Preventing the general public from accessing movies and TV shows without paying for them is a monumental task that, if anything, feels even more difficult than it was 15 years ago.

In addition to hundreds, perhaps thousands of torrent and streaming sites, copyright holders also have to deal with the growing threat of premium IPTV, which grants access to every type of live TV under the sun for comparatively low prices.

Somewhere in the middle of this organized chaos, movie and TV show companies are trying to tackle pirate apps. Mostly Android and iOS-based, these consumer-friendly tools present content in easy-to-navigate interfaces, pulling content from not just their own sources but in many cases third-party file-hosting and IPTV/streaming suppliers, much as other pirate sites do too.

MediaBox HD Targeted By The MPA

One of the more popular tools in this growing niche is MediaBox HD. Available for both Android and iOS, the app is in demand by those looking to access premium content on their phones or, as is increasingly the case, a tablet or Android-based set-top box.

MediaBox HD’s popularity lies in its many features. Aside from a large free library of movies and TV shows, it supports services such as Real-Debrid for more reliable streaming, has Chromecast support, can offer subtitles and even allows for offline viewing. For groups like the MPA, however, these are all reasons to take the app down.

MPA Sends Copyright Complaint to Github

While MediaBox HD has its own site , at the time of writing it’s impossible to access the Android variant of its app from there. Rather than hosting the APK in the same location, the app’s developers chose to host the software on Github instead, meaning it was vulnerable to an easy takedown.

Teaming up under the banner of the Motion Picture Association (MPA), Paramount, Sony, Universal, Warner, Disney and Netflix, sent a copyright complaint to Github, calling on the platform to remove the piracy-facilitating software.

“We are writing to notify you of, and request your assistance in addressing, the extensive copyright infringement of motion pictures and television shows that is occurring by virtue of the operation of the APK software Mediabox HD, which is hosted on and available for download from your repository Github.com,” it reads.

“Specifically, at the URL, the Repository hosts and offers for download the APK, which in turn is used to engage in massive infringement of copyrighted motion pictures and television shows.”

MPA Demands Removal of MediaBox HD Under the DMCA

Attached to the MPA’s complaint but unpublished by Github, the movie and TV show group provides screenshots that claim to show that MedaBox HD streams copyrighted content to the masses resulting in “massive infringement.”

While providing various examples of alleged infringement, the MPA says that these are just the tip of the iceberg since the software goes much further by blatantly infringing other content owned by its members and copyrights held by others.

On this basis, the MPA states that infringement is “plainly is its predominant use and purpose”, citing case law including the MGM v Grokster litigation (2005), the Arista Records v Usenet dispute from 2005, and the 2009 lawsuit between Columbia Pictures and former isoHunt operator Gary Fung.

The MPA suggests that it doesn’t really mind on which basis Github removes the app, whether that’s under the DMCA’s takedown provisions, repeat infringer rules, or Github’s acceptable use policy. Interestingly, however, it does note that it is not trying to claim that the app’s code is copyright-infringing, merely that its sole purpose is to infringe.

“Please note that, by this notice, the MPA Members are not addressing copyright ownership of the APK’s specific lines of code; rather, they are addressing the use of the APK as a whole to provide unauthorized, infringing access to streaming video content, and requesting that you remove or disable access to the APK as a whole on your Repository,” the notice adds.

Github Complied With the Request

Unlike the dispute currently engulfing youtube-dl, which has put Github at odds with the RIAA , there appears to be no such confusion here. Following the request from the MPA, Github removed the MediaBox HD app and, as a result, the software is no longer available from official sources.

While MediaBox HD will likely solve this problem in due course, the attention from the MPA comes after the streaming software was featured in two earlier legal matters.

In September 2019, following a subpoena from the makers of the movie Hellboy, third-party app-store TweakBox took the decision to remove MediaBox HD (plus Popcorn Time and CotoMovies) from its platform.

A month earlier, a Pakistani man who operated a site that offered MediaBox HD, Showbox, Popcorn Time and similar software, agreed to pay a settlement of $150,000 to companies behind the movies The Hitman’s Bodyguard, London Has Fallen and Hunter Killer.

His site, the now-defunct latestshowboxapp.com, was forced to remove MediaBox HD and similar tools, despite not being their developer. The MPA hasn’t yet shown any public signs of seeking a settlement from the developers of MediaBox HD but given past history, that might only be a matter of time.

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

The music industry is convinced. Downloading music from public streaming services, YouTube in particular, is the greatest piracy threat to the industry.

The RIAA and several key music labels are doing everything in their power to counter this menace. They’ve sued several YouTube download sites, removed streamripper URLs from search engines, and most recently they targeted the open-source tool youtube-dl as well.

The last move was a step too far for many. It immediately triggered outrage among developers and the public at large . The opposition reached new heights this week when GitHub and EFF drew a clear line in the sand. No further.

After some modifications, youtube-dl’s repository was reinstated . This was great news for the developers, users, and many stream-ripping sites that rely on the tool. But the decision and the reasoning behind it are much, much bigger than that.

In isolation, the youtube-dl code is a relatively small problem for the music industry. Similar tools will always be available. While the RIAA liked the message that was sent by the removal, they perhaps didn’t foresee that a refusal to take down the same code would be much worse.

‘YouTube Downloading Tools are Not Illegal’

Both GitHub and the EFF have made it very clear that YouTube downloading tools are not by definition illegal. On the contrary.

“Youtube-dl is a lot like the videocassette recorders of decades past: a flexible tool for saving personal copies of video that’s already accessible to the public,” the digital rights group wrote in a recent post on the topic.

GitHub also stressed that youtube-dl is a “ socially beneficial tool ” which can help researchers, journalists, and the public at large.

These comments, which are only a tiny selection of the broader message, are a potential game-changer. The backing from GitHub is particularly notable, as the company is owned by Microsoft, which in its own right is one of the largest copyright holders in the world.

That said, the legality of YouTube download tools is not impacted directly by the public commentary. Eventually, this is something that courts will have to decide over. In the US, there is no clear jurisprudence on this specific issue but that may change in the near future.

The RIAA’s main argument is that these tools violate DMCA section 1201, which prohibits the circumvention of technical protection measures. In YouTube’s case, the RIAA cites the “rolling cipher” protection that YouTube uses to make downloading from the site somewhat more complicated.

Rolling Cipher Encryption?

The question is whether this “rolling cipher” is indeed a protection measure under the DMCA. That’s up to a court to decide, but we have previously shown that anyone with a browser can easily download from YouTube without extra tools.

The RIAA’s position is strengthened by a 2017 order from a court in Germany , that was also cited in the GitHub takedown notice. There, the court ruled that the “rolling cipher” is a technical measure within the meaning of Germany’s Copyright Act.

However, not everyone believes that the court was correct here. EFF stated that, contrary to the court’s ruling, there is no encryption involved. YouTube’s video streams are visible to everyone who uses a regular web browser. The ‘rolling cipher’ simply refers to a changing signature, readable by Javascript, that’s used for some videos.

“The 2017 decision of the Hamburg Regional Court in Germany that RIAA references, which refers to YouTube’s “signature” mechanism, was wrongly decided and is not binding nor even persuasive under U.S. law,” EFF wrote.

GitHub also believes that the German court made an error. Following EFF’s lead, the company concluded that youtube-dl was not circumventing a technical protection measure. “We concluded that the allegations did not establish a violation of the law,” GitHub said.

Stream-Ripper Battle Continues in Court

These are strong statements that will eventually have to be tested before a judge and that may happen sooner rather than later. There are currently two major US lawsuits where the legality of YouTube rippers could be decided. While EFF and GitHub are not part of those cases, their input will likely prove a factor.

One of the lawsuits was filed by Jonathan Nader, the operator of the stream-ripper ‘Yout’, who sued the RIAA last month. Nader decided to be one step ahead of the music industry by demanding a declaratory judgment that his website doesn’t violate Section 1201 of the DMCA .

TorrentFreak reached out to Nader, who said he prefers not to comment on the ongoing litigation. Especially since the RIAA has yet to formally reply.

However, the photo he shared with us reveals that he’s happy with EFF’s stance on the matter.

Nader’s lawsuit touches on the ‘rolling cipher’ argument as well, and he denies that anything is being decrypted or bypassed.

Another lawsuit where the same issue may be brought up was filed by several of the largest music labels two years ago, with support from the RIAA. They sued the YouTube ripping sites FLVTO.biz, 2conv.com , and their Russian operator Tofig Kurbanov.

Both sides are currently still fighting over whether a US court has jurisdiction. Kurbanov’s legal team recently petitioned the US Supreme Court to hear that matter.

If the court decides that the site operator has to defend himself, he is surrounded by a legal team that is confident that they can defeat the copyright and anti-circumvention allegations.

‘RIAA Opposed Every Technological Advance’

Speaking with TorrentFreak, Kurbanov’s defense attorney Evan Fray-Witzer equates stream-ripping to the other technological advances that were protested by the music industry over the years.

“It’s important to remember that the RIAA has consistently opposed virtually every technological advance from the 1970s forward including the advent of cassette tapes, compact discs, and MP3s. For 50 years they have been yelling that the sky is falling and yet – despite this hysteria – music continues not only to survive but to flourish.”

According to Fray-Witzer, this latest attack on stream-ripping is equally misguided and will eventually fail.

“Users have lots of legitimate uses for stream-ripping that have nothing to do with music. And, even when you’re talking about music, users have a legitimate right to time-shift, just as the courts found that people could record TV shows with their VCRs so that they could watch them at a different time,” he says.

The Yout.com and Kurbanov’s cases are not the first stream-ripper lawsuits. A few years ago, the record labels already sued YouTube-MP3 . That site eventually settled the case privately and shut down. While the RIAA celebrated this as a major win, this outcome has little effect on the current cases.

“So far, the RIAA’s successes in court have been the result of defendants who lack the ability to fight back and to prove that these tools do not actually violate copyright law. Hopefully, that’s about to change,” Fray-Witzer notes.

“Stream-ripping sites and software are simply tools – tools with lots of legitimate uses, as the EFF has recognized,” the attorney adds.

DMCA Section 1201 Exceptions

It’s clear that the YouTube downloaders find themselves supported by the recent backing from GitHub and the EFF, but the moral support is just part of the story. In addition, both are also calling on the Copyright Office to broaden the DMCA Section 1201 exceptions .

“We are also advocating specifically on the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA to promote developers’ freedom to build socially beneficial tools like youtube-dl,” GitHub said this week, announcing their plan to get involved in the Copyright Office’s triannual review process.

Right now, US law makes it illegal for most developers to use or distribute code that bypasses technical protection measures, even if that technology or code can also be used for non-infringing or legal means.

Time will tell how these and other issues will develop over time but it’s clear that the RIAA’s takedown notice to GitHub was a wake-up call. Now we just have to see who and what it awakened.

TorrentFreak also reached out to the RIAA to hear their comments on these recent events but the group hasn’t responded. It’s not a stretch to conclude that they are not happy with GitHub’s reversal, to say the least.

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

Nintendo’s ongoing battle to prevent people from playing pirated content on Switch consoles is showing no signs of slowing down .

Its main targets thus far have been distributors and sellers of products offered by the infamous Team-Xecutor but a new lawsuit filed in the United States yesterday targets a seller of another jailbreak-style device.

Circumvention of Technological Protection Measures

As detailed in a number of earlier and similar lawsuits , Nintendo is determined to take action against any product that undermines the security features baked into consoles such as the Switch. These features are designed to prevent unauthorized access to the console and its games with the aim of preventing people from playing pirated content.

According to the latest lawsuit, a defendant identified as Le Hoang Minh, who on Amazon does business under the name ‘Winmart’, sold a device known as RCM Loader. The dongle/device, which operates via a USB-C connector, is marketed as a plug-and-play solution for injecting payload files that allow booting into custom firmware (CFW), including Team-Xecutor’s SX OS.

“Once this circumvention has occurred, the unauthorized CFW modifies the authorized Nintendo Switch operating system, thereby allowing users to obtain and play virtually any pirated game made for the Nintendo Switch. All of this happens without authorization or compensation to Nintendo or to any authorized game publishers,” the company’s complaint reads.

Another feature of the system criticized by Nintendo is the ability for owners of legal copies of games to copy and share those games with others who are also using unauthorized custom firmware. Nintendo says it has been working hard to reduce the availability of SX OS and similar custom firmware but due to the trafficking of devices like RCM Loader, that battle continues.

Defendant Sold RCM Loader Via Amazon

According to the lawsuit, Vietnam-resident Le Hoang Minh, sold RCM Loader devices on Amazon so, to counter this distribution, Nintendo filed a DMCA takedown notice on October 21, 2020, citing 17 U.S.C. § 512(c) and requesting that the listing be removed.

While Amazon did take the listing down, the removal was only temporary.

This short-lived takedown was due to the seller submitting a DMCA counter-notice to Amazon on November 4, 2020, under 17 U.S.C. § 512(g)(3) , claiming that the listing was non-infringing and had been taken down in error.

Defenses Listed in the DMCA Counter Notice

Attempting to cover most available defenses, relevant or not, the counter-notice from Le Hoang Minh is comprehensive if nothing else.

In addition to claiming that the devices are not copyrighted and are therefore in the public domain, the Amazon seller advised the platform that Nintendo’s claim is faulty due to the company failing to provide any copyright registration information in its takedown notice.

“The complainant does not hold the copyright to the material in question, is not the designated representative of the copyright holder, and therefore lacks standing to assert that my use of the material is a violation of any of the owner’s rights,” it added.

In addition to a laundry list of alleged technical failings in Nintendo’s takedown notice, Amazon was advised by the defendant that the use of “the material” was legally protected “because it falls within the ‘fair use’ provision of the copyright regulations” and if Nintendo disagrees with that assertion, it “must” work with the seller to solve the dispute.

“This communication to you is a DMCA counter notification letter as defined in 17 USC 512(g)(3). I declare, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good faith belief that the complaint of copyright violation is based on mistaken information, misidentification of the material in question, or deliberate misreading of the law,” the counter-notice reads.

Importantly, the declaration adds that Le Hoang Minh submits to the jurisdiction of any appropriate US district court in case of a legal dispute with Nintendo.

Nintendo: Challenge Accepted

The lawsuit filed yesterday is a clear indication that Nintendo believes it has the law on its side, in respect of the illegal nature of RCM Loader and the validity of the DMCA counter-notice that attempted to reinstate the listing.

“Defendant manufactures, imports, offers to the public, provides, and otherwise traffics in a circumvention device and software that circumvents the technological measures on the Nintendo Switch — specifically, the RCM Loader,” the company states.

“On information and belief, the only purpose of Defendant’s circumvention device is to circumvent Nintendo’s technological protection measures.”

Demanding maximum statutory damages for each violation of the relevant sections of the DMCA, Nintendo also demands a permanent injunction preventing the defendant from offering to the public or otherwise trafficking in circumvention devices in the future.

On top, Nintendo is demanding relief for the defendant’s alleged abuse of the DMCA counter-notification system by misrepresenting material facts to Amazon, crafted to have the listing restored on the platform, in violation of Nintendo’s rights.

Finally, the gaming giant asks the court to issue an order that will allow for the seizure, impoundment and destruction of all RCM Loader devices in the defendant’s possession, including any related software.

The complaint can be found here (pdf)

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

Nintendo is doing everything in its power to stop the public from playing pirated games on the Switch console.

Their major adversary is the infamous ‘hacking’ group Team-Xecuter , which released ‘jailbreak’ hacks and modchips for the popular game console.

Criminal and Civil Lawsuits

Last month, the US Department of Justice indicted three alleged members of the hacking group. This was a big move, but one that failed to take the group, or even its website, out of business.

The same can be said for several online stores that sell modchips and hacks for the Switch and other consoles. As part of a civil lawsuit , filed by Nintendo earlier this year, a federal court in Seattle granted an injunction that required several foreign stores to shut down. Again, this was easier said than done.

Since the store operators ignored all communication, Nintendo asked their domain registrars to transfer the domain names, as permitted by the court. This is precisely what happened. A few days after granting the injunction, Txswitch.com and other domains were signed over to the videogame company.

‘Hack’ Store Hops to New Domain

However, a day later Txswitch already appeared to have made a comeback, operating from Stxwitch.com. This site looks nearly identical to the old one and even uses the same logo and code.

This type of ‘domain hopping’ is common in pirate circles and Nintendo hoped that the registrar GoDaddy would take the new domain down as well. This would be in line with the injunction, which states that “any variant or successor” was also covered by the order.

Godaddy Demands Detailed Order

In the event, GoDaddy refused to take action without a court order that specifically spells out the new domain name, a new filing by Nintendo explains.

“Nintendo requested that the STXWITCH.COM domain be immediately transferred as a successor or variant of TXSWITCH.COM pursuant to the Judgment. GoDaddy responded to outside counsel for Nintendo stating that they required the domain name to be listed in an order to take action,” Nintendo writes.

The game company requests the court to clarify that, if new copycat sites appear, these are covered by the existing injunction. As such, registrars would be required to take action without a separate order that specifically mentions the new domain.

Putting and End to the Whac-A-Mole

Without such an order, pirate sites will continue to move to new domains, which means that the court has to keep issuing new orders, creating a whack-a-mole situation.

“Nintendo is concerned that absent such further clarifications of the scope of the Judgment, the Doe Defendants will again domain hop, changing a letter of a domain name, and the cycle will continue to repeat with the registrar contending that the new domain is not specifically covered by the injunction and with Nintendo having to return to this Court,” Nintendo adds.

By clarifying that domains of copycat sites and new variants or successors should be transferred to Nintendo, registrars such as GoDaddy will have to take action more swiftly.

This doesn’t mean that registrars have to “police the Internet” and proactively scan for new copycats, the company notes, as Nintendo will track down the new domains and report these accordingly.

Nintendo hopes that with sufficient clarification from the court it can prevent the piracy hack stores from “thumbing their nose at the court” while frustrating Nintendo’s enforcement efforts.

Dynamic Order Isn’t Perfect Either

The requested order is similar to the dynamic pirate site-blocking orders we have seen in other countries. While those deal with ISP blocking, they also allow copyright holders to add new domains names that pop up.

Given the order that’s already in place, it is likely that the court will grant the requested clarification. However, this doesn’t mean that Nintendo’s troubles are over. There are plenty of registrars and registries that don’t fall under US jurisdiction, after all. So the store may move to one of these next.

—

A copy of Nintendo’s request for clarification and to enforce the permanent injunction is available here (pdf)

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

While the world has been struggling with the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, very few notable movies are being released to the public.

Christopher Nolan’s Tenet was a notable exception but with cinema audiences decimated, even that movie failed to reach anything like its full potential.

But as with most rules, there are exceptions.

Just last month, filmmakers released a movie that was not only an instant smash hit but is already one of the most popular Japanese-made movies of all time, despite the pandemic.

Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba the Movie: Infinity Train

Released in Japan on October 16, 2020, Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba the Movie: Infinity Train has done incredibly well by any standards. The anime movie is already the highest-grossing Japanese film of 2020 and is believed to be one of the highest-grossing movies in the country, period. Needless to say, that also makes it one of the most successful anime films ever too.

Based on the manga series Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba , which in itself is the best-selling manga series of all time, the franchise has huge numbers of fans who enjoy the adventures of lead character Tanjiro Kamado, whose kind and determined nature has elevated him to hero status.

A combination of all of these factors has led to an intellectual property drama in both Japan and China, one that has surprisingly caught the attention of the government too.

Hong Kong Police Use Likeness to Front Anti-Fraud Campaign

Given that millions of people are now familiar with Tanjiro, it will come as no surprise that he’s become a part of popular culture, particularly in East Asia but also further afield too. However, a decision by Hong Kong Police to use his likeness in an anti-crime initiative hasn’t gone down well with fans.

Last week a post appeared on Facebook presenting the new face of Hong Kong police’s anti-fraud campaign. Albeit mainly bright purple, the ‘new’ character was immediately confronted with claims of being a ‘rip-off’ of Kanjiro, something that some considered just a little ironic considering the nature of a fraud prevention campaign.

To the untrained eye, similarities might not be blatantly apparent but when taking a closer look, many things become more obvious. When placed side by side in the image below, it’s much easier to see why hardcore fans are less than impressed.

With similar hair, jacket and pants in exactly the same color schemes and designs as those sported by Tanjiro, it’s not hard to see where the police artist drew his influence.

The sword is another obvious element too along with the eyebrows, but when looking at both characters’ foreheads, ‘purple guy’ (who the police say is called ‘Grape’) also has exactly the same marking as Kanjiro which, according to the series, is not a tattoo but a birthmark.

Kanjiro Copying Prompts Copyright Warning From Japan’s Government

While this type of usage might normally find itself glossed over, this matter has attracted the interest of Japan’s Chief Cabinet Secretary Katsunobu Katō.

Noting that he prefers not to comment on specific cases, during a meeting yesterday the Minister did acknowledge that the image posted by Hong Kong Police does indeed resemble Tanjiro, so he took the opportunity to reiterate Japan’s strong stance towards the infringement of local content including manga and anime.

Stating that protecting the rights of Japanese animation is important, Minister Katō added that he wants to “take proper measures” to protect intellectual property wherever possible. There’s no immediate indication that anything will be done to prevent Hong Kong Police from using the image moving forward but we were interested to know whether such use is actionable in Japan or indeed Hong Kong, given the public outcry.

Japan’s Copyright Act Has No Fair Use Doctine

After speaking with an anime expert yesterday who advised that, in his opinion, ‘Grape’ is “a rather obvious parody” of the movie’s main character Tanjiro, TorrentFreak contacted Masaharu Ina, Director of Overseas Copyright Protection at Japan-based anti-piracy group CODA. He confirmed that there is no fair use doctrine under the Copyright Act but said a parody defense is available.

“Parody defense is permitted under the Japanese Copyright Act and has been successfully engaged as a defense against copyright (or trademark) infringement at Japanese Court,” he explained.

In this case, however, he doubts whether the similarities could be actionable as copyright infringement.

“Yes, ‘Kimetsu no Yaiba’ (aka ‘Demon Slayers’) is a copyrighted work. However, just the fact that the Hong Kong design utilizes certain features of the hero of ‘Demon Slayers’ does not constitute a copyright infringement as a matter of law. To constitute a copyright infringement, the design in question must be identical or confusingly similar to the original design. To my eyes the two designs do not appear to be similar enough,” he said.

All of that being said, CODA’s director seems convinced that Hong Kong Police knew what they were doing when they created the new character. As it turns out, when one can read the text that accompanies the image of ‘Grape’, it’s actually there in black and white.

“Interestingly, the design is accompanied by the name of the character that is similar to the original Japanese character and also the name ‘Kimetsu no Yaiba’ in Chinese characters are inserted at the left-top corner, which makes me believe that the Hong Kong Police tried to trade off of the property.

“Therefore, it seems that the design was made on a rather questionable intention, but I do not believe that it constitutes copyright infringement,” he concludes.

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

For broadcasters all over the world, the problem of unlicensed IPTV providers, suppliers, and resellers has only grown during the past few years.

Despite many law enforcement actions, it has remained trivial for consumers to buy subscription packages to access the majority of pay TV channels, PPV events, and VOD content. Last year, however, authorities across Europe took coordinated action to deliver what they hoped would be the most significant blow yet.

Operation Targeting Xtream-Codes

In September 2019, the Guardia di Finanza (GdF), an Italian law enforcement agency under the authority of the Minister of Economy and Finance, revealed that a huge operation was underway to dismantle, among other things, the software service known as Xtream-Codes.

What was unique about this particular action is that Xtream Codes itself wasn’t an IPTV provider. The company behind the software/system offered a comprehensive package that allowed people to manage their own IPTV reselling service and associated customers. It was also registered as a company in Bulgaria and had a local VAT number.

Nevertheless, Italian authorities portrayed Xtream-Codes as a pirate operation, one fully deserving of being shut down to face criminal charges.

For more than a year after the demise of Xtream-Codes, things went almost completely quiet. Until last week, that is, when another massive series of raids were carried out, again at the behest of Italian authorities and again making references to Xtream-Codes.

700 Law Enforcement Officers Shut Down 5,500 IPTV Resources

As previously reported , last week the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust), announced that 700 police officers had been deployed in 11 countries, shutting down around 5,500 servers and other resources related to pirate IPTV.

The reports were echoed by Itay’s GdF, which claimed that as part of the operation (codenamed ‘The Perfect Storm’) it had managed to discover the identities of “over 50 million users” of pirate IPTV services.

While neither announcement mentioned Xtream-Codes by name, when the platform was shut down last year the exact same number of users was mentioned as being connected to the IPTV management system, one that the Italian authorities had already labeled a major pirate service.

It now transpires that after more than a year of maintaining their silence, the people behind Xtream-Codes have had enough.

Xtream-Codes Breaks Its Silence

Earlier today, the previously silenced Xtream-Codes (XTC) portal suddenly produced a lengthy statement in Italian. Its purpose, according to its authors, is to dispel false claims made about the company’s operations after the huge events of last week.

“The company had been in the software development business since 2015 and until its closure, operated worldwide. Proof of this is the great success of users who used the XTC platform and to whom our heartfelt thanks go, who have recognized our product as the best performing tool on the market, in the field of IPTV software,” it begins.

“Over the years we have received many recognitions and awards for our work from the entire IT community, not least XTC has been recognized as one of the 1000 fastest-growing companies in Europe.”

Noting that the company passed “the legality test” in the USA, XTC notes that it registered for the NAB Show in Las Vegas, an annual trade show produced by the National Association of Broadcasters. That event did not go ahead as planned in April 2020 due to the coronavirus pandemic but XTC says that as a company it faced additional problems of its own.

“First of all, the first key concept must be clarified: XTC IS AGAINST PIRACY,” the team insists.

“The hard work carried out in recent years, however, risks being thwarted by the legal events that have arisen in Italy in which the name of XTC, without any foundation, is compared to a criminal association dedicated to the piracy of copyrighted content.”

Xtream-Codes: We Are Against Piracy

The Xtream-Codes system itself could be put to legal uses just as easily as it could illegal uses, since it’s only the licensing status of the content being delivered that makes any difference to its standing. However, in common with software like uTorrent in the BitTorrent scene, Xtream-Codes was well known in IPTV piracy circles simply because it was used by pirate IPTV providers and by extension, many end-users.

All of that being said, it may surprise those who deployed the software in a commercial sense or utilized it in their homes that XTC now claims that it has been working with law enforcement for some time.

“Over the years, XTC has always collaborated with international judicial authorities in order to stop the phenomenon of piracy, to identify and stop those who illegally used our platform. Those judicial authorities, in their sacrosanct activities to combat crime, have always started from the right assumption, which is also the second key concept of the story: THE XTC PLATFORM IS AN ABSOLUTELY LEGAL SOFTWARE,” the company says.

“For these authorities, there has never been any doubt about the lawfulness of the XTC platform, but they have focused their attention, rightly, on the distorted use that some users have made of it and in such cases, XTC has always shown itself to be collaborative in combatting crime.”

Authorities in Italy Saw Things Rather Differently

Unfortunately for XTC, however, the authorities in Italy reportedly saw things in a different light. According to XTC, there was never any attempt to cooperate with the platform to tackle a reported minority of users who abused its systems.

“[The authorities] have never attempted to interact with XTC to try to intercept the dozen users, among the more than 2500 who counted the platform before closing, who used it illegally. XTC was in fact equated to that ten or so subjects, even placing it at the top of this criminal association,” the company complains.

XTC says that in September 2019 it was shut down and also blocked by all ISPs in Italy, a decision accepted on the basis that the truth would soon come out. However, a year on XTC says it is now suffering due to claims that it has been carrying on its business under alternative branding.

“Today, after about a year, XTC is burdened with further very strict precautionary measures, which cannot be reported here for reasons of confidentiality, since some say we are continuing our business under a different name.

“For this infamous affirmation, devoid of any foundation, once again XTC has had to suffer serious consequences, primarily in terms of reputation, which we have built with so much effort over the years,” the company complains.

Criticism of the Press and Authorities

Given the technical nature of a system like Xtream-Codes and the tendency of the mainstream media to take reports by the authorities at face value, it came as no real surprise when many publications took the information they had been provided last year and extrapolated it.

XTC says it remains very disappointed with much of the reporting, which failed to acknowledge that its systems and software only managed IPTV streams and the company did not provide any content itself. The overall intent of XTC, of course, is something to be determined at trial but in the meantime, the company feels it has been poorly treated.

“IPTV is the future and it is very sad that we have been forced to stop for no good reason. It is as if the Italian authorities are trying to spread the message that IPTV software is illegal. For this reason, we have decided to break the silence and denounce the heavy harassment we are undergoing both as XTC and personally, with the awareness that, after this story, to which we are total strangers, nothing will be the same as before.

“But, as someone said ‘soon the time of honors will be over’ and what is seriously assumed at this stage by the investigating bodies must be proven before the Italian judiciary, in which XTC places its utmost and unconditional trust,” the XTC team adds.

Hoping for an outcome in its favor, the company says it has suffered “incalculable damage” due to the actions against it but is now promising that when the truth does come out, it will be “filing a bill” to recoup its losses.

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

In recent years, YTS.mx has become one of the most-used torrent sites, serving millions of visitors every day.

The site can be used without registering an account. However, those who sign up get some extra features, such as an option to bookmark titles. These added benefits can be handy but we learned that having an account also comes with risks.

Movie Companies Target YTS Users

In recent months, a group of movie companies filed several lawsuits against alleged YTS users . In several of these cases, they relied on information that came directly from the YTS user database , including email addresses and download histories.

The information was shared by the YTS operator as part of a confidential settlement agreement. This revelation came as a shock to the affected users and was harshly criticized by other torrent sites, several of which decided to ban YTS torrents .

Pirate Release Warns Downloaders

Today, we can add another episode to this unfolding drama after a torrent for the documentary “ Rise of the Trolls ” appeared online with the addition of a rather unusual message. Roughly three minutes into the video, the following warning appears.

“If you have downloaded this from either YTS or Extratorrent you can expect problems with the authorities. They cooperate with the film industry, more information can be found on Torrentfreak,” it reads.

The shorturl suggests that the link might point to more information but when we tried to access it this morning it redirected to the shorturl homepage. However, we assume that it’s supposed to provide more detail on the YTS database sharing issue.

The torrent, shared by SimplyTheBOSS, was uploaded to various torrent sites and copied by even more. This includes the popular ‘ExtraTorrent’ site extratorrents.it, that was formerly operating as Extratorrent.ag.

This, understandably, raised questions among the site’s users as the comment below illustrates.

TorrentFreak wasn’t in any way involved or consulted on the matter and the warning itself deserves some nuance.

Nuance Required

ExtraTorrent has frequently been linked to YTS and some believe that it is operated by the same ‘group’ of people. However, we’re not aware of any ExtraTorrent database info that was shared with film companies. Such information hasn’t been brought up in lawsuits either.

Also, the warning in the video references problems with the authorities. This is not necessarily the case as the YTS-related lawsuits are all civil cases between film companies and the alleged pirates. There is no law enforcement agency involved, yet.

The warning is correct by stating that YTS cooperated with film companies but whether they still share database information is unknown. We previously learned that it was a one-time arrangement, but details about the ‘deal’ were never officially made public.

That said, many people have lost trust in the site, no matter what happens in the future, and this warning notice underlines that.

The Troll Threat

To find out more, TorrentFreak reached out to the uploader of one of the torrents but he or she preferred not to comment publicly on the matter. The same warning may also appear in other releases, but we have only seen it in the “Ride of the Trolls” torrent so far.

The makers of the documentary have nothing to do with the lawsuits but their title was likely chosen for a reason. The film companies that go after individual pirates are often referred to as “copyright trolls,” after all. Also, the documentary discusses topics such as online anonymity and freedom on the internet.

Finally, it is worth noting that anyone who downloads content via BitTorrent can potentially be tracked, no matter what site they use. Without a VPN, one’s public IP-address is visible to anyone, including copyright holders.

The YTS database information gave filmmakers extra evidence though. They used this in various lawsuits but also sent settlement offers to YTS users directly , using the listed email address.

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

Last month, the RIAA pulled the popular open source tool youtube-mp3 from GitHub.

The music group sent a takedown notice arguing that the software violated section 1201 of the DMCA, which prevents people from bypassing technical protection measures.

This enforcement action wasn’t well-received by the developer community . This included GitHub CEO Nat Friedman, who was ‘annoyed’ and personally offered his help to get the repository reinstated. This wasn’t a false promise, as youtube-dl returned today.

GitHub Reinstates Youtube-dl

“We are taking a stand for developers and have reinstated the youtube-dl repo. Section 1201 of the DMCA is broken and needs to be fixed. Developers should have the freedom to tinker. That’s how you get great tools like youtube-dl,” Friedman says .

GitHub has reinstated the repository after some changes were made. These changes include referrals to copyrighted music, which RIAA pointed out in its claim. However, the software still allows people to download files, including music tracks, from YouTube.

After a careful look at the “circumvention” allegations, GitHub now concludes that they are not valid. The company explains that it “received additional information” that allowed it “to reverse” the takedown.

No DMCA Anti-Circumvention Violations

“[O]ur reinstatement, based on new information that showed the project was not circumventing a technical protection measure (TPM), was inline with our values of putting developers first,” GitHub notes.

This new information comes from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which responded to the RIAA’s takedown request on behalf of the youtube-dl developers. The EFF’s letter explains in detail how the software works and stresses that there is no advanced decryption involved, as we highlighted earlier .

“Youtube-dl stands in place of a Web browser and performs a similar function with respect to user-uploaded videos. Importantly, youtube-dl does not decrypt video streams that are encrypted with commercial DRM technologies, such as Widevine, that are used by subscription video sites, such as Netflix,” the letter reads.

The letter helped to convince GitHub that it wrongly granted the takedown request. And since other copyright issues pointed out by the RIAA were addressed as well, the company decided to reinstate the repository.

Developers First

In addition, the revolt from the developer community was a clear reminder that developers should come first. As such, GitHub also announced that it will overhaul the way it handles DMCA section 1201 claims. One key change is that content won’t always be removed right away.

This change doesn’t apply to regular DMCA takedown notices but to ‘circumvention’ claims specifically. From now on, these will all be manually reviewed and scrutinized by experts.

“When we see it is possible to modify a project to remove allegedly infringing content, we give the owners a chance to fix problems before we take content down. If not, they can always respond to the notification disabling the repository and offer to make changes, or file a counter notice,” GitHub explains.

$1M in Defense Fund

The developer platform will aid developers financially as well. The company announced that it will put $1 million into a defense fund to help open source developers on GitHub protect themselves from overbroad or unwarranted DMCA Section 1201 takedown requests.

In addition, it will also get more involved in the political side of things. Every three years the US Copyright Office reviews its DMCA anti-circumvention exceptions and GitHub will have its voice heard there as well.

“We are also advocating specifically on the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA to promote developers’ freedom to build socially beneficial tools like youtube-dl,” the company notes.

All in all, it’s safe to say that the RIAA’s takedown attempt has completely backfired. We previously reached out to the music group for comment on related youtube-dl issues, but this request remains unanswered.

The RIAA continues to issue similar DMCA circumvention requests to other companies, including Google. These argue that YouTube rippers violate the DMCA as they bypass YouTube’s “rolling cipher.” At GitHub, those won’t work anymore.

Youtube-dl Devs Are Happy

Sergey, one of the youtube-dl developers, tells us that he is happy with all the support they have received from the EFF, GitHub, as well as the public at large.

“EFF’s help was invaluable. We’d like to thank EFF and Mitch Stoltz personally for their incredible support and dedication. We’d also like to thank GitHub for standing up for youtube-dl and taking potential legal risks by allowing youtube-dl to keep the rolling cipher code,” he says.

“We’re also grateful to all the tremendous amount of support and offers received lately (we physically were not able to respond to everyone) and all youtube-dl users,” Sergey adds.

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

Every year copyright holder groups get the chance to share their list of “notorious” piracy actors to the US Trade Representative .

These recommendations serve as the basis for USTR’s annual report, which is a diplomatic tool to pressure companies and countries to take action.

In recent years this list has slowly expanded to include not only pirate sites and counterfeit markets, but also third-party intermediaries.

Focus on Intermediaries

The USTR follows this trend and has made online intermediaries a ‘focus issue’ this year. This was illustrated earlier this week when the RIAA and MPA ‘nominated’ several hosting services, domain registries, and advertisers.

These two groups are not alone as many other rightsholders have chimed in as well. This includes Spain’s top football league ‘ La Liga ‘ which submitted several recommendations that, for the public at large, are not typically associated with piracy.

“Our biggest concern consists of the illegal streaming of live sports competitions by people or companies that are not authorized to do so,” La Liga writes.

IPTV and Streaming Threats

The organization starts by highlighting several illegal IPTV services such as Megaplay, Seko IPTV, VolkaIPTV, ATN and King 365 TV, as well as IPTV playlist forums including IPTV URLs and IPTV SAT. These are the usual suspects one would expect.

The second category includes illegal streaming sites like Pirlo TV, BeIN Match and Yalla Shoot, as well as streaming link sites, such as Cable Gratis TV, Hulk Sport and Hulk Sport. Most of these are clearly infringing as well.

La Liga then moves into the intermediary area by highlighting hosting providers. According to the sports organization, these companies can help to prevent infringements but, in most cases, they don’t.

Uncooperative Hosting Companies

Rightsholders often complain about abuse by pirate sites and services but these complaints don’t have any effect.

“It should be noted that most of the Hosting Providers Companies ignore e-mails and letters referred to IPR infringements,” La Liga writes, after which it sums up the most relevant companies.

This list includes Namecheap, which is located in the US, as well as the Canadian e-commerce platform Shopify. US-based CDN provider Cloudflare gets a mention as well, together with the Russia-based Offshore-Servers and BlueAngelHost from Pakistan.

“Preventive actions are needed to avoid that IPR infringers can host illegal content so easily on the Hosting Provider Companies’ servers,” La Liga notes, while demanding “quick responses and effective solutions” from these intermediaries.

The sports league provides no details on what infringing content these companies host or what action they fail to take. However, it clearly demands a more active and aggressive anti-piracy stance.

eBay and Alibaba

The latter also applies to eBay and Alibaba. These companies are listed in the e-commerce category and reportedly offer illegal set-top boxes and IPTV deals.

While these are “somewhat cooperative” in terms of enforcement, according to La Liga, they can do more.

The list of notorious piracy markets continues with ‘cyberlockers’ such as Mega, MediaFire, and Uptobox. These can be used legally, the recommendation notes, but are often used to share pirated content as well.

Telegram

The latter also applies to social media and communication apps. La Liga calls out Telegram specifically in this regard, noting that it’s “extremely complicated and slow” to remove illegal content from the platform.

“We have detected that Telegram is increasingly being used to illegally share copyright-protected contents through certain channels. Those channels have significantly increased their users, La Liga writes.

These and other recommendations will be taken into account by the USTR which will issue its final list of “notorious markets” in a few months. Whether Namecheap, eBay, Telegram, and Shopify will be called out, has yet to be seen.

Over the past several years, copyright holders have repeatedly called on third-party intermediaries to increase their anti-piracy efforts. The USTR now follows this lead by making it a focus issue and these recommendations are part of the strategy.

However, it’s still an odd sight to see eBay and Namecheap being mentioned alongside The Pirate Bays of this world.

—

A copy of La Liga’s submission to the US Trade Representative is available here (pdf)

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