The U.S. Foreign Trade Barriers Report is an annual publication by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR).

The report aims to draw attention to matters that represent “significant foreign barriers” to U.S. exports, investment, and commerce.

These barriers typically revolve around copyright infringement and other intellectual property matters, data privacy, and handling of trade secrets, but there’s no shortage of problems in other areas that fall outside our reporting niche here.

Piracy Problems Worldwide

In common with the Special 301 Report, the Foreign Trade Barriers Report is published by the USTR. As such there is some crossover, with many countries appearing on both lists for one reason or another.

On piracy, copyright, and closely related matters, this year’s report begins fairly predictably; Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Costa Rica, then over to Asia for criticism of China and Cambodia, among others.

That U.S. standards are not being met in other countries doesn’t come as a surprise. Russia’s relationship with the United States over Ukraine is certainly strained, with the USTR highlighting ‘Decree 322’, a new measure that restricts the ability of foreign right holders from “unfriendly” states to collect license payments for most types of intellectual property.

Vietnam: World Streaming Piracy Epicenter

Then there’s the section dedicated to Vietnam, home of the world’s most popular pirate sites, dedicated to piracy of mostly US-produced movie and TV show content, but with zero qualms about offering other content, to a massive global audience.

Yet despite Vietnam-based/operated pirate sites being responsible for billions and billions of illegal views, the report remarkably mentions not a single one. There’s not even a nod towards them collectively, or even a short note that they exist at all.

That is remarkable, bordering on incredible, but Vietnam’s Deputy Prime Minister Lê Minh Khái did have a meeting with United States Trade Representative Katherine Tai in Boston on April 2, so that may provide an explanation of sorts.

No Such Pass For EU Member States

The one-year anniversary of RARBG’s sudden demise is just a few weeks away. Closely linked to Bulgaria, RARBG was one of the most reliable public torrent sites to ever exist yet if the Bulgarian government had any hand in its closure , it’s yet to claim any credit.

The Trade Barriers report makes no mention of the disappearance of RARBG but does note that the USTR has “enforcement concerns” including “inadequate prosecution efforts, lengthy procedures, and insufficient criminal penalties, particularly in the area of online piracy.”

In August 2023, Bulgaria amended its Criminal Code which should make investigations of pirate sites more straightforward; the United States says it will monitor whether the changes make any difference to the rate of criminal prosecutions in Bulgaria.

Germany: Upload Filters Aren’t Aggressive Enough

Germany also receives criticism from the United States due to its implementation of the pro-copyright yet much-criticized EU Copyright Directive.

“When Germany implemented the Copyright Directive in 2021, it introduced new requirements for online platforms regarding the filtering of user uploads to prevent the automatic blocking of potentially copyright-protected content for uses that are presumably authorized by law,” the Trade Barriers Report begins.

“Some U.S. stakeholders are concerned that Germany also introduced an overly broad copyright presumption that makes it difficult for creators to enforce their copyrights in music and videos that are used in the background of short-form content that is often posted on social media.”

The Trade Barriers Report elaborates no further but, in broad terms, U.S. rightsholders seem unsettled by Germany’s focus on implementing upload filters (which have the potential to restrict freedom of expression) in a way that respects fundamental rights and acknowledges exceptions to copyright law. These exceptions include caricature, parody, pastiche, and quotation, and by considering these factors, the right to freedom of expression and the right to communicate are preserved.

U.S. stakeholders are also concerned that that Germany’s legal framework for technological protection measures “remains inadequate.” Whether that includes the 2023 ruling of a German court that held hosting company Uberspace liable for hosting the website of youtube-dl, because the open-source tool allows people to download content from YouTube, isn’t made clear.

Poland and Romania

Concerns over the situation in Poland read as follows: “Stakeholders continue to identify copyright piracy online as a significant concern in Poland and noted inconsistent enforcement on the part of law enforcement and backlogs in the Polish courts. Stakeholders also are concerned about illegal camcording and easy access to counterfeit products.”

In isolation these statements seem relatively unremarkable yet when compared to reporting directly from Poland, by the anti-piracy group that represents U.S. rightsholders’ interests in Poland, there’s a difference of opinion. In a ceremony last month, the Sygnal anti-piracy group handed out ‘Golden Plate’ awards to Polish police officers for their excellence in fighting piracy.

“The most difficult cases often end up in the hands of the best officers, who are not only perfectly versed in the legal and technological aspects related to economic crime on the Internet, but also stand out for their commitment, and this year especially – for their extraordinary diligence in handling cases. As a result, several dozen pirate websites and services related to them were closed last year,” said Teresa Wierzbowska, President of the Sygnał Association.

Finally, criticism of Romania follows the same pattern of the last 10 to 15 years. Low penalties for IP-related crimes combined with excellent internet infrastructure has always been a potent mix. The report claims that “some notorious online pirate sites” operate from Romania and since IP penalties are low, law enforcement bundle significant cases under tax evasion files.

“Romania lacks an effective and timely mechanism for rights holders to submit takedown requests against online markets and hosting platforms for infringing material. Adequate resources, including additional training for law enforcement, are needed to enhance enforcement quality,” the report concludes.

Romania, just like any other EU country, must abide by applicable EU law. Once intermediaries are made aware of infringing content, the law says they must take it down or risk incurring liability ( pdf ) .

The 2024 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers is available here (pdf)

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

When The Pirate Bay first came online, in the second half of 2003 , the ‘internet’ looked nothing like it does today.

A Harvard student had yet to start writing the first lines of code on a new idea, called “TheFacebook”. YouTube wasn’t around yet either, and the same was true for the smartphones that dominate people’s lives today.

At the time, all popular entertainment was consumed offline. People interested in watching a movie could use the Internet to buy a DVD at one of the early webshops, or sign up with Netflix, which shipped discs through the mail. However, on-demand access was simply not a thing. At least, not legally.

Things were changing though. Napster had made it clear that the Internet had the potential to offer music to the masses, albeit illegally. And with BitTorrent technology, The Pirate Bay expanded this ‘free library’ to various other media types, including TV shows and movies.

Pirate Bay’s Oldest Torrent

Today, more than two decades have passed and most of the files shared on The Pirate Bay in the early years are no longer available. BitTorrent requires at least one person to share a full file copy, which is hard to keep up for decades.

Surprisingly, however, several torrents have managed to stand the test of time and remain available today. A few days ago the site’s longest surviving torrent turned 20 years old.

While a few candidates have shown up over the years, we believe that an episode of “ High Chaparral ” has the honor of being the oldest Pirate Bay torrent that’s still active today. The file was originally uploaded on March 25, 2004, and several people continue to share it today.

The screenshot above only lists one seeder but according to information passed on by OpenTrackr.org, there are four seeders with a full copy. This is quite a remarkable achievement, especially since people complained about a lack of seeders shortly after it was uploaded.

Cult Status

Over the years, the “High Chaparral” torrent achieved cult status among a small group of people who likely keep sharing it, simply because it’s the oldest surviving torrent. This became evident in the Pirate Bay comment section several years ago, when TPB still had comments.

“Well, i guess since this is a part of TPB history i’ll add it to my Raspberry Pi torrent server to seed forever,” zak0403 wrote.

Revolution OS & The Fanimatrix

Record or not, other old torrents on The Pirate Bay also continue to thrive. On March 31, 2004, someone uploaded a pirated copy of the documentary “ Revolution OS ” to the site which is alive and kicking today.

“Revolution OS” covers the history of Linux, GNU, and the free software movement, which was a good fit for the early Pirate Bay crowd. Eleven years ago, we spoke to director J.T.S. Moore, who wasn’t pleased that people were pirating the documentary but was nevertheless glad to see it hadn’t lost its appeal.

Fast-forward to the present day and Revolution OS still has plenty of interest, with more than 30 people actively seeding the torrent.

While these torrents are quite old, they’re not the oldest active torrents available on the Internet. That honor goes to “The Fanimatrix” , which was created in September 2003 and, after being previously resurrected, continues to be available today with more than 100 people seeding.

Ten years ago, we were surprised to see that any of the mentioned torrents were still active. By now, however, we wouldn’t be shocked to see these torrents survive for decades. Whether The Pirate Bay will still be around then is another question.

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

[Opening theme music plays, followed by the sound of a car engine starting up and revving loudly. The camera pans through the bustling streets of London until it comes to rest on a sleek silver sports car parked outside a fancy studio building.]

[The door swings open, and out steps our beloved Alan Partridge, clad in his signature blazer and red tie. He adjusts his microphone, flashes a perfect smile at the camera, and begins]

For those unfamiliar with the legendary Alan Partridge, he’s a fictional character created by British comedy genius Steve Coogan. Alan first appeared on the BBC Radio show ‘On The Hour’ in 1991 before starring in his own TV shows, including the BAFTA-winning spoof talk show, Knowing Me, Knowing You. In 2013, the movie Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa launched Alan onto the international stage, picking up another BAFTA on the way.

Eccentric and inept, awkward yet self-important, Alan was named by The Guardian as one of the greatest comedy characters in British television history. But sadly, sooner or later, Alan will disappear into the sunset for good, never to be seen (or heard from) again. Or at least, that used to be the case for national treasures; today we have generative AI.

Hopes and Dreams, Piracy and Plaintiffs

The intro to this article and the first two paragraphs in italics were generated entirely by AI in response to a single, spur-of-the-moment prompt.

It’s April 1, 2024, and Alan Partridge is interviewing an expert on music piracy to find out if piracy is the work of the devil or the best thing that’s ever happened. Write a funny intro in Alan’s style to introduce the interview.

Anyone familiar with Alan’s work will immediately appreciate that an interview about piracy could go either way, but most likely end in disaster. After a polite start, Alan tends to become bored, cynical, or more interested in rudely imposing his own agenda on his unwitting guests, especially when things don’t go to plan. Fans understand this and the AI models we tested seem to ‘know’ that too.

The only way LLMs can possibly ‘know’ all of this detail is by copying ‘Alan data’ found online; scripts, books, transcripts, most if not all of it copyrighted. Many rightsholders say this is essentially piracy; the copying of copyrighted content without obtaining permission from creators for AI purposes is illegal; it should be restricted, compensated for, or banned completely, they insist.

Pirate Partridge – Ahaarrrr?

When we decided to approach what many suggest is effectively an ‘infringing Alan’ to hear his opinions on piracy, we did so through his unofficial AI agents. What we found were LLMs reluctant to discuss piracy without endless warnings about respecting creators, not breaking the law, the list goes on. It’s clear that lawsuits are already having a chilling effect on ‘chat’, something that would terrify Alan to his core .

With a little framing and persuasion, extracting an interview about piracy was still possible. With some fine-tuning and corrective prompts here and there, plus some guidance on how Alan was likely to become more combative as the discussion went on, we ended up with the interview below.

Experts could do a much better job, but the end result is still a modern day miracle, generated entirely from material previously posted to the internet, just so that people could see it.

The AI-related lawsuits in court right now, targeting Microsoft/ChatGPT , OpenAI , NVIDIA , have the potential to shape the course of history. They could help Alan live forever, or watch him die.

But what if Steve Coogan wants him to die ? It’s his prerogative, after all. Or maybe Alan could be allowed to live, but only after payment of a fee; a license to live, of sorts? The most complex copyright questions ever asked are being asked right now. The answers to those questions could change everything.

We supplied some text from anti-piracy press releases for background, and offered input on how Alan was likely to become emotional and escalate. We suggested that Alan should be allowed to wander off-topic with his trademark anecdotes before being quickly brought back by his guest. Everything in the interview below was generated by AI. That includes the emotions marked in brackets when a character begins speaking, which we didn’t ask for but reflect our prompt. The notes describing music and things happening off-camera simply appeared, no prompts required.

Alan Partridge’s Musical Marathon

Title: ‘Alan Partridge Dissects Piracy with America’s Second Best Songwriter’

Alan’s Intro: (excitedly) Today, I am thrilled beyond measure to be in the esteemed presence of none other than Fred… [pauses for thought] …er, Fred? Yes, that’s right, Fred. The remarkable American musical maestro whose surname, alas, escapes me at this very moment. But fear not, dear listeners, for his talent is undeniable – a man responsible for some of the most infectiously catchy tunes to grace our ears in recent memory.

Alan: (frowning disapprovingly) Fred, I must bring up an issue that’s been causing quite a stir in the music world – your work, dear sir, is being shared freely on various nefarious sites such as The Pirate Bay, 1337x, and Torrentz2. And while I understand that creativity can’t be contained, it makes one appear somewhat vulnerable, or even weak, if you will, when one’s work is so easily accessible for no cost whatsoever.

Fred: It’s frustrating, Alan. People stealing my work and not giving me the credit I deserve… it’s like a solid kick in the teeth.

Alan: (pensive) I can understand that, Fred. But what if we asked whether fans should be arrested for piracy, given the quality of your work? What do you think about that?

Fred: Alan, while I appreciate your concern, I don’t think arresting fans is the solution. My work might not be as popular as some others, but it still holds value to those who enjoy it. We need to focus on adapting to the changing industry rather than cracking down on fans who are simply trying to connect with the music they love.

Alan: (irritated) Alright, Fred. I see your point. But you know what they say – quality is its own reward. Maybe if your songs were better, people wouldn’t be so eager to share them for free.

Fred: (gently) Alan, I appreciate your input, but I think it’s best when you stick to topics you understand. Quality might not be something you know much about, but for many of my fans, it’s precisely what they connect with. Let’s move on.

Alan: (defensive) Fair enough, Fred. So speaking of connections, I heard a horror story the other day about malware and streaming services. Have you ever experienced anything like that?

Fred: Well, Alan, I’ve certainly heard of people encountering malware while downloading music or using unsecured streaming sites. It’s definitely something to be wary of. By the way, have you ever stayed at a Travel Tavern?

Alan: (confused) Why yes, actually! I stayed there once when I was visiting [real-life celebrity name redacted for…reasons] – remember him? Anyway, it was quite an experience. So you see, I do know about infection.

Fred: (laughing) Oh, Alan! That’s a tale worth sharing. Now, let’s get back to the discussion at hand. Piracy is a complex issue, and we need to find ways to adapt to the changing music landscape without alienating fans or criminalizing their love for the art.

Alan: (angry) Ungrateful fans! They take, take, take, but never give anything back. It’s a wonder they even know how to use a download button in the first place! These people are idiots. I hate them.

Fred: (calmly) Alan, it’s not fair to generalize like that. Not all fans are the same.

Alan: (more angry) I’ve had enough of these freeloaders! We need to teach them a lesson. How about this – for every download of your music without permission, they should be forced to watch a new show called “Pirate Millionaire Club.” Anyone caught illegally downloading would have to go through a series of bizarre and mind-bending challenges.

Fred: (amused) Now that’s just petty, Alan.

Alan: (getting more angry) No, it’s justice! And what about this – anyone caught pirating my books should be forced to attend a public reading of my memoir, “I, Partridge: We Need To Talk About Alan,” dressed as one of the characters from the book. They’ll have to recite lines while I judge their performances.

Fred: (laughing) Alan, you’re a man of many ideas! But let’s get serious for a moment. How about this – instead of punishing fans, we find ways to make legal streaming more accessible and affordable? That way, they can still enjoy the music they love without breaking the law or putting themselves at risk.

Alan: (considering) Well, Fred, I suppose that could work. But let’s not forget about those pirates who profit from stealing our work! What do you think about imposing some hefty fines on these guys? Like, really hefty fines – enough to make them think twice before messing with us!

Fred: (nodding) I agree, Alan. Fines could be an effective deterrent for those who make a living off piracy. But let’s not go overboard. What are your top three ways to stop piracy?

Alan: (serious) Alright, Fred. My top three ways to stop piracy would be:

1. Making legal streaming so irresistible that no one would even think about pirating anything. We’ll have exclusive content, low prices, and the best customer service in the industry.

2. Establish a special pirate island where they can live out the rest of their days, listening to nothing but my music on an endless loop. (winks) No, but seriously now.

3. Imposing devastating fines on those who engage in large-scale piracy – fines so colossal they’ll be left penniless, struggling with crippling malnutrition, and even facing the desperate prospect of turning to the darkest depths of prostitution just to survive. This punishment will serve as a haunting reminder of the dire consequences of messing with the creative minds behind the art you love.

Fred: (laughing) Alan, you’re a true visionary! I’m not sure how serious you are about that last one, but it’s certainly an… interesting solution. Thanks for inviting me, Alan – as always, it’s been an adventure.

Alan: (smiling) My pleasure, Fred. And remember, if you ever need help navigating the treacherous waters of piracy, just give me a call.

TorrentFreak: Don’t get too comfortable, Alan. You could be replaced by AI in the blink of an eye. Scared?

Alan: Ah, come on! I’m not scared of some silicon stuff. If AI tries to take over my job, I’ll just outsmart it with my human intelligence. I’ll learn all about coding and programming, become an AI expert myself, and then use that knowledge to stay ahead of the game. No big deal!

TorrentFreak: Will you play a request for us Alan? I was thinking of ‘I Fight for the Human Race’ by Gary Numan because it seems to capture your feelings right now. [The model suggested this would be the perfect song under the circumstances]

Alan: You know what? That’s a perfect choice! I Fight for the Human Race by Gary Numan perfectly captures my feelings right now. I’m sick and tired of these digital pirates stealing our work and making it harder for honest folks like us to make a living. But you know what? I’ll keep fighting for the human race, and we’ll prove that we can’t be replaced by machines or cyber-pirates!

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

The Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment ( ACE ) is the world’s most active anti-piracy coalition, with tentacles all around the globe.

The group is closely affiliated with the MPA which regularly obtains DMCA subpoenas on ACE’s behalf, aiming to pick up trails that will eventually lead to the operators of popular piracy sites and services.

MPA/ACE Subpoenas Identify Piracy Targets

This week, a new series of subpoenas appeared on our radar, requesting Cloudflare and the Tonic domain registry to share all information they have on allegedly pirating customers. These subpoenas are quite common but newsworthy nonetheless, as they provide insight on current anti-piracy priorities.

The latest requests are no exception and include some familiar names. Just a few days ago we reported how pirate streaming app MagisTV is at the center of an anti-piracy campaign in Ecuador . The same name also appears in the most recent DMCA subpoena applications.

In one of the subpoenas requests, two ‘MagisTV’ apps and their associated sites are listed, together with the ‘TVExpress’, ‘My Family Cinema’, and ‘Brasil TV’ apps. The list is completed by other (sports) streaming services such as cccambox.com and multicanais.cl.

MagisTV is by no means a new pirate app; both MPA and ACE have been familiar with the service for a while. In fact, the MPA nominated it for the USTR’s annual list of notorious piracy markets for the past two years.

“MagisTV has been in operation since approximately 2019, significantly longer than its peers. Generally, IPTV services popular in Latin America repeatedly change domain names and/or brands to avoid detection and enforcement actions,” MPA wrote last October .

The IPTV service markets through resellers and some unaffiliated third parties try to profit from the brand as well. This makes it tricky to find out which site is official and which is a scam, as outlined on one of the targeted sites.

“BEWARE of websites that offer ‘free’ versions. These Apps and services are fraudulent and have NO relationship with Magis TV, they are clones and the dangers of their installation and use are unknown,” the note reads.

Whether this warning is legit or not is a question we prefer not to answer. It’s clear, however, that ACE is eager to find out who’s behind this version, and they hope Cloudflare can provide useful information.

Aniwatch and Zorox

The recent wave of DMCA notices also targets live-streaming portal thetvapp.to. In addition, traditional on-demand pirate streaming sites are also listed, including ssoap2day.to, allmanga.to, aniwatchtv.to, and zoroxtv.to.

The latter domain is the new home of zorox.to, which was suspended by registrar Namecheap earlier this month , following an Indian court order.

The name Aniwatch also rings a bell, as it’s similar to the popular pirate streaming portal that changed its name to HiAnime a few weeks ago. However, aniwatchtv.to appears to be a copycat that’s unrelated to the original site, much like Zorox is not linked to the original Zoro, which was the predecessor of Aniwatch (for those who can still follow along).

Futile?

Seeing the same brands reappear in these enforcement efforts isn’t necessarily positive for ACE, as it suggests that the operators, or at least the brands, continue to evade its enforcement efforts. That’s not a good thing.

ACE is aware of the limitations of its efforts and knows all too well that pirates are actively trying to evade being caught. That said, with every effort some sites and services disappear and ACE hopes that, by keeping the pressure on, it can successfully frustrate these pirate operations.

Besides direct enforcement efforts, ACE is also getting involved in research after commissioning a piracy/malware study in India recently. As we’ve seen in the past , the findings suggest that since pirate sites are disproportionally linked to malware, the Indian government should intervene.

The declarations requesting the DMCA subpoenas referenced in this article are available here ( 1 , 2 and 3 )

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

Operating a pirate IPTV service can be a dangerous endeavor, no matter where one’s located. In the United States, home to Hollywood and other major entertainment outfits, the risks are arguably even higher.

In the past, we have seen several pirate IPTV businesses being taken to court , with rightsholders almost always on the winning side. These cases can result in million-dollar damages awards or even multi-year prison sentences , if the feds get involved.

Despite this backdrop, some people are still willing to take a gamble. According to a new lawsuit filed at a Texan federal court, Dallas resident William Freemon and his company Freemon Technology Industries, are a prime example.

Hollywood Lawsuit Against IPTV Operator

The complaint, filed by Hollywood majors including Disney and Warner Bros, as well as streaming giants Amazon and Netflix, accuses the defendant of widespread copyright infringement.

This alleged illegal activity involves selling presumed pirate IPTV subscriptions through domains such as instantiptv.net, streamingtvnow.com,streamingtvnow.net, tvnitro.net, cashappiptv.com, livetvresellers.com, stncloud.ltd, and stnlive.ltd, some of which remain online today.

“Freemon operates an extensive and commercially scaled network of illegal streaming services that offers unauthorized access to live channels and video-on-demand streams of Plaintiffs’ copyrighted movies and TV shows,” the complaint reads.

The defendant is a familiar name for the entertainment companies, who have followed his actions for years.

“Freemon has a long history of brazen disregard for copyright laws, and his early foray into internet piracy is the first link in the chain leading to his current web of illegal services,” they write.

“Beginning in 2016 and continuing through 2019, Freemon sold illegally modified Fire TV Stick devices. These devices connect to a regular TV and allow customers to access unauthorized content.”

Firesticks Lead to IPTV

The ‘loaded’ Firestick business was promoted on X and Facebook and the complaint includes two dated screenshots from this activity. At the time, these devices were sold through firesticksloaded.com and firesticksloaded.biz, and Freemon was listed as the registrant for the latter domain.

These sites are long gone now but they offered a fruitful lead to other, potentially illegal, activities. The Firesticks domains were hosted on the same IP address as several other domain names and ultimately formed a trail to the controversial IPTV operations.

Those IPTV services include ‘Streaming TV Now’, ‘Instant IPTV’, ‘Cash App IPTV’, and ‘TV Nitro’. Some of these were subsequently advertised through the YouTube channel @williamfreemon3378, which the plaintiffs believe belongs to the defendant.

The YouTube videos are no longer online today as they were taken down following complaints from rightsholders, but they’re used as additional evidence to support the current lawsuit.

“These YouTube videos —and their subsequent removal— nonetheless provide further evidence that Freemon is behind this web of services and that he knows he is committing infringement,” the complaint reads.

TV Nitro and Other IPTV Endeavors

According to the plaintiffs, ‘TV Nitro’ was the first IPTV service that Freemon was linked to. This service originally operated as ‘Nitro TV’ between 2019 and 2021. After subsequently going offline for two years, it recently reappeared.

‘Streaming TV Now’ is the most popular IPTV service according to the complaint. It first appeared online in 2020 and offers access to 11,000 live channels, as well as on-demand access to over 27,000 movies and 9,000 TV series.

“Freemon offers customer subscription packages for Streaming TV Now at prices ranging from $20 per month to $150 per year—depending on the package and billing cycle selected. The money goes to Freemon.”

In addition to offering IPTV packages to the public, the defendant is also accused of recruiting resellers through livetvresellers.com, presumably to expand the reach of his IPTV business.

Warning Leads to Lawsuit

Before taking the matter to court, Amazon, Netflix, and the Hollywood studios sent a letter to the defendant, asking him to stop all infringing activities. However, that didn’t yield the desired response. Instead of taking action, the defendant said he no longer controls the domains.

“Freemon was not cooperative. He did not take down the Infringing Services and instead offered unsubstantiated claims that he transferred the associated domains,” the complaint reads.

“Plaintiffs spent months negotiating with Freemon. Based on the lack of substantial change to the Infringing Services in the intervening times, including that the respective main domains are still hosted with the same hosting provider [Amarutu], Freemon is likely still controlling the Infringing Domains.

“Freemon’s evasiveness is particularly concerning in light of his long history of willful infringement,” the plaintiffs add.

The rightsholders allege that the defendant is liable for copyright infringement, either directly or indirectly. They therefore request a jury trial and appropriate damages.

With 125 movies and TV shows listed in the complaint, maximum statutory damages can be as high as $18 million. The figure could increase further still, as the plaintiffs reserve the right to add more titles.

For now, however, the priority seems to be to end the infringing activity. To that end, Amazon and the other plaintiffs request injunctive relief, including the handover of all infringing domain names and the destruction of all ‘pirate’ hardware.

—

A copy of the complaint, filed yesterday at the District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas, is available here (pdf)

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

Z-Library is one of the largest shadow libraries on the Internet, hosting millions of books and articles that can be downloaded for free.

The site defied all odds over the past two years. It continued to operate despite a full-fledged criminal prosecution by the United States, which resulted in the arrest of two alleged operators in Argentina.

According to the latest available information, these two defendants are still fighting their extradition. Meanwhile, the Z-Library site has continued to operate as if nothing ever happened, serving books to millions of people all over the world.

Z-Library Fundraising

A few days ago, the shadow library announced a new fundraising campaign to generate revenue. While users can buy premium access all year round to obtain access to additional features and downloads, Z-Library regularly hosts additional donation drives to fund project maintenance and development.

“Although the last 2 years have been challenging for the project and the team, we are not giving up and are continuing to work on the development of the library,” the team writes, asking users to contribute.

As last time, thousands of dollars are quickly pouring in from all over the world. Despite the legal challenges and the ongoing criminal investigation, many people seem happy to chip-in through various payment options, including cryptocurrencies.

This type of generosity from users is rarely seen on ‘pirate’ sites. While the shadow library’s operators are undoubtedly happy with the support, popularity also comes with a major downside; scammers.

Soon after Z-Library lost its main domain names following U.S.-orchestrated seizures, outsiders stepped in to hijack the traffic. The site has repeatedly warned against these “fraudulent” and “unsafe” copycats but the problem never went away. On the contrary, it’s getting worse.

Email Scams

Over the past several weeks, there have been dozens of reports from Z-Library users who received emails, purported to be from the Z-Library team, alerting them to a new domain name. One of the early versions included the following message :

“It is with a heavy heart yet hopeful spirit that we reach out to you. We’re entering a period of significant change at Z-Library.

As an integral part of our community we believe it’s important you’re among the first to learn of our transition to a new domain: z-lib.id. This change, though challenging, paves the way for an enhanced, more robust Z-Library experience.

Your steadfast support has been a beacon during our journey. As we navigate these new waters, your continued presence and advocacy are more important than ever. We hope you’ll join us in embracing this change and help in sharing our new address, z-lib.id, within your circles.”

These emails were received by actual Z-Library users but the domain being promoted has nothing to do with the original Z-Library project. On the contrary, it appears to be linked to a popular copycat site that’s been around for a while.

In recent weeks these ‘scammy’ emails have continued, but the messaging has changed somewhat. An email sent to many people this month is more to the point, urging people to visit and bookmark the new domain.

“Good news! Z-Library has a new web address: z-lib.id. You can simply type “z-lib.id” in Google or put it in your browser to visit us. We appreciate your support.”

Needless to say, these emails are not being sent by the Z-Library team but by scammers attempting to drive traffic to their site. There’s a clear profit motive, as “premium” access is currently required to download anything.

‘Not Compromised’

Of course, it’s no surprise that outsiders are trying to profit from the popularity of an existing piracy brand. We have seen variations of this theme for several decades. However, the email campaigns are rather novel.

At this point, it’s not clear how the scammers obtained the emails. In an email to TorrentFreak, the real Z-Library team acknowledges the scam problems but says that there’s no sign that their systems were compromised in any way.

“Unfortunately, the situation with fraudulent mailings is getting worse. Since our domains were blocked in November 2022, there have been at least a few independent scam sites posing as z-library. They use our name, design, and highly similar domain names.

“[W]e are confident that there have been no incidents of user data leakage. However, we strongly recommend that you change the password for your account,” a Z-Library spokesperson writes.

The team suggests that recipients of the scam emails may have tried to sign into one of the scam sites in the past. That would have exposed their email address and password to these people, which is why Z-Library believes it’s important to update this information.

Scam Connection

It’s not clear who is behind these misleading email campaigns, but there are some interesting patterns to observe. The .id domain name promoted in the emails uses the same Cloudflare nameservers as z-lib.is did in the past.

The identical nameservers are not solid proof, however, as there are thousands of sites using the same ones. However, there’s an additional traffic pattern that links the two domains as well.

As seen above, traffic to the .is domain tanked in February, around the time when the emails started coming in, while traffic to the new .id domain surged. This suggests a link between the two domains. Perhaps the scammers somehow lost control over their old domain, triggering them to launch the email campaign.

Seizures and other Troubles

Whatever the reason, the official Z-Library team continues to caution users to be on the lookout for copycats, including via an updated warning banner that mentions the new domain name.

The Z-Library team believes that scammers and copycats are regularly DDoSing its servers too. At the same time, they have tried to add their links to the official Wikipedia page and hijack the top positions in search engines.

Of course, scammers are only part of the challenge. The U.S. Government has also repeatedly seized the site’s domain names, which creates an opportunity for copycats to increase their traffic. The latest seizure round was last November, but that may not be the last.

On the legal front, there hasn’t been any movement in the U.S. criminal case recently. The two alleged operators filed a motion to dismiss the criminal complaint last summer, but news has been quiet since then.

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

In the fall of 2019 , Brazilian law enforcement agencies launched the first wave of anti-piracy campaign ‘Operation 404,’ referring to the well-known HTTP error code.

With help from law enforcement in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Argentina, the authorities took down more than a hundred sites and services, while several suspects were arrested.

Following its initial successes, several new waves ‘Operation 404’ were initiated over the ensuing years. Each wave led to raids and takedowns across the country, with assistance from international law enforcement partners. It was clear that Brazil had its enforcement apparatus in order, but the outcomes of these efforts in terms of follow-up actions were largely unknown.

This week, anti-piracy group ALIANZA booked its first ‘404’ related victory in court. Following a criminal complaint from the group, Judge Marina Figueiredo Coelho of the Fifth Criminal Court of Campinas, Sao Paolo, convicted the operator of a pirate IPTV service that was taken down in 2020.

Prison for Flash IPTV Operator

The operator of Flash IPTV, who is referred to by the initials A.W.A.P., was found guilty of criminal copyright infringement and sentenced to five years and four months in prison.

Flash IPTV was a relatively large IPTV service with 13,547 active users at its peak. According to local news reports , the service generated R$4,542,034 ($912,000) in revenue over twelve months, before it was taken offline in 2020 as part of the second ‘Operation 404’ campaign .

Speaking with TorrentFreak, ALIANZA says that this is a historic verdict, as it’s the first criminal IPTV prosecution linked to ‘Operation 404’ in Brazil.

“We appreciate the commitment of the police and judicial authorities in resolving this important case. The conviction of A.W.A.P. is a milestone that reinforces our commitment to defending the rights of creators and fighting against illegal practices that harm the creative economy,” says Víctor Roldán, ALIANZA’s executive director.

More to Come?

A copy of the verdict wasn’t released to the public, as is common with these types of convictions, so further details are scarce.

While Operation 404 resulted in many arrests over the years, follow-up prosecutions have been rare in Brazil. Previously, ALIANZA did score a similar victory in Ecuador , where the operator of the pirate IPTV service IPTVlisto.com was sentenced to a year in prison.

Last fall, Brazilian authorities conducted the sixth wave of Operation 404 and more are expected to follow in the future. These enforcement initiatives are broadly praised by rightsholders and the recent conviction will only strengthen their support.

There’s always room for improvement, of course. A few weeks ago, the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) recommended Brazil to remain on the US ‘ Special 301 ‘ Watch List of countries with IP-related challenges.

IIPA saw various positive developments, especially regarding Operation 404. However, disagreement between rightsholders over enforcement action could still improve.

“Brazil still suffers from a lack of specific norms and regulations regarding the enforcement of copyrighted works over the Internet and a lack of resources and staff to support enforcement actions considering the reach and amount of content piracy in the region,” IIPA wrote.

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

Most anti-piracy tools and mechanisms, whether dedicated online platforms or legislation crafted to achieve a particular goal, have issues that affect their performance.

No matter how tough, legislation could be of date when finally implemented, or reveal itself to be unwieldy in practice, too costly, or simply ineffective. Technical solutions may face compliance and regulatory issues, while pirate adversaries remain light on their feet by ignoring them all.

One key to success for rightsholders is to exploit pirates where they’re most vulnerable, i.e anywhere where they’re reliant on services operated by businesses that already comply with the law and are more likely to take action.

The European Commission’s Recommendation (Toolbox) published on Tuesday, focuses on just that by providing guidance on enforcement, suggesting priority actions, and encouraging use of existing anti-counterfeit/anti-piracy tools.

Cooperation, Coordination and Information Sharing

The Commission says a key aim of the Toolbox is to promote and facilitate effective cooperation between rightsholders, providers of intermediary services, and competent authorities, by promoting good practice and use of appropriate tools and new technologies.

The headline focus is anti-counterfeiting but within the text the EC notes that “most guiding principles, good practices and tools” developed under the recommendation can also be relevant when tackling pirated content online. In particular, voluntary actions taken by online intermediaries, “enhanced cooperation among competent national authorities,” and the sharing of information and data.

Cooperation and increased information sharing are essential and should be further promoted, at all levels, in accordance with Union law, the protection of personal data and the freedom to conduct business under Article 16 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘ the Charter ’). Good practices should be identified, and recommended to all actors, including e-commerce marketplaces, transport and logistic service providers, payment services providers, social media providers, providers of domain name services, etc. Secondly, further cooperation and information sharing should be encouraged. This relates to all competent authorities, including market surveillance authorities that currently may not have competences for IP-infringing activities, and promoting further the use of dedicated tools such as the IP Enforcement Portal (‘IPEP’)…

Payment Services, Social Media Platforms

The EC highlights payment services as an area where more can be done. On one hand, these companies are central to rightsholders’ activities. On the other, they can also be used to support IP-infringing activities. The EC says that to prevent misuse of their services for IP-infringing activities, payment services should be encouraged to implement the following good practices:

(a) to clearly state in their terms and conditions, as a ground for suspension or termination of their contract with sellers, any finding, including by the competent authority, of the use of their payment services for IP-infringing activities;
(b) to set up notification mechanisms allowing rightsholders using their payment services to notify any IP-infringing activity;
(c) where technically and economically feasible, to have an information system in place to enable the identification of operators engaging in IP-infringing activities, across different payment services, when one payment service provider has terminated its services with such operators on the grounds of IP-infringing activities;
(d) to exchange information with other payment service providers on trends regarding IP-infringing activities and to put in place specific measures against repeated misuse of their services, particularly where there has been a finding by a competent authority that their services have been used for IP-infringing activities.

Social media providers should similarly prevent misuse of their services, including by having systems in place to identify and take action against those misusing their services for IP-infringing activities.

Domain Name Registries/Registrars

The Commission’s Recommendation naturally assumes that where the law compels intermediaries or service providers to take action, that should be the standard minimum response. However, when entities are asked to go above and beyond, which appears to underpin almost every proposal in the Toolbox, service providers find themselves “encouraged to implement” various measures.

In respect of domain names, Directive (EU) 2022/2555 obliges “TLD name registries and entities providing domain name registration services” to “collect and guarantee the integrity and availability of domain name registration data.” EU Member States should further require these entities to “respond without undue delay” to requests for the disclosure of registration data following requests from “legitimate access seekers.”

Legitimate access seekers include those considered competent under EU or national law for the prevention, investigation, detection, or prosecution of criminal offenses. However, the definition can also encompass anyone with a legitimate reason to access the information, which includes rightsholders and their agents.

When access to domain name registration data that is personal data is sought, TLD-name registries and entities providing domain name registration services established in the EU and/or offering services in the EU are encouraged to recognize as legitimate access seekers any natural or legal persons who make a request for a right to information pursuant to Directive 2004/48/EC .

Member States are further encouraged to share intelligence and data on emerging piracy trends, including lists of websites that have been held by competent authorities to have carried out IP-infringing activities, the tactics and behaviors of alleged infringers, and to explore news ways to share information on those who “repeatedly engage in IP-infringing activities.”

Dynamic Injunctions, Unmasking Petty Infringers

Several EU Member States already have mechanisms in place that allow rightsholders to obtain injunctions against infringers and intermediaries, but the Commission would like to see more.

Specifically, Member States are encouraged to provide for the possibility of dynamic injunctions that can be applied to IP-infringing activities that are similar to those already identified, but are yet to be identified, such as the use of mirror sites.

The Commission also encourages Member States to ensure that petty infringers can’t escape simply because their activities are not commercial in scale or even commercial at all.

“Member States are encouraged to provide for the possibility for the competent judicial authorities to order disclosure of the relevant information to effectively fight IP infringements which are not on a commercial scale, in response to a justified and proportionate request of the claimant in proceedings,” the Commission writes.

“For these purposes, the relevant information could consist of the same information which may be requested in accordance with Article 8(2) of Directive 2004/48/EC , including the email address, telephone number and IP addresses relating to alleged infringers or participants to alleged infringing activities.”

The European Commission’s Recommendation (Toolbox) can be found here (pdf)

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

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: Back in 2004, in the pre-Web 2.0 era, research indicated that BitTorrent was responsible for an impressive 35% of all Internet traffic. At the time, file-sharing via peer-to-peer networks was the main traffic driver as no other services consumed large amounts of bandwidth. Fast-forward two decades and these statistics are ancient history. With the growth of video streaming, including services such as YouTube, Netflix, and TikTok, file-sharing traffic is nothing more than a drop in today's data pool. [...] This week, Canadian broadband management company Sandvine released its latest Global Internet Phenomena Report which makes it clear that BitTorrent no longer leads any charts. The latest data show that video and social media are the leading drivers of downstream traffic, accounting for more than half of all fixed access and mobile data worldwide. Needless to say, BitTorrent is nowhere to be found in the list of 'top apps'. Looking at upstream traffic, BitTorrent still has some relevance on fixed access networks where it accounts for 4% of the bandwidth. However, it's been surpassed by cloud storage apps, FaceTime, Google, and YouTube. On mobile connections, BitTorrent no longer makes it into the top ten. The average of 46 MB upstream traffic per subscriber shouldn't impress any file-sharer. However, since only a small percentage of all subscribers use BitTorrent, the upstream traffic per user is of course much higher.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

BitTorrent Is No Longer the 'King' of Upstream Internet Traffic