Cloudflare is a content-neutral Internet infrastructure service. The company aims not to interfere with the traffic of its clients and users but, in some cases, it has to take action. This means responding to DMCA subpoenas and takedown requests for hosted content, for example. In addition, Cloudflare now reports it has blocked access to 'abusive' content on its Ethereum gateway. Popular Internet infrastructure service Cloudflare serves millions of customers and provides a variety of connectivity and privacy features to the general public. People can freely use the company’s open DNS resolver 1.1.1.1, for example, or use its IPFS and Ethereum gateways to access content on these decentralized web services. One of Cloudflare’s main aims is to make the Internet more secure while respecting the privacy of its users. This laudable goal is broadly respected but in common with other internet services, abuse of Cloudflare’s services can lead to conflicting situations. The California-based company previously terminated service to controversial sites including the Daily Stormer and Kiwi Farms. These actions were taken voluntarily, with Cloudflare citing an immediate threat to human life as the reason for the Kiwi Farms intervention. Domain Blocking In addition to these rare events, the Internet infrastructure company is also subject to court orders from around the globe. In some cases, these orders require the company to block access to piracy-related domain names. Cloudflare mentions these blocking orders in its latest transparency report which covers the second half of 2022. The report doesn’t mention the number of court orders or blocked domains, but it confirms that Cloudflare complies with legitimate legal rulings. “If we determine that the order is valid and requires Cloudflare action, we may limit blocking of access to the content to those areas where it violates local law, a practice known as ‘geo-blocking’,” Cloudflare writes. DNS Blocking DNS blocking orders apply locally and shouldn’t affect people in other countries. However, things got more complicated recently when an Italian court required Cloudflare to restrict access to three torrent sites through its public DNS resolver 1.1.1.1. Cloudflare fiercely objected to the order but ultimately lost the legal battle. That left the company with no other option than to take action. But, instead of blocking content through its global DNS resolver, it geo-blocked the domains for Italians. “To the extent that those websites used Cloudflare services, Cloudflare took steps following the issuance of the order to disable access to those websites for users in Italy or from Cloudflare equipment in Italy. “Cloudflare took action to geoblock all three domains that were addressed by the court’s order and were using our service at the time the orders were issued via Cloudflare’s pass-through CDN and security services,” the company added. IPFS and Ethereum Restrictions In its most recent transparency report, Cloudflare further notes that it has implemented access restrictions on its public Ethereum gateway. The company doesn’t store any content on the Ethereum network, nor can it remove any. However, it can block access through its service. If Cloudflare receives valid abuse reports or copyright infringement complaints, it will take appropriate action. The same applies to the gateway for the decentralized IPFS network. In its previous transparency report, Cloudflare already mentioned more than 1,000 IPFS actions a figure that increased slightly in the second half of last year. At the same time, Cloudflare also restricted access to 99 ‘items’ on the Ethereum network. Since these are ‘gateway’ related restrictions there’s no impact on the content hosted on IPFS or Ethereum. Instead, it will only make it impossible to access content through Cloudflare’s service. It’s not clear how many of these restrictions are abuse or copyright-related, as not much context is provided. The Ethereum actions are, at least in part, a response to the U.S. Department of Treasury’s sanctions against the cryptocurrency tumbler Tornado Cash. “Those sanctions raise significant legal questions about the extent to which particular computer software, rather than individuals or entities that use that software, can be subject to sanctions,” Cloudflare writes. “Nonetheless, to comply with legal requirements, Cloudflare has taken steps to disable access through the Cloudflare-operated Ethereum Gateway to the digital currency addresses identified in the designation.” DMCA Notices and Subpoenas There are more obvious copyright responses as well. While Cloudflare generally doesn’t block content in response to DMCA notices for customers that use its CDN services, it does remove infringing content permanently hosted on its servers. These hosting services have expanded over the years and the same is true for the volume of valid DMCA notices received, up from 18 to 972 in the span of a year, as shown below. That’s still a fairly modest number for a company with millions of customers. Finally, Cloudflare reports that the number of civil subpoenas, including those issued under the DMCA, has decreased. Rightsholders including the Motion Picture Association (MPA) typically use these requests to obtain identifying information about Cloudflare customers. In the second half of last year, the company received 20 civil subpoenas which targeted 57 domain names. That’s the lowest number since Cloudflare first disclosed this statistic five years ago, signaling a downward trend.

A 62-year-old man from the UK has been arrested in Spain on suspicion of receiving over 5,500 payments for pirate IPTV subscriptions totaling £185,000. Police launched an investigation after a broadcaster filed a complaint against social media accounts offering illicit packages containing exclusive sports content. According to data published by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, UK residents made 15.6 million visits to Spain in 2022, with holidays the most popular reason. Whether Brits are on a two-week vacation or embedded within the ex-pat community, there’s a tendency to appreciate things less available at home, sunshine in particular. For many, however, a longing for British things has created opportunities for those prepared to meet the demand. By offering BBC and ITV channels, for example, pirate IPTV services have become very popular indeed but since the packages offer much more, they’re almost a must for bars and restaurants in tourist areas. Social Media Sales Attract Attention According to information released by Spain’s National Police on Monday, a broadcaster’s representative filed a complaint after spotting a profile on social media platforms offering pirate IPTV subscriptions. Those packages granted access to sporting events to which the broadcaster holds the rights. Officers assigned to the Technological Crimes Group of the Provincial Judicial Police Brigade of Alicante launched an investigation to identify the person behind those accounts. Investigation: Key Findings Benidorm is a seaside resort on Spain’s east coast. It’s a popular destination for tourists from the UK, including those who enjoy watching live football at local bars, often courtesy of IPTV packages. Police investigators say they located several ads offering the subscriptions for sale. In one of the ads it was claimed that the person offering them had been “supplying IPTV to bars and restaurants in Benidorm for ten years, with support 24 hours a day, seven days a week.” Police say the subscriptions were on sale for as little as £7 up to a maximum of £50, presumably based on subscription length and the content on offer. At least one package provided access to 594 channels, including those belonging to the broadcaster behind the original complaint. Other findings led investigators to conclude that the person offering the subscriptions was from the UK and his target audience likely consisted of English speakers in Spain. “During the investigation, police officers verified that the payments made were destined for a bank account in the United Kingdom and, in addition to sporting events, offered access to English, Scottish and Irish channels. For this reason, the audience to which the television offer was directed was of British or English-speaking origin,” police reveal. “After various police efforts, the agents verified that the person who seemed to be behind the scheme was a British citizen who was linked to various bank accounts and who had his own Internet server to offer the services. The man had a home address in Benidorm and made continuous trips from the United Kingdom to the Alicante town.” Policía Nacional Arrest Brit in Benidorm After obtaining permission from a local court, police raided the man’s home in Benidorm. During the search, officers found two IPTV devices, a mobile phone, and a laptop. It’s alleged that an application open on the laptop allowed the man to control the IPTV services he offered on social media and at the time of the police intervention, he was offering several dozen, including some in Spain. An inspection of the suspect’s mobile phone revealed various apps for accessing “banking entities” in the UK. Officers were only able to access one of those apps but found that the suspect had made transactions worth over £9,500. Many additional transactions were found by other means. “[A]fter the officers of the Technological Crimes Group analyzed a payment platform through which the detainee charged for subscriptions, they verified that the person involved had allegedly received nearly 5,500 payments for the subscriptions, the majority in pounds sterling and about 200 payments in euros. The amount exceeded 185,000 pounds sterling and about 6,500 euros,” police note. “Market and Consumer” Offenses Police say a 62-year-old British man stands accused of intellectual property offenses, specifically those related to the market and consumers. That terminology suggests an eye on events back in 2019 that didn’t go exactly to plan. Following complaints by top-tier football league, LaLiga, more than 50 people in the Alicante area appeared in court for showing LaLiga matches in bars and restaurants either via illegal IPTV packages, or official subscriptions designed for residential use. After some of those individuals were found guilty, a criminal court in Alicante found that showing the matches in public wasn’t an intellectual property crime. That led to acquittals and the reversal of earlier guilty verdicts on the basis that “football does not have the character of a literary, scientific or artistic work” so copyright did not apply. Cases against several bars in Valencia also failed to convince the court of intellectual property crimes. Instead, the court found that a minor crime related to the market and consumers had been committed.

For Star Trek fans, 'La Sirena' refers to the Kaplan F17 Speed Freighter that was prominently featured in the 'Picard' series. For people more interested in adult content, 'La Sirena' (69) is associated with a Venezuelan actress. The differences are clear but takedown company DMCA Piracy Prevention has trouble distinguishing between the two, which motivated Tumblr's parent company Automattic to add the outfit to its DMCA "Hall of Shame". As one of the leading niche blog platforms, Tumblr receives thousands of DMCA takedown requests every year. Many of these point to copyright-infringing material, but not all. Tumblr’s parent company Automattic is known to inspect all takedown notices carefully and has a track record of defending its users, whether abuse is intentional or not. To set an example, the company occasionally highlights the worst offenders in its “Hall of Shame.” This overview of the worst offenders welcomed a new entry last week; triggered by the unlikely confusion between a Star Trek fandom blog and an adult entertainment actress. La Sirena The recent Hall of Fame entry centers around “La Sirena,” which is Spanish for The Mermaid. Aside from being a dictionary term, Star Trek fans will know La Sirena as the Kaplan F17 Speed Freighter featured in the Picard series. This starship is more than just another prop for die-hard Trekkies. The person behind the Tumblr blog “Mapping La Sirena” has spent countless hours and dedicated dozens of posts to the iconic Speed Freighter. The term “La Sirena” isn’t exclusive to the starship, however. Others have adopted it too, including Venezuelan adult actress Antonella Alonso who picked La Sirena 69 as her stage name. In theory, such diverse uses of “La Sirena” should never cross paths. According to Tumblr’s parent company Automattic, third-party takedown service ‘DMCA Piracy Prevention Inc’ has trouble distinguishing between the two, earning it a spot in the company’s ‘Hall of Shame’. Hall of Shame DMCA Piracy Prevention began sending takedown notices to Tumblr at the beginning of the year and has since submitted over 300 complaints. While Tumblr users occasionally post copyrighted content without permission, in this case many of the reported blogs were not infringing at all. Instead, DMCA Piracy Prevention appears to confuse the ‘La Sirena’ fandom blog with their client ‘La Sirena 69’ based on little else than the similarity between the names. This resulted in a flurry of inaccurate takedown requests. “In one recent copyright claim, the monitoring service targeted over 90 Tumblr posts that matched a keyword search of “la sirena,” Automattic’s Emily Fowler writes. “But instead of alerting our team to La Sirena 69’s allegedly infringed content, the company reported a wide array of mappinglasirena.tumblr.com’s original posts—like a short essay about a new La Sirena booklet, an article analysis of the starship’s design, and even the blog owner’s thoughts on the fourth trailer for Picard season two.” None of the reported links from the fandom blog contained anything that would even remotely violate the rights of the adult performer. As such, Tumblr’s takedown team rejected the notices and kept all the posts online, adding DMCA Piracy Protection to its “Hall of Shame” instead. Prevent DMCA Abuse The Trust and Safety team at Automattic hopes that by calling out these overbroad takedown campaigns, companies will review their processes and do better going forward. In this instance, there is plenty of room for improvement. “Copyright monitoring services should not flippantly report content entirely irrelevant to their clients’ content; that is an abuse of the DMCA. These companies have a responsibility to verify that the content targeted in their takedown notices is actually owned by their client.” Automattic’s team reviews DMCA notices meticulously and spotted that “La Sirena 69” is not “La Sirena” but that’s a difference takedown companies should notice, before sending their takedown requests. If not, independent creators such as “Mapping La Sirena” are at risk of being needlessly censored. “Whether it’s an improved algorithm or more human eyes on every notice that they’re submitting, guardrails must be implemented to prevent DMCA abuse—otherwise, these monitoring services risk unnecessarily burdening innocent content creators, or removing innocuous content,” Emily continues. “Tumblr is a special place—not only for Trekkies, but for anyone who writes prose, creates artwork, constructs moodboards, or expresses themselves in their own unique way. This mission is why we do what we do, and we will never stop fighting for users to champion this right in our little pocket of cyberspace.”

@anonimni applying for one. I would love to get into this tracker.

A new phase of the StreamSafely.com anti-piracy campaign is underway. Visitors to the portal are advised that pirate streaming sites aren't what they seem and the content on offer acts as a smoke-screen for credit card fraud, identity theft, and so much more. But what about the entities behind the StreamSafely campaign; who are they and what's in it for them? Indeed, about that.... In the unlikely event people haven’t noticed, the internet isn’t what it used to be. In so many ways it has already surpassed our wildest dreams but in common with the physical world, threats to personal safety are inevitable and significant. Online security is the headline theme of the StreamSafely anti-piracy campaign and this week the U.S. Government’s Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (IPRCenter) and Hollywood’s Motion Picture Association (MPA) revealed two new PSAs to boost the campaign’s visibility. “There are piracy sites that appear legitimate and safe, but most are operated by global crime syndicates,” said Jan van Voorn, MPA’s Chief of Global Content Protection and head of ACE. While that’s a fairly dramatic claim, at the highest level it appears to be true; it’s also entirely in keeping with the current drive to convince pirate site users there are much safer options elsewhere. That’s the foundation on which StreamSafely is built to ensure it meets its overarching goals. So what are those goals? Through the prism and messaging of StreamSafely, the chief concern is to protect the financial welfare of consuming pirates and their families. Put much more bluntly, entertainment companies want to make sure that the people ‘stealing’ their content are kept safe and don’t have their private information unnecessarily exposed. The most cynical might conclude that a) the campaign isn’t really concerned about pirates having their bank accounts emptied because b) its key aim is to demonize piracy through scare tactics and then c) wait for the signups to legal subscription services. StreamSafely may have a straightforward message but the oversimplification above, convenient as it is, undersells the complexity of a campaign that is so much more. StreamSafely: How it All Began The people who came up with the StreamSafely campaign and still run it today are collectively known as Ctam Cable Marketing Association Inc., or CTAM for short. As the current member list shows, cable marketing has considerable scope. Around 2018/19, CTAM approached IE Network, a company that describes itself as “part intelligence agency, part newsroom.” IE Network says that by compiling the best data, insights and information, it’s able to “transform research and strategy into precise messaging with the right voice and tone, driving powerful storytelling that inspires, educates and persuades.” Under the heading The Cable Industry v. Content Piracy the story CTAM wanted to tell is detailed on IE Network’s website. CTAM wanted to combat an escalating content piracy industry that was robbing legitimate content creators of their intellectual property and risking the privacy and safety of content users. The members of CTAM turned to i.e. network to educate themselves about the bad actors in content piracy—and its end-users—to determine how best to educate the public about the implications of unauthorized entertainment content and to discourage people from consuming it. “What followed was StreamSafely.com, a website sponsored by CTAM with content developed by IEN. Launching in late 2019, StreamSafely.com has already achieved its primary goal: to help visitors get smart about piracy and how to avoid illegal content consumption,” the website reads. StreamSafely: Four Years Later In November 2023, the same story is still being told. Piracy volumes remain massive and as highlighted earlier, risks are increasing. These threats disproportionately affect casual pirates who are less likely to know that adblocking software like uBlock doesn’t just block unwanted advertising. When correctly configured, uBlock restricts the ability of the most cynical sites to offload malicious code onto the machines of unwitting site users. As a result, their ability to make money is massively undermined and if that’s taken to its logical conclusion, time spent running a site for profit is better spent elsewhere. Before we explore what else uBlock is good for, CTAM’s tax filings (designated as a 501(c)6 nonprofit) for 2021 make for a fairly interesting read: $4.93 million in revenue vs. $4.56 million expenses, $1.1 million in compensation for the top three executives alone, and then a key mission revealing action to mitigate piracy and password sharing. That leads us to CTAM’s business priorities for 2023, including: “Protect revenue by neutralizing content piracy through consumer education site StreamSafely.com” (pdf). Can’t Study Pirates Properly Without Data The CTAM website as a whole is an intriguing read but somewhat unfortunately, sections marked ‘Audience Intelligence Reports’ relating to the audience of StreamSafely.com are unavailable to the public. Nevertheless, it’s safe to conclude that visitors to the StreamSafely site are a useful source of data. According to CTAM’s most recently published tax filing, in the last reporting period the marketing group spent $432,000 with IEN, the company it worked with to conceive StreamSafely back in 2019. The nature of the work carried out is unclear but since the company was previously asked to provide information on “bad actors” and their “end-users”, refreshed information may still be coming through. That theory might make more sense if the MPA wasn’t involved in StreamSafely, and by default, anti-piracy coalition ACE, which has access to the best intelligence, globally. Since CTAM also mentions an alignment of tactics with Digital Citizens Alliance, whose reporting is aligned with the MPA’s, not to mention many of CTAM’s own members, the entire project is surrounded by pools of piracy data, although the extent of any sharing is impossible to say. Campaign Data, Measuring Success or Otherwise That leads to the question of how CTAM is able to measure the performance of the StreamSafely campaign, i.e whether visitors to the StreamSafely website (mostly consumers of pirated content, if the targeting is right) find value and that leads to positive changes in behavior. From the very first visit to StreamSafely.com it’s clear that a number of technologies deployed on the site can provide the campaign with significant insight, providing those visitors aren’t running uBlock, which blocks most if not all of them. With help from tools offered by The Markup, which describes itself as a “nonprofit newsroom that investigates how powerful institutions are using technology to change our society”, the nature and abilities of those technologies can be presented in no-nonsense terms. The Blacklight Privacy Inspector had a look at StreamSafely.com and reported back with its findings. StreamSafely has ‘only’ five ad trackers, less than the average seven found on popular sites. But while popular sites usually get by with three third-party cookies on average, Blacklight’s Privacy Inspector found almost four times that on StreamSafely. “These are commonly used by advertising tracking companies to profile you based on your internet usage. Blacklight detected 11 third-party cookies on this site. Blacklight detected cookies for Alphabet, Inc. and Microsoft Corporation,” Blacklight’s report reads. Other technologies on the anti-piracy campaign site include behavior analytics system, Hotjar. By recording website visitors’ keystrokes, clicks, mouse and trackpad movements, Hotjar allows website operators to view visitors’ journeys through their websites using heatmaps and videos. Combined with Google Analytics, Hotjar is a very powerful tool and sensitive too, especially when considering StreamSafely’s target audience. The target audience of the StreamSafely campaign consists of people who visit pirate sites, who are unaware of the potential dangers. The aim of the site is to inform those people of the risks and make them aware of legal alternatives. At some point, success can be measured by the transformation of at-risk free-loading pirates into consumers of safe, legal alternatives. That may be why StreamSafely uses tools provided by TK Interactive because, after all, stopping pirates from consuming pirated content is only the first step in their rehabilitation journey. And now that the risk of their bank accounts being emptied has been eliminated, they can put some of that hard-earned cash to good use. Welcome aboard and stay safe.

Happy 20, November konami decided 20, November was a good time for extended e-amusement maintenance... happy holidays

The Motion Picture Association (MPA) is one of the key proponents of pirate site blocking. The group, which counts Hollywood studios and Netflix as its members, recently met with several international stakeholders at a "site blocking conference". The event wasn't widely publicized but TorrentFreak learned that France, Italy and the Philippines were recognized for their innovations. Website blocking has become the go-to anti-piracy measure for the entertainment industries when tackling pirate sites on the internet. The practice has been around for well over 15 years and has gradually expanded to more than forty countries around the world. Thus far, pirate site blocking is notably absent in the United States. However, American-funded forces are active elsewhere in the world to forge new blocking initiatives, through voluntary agreements or the courts. Philippine Blocking Measures The resulting blocking measures are immediately noticeable to the public at large but there’s also quite a bit of information sharing and discussion taking place behind closed doors. In this regard, a recent letter from the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) is particularly noteworthy. IPOPHL is the main facilitator of a new site-blocking regime established under a memorandum of understanding (MOU). As part of the agreement, set to come into effect later this month, Internet providers agreed to voluntarily block access to known pirate sites. The Philippine Government is determined to tackle online piracy, a goal reiterated in a recent IPOPHL letter to the U.S. Trade Representative which contained additional background information. MPA and ACE Guide Blocking Efforts It transpires that the blocking measures were made possible thanks to assistance from the Motion Picture Association and ACE, its affiliated anti-piracy arm. Among other things, the movie industry group provided technical expertise. “This [site blocking] mechanism was realized with the support of the Motion Picture Association through the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE) who worked with IPOPHL in providing information on similar mechanisms and best practices in other jurisdictions,” the letter reads. “ACE also conducted a training on site-blocking to equip the IPOPHL’s IEO personnel with technical knowledge on site-blocking mechanisms.” It’s no secret that the MPA is heavily involved in rolling out site-blocking initiatives around the world. What we hadn’t heard until recently is that the industry group also brings stakeholders together in an ‘Annual Global Site Blocking Strategy Conference’. MPA Recognizes ‘Innovations’ at Site Blocking Conference The conference, which took place last month, came up in IPOPHL’s letter mentioning the MPA’s recognition of the Philippines’ site-blocking progress. “At the [MPA’s] Annual Global Site Blocking Strategy (GSS) Conference held in Amsterdam on October 3, 2023, the Philippines (through IPOPHL) was a recipient of one of the awards this year, for pushing for site blocking legislation and for the coordination and roll out of the voluntary site blocking MoU. “Every year, the MPA hands out a few awards to those countries or counsels which have excelled in the field of site blocking,” the letter adds. The conference and the accolades were not reported publicly, but the MPA confirmed to us that the Asian country was indeed praised for its achievements. Aiming to avoid confusion with the annual MPA awards, the group stressed that the award isn’t official. An MPA EMEA spokesperson notes that the Philippines agreement shows that voluntary collaboration between the MPA, governments, and Internet providers can have the desired effect. “The voluntary siteblocking MOU, made possible thanks to the leadership and support of the Philippines Intellectual Property Office is yet another example of the MPA, authorities and ISPs working together in the fight against piracy. “Siteblocking has proven to be an effective tool against large scale content theft and we applaud the Philippines for taking action to support creativity,” MPA’s spokesperson adds. In addition to the Philippines, countries including France and Italy were also ‘recognized’ for their innovations in site blocking, but more specific details are not available. Overall, it’s clear that MPA is determined to help countries around the world roll out effective site-blocking measures. Whether it will be able to use this wealth of knowledge in the United States anytime soon is unknown. But that’s nothing new.

Even among those who accept piracy is illegal, there are some who still struggle to view casual streaming as a serious crime. By introducing credit card fraud, identity theft, and malware into the mix, it's hoped that piracy will absorb the juices of these 'real' crimes and be taken more seriously. In South Korea, where pirate movies and careless clicks turn innocent teenagers into crazed gambling addicts, anti-piracy messaging may have hit the jackpot. No matter where people live or how much knowledge and experience they’ve accumulated, governments and corporations rarely shy away from an opportunity to offer behavioral advice. Delivered via TV, radio and the internet, public service announcements enlighten the masses on topics seemingly so complex, they’re only fully understood by the few. Even if that was the case, 30 seconds of theatrics followed by what amounts to a blind order may have worked 40 years ago; today, people expect more than that and when it comes to anti-piracy PSAs, magnitudes more. For the last few years the global anti-piracy message hasn’t wavered for a moment. There’s no memorable slogan to recall, but the message couldn’t be clearer: If people pirate content, using IPTV services in particular, more likely than not they will become infected with malware, have their identities stolen, credit cards maxed-out, and/or bank accounts emptied. It’s one of the strongest and most united messages ever sent, and with multiple and significant caveats, even has some basis in truth. It appears to have done little to suppress demand, however. Whether events unfolding in South Korea will dampen local demand remains to be seen, but the narrative playing out on national news could hardly be worse for pirate sites. Piracy and Illegal Gambling Start Sharing a Cell Before the advent of various international schemes that prevent gambling companies from advertising on pirate sites or contain an abstention agreement, gambling ads and pirate site were commonly seen together. In South Korea, the government is no fan of piracy, but it tolerates illegal gambling even less. Online gambling within South Korea is outlawed, and government control in the rest of the market effectively amounts to a lucrative monopoly. When pressure mounted on former local piracy site Noonoo TV, the existence of ads promoting illegal gambling on the site receive dozens of mentions in the media. While Noonoo seems to be dead, the local piracy/gambling nexus is reportedly in full swing. With black market gambling reportedly worth up to $80 billion, national TV news channel KBS has run dozens of stories over the past couple of months, all with a common theme. Enjoy the Movie, Stay For the Gambling The story at the heart of the current controversy dates back to September; KBS published a video report (below, English translation via subtitle) in which the presenter explains (around the one-minute mark) that the channel’s reporters tested out an illegal streaming site offering Netflix content for free. When a reporter clicked on one of the ads, it led to a surprisingly open criminal who confirmed the channel’s suspicions, apparently with no hesitation. “When I click on the advertising banner on the screen, I am taken directly to an online gambling site. On other illegal streaming sites, similar advertisements appear on the screen,” the presenter says. “After checking them one by one, most of them were the same company. A reporter contacted the online gambling operator and asked if he had anything to do with the streaming site, and he answered ‘yes’. So, it appears that they are making money by offering free OTT services and luring users who are misled by them to gambling sites,” Commenting on the allegations, police confirmed an investigation into the connections between gambling sites and pirate streaming portals, adding that accounts linked to five sites had been frozen, with two sites shut down. “The problem with these illegal OTTs and the gambling sites connected to them,” the presenter adds, “is that even teenagers are exposed to them without protection.” Teenage Gambling Addicts How KBS identified and then obtained permission to interview school kids who used these sites isn’t clear. The channel disguised their voices and blurred out their faces, but there’s little to hide their naivety. One of the opening statements appears to show a lack of understanding, if not complete ignorance, of exactly the type of disclosure that can ruin people’s lives. “Even though I was a minor, I signed up immediately after entering my name, date of birth, and phone number, and that’s how I started ‘gambling’,” a student revealed. “I was trying to watch it for free, but a lot of windows appeared at the bottom and a window at the top,” added another. “While watching a free movie on an illegal OTT site, I inadvertently saw an advertisement. I clicked and entered the gambling site,” the interviewer was told. “At first, out of curiosity, I went to the gambling site. The money I sent later grew out of control, and I even resorted to private loans.” The final horror story manages to sound even more miserable than the others. “This year I earned about 10 million won [US7,600],” the student said. “I originally saved up the money by doing a part-time job. But my mother and her parents had to give luxury goods and gold, and I took all of the collateral, because the interest rates on the losses jumped 100% in three days.” Video From Inside an Alleged Gambling/Pirate Site Operation KBS News doesn’t reveal who provided the video, but it was allegedly recorded inside an office where a gambling operation was based. The channel says it shows both the gambling platform and the pirate site being operated from the same room, enough evidence for the channel to conclude direct links between pirate movies and TV shows, and illegal gambling. “There are adult sites and drama-watching sites. Those are the ones that work best,” a company official explained. “These days, [gambling] sites don’t work without kids.”

Documenting copyright trends relevant to the global piracy and anti-piracy landscapes, and what happens when everything inevitably collides, is what TorrentFreak aims to do, week in and week out. However, interesting pieces of information often go unpublished, mostly due to time constraints. Starting today, we'll begin sharing recently spotted news that for one reason or another, didn't quite make it. ⦿ Guy Owes $117m After pornEZ Suddenly Got Hard ⦿ “No Fees Ever” Tanggula TV Trafficking Targeted ⦿ Z-Library’s Domains Just Keep on Disappearing… ⦿ Anna’s Archive’s Sudden X / Twitter Vanishing Act ⦿ Sci-Hub Meets 24/7/365 UK Block Party Mid-January 2023, MindGeek subsidiary MG Premium sued Nguyen Hoi, the alleged operator of unlicensed adult streaming site, Pornez.net. (2:23-cv-00349-CBM-PVC – MG Premium Ltd v. Nguyen Hoi) Data from Google’s Transparency portal reveals that MG filed over 5.6 million DMCA takedown notices hoping to make the site less visible. On November 6, 2023, a California district court handed down a permanent injunction and ordered the defendant to pay MG Premium a cool $117,270,000 in statutory copyright damages. Pornez.net is no longer online but sites with similar domains and extensions appear keen to emulate their namesake, not including the damages award, obviously. Extracting massive damages awards from pirates is something DISH Network also enjoys. A DISH/Sling lawsuit filed last month in a Carolina district court targets Sentry Inc. and alleged owner, Michael Graziano. The complaint claims that the defendants “provide and profit from the sale of an illicit streaming service known as Tanggula” through which it’s possible to watch DISH/Sling programming without authorization. Tanggula set-top boxes are advertised on social media platforms, sold via various affiliate and reseller schemes, and ‘reviewed’ regularly on YouTube. According to the Black Friday offers currently being advertised on Twitter, $299 is the ‘bargain’ rate for a black and red Android-based device. However, DISH doesn’t appear too concerned about Tanggula boxes per ser, its focus is the software that runs on these devices and the thousands of live TV channels on offer. Indeed, after shelling out the initial sum, Tanggula says buyers can look forward to paying “no fees ever”. DISH claims that the defendants sell access to packages via the websites www.alltvboxes.com and www.elitetv2023.com. Both websites were operational when the lawsuit was filed but are now offline. DISH investigators made undercover purchases according to the complaint (9:23-cv-05074 DISH Network LLC et al v. Sentry, Inc. et al, pdf), which seeks damages for alleged violations of the DMCA’s anti-trafficking provisions (17 U.S.C. S 1201). Z-Library had dozens of domains seized last week, presumably some type of gift to celebrate the one-year anniversary of the initial law enforcement crackdown. During this wave the United States teamed up with Austrian law enforcement agencies (more detail in our Nov 8 report). Z-Library confirmed the seizures late last week, noting that the domains were connected to Z-Library sub-projects. Since our initial report, an additional main/backup domain has also been seized. Z-Library is still in control of its main domain (singlelogin.re) but lost singlelogin.asia in the recent round of seizures. It joins singlelogin.app, singlelogin.site, singlelogin.click, and a couple of hundred additional domains now under the control of U.S. authorities. On a related note, Anna’s Archive appears to be still going strong but as a reader pointed out to us on Monday, the @AnnaArchivist account on X/Twitter was wiped out last week and no longer exists. Finally, Sci-Hub and its mirrors/proxies will soon become less accessible for customers of the UK’s largest ISPs. As part of a High Court-sanctioned blocking campaign, Elsevier & Springer Nature recently added around a dozen new entries to the blocklist. Sci-hub.pk and various subdomains of scihubtw.tw, sci-hub.se, sci-hub.st and unblockit.zip, join hundreds of previous blocklist entries targeting Sci-Hub and Libgen.

Two men who allegedly used 65 Google accounts to bombard Google with fraudulent DMCA takedown notices targeting up to 620,000 URLs, have been named in a Google lawsuit filed in California on Monday. Google says the men weaponized copyright law's notice-and-takedown system to sabotage competitors' trade, while damaging the search engine's business and those of its customers. While all non-compliant DMCA takedown notices are invalid by default, there’s a huge difference between those sent in error and others crafted for purely malicious purposes. Bogus DMCA takedown notices are nothing new, but the rise of organized groups using malicious DMCA notices as a business tool has been apparent in recent years. Since the vast majority of culprits facing zero consequences, that may have acted as motivation to send more. Through a lawsuit filed at a California court on Monday, Google appears to be sending the message that enough is enough. Defendants Weaponized DMCA Takedowns Google’s complaint targets Nguyen Van Duc and Pham Van Thien, both said to be residents of Vietnam and the leaders of up to 20 Doe defendants. Google says the defendants systematically abused accounts “to submit a barrage” of fraudulent copyright takedown requests aimed at removing their competitors’ website URLs from Google Search results. “Defendants have weaponized copyright law’s notice-and-takedown process and used it not for its intended purpose of expeditiously removing infringing content, but instead to have the legitimate content of their competitors removed based on false allegations. Defendants’ illegal, fraudulent scheme harms consumers, third-party businesses, and Google; stifles competition; and threatens to tarnish Google’s trusted brand.” Over the past few years, Nguyen, Pham and those working with them, are said to have created at least 65 Google accounts to send confirmed bogus notices targeting 117,000 URLs, plus another 500,000 URLs via notices that Google suspects are fraudulent too. “Defendants appear to be connected with websites selling printed t-shirts, and their unlawful conduct aims to remove competing third-party sellers from Google Search results. Defendants have maliciously and illegally exploited Google’s policies and procedures under the DMCA to sabotage and harm their competitors,” the complaint adds. Google Aims to Put an End to Abuse, Hold Defendants Accountable Google goes on to highlight its position as a major intermediary that processes DMCA notices targeting 600 million URLs every year, and the requirement under the DMCA to remove or disable content notified as allegedly infringing. If the company fails to act expeditiously once in receipt of a DMCA notice that complies with the statutory requirements, the company risks losing its safe harbor protection, Google notes. Since Google must often rely on the accuracy of statements made in DMCA notices, fraudulent notices can result in content being wrongfully taken down. That damages the company’s search engine advertising business, and the business Google’s customers hoped to attract. In this matter, the defendants’ embarked on a campaign that exploited Google’s systems and the DMCA takedown process to undermine their competitors. Fake Names, Fraudulent Representations The misrepresentations in notices sent to Google were potentially damaging to other parties too. Under fake names, the defendants falsely claimed to represent large companies such as Amazon, Twitter, and NBC News, plus sports teams including the Philadelphia Eagles, Los Angeles Lakers, San Diego Padres. In similarly false notices, they claimed to represent famous individuals including Elon Musk, Taylor Swift, LeVar Burton, and Kanye West. The complaint notes that some notices were submitted under company names that do not exist in the United States, at addresses where innocent families and businesses can be found. Google says that despite these claims, the defendants can be found in Vietnam from where they proudly advertise their ‘SEO’ scheme to others, including via YouTube. “Bad actors like Defendants use this tactic to attack and fraudulently suppress competitors’ websites and products in Google Search results, making consumers more likely to buy the same or similar products from the bad actors or their affiliates,” the complaint continues. “Such bad actors know that a fraudulent takedown request often has the same effect as a legitimate one; if a takedown request contains all the elements required under Section 512(c)(3)(A), it likely will trigger removal by Google. “Unfortunately, to ensure compliance with the DMCA and in reliance on the information submitted in Defendants’ takedown requests, Google’s system removed a significant number of thirdparty website URLs targeted by Defendants for a period of time before Google and/or the websites’ owners figured out what was going on and took appropriate steps to reinstate the URLs.” A particularly damaging batch of fraudulent notices targeted more than 35,000 URLs operated by a Google customer that spends tens of millions of dollars per year on Google search ads. The effect was a significant drop in traffic during the holiday season, revenue losses for the customer and its sellers of $5 million, and a loss to Google of between $2 and $3 million. Holding Defendants Accountable Those who knowingly make false statements in a DMCA notice can be held liable for damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees. In this matter the defendants’ conduct is said to have caused Google to suffer economic harm due to lost advertising revenue, damage to business relations, and the allocation of significant resources to investigate their wrongdoing. Google seeks attorneys’ fees and damages under 17 U.S.C. §512(f), in an amount to be determined at trial. The complaint adds that when the defendants created dozens of Google accounts, each time they entered into enforceable agreements with Google. While Google says it has “performed all its obligations” under those contracts, the actions of the defendants amount to breaches of their contractual obligations to Google and intentional interference in contractual relationships between Google and its advertising customers. Google says the defendants should be required to pay all general, special, and actual damages that Google “has sustained or will sustain” due to the fraudulent notices. Google further requests an order to restrain the defendants (and anyone working in concert with them), from submitting any further fraudulent takedown notices and/or creating any Gmail accounts. Google also wants a ban on the defendants using any of its products or services to advertise their websites or products.

A newspaper run by the Communist Party of Vietnam is reporting the “disappearance” of a number of popular channels from pay TV packages. Citing National Geographic and Nat Geo Wild as examples, the paper notesthey're owned by Disney. Vietnam's Ministry of Information and Communications is said to be "concerned" that the withdrawal will allow piracy to run rampant in Vietnam. Multiple high-level trade reports in the U.S. note that piracy has been rampant for years. Given the sheer scale and reach of pirate sites either operated from Vietnam, or with direct connections to Vietnam, describing the country as a global piracy problem wouldn’t be a stretch. After being briefed by Hollywood for the umpteenth time, that’s certainly the view of the United States government. Yet despite reported progress, including an overhaul of Vietnam’s copyright laws and promises to crack down on piracy, including the formation of a specialist anti-piracy unit, nothing has had any visible effect. However, turn off a few legal TV channels inside Vietnam and suddenly piracy is a real concern. International Pay TV Channels Withdraw Sài Gòn Giải Phóng, a media outlet owned by the Communist Party of Vietnam, published a report yesterday claiming that during October and November, TV channels “disappeared” from pay TV subscription packages. National Geographic and Nat Geo Wild were named specifically along with their owner, Disney. Other channels under the same ownership including Fox Movies, Fox Sports, Disney Channel and Disney Junior, were previously withdrawn, the paper reported. To explain the exodus, the article cites Nguyen Thanh Lam, Vietnam’s Deputy Minister of Information and Communications. He says that film companies and other entertainment content businesses, Disney included, believe that traditional television has run its course and video-on-demand services are the future. Since launching the Disney+ service, the article continues, Disney has begun to put everything it has onto the platform; it even had a message during the service’s launch ceremony: “Goodbye cable TV.” Disney+ is indeed widely available; Aladdin and Anastasia can be viewed in Algeria and Albania, Bambi and Bagheera in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Unfortunately nothing for Vietnam, though, since Disney+ isn’t available there. The article stresses the entire Southeast Asian market has seen international TV companies withdraw content but according to recent data, Disney+ is available in Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. As things stand, there’s no real option to view the lost channels in Vietnam anymore, at least not legally. Vietnam’s Government Voices Piracy Concerns The theory that making content legally available is the only way to ensure legal sales appears clear to Vietnam’s government. The last thing a market needs is a gap opening up for pirates to exploit, as the article explains: According to the Ministry of Information and Communications, although the withdrawal from the pay cable TV market in Vietnam is due to a change in the business orientation of the above channels, this also raises many concerns about the gap that these channels will leave behind. What is left is an opportunity for pirates, pirated websites, and illegal profits to run rampant when people’s need to watch sports, watch movies, listen to music….is very large To show the scale of the demand, the article cites figures compiled by the Ministry of Information and Communications. As of October 2023, the number of pay TV subscribers in Vietnam reached 18.7 million, an increase of 12.3% over the same period last year. Pay TV revenue as of the third quarter of 2023 had reached VND 7,500 billion ($307.5 million), up 1.4% over the same period in 2022. The government is apparently seeking recommendations on which companies can step in to fill the pay TV gap; it also appears to be painting the loss as an opportunity. “From a positive perspective, the withdrawal of international television channels is also an opportunity for domestic television channels to have more customers,” the Communist Party-owned publication notes. “Besides, if people continue to support pirated websites, businesses providing official services will no longer buy copyrighted content at high costs – something that happened in the past. At that time, people will also be disadvantaged.” If Only Someone Could Do Something Regardless of the overt or underlying reasons for withdrawing the channels, entertainment companies have a primary mission to generate profit and if a business is profitable in certain regions or product areas, those are only discarded for exceptional reasons. There are significant problems in Vietnam regarding the country’s Cinema Law (report, page 10 (pdf)) but the piracy problem never gets any better. When Vietnam did conduct some kind of crackdown, the focus wasn’t on U.S. content being pirated and then distributed all over the world, it was on pirated sports content from overseas being consumed inside the country. Blocking a reported 1,000 sites presented few problems for the authorities then. Yet according to the U.S. Department of Trade, despite Vietnam being host to the world’s “most egregious piracy sites” there is no clear or effective enforcement path available against these sites or their operators.”

Following a three-year investigation involving a prosecutor's office, a police economic crime unit, and a regional police force, three men linked to piracy portal Ogladaj (Watch) have been arrested in Poland. Police say they seized luxury cars, silver bars, cryptocurrency and cash. Other crimes that make the prosecution much more intriguing are mentioned in much less detail. A study published in September by the European Union Intellectual Property Office found that by late 2022, each internet user in the EU accessed websites offering pirated content at a rate of around 10 times per month. Estonia and Latvia were called out as Europe’s most prolific infringers with around 25 accesses per user per month. German citizens and their Italian counterparts were highlighted as among the best behaved; 7.5 accesses per user per month, or roughly one pirate site visit every four days. Yet when it comes to overall piracy rates and movie piracy in particular, no country in Europe can match the level of restraint shown in Poland. Not only do the Poles pirate less overall than any other country in the bloc, its citizens lead Europe on exposure to legal services. The European average for buying from the internet or a pay TV platform in 2022 was just over four people in every ten (pdf). Poland managed almost six in ten (59%), the best in Europe. All France had to show after 15 of years of monitoring, fining, and trying to reeducate pirates, was just three out of ten, the worst rate in Europe. Poland Steps Up Piracy Crackdown Last November, officers from Poland’s Central Bureau for Combatting Cybercrime (CBZC) arrested a then-28-year-old man on suspicion of connections to local platform, Zaukaj.vip. In January 2023, a 33-year-old believed to be the site’s founder was arrested and charged with fraud offenses dating back to February 2020. A separate investigation began in May 2020 and ran until June 2023. The Department for Combating Economic Crime in Kraków, under the supervision of the District Prosecutor’s Office in Lublin, targeted the operators of Ogladaj.to (Watch.to) for illegally distributing movies and TV shows online. According to information provided by police this week, the service was well organized and utilized content obtained from suppliers in Russia and Ukraine. Ogladaj’s outward appearance was somewhat typical of a web-based streaming service and the content itself appears to have been embedded in a YouTube-style player. With just 25,000 visits per month, on face value Ogladaj’s traffic levels seem a little low to warrant three years’ worth of investigation resources, at least when compared to other locally-significant platforms. For perspective, Poland-focused streaming site CDA-HD.cc receives around 1.7 million visits per month while Filman.cc, a site that claims to be registered as a legal business in Poland (1), receives over 10 million. Huge Losses to Rights Holders Despite what appears to be a somewhat limited audience, police claim that Ogladaj caused losses to rightsholders in the region of PLN 15 million ($3,615,777). Customers reportedly paid for subscriptions by redeeming vouchers bought online, although just days after police wrapped up their investigation (and seemingly before any arrests were made) customer complaints about an inaccessible service had already begun to appear online. Interestingly, the streaming service also accepted cryptocurrency payments. Police say these were processed through a crypto exchange office allegedly operated by one of the suspects. In October police arrested a 36-year-old man, described as the founder of Ogladaj, at an apartment in Gdynia, northern Poland. On the same day, a 38-year-old IT specialist was detained in Lower Silesia. Both men were subsequently charged with crimes in connection with the unlawful distribution of copyrighted content. There was some other stuff too. “Internet portal with erotic advertising” The report released by Małopolska police says that officers became aware that the alleged founder of Ogladaj was also responsible for creating an “internet portal with erotic advertising.” The arrested 38-year-old provided technical support for both websites, police say. “During a search of the suspects’ places of residence, the electronic equipment they used was seized. In addition, money in various currencies, funds in accounts, luxury cars, as well as high-quality sports equipment, silver bars and gold collector coins were seized from the suspects for future fines,” the report reads. The total value of the seized property is estimated at PLN 1,000,000, around $240,700, but whether all of that is attributable to the piracy operation becomes unclear when other potential crimes enter the equation. “[The suspects] will also be held responsible for deriving financial benefits from prostitution,” police add, with no further detail. Suspects Must Not Flee A third suspect in the case is described as a 30-year-old man who sold Ogladaj vouchers on his own website. If found guilty, police says the suspects face up to five years in prison. The men were released and placed under police supervision, which includes a ban on them leaving the country. Given the rather unusual events of 2020, which saw one of the world’s most wanted pirates suddenly vanish into thin air, that doesn’t come as a surprise.

Pirate IPTV service Beast TV shut down in 2020 in response to a lawsuit filed in Canada by several Hollywood studios, Netflix, Amazon, and Bell Media. A lawsuit filed Thursday in the United States claims to target a former 'Top 10' Beast TV reseller who allegedly still sells Beast TV-branded subscriptions. When Beast was shut down almost three years ago, an announcement on the defendant's alleged site, posted under a name that matches his, claimed the service was still alive. Popular pirate IPTV service Beast TV built one of the most recognizable brands the illicit sector had even seen. That level of recognition is good for business and also well known for attracting rightsholders’ attorneys. In the dying weeks of 2020, Beast TV began to fail which not only fueled rumors of legal action, but also a series of counter-rumors claiming everything was fine and the service would be back online soon. Things were actually as far away from fine as one could imagine. Behind the scenes it was already known that entertainment companies had formed a powerful coalition to take Beast TV down. Warner Bros., Amazon, Bell Media, Columbia, Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Sony Pictures, and Universal City Studios launched their action on October 2, 2020, before executing an ex parte injunction on November 24, 2020. Beast’s operators – Tyler White and Colin Wright – were ordered to shut the service down, disclose technical information, and comply with a laundry list of additional demands and orders. Both were found guilty of contempt after failing to fully comply and in many cases, not complying at all. The lawsuit is still ongoing and from court documents available to the public, it hasn’t been short on drama; at times it has even trended towards the surreal. In the wake of “various aspects” of the Beast service being “migrated elsewhere”, and evidence being destroyed or simply withheld, the “dissipation” of at least CAD$344,000 is said to have frustrated the plaintiffs. In June 2023 after pleading guilty to contempt, White was sentenced to 60 days incarceration at a correctional facility in Halifax, Nova Scotia. To prevent disruption to White’s job, the court agreed the sentence could “be served intermittently from Friday evenings at 6 p.m. until Monday mornings at 6 a.m.” ‘Rumors of Beast TV’s Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated’ With the lawsuit apparently nowhere near a conclusion even after three years, this summer Canada’s Federal Court noted that Tyler White had already spent at least CAD$400,000 defending the action. On that basis alone, it seems reasonable to assume that being associated with the Beast TV brand is something most people would seek to avoid. For the alleged operators of channels4cheap.com and purchase-iptv.com, Beast TV branding is a prominent feature. According to an announcement on the site, posted almost three years ago in the wake of Beast TV’s demise, Beast didn’t actually die. As the image above shows, efforts were being made late December 2020 to convince people that Beast TV wasn’t actually finished. That post is still in place today, minus a YouTube video that was removed for violating the platform’s terms of service. Also intact are pages where people can subscribe to a Beast TV-branded IPTV service, perfect for those who enjoy the thrill of watching the same pirate IPTV streams as DISH Network’s piracy investigators. DISH Lawsuit Incoming According to a lawsuit filed Thursday at a Texas district court, DISH investigators made undercover purchases from the Channels4Cheap (C4C) website. That allowed the company to identify John Gwaka Magembe and Joyce Berry as the alleged operators of the C4C website. “Defendants are trafficking in the Beast TV internet streaming television service a/k/a Channels4Cheap through their websites located at www.channels4cheap.com and its sister website www.purchase-iptv.com,” the complaint reads. “Defendants sell Device Codes [subscriptions] to the Service on the C4C Website for $2 for a forty eight hour trial; $15 for one month; $40 for three months; $70 for six months; and $120 for twelve months, depending on the option selected by the user.” How DISH came into possession of the evidence shown in the screenshot below is unclear; it appears to feature part of a reseller management interface carrying obviously sensitive information. The screenshot references a Beast TV domain (beasthosts.com, confirmed as official in Canadian court documents), and data revealing a ‘John Magembe’ as a top 10 reseller of Beast TV subscriptions, presumably from a time when the platform was still in full swing. The defendants face claims of violating the DMCA and breaches of the Federal Communications Act. DISH and fellow plaintiff Sling are seeking a permanent injunction plus actual or statutory damages, which could reach millions of dollars, tens of millions of dollars, or potentially half a billion. Predicting a precise amount is difficult in today’s settlement-rich environment but whatever happens, this lawsuit is still likely to be finished before the lawsuit in Canada concludes, but when that might be is anyone’s guess.

As part of its overall strategy to reduce piracy in the Netherlands, local anti-piracy group BREIN announced a program to identify major or frequent uploaders by their IP addresses so that warnings could be sent via their ISPs. Under this system, user identities would not have been obtained by BREIN, but after a local ISP refused to cooperate and BREIN's request to proceed was denied twice in court, BREIN had a decision to make. (SPOILER: It's bad news for pirates) Many copyright holders believe that if they’re able to communicate with pirates, a proportion will change their behavior. The tone of the messaging varies but legal consequences are typically found somewhere in the mix. When attempting to reach alleged BitTorrent pirates at scale, the immediate problem is accurate identification. While IP addresses can lead to an infringer or at least the person who pays the internet bill, it’s an expensive process when there’s no intention to sue while recovering costs. BREIN Hatches a Plan In late 2020, Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN believed it had found a solution. The plan was to monitor BitTorrent swarms, identify IP addresses sharing content most frequently or long-term, and then match them to local ISPs. After receiving warning notices from BREIN targeting those IP addresses, all the ISPs had to do was match them to the relevant customers and forward BREIN’s notices. BREIN’s plan didn’t require knowledge of the alleged infringers’ identities; the ISPs would act as proxies, ensure the notices were delivered, leaving BREIN to monitor BitTorrent networks for any signs of changes in behavior. Nobody was getting sued, at least not at this stage. BREIN presented its plan to Ziggo, the largest ISP in the Netherlands, which declined to cooperate on privacy grounds. Just as it had done many times previously, BREIN took Ziggo to court aiming to force compliance, arguing that its plan was a proportionate and privacy-respecting response to piracy. Two Courts, Two Rare Defeats for BREIN During the first hearing at a court in Utrecht, among other things Ziggo argued that BREIN’s request was too broad. While the court disagreed, Ziggo’s privacy concerns found fertile ground thanks to the Netherlands’ implementation of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). To legally process personal information, companies must meet certain criteria and obtain appropriate licensing. BREIN had already obtained permission from the Dutch Data Protection Authority before starting its work. Ziggo, on the other hand, had no reason to obtain permission, at least not until BREIN requested cooperation. The court found that without obtaining permission from the data protection authority, the law didn’t allow Ziggo to comply with BREIN’s request. Since Ziggo had no intention of obtaining permission and couldn’t be compelled to do so, that effectively settled the matter in Ziggo’s favor. BREIN filed an appeal but the outcome was the same. With no legal basis for Ziggo to process personal data, the ISP couldn’t be compelled to forward the notices. BREIN Decides Against a Supreme Court Appeal In March 2023, BREIN announced that it would not appeal to the Supreme Court. Those familiar with BREIN’s history would’ve recognized that as out of character, but it’s also unusual for EU privacy laws to rub up against rightsholders’ ability to protect copyrights and then come out on top. While obviously a setback, it was always likely that BREIN would find another way. In a statement Thursday, BREIN said that with anonymous warnings off the table, it will adopt a ‘tit-for-tat’ policy that does away with warnings completely. “This means that from now on, BREIN will simply identify first, major or frequent infringers, if necessary with the provision of their name and address data by their internet providers, and hold them accountable for their infringement,” BREIN says. “Depending on the circumstances of the case, this involves signing a declaration of abstention with a penalty clause for future infringements, full or partial reimbursement of the costs incurred and, if necessary, compensation for the damages of injured rights holders.” Given a choice, pirates may have preferred ‘anonymous’ warnings, but that would’ve been in addition to the above, which at no point was ever off the table. Whether it’s financially-viable at scale is a different matter but BREIN has options to balance the books, mostly at alleged pirates’ expense. “If intermediaries wrongly refuse to voluntarily provide name and address data, BREIN must incur costs in order to obtain a court order. If these are not reimbursed by the intermediary, BREIN may choose to recover them from the infringer,” the anti-piracy group explains. “This is one of the reasons why BREIN usually requests intermediaries to inform their customers of the request for [personal details] so that they can choose to report themselves to BREIN.” In Some Cases, ISPs May Be Compelled to Send Warnings In a separate case, BREIN accused a Ziggo subscriber of offering over 200 pirated eBooks to the public via an open directory. BREIN asked the ISP to forward a warning or share their personal details. When Ziggo declined to cooperate, BREIN took the ISP to court and in 2022, lost the case on the same privacy grounds. On appeal, however, it was BREIN’s turn to come out on top. Where the GDPR previously scuppered BREIN’s ability to send anonymous warnings, the court of appeal found that BREIN’s interests in shutting down access to the pirated eBooks outweighed the Ziggo subscriber’s privacy rights. Moving forward, this means that BREIN will be able to obtain suspected pirates’ details, providing it meets certain requirements. BREIN says it must demonstrate “that (i) the damage and unlawfulness are sufficiently plausible, (ii) the applicant (BREIN) has a realistic interest in obtaining the data, (iii) there is no other, less intrusive option to retrieve the data. , and (iv) when weighing the interests, the interest of the applicant is greater than that of the data subject and the provider.” In other words, every case will be judged on its merits and there will be no blanket coverage on disclosure. There will be no opportunities for pirates to regret being caught in a way that doesn’t cost money either. After almost two decades of public warnings, thousands of news articles, and millions of cash settlements paid worldwide, the final warning always ends up being the most critical warning of all.

@F4DeLeSS Thank you. Appreciate it.