sent to alleged file-sharers only reference civil law. However, the website that letter recipients are directed to also makes extremely clear references to criminal law and potential criminal liability, not only for those who refuse to settle, but even those who want to. It’s the kind of messaging the Open Rights Group warned about in 2016 but the government did nothing to prevent.

    Finally, when we first saw indications of a developing settlement scheme last summer, we predicted that a movie called “The Marksman” was likely to feature at some point.

    The settlement portal appears to confirm this, and also references other movies including After We Collided and Run Fight Hide. It’s clear that the companies involved have planned in considerable detail what appears to be a long-term project. It will undoubtedly keep the High Court, internet service providers, and solicitors busy.

    Meanwhile, parents will be wondering whether they need to turn informant on their partner, kids, friends or anyone else with access to their wifi. Or if by simply paying up money they just don’t have, life will go back to normal again. Certainly puts the food and fuel bill crisis into perspective, with perfect timing too.

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