Following the shutdown of KickassTorrents, the next pretenders to the torrent throne will be weighing up the pros and cons of pirate life. There are lessons to be learned for those willing to take the risk, but can any setup be truly bullet-proof when challenged by the US Government? To the huge disappointment of millions of BitTorrent users, KickassTorrents disappeared this week following an investigation by the Department of Homeland Security in the United States. With a huge hole now present at the top of the torrent landscape, other sites plus interested groups and individuals will be considering their options. Step up their game and take over the top slot? Cautiously maintain the status quo? Or pull out altogether… Make no mistake, this is a game of great reward, matched only by the risk. If the DHS complaint is to be believed, Kickass made dozens of millions of euros, enough to tempt even the nerviest of individuals. But while that might attract some, is avoiding detection almost impossible these days? The complaint against KAT shows that while not inevitable, it’s becoming increasingly difficult. It also shows that carelessness plays a huge part in undermining security and that mistakes made by others in the past are always worth paying attention to. Servers in the United States Perhaps most tellingly, in the first instance KAT failed to learn from the ‘mistakes’ made by Megaupload. While the cases are somewhat dissimilar, both entities chose to have a US presence for at least some of their servers. This allowed US authorities to get involved. Not a great start. “[Since 2008], KAT has relied on a network of computer servers around the world to operate, including computer servers located in Chicago, Illinois,” the complaint against the site reads. The Chicago server weren’t trivial either. “According to a reverse DNS search conducted by the hosting company on or about May 5, 2015, that server was the mail client ‘mail.kat.ph’.” Torrent site mail servers. In the United States. What could go possibly go wrong? In a word? Everything. In January 2016, DHS obtained a search warrant and cloned the Chicago servers. Somewhat unsurprisingly this gifted investigating agent Jared Der-Yeghiayan (the same guy who infiltrated Silk Road) valuable information. “I located multiple files that contained unique user information, access logs, and other information. These files include a file titled ‘passwd’ located in the ‘etc’ directory, which was last accessed on or about January 13, 2016, and which identified the users who had access to the operating system,” Der-Yeghiayan said. Servers in Canada KAT also ran several servers hosted with Montreal-based Netelligent Hosting Services. There too, KAT was vulnerable. In response to a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty request, in April 2016 the Royal Canadian Mounted Police obtained business records associated with KAT’s account and made forensic images of the torrent site’s hard drives. Why KAT chose Netelligent isn’t clear, but the site should have been aware that the hosting company would be forced to comply with law enforcement requests. After all, it had happened at least once before in a case involving Swedish torrent site, Sparvar. Mistakes at the beginning When pirate sites first launch, few admins expect them to become world leaders. If they did, they’d probably approach things a little differently at the start. In KAT’s case, alleged founder Artem Vaulin registered several of the site’s domains in his own name, information that was happily handed to the DHS by US-based hosting company GoDaddy. Vaulin also used a Gmail account, operated by US-based Google. The complaint doesn’t explicitly say that Google handed over information, but it’s a distinct possibility. In any event, an email sent from that account in 2009 provided a helpful bridge to investigators. “I changed my gmail. now it’s [email protected],” it read. Forging further connections from his private email accounts to those operated from KAT, in 2012 Vaulin sent ‘test’ emails from KAT email addresses to his Apple address. This, HSI said, signaled the point that Vaulin began using KAT emails for business. No time to relax, even socially In addition to using an email account operated by US-based Apple, (in which HSI found Vaulin’s passport and driver’s license details, plus his banking info), the Ukranian also had an iTunes account. Purchases he made there were logged by Apple, down to the IP address. Then, thanks to information provided by US-based Facebook (notice the recurring Stateside theme?), HSI were able to match that same IP address against a login to KAT’s Facebook page. Anonymous Bitcoin – not quite If the irony of the legitimate iTunes purchases didn’t quite hit the spot, the notion that Bitcoin could land someone in trouble should tick all the boxes. According to the complaint, US-based Bitcoin exchange Coinbase handed over information on Vaulin’s business to HSI. “Records received from the bitcoin exchange company Coinbase revealed that the KAT Bitcoin Donation Address sent bitcoins it received to a user’s account maintained at Coinbase. This account was identified as belonging to Artem Vaulin located in Kharkov, Ukraine,” it reads. Final thoughts For a site that the US Government had always insisted was operating overseas, KickassTorrents clearly had a huge number of United States connections. This appears to have made the investigation much more simple than it would have been had the site and its owner had maintained a presence solely in Eastern Europe. Why the site chose to maintain these connections despite the risks might never be answered, but history has shown us time and again that US-based sites are not only vulnerable but also open to the wrath of the US Government. With decades of prison time at stake, that is clearly bad news. But for now at least, Vaulin is being detained in Poland, waiting to hear of his fate. Whether or not he’ll quickly be sent to the United States is unclear, but it seems unlikely that a massively prolonged Kim Dotcom-style extradition battle is on the agenda. A smaller one might be, however. While the shutdown of KAT and the arrest of its owner came out of the blue, the writing has always been on the wall. The shutdown is just one of several momentous ‘pirate’ events in the past 18 months including the closure (and resurrection) of The Pirate Bay, the dismantling of the main Popcorn Time fork, and the end of YTS/YIFY. source : https://torrentfreak.com/kickasstorrents-connections-to-the-us-doomed-the-site-160723/

Starting from today all registrations are closed. Nobody can register anymore, invite based or normal based.In the next few days all accounts that are registered on identical IP addresses will be banned/disabled. [clone accounts].Furthermore accounts that dont have at least 15GB downloaded and are 1 month old will be also purged.We are trying to build a nice and strong community. We dont need clone accounts from the same address or accounts that are not used.Take care!

It has been just over a day since KickassTorrents (KAT) was shut down by the U.S. Government, following the arrest of the site's alleged owner. While the official site is still offline mirrors and copies are being launched left and right, with some misleadingly claiming to be an "official" resurrection of KAT. With an active community and millions of regular visitors, KickassTorrents has been the most used torrent site for quite some time. This ended abruptly earlier this week, following the arrest of its alleged founder in Poland. A criminal complaint from the U.S. Government revealed that entire operation had been compromised by the Department of Homeland Security. Starting a few hours ago, the first Kickass domain was signed over to the U.S. authorities. Others are expected to follow during the days to come. Kickass.to now displays a seizure notice, which means that the associated domain registry was quick to respond to the U.S. warrant. People who visit the Kickass.to address today will see the following banner, specifically tailored for KAT. KAT’s seizure banner As expected, the U.S. authorities are not the only ones to ‘lift’ KAT’s logo, many others are doing the same, but for a different reason. Shortly after KAT went offline dozens of people began promoting mirrors and copies of the site. Some are just trying to keep lost files accessible, but there’s also a group trying to take over the brand, similar to the efforts seen following YIFY’s demise. For example, the operator of Kickass.la sent an email to several reporters promoting a new KAT address. In a follow-up, we were told that the site is an “official backup,” and that a copy of the database is in their possession. However, the site appears to be little more than a partial copy and the person behind it later admitted that they are not related to KAT. Only adding to the confusion are the many other copies and alternatives claiming to be the official resurrection of KAT. Some even advertise themselves as such, but most have been available for a longer time as proxy/mirror sites. Kickasstorrents.to, for example, has been around for a long time, hosting cached pages of the original site. The latter is also true for others, such as Dxtorrent.com. But in any case, there is no true backup with freshly added content available. Another mirror that has been widely discussed is kickasstorrents.website (which is NOT a project of Isohunt.to, as some reports suggest). Unlike others, the people behind this site are very clear about the fact that they are not related to the original KAT team. Their copy currently lists torrent files from the past one and a half years, but like other mirrors it doesn’t have a working forum or upload functionality. “It’s not perfect but if users need to save and archive something it’s time. We don’t know how long it can last, but at least it’s something,” the site’s operator told TorrentFreak. The people behind the site, who describe themselves as a group of individuals who stand for freedom of the Internet, also launched a petition on Change.org calling for the release of KAT’s alleged owner Artem Vaulin. “We are protesting against violent attack on our right to share information and arrest of Kat.cr founder Artem Vaulin. Our freedom to share is the human right which Artem Vaulin has been providing to millions of users from all over the world,” they say. While a notable effort, the banner promoting the cause appears to show a photo of an entirely different Artem Vaulin. The image was removed from the petition after we pointed this out, but it’s still present in the manifesto at the time of writing and being shared in news articles and on social media. What is clear is that former KAT users are grasping at straws to get their old community back. While mirrors and copies do look like their old home, without a working forum and new content they don’t provide much of an alternative. For now, people are probably better off not trusting any “KAT resurrection” claims. The chance of getting your password stolen is higher than finding a site with a true backup of the user database.

Yesterday the U.S. Government delivered a massive blow to KickassTorrents. With its alleged founder arrested and pretty much the entire site's operation compromised, it's not obvious that there will be a Pirate Bay style comeback anytime soon. Founded in 2009, KickassTorrents (KAT) grew out to become the largest torrent site on the Internet with millions of visitors a day. As a result, copyright holders and law enforcement have taken aim at the site in recent years. This resulted in several ISP blockades around the world, but yesterday the big hit came when the site’s alleged founder was arrested in Poland. Soon after the news was made public KAT disappeared, leaving its users without their favorite site. The question that’s on many people’s minds right now is whether the site will make a Pirate Bay-style comeback. While it’s impossible to answer this question with certainty, the odds can be more carefully weighed by taking a closer look at the events that led up to the bust and what may follow. First off, KickassTorrents is now down across all the site’s official domain names. This downtime seems to be voluntary in part, as the authorities haven’t seized the servers. Also, several domains are still in the hands of the KAT-team. That said, the criminal complaint filed in the U.S. District Court in Chicago does reveal that KAT has been heavily compromised (pdf). According to the feds, Artem Vaulin, a 30-year-old from Ukraine, is the key player behind the site. Over the years, he obfuscated his connections to the site, but several security holes eventually revealed his identity. With help from several companies in the United States and abroad, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) agent Jared Der-Yeghiayan identifies the Ukrainian as the driving force behind the site. The oldest traces to Vaulin are the WHOIS records for various domains, registered in his name early 2009. “A review of historical Whois information for KAT….identified that it was registered on or about January 19, 2009, to Artem Vaulin with an address located in Kharkiv, Ukraine,” the affidavit reads. This matches with records obtained from domain registrar GoDaddy, which indicate that Vaulin purchased three KAT-related domain names around the same time. The agent further uncovered that the alleged KAT founder used an email address with the nickname “tirm.” The same name was listed as KAT’s “owner” on the site’s “People” page in the early days, but was eventually removed in 2011. Tirm on KAT’s people page The HSI agent also looked at several messages posted on KAT, which suggest that “tirm” was actively involved in operating the site. “As part of this investigation, I also reviewed historical messages posted by tirm, KAT’s purported ‘Owner.’ These postings and others indicate that tirm was actively engaged in the early running of KAT in addition to being listed as an administrator and the website’s owner,” the HSI agent writes. Assisted by Apple and Facebook the feds were then able to strengthen the link between Vaulin, tirm, and his involvement in the site. Facebook, for example, handed over IP-address logs from the KAT fanpage. With help from Apple, the investigator was then able to cross-reference this with an IP-address Vaulin used for an iTunes transaction. “Records provided by Apple showed that [email protected] conducted an iTunes transaction using IP Address 109.86.226.203 on or about July 31, 2015. The same IP Address was used on the same day to login into the KAT Facebook Account.” In addition, Apple appears to have handed over private email conversations which reference KAT, dating back several years. These emails also mention a “kickasstorrent payment,” which is believed to be revenue related. “I identified a number of emails in the [email protected] account relating to Vaulin’s operation of KAT. In particular, between on or about June 8, 2010, and on or about September 3, 2010,” the HSI agent writes. More recent records show that an IP-address linked to KAT’s Facebook page was also used to access Vaulin’s Coinbase account, suggesting that the Bitcoin wallet also assisted in the investigation. “Notably, IP address 78.108.178.77 accessed the KAT Facebook Account about a dozen times in September and October 2015. This same IP Address was used to login to Vaulin’s Coinbase account 47 times between on or about January 28, 2014, through on or about November 13, 2014.” As for the business side, the complaint mentions a variety of ad payments, suggesting that KAT made over a dozen million dollars in revenue per year. It also identifies the company Cryptoneat as KAT’s front. The Cryptoneat.com domain was registered by Vaulin and LinkedIn lists several employees of the company who were involved in the early development of the site. “Many of the employees found on LinkedIn who present themselves as working for Cryptoneat are the same employees who received assignments from Vaulin in the KAT alert emails,” the complaint reads. Interestingly, none of the other employees are identified or charged. To gather further information on the money side, the feds also orchestrated an undercover operation where they posed as an advertiser for “a website purportedly advertising a program to study in the United States.” This revealed details of several bank accounts, with one receiving over $28 million in just eight months. “Those records reflect that the Subject Account received a total of approximately €28,411,357 in deposits between on or about August 28, 2015, and on or about March 10, 2016.” Bank account Finally, and crucially, the investigators issued a warrant directed at the Canadian webhost of KickassTorrents. This was one of the biggest scores as it provided them with full copies of KAT’s hard drives, including the email server. “I observed […] that they were all running the same Linux Gentoo operating system, and that they contained files with user information, SSH access logs, and other information, including a file titled ‘passwd’ located in the ‘etc’ directory,” the HSI agent writes. “I also located numerous files associated with KAT, including directories and logs associated to their name servers, emails and other files,” he adds. Considering all the information U.S. law enforcement has in its possession, it’s doubtful that KAT will resume its old operation anytime soon. Technically it won’t be hard to orchestrate a Pirate Bay-style comeback, as there are probably some backups available. However, now that the site has been heavily compromised and an ongoing criminal investigation is underway, it would be a risky endeavor. Similarly, uploaders and users may also worry about what information the authorities have in their possession. The complaint cites private messages that were sent through KAT, suggesting that the authorities have access to a significant amount of data. While regular users are unlikely to be targeted, the information may provide useful for future investigations into large-scale uploaders. More clarity on this, the site’s future, and what it means for the torrent ecosystem, is expected to become evident when the dust settles.

A ruling handed down by a court in Italy which found Kim Dotcom's Megavideo liable for TV piracy has been slammed by the entrepreneur's lawyer. Speaking with TorrentFreak, Ira Rothken says that the notion that a service provider needs to take down content without knowing its URL is fraught with difficulty and could violate freedom of expression. While Kim Dotcom’s Megaupload has been the focus of thousands of headlines over the past half decade, the tech entrepreneur also had many other successful ventures in his portfolio. Among them was Megavideo, a file-hosting service that allowed users to upload video in much the same way as YouTube does today. The ad-supported platform was free to use for any video up to 72 minutes in length, with content of longer duration requiring a subscription to watch in full without waits. Megavideo disappeared in 2012 following the raids on Megaupload but that didn’t stop Italian TV outfit RTI (Reti Televisive Italiane) suing for copyright infringement. As reported yesterday, a Rome court has just ordered Megavideo to pay $13.4m in damages after the company reportedly failed to respond to takedown notices. However, the decision is an extremely unusual one. In Megavideo’s absence the court found that the copyright holder’s takedown notices (which listed only TV show titles and contained no URLs) were sufficient for Megavideo to take action. The court also found that video categorization and ad placement undermined Megavideo’s safe harbor. Speaking with TorrentFreak, Megaupload/Megavideo lawyer Ira Rothken says that the ruling represents a real cause for concern for other companies operating in the same sector. “The Rome court apparently ruled on this Megavideo case in a default context, unknown to us, and the result is unworkable caselaw on ISP secondary copyright liability,” Rothken explains. “The court used user-generated categorization and garden variety ads like those found on YouTube and other mainstream cloud sites as adverse factors. Without categories and ads there likely could be no user-generated content sites.” But unsurprisingly it’s the issue of the URL-free takedown notices that attracts the most attention. In the United States and across Europe, it’s an accepted norm that takedown notices must be specific about the content to be removed. That the Italian court decided otherwise presents a real danger for service providers. “It was not explained in the Rome ruling why the copyright owners couldn’t provide URLs in the takedown notices and no burden analysis based on competent evidence was done by the Court,” Rothken says. “The Rome Court’s ruling not requiring specific URLs in cloud takedown notices contradicts US caselaw in the United States in cases which permit ISPs to ignore takedown requests that do not contain a specific link.” Rothken points out that in US courts the burden is on copyright holders to police their works online and that service providers are not responsible for deciding what is and is not infringing. “The ISP has no duty to investigate and providing only a title without a URL would require investigation and the making of ad hoc copyright assessments,” he adds. But that’s exactly what Megavideo would have had to do in the scenario outlined by the court. Without specific URLs being provided in takedown requests, Megavideo would have been left to trawl its databases for titles of videos that contained the same or similar words cited by copyright holders, a notoriously inaccurate method of detecting infringing content. “Under the Rome Court’s ‘no URL’ requirement, some enterprising plaintiff can do a takedown notice for some video clips called “the Greek wedding” with no URL provided and no one will know what Greek wedding clips they are referring to,” Rothken says. “Worse, to disambiguate the takedown request the ISP would need a legal copy of the alleged video for comparison purposes obtainable through no court-described method.” However, even in the event that the original video was successfully obtained from the copyright holder, matters would not be straightforward. “The ISP would need a warehouse full of folks that would need to watch the target video and thousands of cloud-stored videos and make ad hoc assessments on infringements versus third-party works versus fair use versus licensed uses to avoid overbroad deletions or copyright lawsuits,” Rothken warns. Aside from the obviously curious details of the ruling, it’s a little surprising that other companies invested in the sector, YouTube for instance, haven’t become involved in a case that appears to have implications for them. Nevertheless, the court has spoken and Rothken says that its ruling poses a real cause for concern. “This type of secondary infringement rule if allowed to stand arguably violates EU freedom of expression and copyright-related treaties, amongst other things,” he concludes. source : https://torrentfreak.com/megavideo-lawyer-slams-tv-piracy-court-ruling-160720/

The U.S. military is being accused of installing 'pirated' copies of 3D virtual reality software onto hundreds of thousands of computers without permission. Bitmanagement, the makers of the software, accuse the Navy of willful copyright infringement and are suing the Government for more than half a billion dollars in unpaid licenses. In recent years the U.S. Government has taken an aggressive stance towards copyright infringement, both at home and abroad. However, that doesn’t mean that the Government always sticks to the rules, quite the contrary. In a recent lawsuit it stands accused of willful copyright infringement on a massive scale. The case centers around “BS Contact Geo,” a 3D virtual reality application developed by the German company Bitmanagement. The Navy was enthusiastic about the geographical modeling capabilities of the software and in 2011 and 2012 it agreed to license its use for 38 computers. “Those individual PC-based licenses authorized the Navy to install BS Contact Geo on a total of just 38 computers for the purposes of testing, trial runs, and integration into Navy systems,” the software vendor states in the federal claims court complaint (pdf). After testing the application for a while, both parties started negotiating the licensing of additional computers. However, before any deals were made, the software maker learned that the Navy had already installed it on over 100,000 computers. According to emails Bitmanagement executives received in 2013, the software had been rolled onto at least 558,466 computers on the Navy’s network, without their permission. “Even as it negotiated with Bitmanagement over the proposed large-scale licensing of its product, the Navy was simultaneously copying and installing that software, without Bitmanagement’s advance knowledge or authorization, on a massive scale,” the complaint reads. In addition, the Navy allegedly disabled the software that is supposed to track on how many computers the software is being used. This violation of the terms of service prevents the software vendor from stopping the unauthorized copying. “To make matters worse, starting in 2014, the ‘Flexwrap’ software intended to track the Navy’s use and duplication of BS Contact Geo on Navy computers was disabled,” the complaint explains. This change made it impossible for Bitmanagement to know the scope of the deployment and use of BS Contact Geo on unlicensed machines or to limit that use,” the company adds. The software vendor says that the willful copyright infringement has caused injury to its business and rights. As a result, they’re now demanding compensation for the damage that was caused, to a total of nearly $600 million. Installing BS Contact Geo onto a single PC cost roughly $1067 at the time, so Bitmanagement claims that it is entitled to at least $596,308,103 in unpaid licensing fees. For comparison, that is more than the damages Kim Dotcom and Megaupload have caused copyright holders, according to the United States. And that case was billed by the FBI as one of the “largest criminal copyright cases” in history. Interestingly this is not the first time that the U.S. military has been “caught” pirating software. A few years ago it was accused of operating unlicensed logistics software, a case the Obama administration eventually settled for $50 million. source : https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-government-sued-for-software-piracy-maker-claims-600m-160720/

welcome to I-H and have fun.

welcome to I-H and have fun.

welcome to I-H and have fun.

welcome to I-H and have fun.

welcome to I-H have fun with chatting in shoutbox.

An Italian court has ordered Kim Dotcom's Megavideo to pay $13.4m in damages after making TV shows available without permission. The roots of the case date back to 2010 when TV company RTI sent Megavideo takedown notices, without specifying any URLs. The court found that the URLs weren't needed. Kim Dotcom’s Megaupload empire was shuttered in 2012 with dramatic raids in New Zealand and legal action on several continents. Nevertheless, the drama continues. The entrepreneur and his former colleagues are fighting on several fronts, including extradition cases in New Zealand plus pending copyright, racketeering and money laundering charges in the United States. Interestingly, another case has just emerged out of the shadows in Europe. Megavideo, Megaupload’s sister site, was focused on storing videos uploaded by its users. Predictably, however, thousands of these videos were movies and TV shows, for which Megaupload users held no copyrights. Some of that content belonged to TV company RTI (Reti Televisive Italiane), a subsidiary of Mediaset, the media giant founded by former Italian president Silvio Berlusconi. In an effort to have that content removed, in 2010 RTI says it contacted Megavideo with takedown requests, takedowns which the company failed to act upon. This prompted RTI to take Megavideo to court, claiming that the video hosting platform had infringed its broadcasting rights and engaged in unfair competition. RTI asked the court to order Megavideo to take down the unauthorized content and award damages of more than $110m. The unfair competition claim gained no traction but the Tribunale di Roma has just handed down its decision and its bad news for Megavideo. The Court found that the Hong Kong-based video hosting platform illegally distributed more than 16,000 minutes of RTI programming and ordered it to pay the equivalent of $13.4m in damages, plus more than $60,000 in legal costs. In Megavideo’s absence (the company did not defend itself), the Court considered whether the platform could enjoy safe harbor as a hosting provider. Megavideo failed on a number of points, notably by organizing content into various categories, placing advertising based on the geo-locations of its users, and lifting viewing limitations on users after they paid a subscription. But perhaps the most curious element of the case surrounds the takedown notices RTI sent to Megavideo back in 2010. While most DMCA-style efforts must include an offending URL so that platforms are easily able to identify the content in question, RTI offered Megavideo no such luxury. The TV company simply advised the hosting platform that its TV shows were on the site and ordered it to take them down. Strangely the Court found that this was enough information for Megavideo to act on the allegations of infringement. In a partial translation of the ruling, IPKitten has the Court noting that “the information included in those takedown requests was sufficient to allow the defendant to take action to prevent the continuation of the infringement of [RTI’s] rights.” Even in the absence of the takedowns, the Court added that “the defendant could easily and independently acquire knowledge of such infringements, both because of the notoriety of the TV programmes in question and the relevant broadcasting channels and, in particular, the presence RTI’s distinctive signs on all TV programmes’ extracts.” In the overall scheme of things the ruling probably represents a minor setback for Kim Dotcom, but the notion that copyright holders can send extremely general takedown requests to hosting platforms and expect them to take action is a worrying one that might not be supported under EU law. Kim Dotcom did not immediately respond to our requests for comment. source: https://torrentfreak.com/court-orders-dotcoms-megavideo-to-pay-13-4m-for-tv-show-piracy-160719/

As predicted last week, the company which owns vKontakte and Russia's two other major social networking sites has signed a music licensing deal with Universal Music to end piracy on the platforms. As a result, all outstanding copyright legal action between the companies has been settled. After years of being branded one of the world’s worst Internet piracy facilitators, social networking giant vKontakte has taken a huge step towards fixing its reputation. As predicated last week, vKontakte owner Mail.ru has now signed a licensing agreement with Universal Music and United Music Agency which will see music and video content appear legally on the platform. The deal also covers Mail.ru’s two other social networking platforms, Classmates (Odnoklassniki) and My World. Along with vKontakte, these sites are the three most popular social networking platforms in Russia. With the agreement now signed, Mail.ru has licensing agreements in place with the three leading music rights groups – Universal Music Group (UMG), Warner Music and Sony Music. In addition to allowing huge catalogs of music to appear on vKontakte legitimately, the Universal deal also puts to rest all copyright-related legal action between the companies. VKontakte has now settled its differences with all three music giants. Details on the UMG deal are scarce, but Mail.ru says that its social network platforms will “test various monetization models jointly with other market players” to find the best solution for artists and fans. Insiders familiar with the negotiations told Russian news outlet Vedomosti that Universal has received a “minimum guarantee” that it will generate around $8m over the next three years. VKontakte CEO Boris Dobrodeyev welcomed the deal between the companies and expressed optimism for the future. “Following extensive negotiations, we have agreed terms with all of the major music rights holders, enabling us to draw a line under this process. This is a historic moment and a new milestone in VKontakte’s history,” Dobrodeyev said. “Our constructive and mutually beneficial collaboration has put an end to earlier disputes with the record companies. Following the removal of legal barriers, we can now create new products based on VKontakte’s music service that users will value.” Adrian Cheesley, Senior Vice President at Universal Music Group, said that the deal will ensure that artists will now be paid when their content is exploited on social networks. “Music has tremendous value and we’re gratified to reach a commercial agreement that ensures UMG’s artists are fairly compensated for the use of their music,” Cheesley said. “Russia is an important, and growing, market for UMG and with this important step we’re looking forward to developing more local artists, investing in growing the music scene and broadly licensing services.” It is not yet clear how the terms of the licensing deal will affect how music is made available on vKontakte in future, but it’s likely it will be less of a free-for-all than it currently is. Music downloaded from vKontakte is an important fuelling element of the pirate content landscape so this is definitely something to watch in the weeks and months to come. source :Torrentfreak

Hello TD Members It is with great pleasure I announce that over the past couple of days TD has rolled out a much awaited and requested "Thank You" button within each torrent. to use the new feature then please just click the "thank the uploader" button I would like to Thank all TD members on their patience on this long awaited feature Regards all TD staff

The regulatory body responsible for keeping gambling clean in the UK has announced a new licensing condition for operators. Following a consultation with stakeholders, licensees will be required to prevent their advertisements appearing on sites that provide unauthorized access to copyrighted content. The vast majority of publicly available ‘pirate’ sites rely on some kind of advertising to generate revenue. With millions of visitors per month, some are reported to make significant sums. As a result, copyright holders have been investing considerable resources into initiatives that try to persuade advertisers to stop supporting them. If advertising is removed from these sites, they will cease to exist, entertainment companies argue. But despite immense pressure on mainstream advertisers, it is still fairly common to be presented with gambling adverts when visiting unauthorized torrent and streaming portals. Just months ago, Bet365, Coral and Sky Bet in the UK were called out over the practice. However, it’s now clear that if UK gambling operators want to keep their valuable licenses clean, they will have to ensure there is no repeat of these mistakes. The Gambling Commission is a government-sponsored body with a mandate to keep the gambling business clean in the UK. Its responsibilities include protecting children and other vulnerable people while ensuring that gambling is fair and open. It is also charged with keeping all aspects of crime out of gambling. In September 2016, the Commission consulted on amendments (pdf) to licensing conditions that would compel licensees to ensure that advertisements “placed by themselves and others” do not appear on websites providing unauthorized access to copyright content. That consultation was published in May (pdf) followed by a supplementary consultation this month. All respondents agreed in principle that gambling operators should not advertise on pirate sites but there was less consensus on how that could be achieved. While not advertising directly is less of a problem, some respondents indicated that they use affiliates to place adverts on their behalf, so monitoring them all could prove difficult. Others noted that special software designed for the task might prove expensive. Overall, however, the Gambling Commission says that something still needs to be done since ads for gambling companies continue to appear on pirate sites. “Although adverts placed on such websites are not criminal in themselves, they contribute to funding the websites, and are therefore associating gambling with crime. They also frequently appear next to other adverts and links containing malware or viruses,” the Commission says. As a result, the Commission is now taking action. Due to the perceived seriousness of the situation, the implementation of a ‘social code’ often employed by the industry was rejected. Instead, a new licensing condition is being introduced which will require licensees to ensure that their marketing does not appear on pirate sites. Licensees will be free to choose which preventative measures they take but they are being advised to make use of the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit’s ‘Infringing Website List‘. Operators are also advised to tighten their agreements with affiliates, making it clear that “robust action” can be taken for any breaches. The use of proactive monitoring software is also advised. There were some objections from operators, mostly concerning the difficulty of the task ahead, but help will be at hand. Licensees will able to draw on the experiences not only of PIPCU, but also the Federation Against Copyright Theft and the BPI. “We have decided to implement the new licence condition requiring operators to take responsibility for preventing digital adverts advertising their brand from appearing on websites providing access to unauthorised content,” the Gambling Commission said in response to the consultation. “We have taken account of respondents’ views and have amended the wording of the licence condition to make clear that in the case of third party advertising operators should implement all reasonable steps to prevent marketing appearing on such websites, and to react quickly and effectively if they do appear.” The new licence condition (shown below) will be implemented in the autumn/fall. source :Torrentfreak

Private Internet Access is informing users that some of its servers in Russia may have been seized by the authorities. The company believes that it may have been targeted due to its strict no-logging policy, something which puts it at odds with Russian data-retention rules. In a digital world where surveillance and privacy invasions are becoming more commonplace, increasing numbers of Internet users are improving their online security. As a result, in recent years there has been an explosion in people deploying privacy-enhancing tools such as VPNs, which enable anyone to add an extra layer of protection against online snoops. One of the most successful companies in this field is London Trust Media, the makers of the popular Private Internet Access (PIA) service. The company prides itself on its dedication to security and is possibly the only operator to have its strict no-logging claims tested in public. But while a no-logging policy is an essential requirement for thousands of VPN customers, authorities in some regions see them as a threat. This morning, PIA is reporting a development in Russia which has left it with no other option than to leave the country. In an email sent out to its users, PIA explains that due to the passing of a new law last year which requires Internet providers to hold logs of Internet traffic for up to a year, it has become a target for Russian authorities. “We believe that due to the enforcement regime surrounding this new law, some of our Russian Servers (RU) were recently seized by Russian Authorities, without notice or any type of due process. We think it’s because we are the most outspoken and only verified no-log VPN provider,” PIA announced. The law to which PIA refers was passed by Russia’s State Duma in July 2014 and enacted September 2015. It requires that all web services store the user data of Russians within the country. This means that international companies could be forced to have a physical local presence, to which Russian authorities potentially have access. While the deadline for compliance is technically September 2016, Private Internet Access says that given the server seizure and future privacy implications, it will no longer be doing business in the region. “Upon learning of the [seizures], we immediately discontinued our Russian gateways and will no longer be doing business in the region,” the company says. “Luckily, since we do not log any traffic or session data, period, no data has been compromised. Our users are, and will always be, private and secure.” Even though PIA has assured its users that there is nothing to fear, some remain concerned over the seizures. To those individuals, PIA is offering additional assurances that it’s going the extra mile to ensure total security. “To make it clear, the privacy and security of our users is our number one priority,” the company says. “For preventative reasons, we are rotating all of our certificates. Furthermore, we’re updating our client applications with improved security measures to mitigate circumstances like this in the future, on top of what is already in place.” If they haven’t already done so, users should update their PIA desktop clients and Android apps to get the new upgrades. In response to the Russian incident, PIA says it will take the opportunity to evaluate other countries and their policies. “In any event, we are aware that there may be times that notice and due process are forgone. However, we do not log and are default secure against seizure,” the company concludes. source : https://torrentfreak.com/vpn-provider-pia-exits-russia-server-seizures-160712/

Hello, If you live in the UK or any other country and are unable to load IPTorrents due to ISP censorship then start using IPT Browser. This iPT Browser is not only for the UK members, anyone in any country can use it to bypass university, school, ISPs blocking. Download link: Download Now 1) Download it 2) Extract the ZIP file 3) Enjoy Fast Browsing IMPORTANT: If IPT Browser is not working for you, please disable firewall and anti virus and try again. Anti Virus Scan Result: Link Updates: Zoom in and Zoom out feature added! ( ctrl & + to zoom in, ctrl & - out, ctrl & r to reset ) Best Regards IPT Staff

Popular torrent search engine BTDigg is showing signs of life after weeks of downtime. The site, which discovers new files through BitTorrent's Distributed Hash Table (DHT), blames spam torrents for the sudden shutdown. The site's operators will consider a comeback if they can find a way to deal with the issue effectively. Five years ago a new kind of torrent indexing siteappeared online. Where most other sites rely on user uploads or pull their torrents from other sites, BTDigg took a different approach by using DHT to find new content. Since then the site has become a regular destination for many people. With millions of pageviews per month, BTDigg listed itself among the larger torrent sites on the web. Despite being blocked by court order in the UK, the site hasn’t faced any significant setbacks. However, a few weeks ago this suddenly changed as the site became unreachable for unknown reasons. With a lack of updates on social media, the prolonged downtime was a mystery. TorrentFreak contacted the site’s operators on several occasions but didn’t hear back, until a few hours ago. In a brief statement the BTDigg team says that the site will remain shut down for the time being. However, the downtime might not last forever. “We closed the site temporarily, but it’s not hard to return,” BTDigg’s operators informs us. A continued flood of spam torrents is the main reason for the sudden disappearance according to the team. They hope to resolve this with an ‘artificial intelligence’ that effectively filters out the problematic content, after which they plan to return. “The main problem is ‘spam’ torrents. When we finish creating an AI that filters spam, we’ll reopen the site,” BTDigg says. This pending return is positive news for BTDigg users. However, with no concrete ETA for the comeback they will have to find their daily torrent fix elsewhere for the time being. Also, while a full return is an option, there’s also a chance that the site will move on under new management. BTDigg’s team informed TorrentFreak that they are considering selling the site’s source code and a year of support to a third party. What that means for the site’s future has yet to be seen. Source :https://torrentfreak.com/btdigg-shut-down-due-to-torrent-spam-for-now-160711/

For the next 48 hours you will receive double the credits for any VIP Donation.If we reach our goal Freeleech will be enabled for 7 days.Time Remaining: 1 days, 20 hours and 35 minutes

welcome to I-H have fun

Respected members, Please stop reporting OMARMATEEN torrents. We are working as fast as we can to change the name from OMARMATEEN to Scene but we do have to sleep. We understand how you feel, as we feel the same way. Someone in Scene has a horrible sense of humor. Please understand they do things like this from time to time and we work very hard to correct it as soon as possible. So please be pateint as we will get to them all. If you happen to notice something that may be offensive in the future, please just send a PM to the helpdesk and let us know what it is and why it may be offensive. Remember, not everyone is from the same country so we may not always know what is going on everywhere since we are here all the time Thank you for your continued support and happy seeding! TD Staff expect andy

Anti-piracy advocates are continuing to pile the pressure onto YouTube, this time from a quite unexpected angle. Bizarrely, the site is now under attack for allowing people to upload videos that send would-be pirates to scammy sites. But doesn't that help the cause? In case readers missed it, copyright holders are very unhappy with YouTube. In recent months the site has developed into a battleground over the DMCA and the entertainment industries’ war with Google, with the record labels making most of the noise. This week it was the MPAA’s turn to put more pressure on the site, this time by linking to an article published by filmmaker and anti-piracy advocate Ellen Seidler. As can be seen below, it implores YouTube to clean up its act. The piece by Seidler is an interesting one, in that it criticizes YouTube for allowing people to upload fake movies that lead people to scammy sites. In the unlikely event readers haven’t seen them, these fake movies are easily found by typing the name of almost any mainstream film into YouTube’s search box and adding the words “full movie”. Once accessed, the videos nearly always instruct users to ‘click the link’ below the video to access the full movie. These links rarely, if ever, lead to anything good, and especially not the movie people expect. While Seidler’s post expresses concern over the dubious sites that YouTube users are sent to, it seems likely that her post is more broadly aimed at chipping away at YouTube’s credibility and reputation. Little doubt that the MPAA’s retweet had that in mind too. However, taking a step back reveals a much more complex picture. Seidler correctly notes that these fakes pollute YouTube’s results but she also reports a secondary problem – it makes her anti-piracy work much harder. “When I search for copies of my film using my Content ID account, I have to wade through dozens of these fake uploads,” Seidler complains. “Removing them is an incredibly time-consuming task as it seems YouTube has purposely chosen to make the Content ID dashboard as inconvenient as possible for users.” source: https://torrentfreak.com/fake-pirate-movies-annoy-pirates-anti-pirates-alike-160710/ Of course, this situation is bad for people like Seidler who are trying to protect their content but consider for a moment the tremendous negative effect on pirates. For many years people were able to type a movie title into YouTube, filter out all clips less than 20 minutes long, and more often than not come up with a decent copy of the movie in question. Well, no more. Today, YouTube’s search results are a horrible place to attempt ‘full movie’ piracy and that’s mostly down to the ‘full movie’ scammers. If anything, one might think that Hollywood would be at least marginally grateful for third-parties infecting would-be pirates with malware or getting them stuck in horrible subscription traps. That’s quality piracy deterrence right there. Instead, Seidler suggests ways that YouTube could clean up its site, perhaps by detecting and removing these fakes with ContentID. Pirates would certainly appreciate that, but YouTube isn’t likely to oblige. Proactively removing content in that manner would only invite calls for YouTube do the same for copyrighted content. Before long, the same calls would go out to Google in general, with big implications for its search business. So for now, both Seidler and would-be pirates are going to have to put up with these fake movie operations. Anti-piracy people will have to figure it out for themselves, but the best advice for regular users is to never click on the links in ‘fake movie’ YouTube descriptions. Finally, Seidler raises the question of who is behind these scams. One of the outfits she names is TzarMedia.com, a site that has hundreds of negative online reviews. The rabbit hole seems very, very deep on this one but there seems to be a recurring theme for those with an urge to investigate further. It looks messy, really messy.

Copyright holders are often accused of making YouTube users' lives a misery, with their nonsense claims over supposedly infringing content. But while it's easy to feel victimized by these powerful groups, sometimes the most ridiculous claims are easily ironed out. Seemingly every week there are horror stories of copyright holders abusing the DMCA in order to harass the little guy and suppress legitimate speech. It’s a problem that infuriates the masses, particularly on YouTube. Early Friday, TorrentFreak was informed of a situation faced by a woman running Emadion, an Italy-based site dedicated to horror, the supernatural, and the bizarre. Emadion is supported by a small YouTube channel which recently received notification that an uploaded video was infringing copyright. The details are enough to make smoke come out of any YouTuber’s ears. The video in question features the infamous and harrowing 911 recording of a call which detailed a horrific pet chimpanzee attack that took place in the United States in 2009. The Emadion channel operator had augmented the clip (warning: upsetting) with Italian subtitles for the benefit of local viewers. However, Emadion quickly received a copyright claim from BestMusic Digital, the representative of Romanian musician, Kazi Ploae si Specii, who claimed that the content was his. Bemused, Emadion carried out some checks and found that the artist had uploaded a track titled ‘Valium‘. Sure enough, his track features a sample of the same 911 recording. Believing that the copyright complaint was a mistake, Emadion filed a dispute with YouTube, but the response was not what they’d hoped for. “After reviewing your notification, BestMusic Digital Distro has decided that the copyright infringement violation is still valid,” the notice read. Furthermore, Emadion was advised that the 911 call video would now be monetized by the Romanian artist, alongside a warning of the implications of making a further unsuccessful appeal. “You may appeal this decision, but if the author does not accept your appeal, you may receive a warning in your account,” YouTube advised. Of course, any YouTube user would have a right to be worried by this notice. One dispute had already been rejected, why wouldn’t a second? Concerned, a representative of Emadion contacted TF for advice. Could the 911 call really be copyrighted by this artist? In a word, doubtful. Connecticut, where the recording took place, treats 911 tapes as public records and makes them available online. So, at this point the pitchforks were getting sharpened ready to deal with the aggressive copyright holder who was ‘bullying’ the little guy into submission. With a critical article already underway, TF contacted BestMusic Digital for comment. Their response was unexpectedly quick, frank, and friendly. “We have revised the track from the artist that you mentioned, deleted the track and removed the material from YouTube. It seems that the artist used that sample in his track and uploaded it to our system for the use of Content ID,” a company spokesperson advised. “As standard when uploading tracks to our system for Content ID, artists accept the [terms and conditions] stating that they have full rights over the uploaded content. On the other hand, there are underground artists that don’t always do things by the book and this is how things like these happen.” Within minutes a very happy Emadion confirmed that the complaint had been withdrawn and the threat of a strike lifted. A great result. However, one thing hadn’t quite been cleared up – why was Emadion’s dispute rejected? “It was just an error on my part. I clicked the wrong button. I resolved it when I saw your email,” TF was told. While tales of happily solved copyright disputes aren’t the usual fodder of these pages, hopefully this one will prove helpful. YouTube’s dispute process is somewhat clinical, and communication through it can prove frustrating for users. However, it’s worth remembering that there are real human beings at the ends of these problems and as a result there’s an opportunity for discussion and negotiation, person to person. It might not always work, but it has to be worth a shot. source : https://torrentfreak.com/shock-copyright-bullies-can-negotiated-with-160709/

Hello,Its again the time of the month when we have to ask for your donations. With being stuck at only 6% it is very difficult for us to keep the site up and running. This has been the same since the past 9-10 months now.Please do consider donating whenever possible, even a small donating goes a long way...Thank YouHKR

The UK Government's Digital Economy Bill, which is set to revamp current copyright legislation, has been introduced in Parliament. One of the most controversial changes is the increased maximum sentences for online copyright infringement. Despite public protest, the bill increased the maximum prison term five-fold, from two to ten years. Last year the UK Government announced a plan to increase the maximum prison sentence for online copyright infringement to ten years. The current maximum of two years is not enough to deter infringers, lawmakers argued. The plan followed a recommendation put forward in a study commissioned by the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) a few months earlier. This study concluded that criminal sanctions for online copyright infringement could be increased to bring them into line with related offenses, such as counterfeiting. Before implementing the changes the Government launched a public consultation, asking for comments and advice from the public. But, even though the vast majority of the responses urged the authorities not to up the prison term, lawmakers decided otherwise. As a result, a new draft of the Digital Economy bill published this week extends the current prison term from two to ten years. The relevant part amends the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, and simply replaces the word two with ten. The new bill was unveiled in Parliament yesterday where it passed its first reading. If adopted in its current form, it allows courts to hand out tougher sentences. The small but impactful change (3) Copyright holders have lobbied for this update for a long time. According to them, harsher penalties are needed to deter people from committing large-scale copyright infringement, something the Government agrees with. “The Government believes that a maximum sentence of 10 years allows the courts to apply an appropriate sentence to reflect the scale of the offending,” the Government explained previously, adding that the maximum sentence will only be applied in rare cases. This means that casual file-sharers are not likely to end up in prison for a decade. However, organized groups that systematically offer pirated files, such as Scene or P2P release groups, are likely to be punished more harshly. One of the motivations to up the sentence for online piracy is to bring it on par with counterfeiting. Interestingly, however, both were already equal when they were first adopted. When the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act was first introduced both counterfeiting and piracy carried a maximum sentence of two years. Following industry calls the counterfeiting sentences were increased in 2002, and now the piracy side has followed the same path. source : Torrentfreak