Irc changes For the last few months Irc has been getting alot of spam from People wanting invites ect this has now got to the point where we need to control it. Due to this we have set the main Channel to Members only to join this channel you need to Click on your username at the top of the page and then Click edit Profile. Look down and your see IRC Options Click Enable IRC Access (Generate Key) then Save at the bottom of the page your see then that the system has made you a key. Now join IRC like you Normaly would and Type /msg tl-monkey !invite YOURKEYHERE. Your then be joined to the main members Channel (Make sure to user your SITE username or it will not invite you)

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), which represents the six major Hollywood film studios, is trying to make online piracy everybody's problem by filing a civil lawsuit directed at piracy site MovieTube banner, and also broadly listing all the third parties that are involved with servicing the site. The notoriously litigious trade association is targeting everything from domain registrars to internet service providers (ISPs), and even content delivery and advertising networks. The complaint against MovieTube filed by the MPAA covers "all persons and entities providing any services to or in connection with the domain names," and the complaint defines this as including (among others) digital advertising service providers, search-based online advertising services, content delivery networks, domain name registries, domain name server systems, and indexers. In other words, anyone who has a hand in the fundamental operating structure of the internet. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, if the complaint were accepted by the US courts, it would be much easier for bodies like the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) to quickly block access to piracy websites "with little or no court supervision, and with Internet service and infrastructure companies conscripted as enforcers". In other words, in order to prevent being sued themselves, ISPs, web hosts and social media networks like Facebook could be forced to self-police and proactively block access to copyright-infringing content before they are blamed for being implicit in the offence too. How pirated content is blocked today Currently, the only way copyright owners can stop consumers from being able to access pirated content is by suing the site owners and demanding that courts order ISPs to directly block their internet subscribers from accessing piracy websites. Generally, ISPs are not keen to prevent illegal downloading unless expressly required to do so by their governments, as the more data a user consumes, the more they pay their provider. In the UK, from May 2012 onwards, the five major ISPs have had to block a variety of online piracy websites such as The Pirate Bay, Kickass Torrents, EZTV and Torrentz, thanks to court orders requested by the MPAA and the British Phonographic Industry (BPI). However, the communities that run these websites create numerous proxy websites, mirrors of the original website and multiple forwarding domains, making the fight to stop online piracy more like a whack-a-mole game. So now Hollywood wants to make online piracy hurt as many parties as possible, especially since the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) bill, which would have made it easy to obtain court orders to block access to piracy sites failed to pass Congress in 2012 thanks to huge opposition from the tech industry and internet giants like Google and Facebook. The EFF says that although SOPA wasn't passed into law, the MPAA and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are now filing lawsuits that "pretend as if SOPA was actually signed into law", and that they are targeting piracy sites located elsewhere in the world that are less likely to turn up to US court to defend themselves.

Several studies have shown that piracy hurts the revenues of content owners, and instead pirate sites are reaping hundreds of millions of dollars in online advertising. Yet theft of movies and TV content seems to be as rampant today as ever. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) reports that in 2014, just in the U.S. alone, 710 million movies and TV shows were shared via BitTorrent sites. Extrapolating to a global scale (the U.S. is less than 5% of the world’s population) and adding streaming and other piracy methods, losses were likely in the billions of dollars. The staggering order of magnitude may lead some to wonder if it’s even worth fighting the battle, or if it has been lost already. Can the battle against piracy be won? If so, how? To answer this question I engaged in research, interviews, and debates with technology, piracy, and industry experts, and this the first of several posts on this topic. Let me start with the main conclusion: Isolated efforts by individual stakeholders to eliminate piracy are a losing proposition. Dean Marks, Executive VP and Deputy General Counsel of Global Content Protection at the MPAA, has been involved in the enforcement of copyrights for decades. He adds: “There is no silver bullet against piracy. And anti-piracy technological innovations can only get you so far, because ultimately, if you can see it, you can copy it.” Instead, content owners must coordinate with Internet intermediaries, regulators, and law enforcement to develop a multi-pronged approach to corral and contain piracy. Motion picture and TV studios are engaged in some initiatives to prevent and mitigate piracy, which include increasing the supply of legal content online, decreasing the supply of pirated content through enforcement of copyrights, curbing the support network for pirate sites, and decreasing the demand for pirate content through education. All of us in the Internet ecosystem share a responsibility to take meaningful steps to curb copyright infringement online,” Marks said. “Creators, search engines, ad networks, payment processors, ISPs – we all must play a role in finding solutions that mean less infringement and more high-quality, legitimate choices for audiences.” To underscore the benefits of industry-level coordination, let’s focus on the enforcement of copyrights. For technical enforcement, it’s not enough to identify legal copies or streams as they navigate the web. That only opens the lanes for legal content to reach customers. It’s also necessary to close the lanes for illegal content. That can be done by closing down sources of illegal copies like BitTorrent sites or blocking the traffic enabled by these sites. For both of these strategies, it is the concerted and coordinated efforts by content owners, distributors, regulators, and enforcement agencies that will have the most impact. To back up this claim, let me point to the work of Brett Danaher, an economist from Wellesley College and visiting researcher at Carnegie Mellon, who has been studying this problem for nearly 10 years. In a recently released study with Mike Smith and Rahul Telang at Carnegie Mellon, Danaher analyzed the impact on piracy and legal downloading of two site blocking events in the U.K. Danaher states: “One event was the blocking of Pirate Bay in 2012, and the other one was the near simultaneous blocking of 28 sites in 2013, 19 of which were for video content. The 2012 blocking of Pirate Bay had no significant effect to curb piracy or increase legal consumption, because most pirates simply found another site to engage in illegal downloading. But the blocking of 19 pirate sites in 2013 led to a statistically significant reduction in piracy and an increase in legal consumption of video content.” http://blogs-images.forbes.com/nelso...y-Danaher1.png Interestingly, much of the media coverage about the study so far has focused on the failure of the isolated Pirate Bay blocking. But the key lesson has been overlooked, and it can be traced to best practices for revenue protection in other industries: trying to cover one of many holes is bound to have little impact on revenue leakage. The idea is to make piracy costly in terms of time and effort, since you can’t realistically eliminate it. To illustrate this, Danaher adds: “We found that many of the heaviest pirate users were able to get around the 19 site blocking, but less sophisticated users had a harder time, so many opted for legal purchases.” No matter how hard you try, expert pirates are likely to find work-arounds to enforcement, but the mainstream majority can be deterred and educated to purchase legal content as long as it is available for a reasonable price. We may never see the end of piracy. But if industry and government coordinate effectively, piracy can be corralled and contained. One way is to simultaneously and strategically block illegal content from the main enabling sites, although European regulations are more amenable to multi-site blocking at this point. But notice that the new U.S. net neutrality rules don’t preclude Internet Service Providers from blocking or throttling illegal content, which may be setting legal grounds for them to do so. Regardless, a strategic, multi-pronged approach to curb piracy is necessary to bring back billions of dollars to artists and copyright holders, and the cooperation between industry and government is critical. There is light at the end of the tunnel to corral piracy, if only the key stakeholders fully engage globally as a united front.

We may live in a world where most songs, TV shows and movies are available legally on demand, but a majority of UK millennials continue to steal them instead. According to research conducted by Kantar Media and published by the UK Copyright Office, 56 percent of Britons aged 16-34, and 59 percent of males in that same age range, use file-sharing services to access at least some of the content they consume every month. The same research found that the rest of the British population is far less interested in pirating their film, music and TV -- only a quarter of Britons aged 35-54, and only 10 percent of those aged 12-15 or older than 55 access content illegally. Those numbers are more closely aligned with global averages, which hold that 20 percent of the world’s Internet users resort to piracy to access digital content online. But the UK Copyright Office’s research suggests that Britain’s piracy problems may be more severe than average: 45 percent of British Internet users fall into the millennial age bracket. Bucking The Trend These are worrying numbers for one of the world’s largest markets for music, film and TV. They also defy a pattern that has emerged over the past decade: in markets where legal alternatives to piracy start to grow, piracy tends to fade. It is difficult to make an apples-to-apples comparison because few countries conduct regular research on the demographics of file-sharers. But research done by different firms tells a similar story. In North America, for example, the popular filesharing service BitTorrent accounts for just 6 percent of web traffic today, a massive drop from the 60 percent it accounted for over a decade ago, or the 31 percent it accounted for in 2008, according to research conducted by Sandvine. While efforts to block piracy hubs and legal offensives have played a role, a lot of the credit has been given to the rise of services like Netflix, Spotify and Amazon Instant Video. Indeed, during peak Internet use hours, Sandvine found that in 2014, Netflix accounted for some 34 percent of North American web traffic, while BitTorrent accounted for less than five percent. http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibti...arketerbpi.png In the UK, those services and others have grown considerably as well; just two years after its UK launch, Netflix is the second-highest consumer of bandwidth in that country, and according to the Official Charts Company, the firm trusted by the British music industry, UK consumers streamed an average of more than 500 million songs per week in July 2015, an increase of more than 80 percent from July 2014. This past year, revenue from streaming services rose sharply and became the second-highest source of digital music revenue, behind full album downloads, according to the International Federation of Phonographic Industries. Yet despite that growth, millennial enthusiasm for piracy remains undisturbed. Whether the generation that follows them will act the same way remains to be seen.

2 million songs deleted after copyright crackdown in China http://www.wantchinatimes.com/newsph...1309_copy1.jpg China's copyright regulator said on Monday that the online music copyright situation has improved since it ordered music providers to remove unlicensed songs in July. Music steaming services had removed more than 2.2 million unlicensed songs as of Friday, said the National Copyright Administration (NCA). Internet companies have also improved their efforts in copyright cooperation, said the NCA. The regulator will help music streaming services find a suitable way to pay royalties and will continue to check for violators. As part of "Sword Net 2015," the anti-piracy campaign aims to improve online copyright management, protect royalty holders and restore confidence in the copyright system.

BitTorrent Sync is getting an update on Android and iOS that’ll make it a lot more useful for power users on the go. Previously, you had to open the Sync app before adding items, which could only be uploaded to a folder that lived within your camera roll on iOS or your local file system on Android. Now you can create different kinds of files and directly add them to a sync folder. This means you’ll now be able to record a video or create a document on your phone and have any edits you make in other apps be automatically uploaded onto the rest of your Sync-enabled devices. That’s a lot more convenient than having to wait until you arrived at home to make such changes on your laptop. The update also means that iOS users can use the native camera roll viewer to choose what files they want to have synced up, rather than being forced to open the files from the Sync app. If you need to make edits to a document, Sync is also making things a bit easier by automating uploads when you open a file from within the app. Whereas before you could only preview the files in a synced folder, now tapping on the file will take you to an outside application where you can make changes. These will then automatically be sent to the rest of your linked devices. The updated functionality is rolling out to Android and iOS users today.

Microsoft’s new Services Terms that went in effect on the 1st of August state the technology giant can prevent you from playing counterfeit games or use unauthorized hardware. The terms are valid for everyone using Microsoft services such as Office 365, Outlook.com, Xbox Live, Skype, OneDrive, Bing and MSN. Also software using a Microsoft account is covered by the terms meaning the terms also affect most Windows 10 users. Although Microsoft’s latest OS can be used without a Microsoft account the majority of users will nevertheless use it with an account from the Redmond company. The terms now explicitly state Microsoft can release updates that could have some serious consequences. In the terms the company states it might, “download software updates or configuration changes, including those that prevent you from accessing the Services, playing counterfeit games, or using unauthorized hardware peripheral devices.” It’s unclear what the company means with unauthorized hardware peripheral devices, it could be that the company will disable e.g. Xbox controllers that are not certified by Microsoft. Counterfeit games is more clear, this is pirated software. Users not on Windows 10 could potentially also become a victim of these new terms, also updates to Skype, Windows Live Mail, Maps, OneDrive app, OneNote app, Windows Movie Maker, Windows Photo Gallery and Windows Games published by Microsoft are covered by the terms. With the release of Windows 10 there has also been a lot of buzz regarding the privacy settings of the operating system. The express settings, which are used by default when installing the operating system, contain some settings that by some users are considered as privacy concerns, such as the use of Cortana, automatic updates, the use of a Microsoft account and the gathering of telemetry and privacy by Microsoft.

That didn't take long. The world's oldest Internet hobby is resuming in India, days after the country virtually banned Internet porn. Indians took to Twitter and other social-media sites blasting this weekend's anti-porn move, and the government has listened. IT and Telecom Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said Tuesday that websites that don't display child pornography may resume streaming, according to local media reports. On Saturday, the Indian government initially ordered Internet providers to filter about 857 websites said to render pornographic material in a bid to protect morality. The government said the sites' content was "immoral and indecent," sites including things like Pornhub and Playboy. "A new notification will be issued shortly. The ban will be partially withdrawn. Sites that do not promote child porn will be unbanned," Prasad told India Today TV. India has about 350 million Internet users, a number that is expected to grow to 500 million by 2017. And for this specific sect of the Internet, India is also a world leader metrically speaking. Behind the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada, India ranks fourth when it comes to Pornhub traffic.

Tracker's Name: TheCafe Genre: General Sign-up Link: https://thecafe.me/signup.php Additional information: Official IRC Support Channel #help @ irc.thecafe.me

Tracker's Name: Audionews Genre: Music Sign-up Link: http://audionews.org/profile.php?mode=register Closing date: Soon Additional information: Tracker opens sign ups on 2nd of every month.

The High Court recently overturned private copying exceptions introduced last year by the UK Government, once again outlawing the habits of millions of citizens. The Intellectual Property Office today explains that ripping a CD in iTunes is no longer permitted, and neither is backing up your computer if it contains copyrighted content. Late last year the UK Government legalized copying for private use, a practice which many citizens already believed to be legal. The UK Intellectual Property Office noted that the changes were “in the best interest” of consumers and that they would bring copyright law into the 21st century. However, the new regulation was short-lived. Fearing a loss of income several music groups objected at the High Court, which subsequently agreed that the new legislation is unlawful. As a result the changes were overturned last month and the previous limitations were reinstated. To find out what the public can and can’t do under the law, TF reached out to the UK Intellectual Property Office, which provided some very clear answers. “It is now unlawful to make private copies of copyright works you own, without permission from the copyright holder – this includes format shifting from one medium to another,” a spokesperson informed us. The IPO specifically notes that copying a CD to an MP3 player is not permitted. This means that iTunes’ popular ripping feature, which Apple actively promotes during the software’s installation, is illegal. Also, under the current law iTunes is actively facilitating copyright infringement by promoting their CD-ripping functionality. This means that the company could face significant claims for damages. https://torrentfreak.com/images/iTunespromo.png Apple’s iTunes installer offers ripping advice There is more though, as the law affects much more than just ripping CDs. Simply copying a song in an automated computer backup or storing a copy on a private cloud hosting service is also against the law. “…it includes creating back-ups without permission from the copyright holder as this necessarily involves an act of copying,” we were informed by the Government spokesperson. Strictly speaking this means that UK citizens are not allowed to make a backup of their computer. After all, pretty much every computer contains copyrighted media. Needless to say, this turns almost the entire country into ‘outlaws’. The Government is not happy with the High Court decision but it hasn’t decided whether it will propose revised private copying exceptions in the future. Copyright holders previously suggested allowing private copying in exchange for a tax on blank CDs and hard drives. “As this is a complex area of law, the Government is carefully considering the implications of the ruling and the available options, before deciding any future course of action.” As reassurance, the Government notes that that people shouldn’t be too concerned because copyright holders are not known to come after people who make a backup of their computers. “The Government is not aware of any cases of copyright holders having prosecuted individuals for format shifting music solely for their own personal use,” the IPO spokesperson says. However, copyright holders can take people to court over both CD-ripping and computer backups, if they want to. Source torrentfreak.com

Giveaways 1 nCore.account email change in a week apply here no pm actíve user thanks rep have a nice day

Giveaways 1 FormulaMonkey.account apply here no pm actíve user I am writing will be victorious patience

Tracker's Name: The Trading Post Genre: General Sign-up Link: http://www.tradepost.xyz/index.php?page=account Closing date: Will be open for a while Additional information: General Tracker Do not miss out on your favourite Soap Coronation Street Eastenders Emmerdale Fair City Music Movies TV Drama General Sport Adding Content at all times

Major movie studios are again trying to make a website they don’t like disappear without a trial. This time, the studios are asking for one court order to bind every domain name registrar, registry, hosting provider, payment processor, caching service, advertising network, social network and bulletin board — in short, the entire internet — to block and filter a site called Movietube. If they succeed, the studios could set a dangerous precedent for quick website blocking with little or no court supervision, and with internet service and infrastructure companies conscripted as enforcers. That precedent would create a powerful tool of censorship — which we think should be called SOPApower, given its similarity to the ill-fated SOPA bill. It will be abused, which is why it’s important to stop it from being created in the first place. In 2012, the internet community stopped SOPA, a bill that would have created new, easy-to-obtain court orders against domain name registrars, ad networks, payment providers and search engines to force them to cut off service to a website accused of “facilitating” copyright or trademark infringement. Everyone from network engineers to civic organisations to entrepreneurs to millions of ordinary internet users spoke out against the bill. Constitutional scholars showed how SOPA orders could act as prior restraints on speech, one of the most egregious forms of First Amendment violation. The internet’s architects helped explain how using the domain name system (DNS) for site blocking would undermine the internet’s security and empower the censorship efforts of repressive governments. You, the internet community, helped Congress understand that SOPApower will inevitably be abused to silence marginalised or unpopular opinions. Congress shelved the bill and hasn’t brought it back. This year, members of the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America have begun filing lawsuits that pretend as if SOPA was actually signed into law. These entertainment distributors choose non-US website owners who are unlikely to garner much sympathy with the public and are unlikely to show up in a US court to defend themselves. They speed up court processes by instilling a false sense of urgency, giving internet companies and defenders of the public interest little time to weigh in. The courts, seeing little or no formal opposition, put their stamp on broad site-blocking orders written by the entertainment companies. The companies then have a legal banhammer to use against any internet company who could possibly help force the foreign site off of the internet — and even some that can’t. So far this year, entertainment companies have used these SOPA-like orders to take down a site that promised to stream the recent boxing match between Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao, and another to make Blu-ray ripping software disappear. Another case would have forced the content delivery network CloudFlare to filter its service for any sites that had the word “grooveshark” in their names. CloudFlare and EFF were successful in getting that order modified to take away the filtering requirement. The case by MPAA’s member studios against the MovieTube sites was filed two weeks ago. Like the others, it targets foreign websites with unknown owners who are unlikely to defend themselves in U.S. court. Like the others, it demands a site-blocking order as quickly as possible. This time, though, the draft order the studios want the District Court for the Southern District of New York to sign is so broad, it potentially could be used against almost any internet platform or service. It would cover all “persons and entities providing any services to or in connection with the domain names”, specifically including “domain name registries”, “content delivery networks”, “domain name server systems” (i.e. every internet service provider), “web hosting providers, digital advertising service providers, search-based online advertising services, … domain name registration privacy protection services”, “social media services” and “user generated and online content services”. The MPAA members also call out numerous internet companies by name against whom they want to wield the banhammer: Verisign, Neustar, Afilias Limited, Nominet UK, Public Interest Registry, AdCash, Propeller Ads Media, MGID, Matomy Media Group, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr and Tumblr. If the court signs this proposed order, the MPAA companies will have the power to force practically every internet company within the reach of U.S. law to help them disappear the MovieTube websites. Regardless of whether those sites are engaged in copyright infringement or not, this is a scary amount of power to confer on the movie studios. And it looks even worse at scale: if orders like this become the norm, internet companies large and small will have to build infrastructure resembling the Great Firewall of China in order to comply. On top of all this, the studios also fired another shot in their battle against private domain name registrations. In their complaint against Movietube, the studios went to great lengths to demonise domain privacy, accusing the owners of Movietube of “hav[ing] concealed their identities by hiding behind ‘proxy’ or ‘privacy’ registration surrogates.” The MPAA’s claims make domain privacy services sound like a nefarious tool of criminals, where in reality it’s used by those who depend on privacy to voice unpopular opinions on the internet while avoiding harassment. The MPAA’s claims are similar to claims made by the studios, along with major music labels and other entertainment distributors, that have been working to pressure ICANN to eliminate or sharply limit proxy registration providers. EFF joined many other activists last month in a letter to ICANN explaining the potential for harassment and the threats to free speech that would be created by eliminating privacy in domain registrations Entertainment distributors’ efforts to turn the internet into a copyright and trademark enforcement machine have been abused again and again. Powerful, private interests use the takedown procedures created by Congress to censor critical commentary. Precedents set by RIAA during its lawsuit campaign of 2004-2008 led directly to today’s scourge of copyright trolls. SOPApower will be no different. Of course, the entertainment companies won’t explain to the courts all of the ways the power they seek will be abused. But EFF will, and we hope internet companies will

Tracker's Name: ShareMania.NET Genre: HD Sign-up Link: http://www.sharemania.net/register/ Closing date: August 5 Additional information: ShareMania.NET is a forum and a tracker for HD Music Videos, Live Performances, TV Shows, etc... Open registration for three days.

Tracker's Name: The Trading Post Genre: General Sign-up Link: http://www.tradepost.xyz/index.php?page=account Closing date: Will be open for a while Additional information: General Tracker Do not miss out on your favourite Soap Coronation Street Eastenders Emmerdale Fair City Music Movies TV Drama General Sport Adding Content at all times

Special Invites have been issued to all PTM users. These invites have been awarded by staff and are free to use! However there is a limited time in which you can use them (7days as of this announce ). If you find you can not send invites please check two things; Invites can only be sent by user class 'Trader' and above. The max user limit applies to all invites, special or otherwise. We will be purging accounts in the coming days so keep an eye on the global user count on the homepage. The reason for doing this now, is we are rapidly approaching our max users limit. In the next few days we will start to prune accounts to which the staff believe are no longer being used. A general idea of what we consider not being used: If a user hasn't downloaded a .torrent in over 1 year If a user hasn't logged in in the last 3 months etc. etc. Normal users need not worry about such things, we are only trying to remove some of the accounts with no activity!

Ranks and AutoRank System Grettings, The Ranks List and AutoRank System is being revised. Please be advised that over the next few days these changes will take effect. Revised Ranks: Owner | Administrator | Moderator | System Bot | BluRG | V.I.P | Subscriber | Trustee | Uploader | Blu God | Blu Junkie | Blu Addict | Blu Master | Blu Warrior | Blu User | Recruit | Leecher Rank Added: Blu God Ranks Dismissed: Senior Admin | GFX Team | On A Quest | SuperLeech NEW AUTORANK REQUIRMENTS: Leecher: Users who have a ratio lower than 0.50. Recruit: This is the default rank for new users. Blu User: Have seeded 1TB, and have a ratio of 1.50 Blu Warrior: Have seeded 2TB, and have a ratio of 3.00 Blu Master: Have seeded 4TB, and have a ratio of 6.00 Blu Addict: Have seeded 16TB, and have a ratio of 12.00 Blu Junkie: Have seeded 32TB, and have a ratio of 24.00 Blu god: Have seeded 64TB, and have a ratio of 48.00 This is a MASS PM. Please use helpdesk if you have any questions. Best Regards, Blu Staff

Server Downtime - 2015 Edition Dearest, darling, users. On August 6th, the server will be traveling to a new home in a new datacenter. During the hours of 17:00 & 21:00 GMT, Cinemageddon will be unreachable. As the 4 hours of unattainable cinematic crap will no doubt eat at your soul and wear down your mental well being, here is a short list of things you can do during the downtime: Take up basket weaving. Watch 2.5 movies Get blind drunk Cheat on your spouse Write a rock opera Hoard movies from THC, TiK, or SC Lament the awful news here: Server Downtime - 2015 Edition https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22644928/nevar.jpg

Server Downtime Our server will be down for a datacenter migration on Thursday, August 06, starting at around 17:00 UTC. The site, the tracker, and IRC will be offline during this time. We expect to be back up about four hours later, at 21:00 UTC.

2015-08-04 - Please finish your downloads by Friday of this week, as freeleech will be turned off sometime this weekend. - ZDRuX

Copyright holders who demanded a rapid introduction of site-blocking legislation in Australia are coming under fire for not presenting their first cases quickly enough. Under intense pressure the country introduced a new legal framework in June but six weeks on and the first site-blocking complaint is said to remain at the "legal advice" stage. When entertainment industry groups speak publicly of the piracy situation, the rhetoric suggests that the sky is falling, that the very future of the business is at risk if something isn’t done quickly. In truth it’s been that way for more than 30 years but that doesn’t stop successive governments in countries around the globe taking the threats seriously. And considering the size of the entertainment industries and the influence of those running them, it’s not difficult to see why. In Australia, calls to do something about the “scumbag theft” carried out by “copyright bandits” have escalated to almost fever pitch in recent years, with 2014 seeing the most concerted effort yet to crack down on file-sharers and the sites they use. In response, Attorney-General George Brandis and Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull asked the Cabinet to develop legislation which would allow ‘pirate’ sites to be blocked by ISPs. In March 2015 the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015 was introduced and after just three months of consideration by parliament, the legislation was passed into law. Considering the demands for dramatic and urgent action, one might think that rightsholders would be already queuing up to have the first sites blocked. But according to a report from ABC, that point is still a long way off. While it appears that pay TV company Foxtel will be the pioneer of the very first legal case under the new legislation (probably against a big player such as The Pirate Bay), the timescale for implementation being quoted by the company is not a matter of weeks, but loosely described as arriving “in the coming months”. The fact that Foxtel is still at the “legal advice” stage on “how best to put the legislation into effect” has upset critics, who believe that rightsholders may have overstated the need for urgent new laws. “We are astounded, given the urgency with which this law was passed at the urging of the rights holders, that so far they haven’t bothered to use it,” says Internet Australia CEO Laurie Patton. “We would have thought that they’d have a raft of cases ready to go if the problem is that critical.” While six weeks might appear to be a reasonable amount of time to put a case together (the legislation was passed June 26), it’s worth bearing in mind that the first blocking cases to be brought in any region have always been the most important. Their implications stretch far beyond blocking a single site. Although each case will be different to some extent, the first case – if presented correctly – will provide a template for subsequent cases, saving rightsholders (and the courts) lots of time and money in the long run. Getting the system running smoothly from the start will be a key priority so it’s no surprise that Foxtel aren’t already waiting at the doors of the court. Nevertheless, there are plenty of things to be done and according to John Stanton from the Communications Alliance, Australia’s ISPs still haven’t been consulted on the basics of what will need to be done following any injunction. “ISPs hope that if applications are to be lodged, rights holders will discuss them in advance with ISPs, to provide an opportunity for some shared understanding on logistical and other issues,” Stanton says. “These issues including timing, the provision by rights holders of a landing page to inform internet users why a website has been blocked, discussion of the various technical options for website blocking and the planned breadth of an application.” Considering the importance of ISPs to the success of site-blocking, not having included or consulted them thus far is somewhat of a mystery and perhaps indicative of how far from presenting its first case Foxtel is. Still, with years of training behind them in respect of geo-unblocking services such as Netflix, it could very well be that the introduction of the first site blockade will have a minimum of impact on Aussies anyway – whether it arrives in the next few weeks or in distant months. Source torrentfreak.com

Internal Release Groups We are currently looking for Full BluRay Suppliers, mHD Encoding Groups, Anime encoding groups, or anything that is different then what we have now but still fits within our rules. We are BeyondHD so our standards are high. If you feel that you have what takes and would like to apply please send a PM by clicking on the icon below https://beyondhd.me/pm_system.php?ac...p%253Fid%253D6

The Indian Government has ordered local ISPs to block access to a list of 857 websites that supposedly link to adult material. The broad blocking order goes further than targeting dedicated porn sites alone though. Torrent sites kickass.to and h33t.to are listed too, as well as 9Gag, Liveleak and CollegeHumor. This weekend millions of Indian Internet users started to notice that their favorite websites were no longer accessible. https://torrentfreak.com/images/blockedcollege.png On Friday the Government ordered local Internet providers to block access to a list of 857 websites, including many of the top porn sites. “Your requested URL has been blocked as per the directions received from Department of Telecommunications, Government of India,” was the warning many got to see instead. The move has sparked outrage among the public, who condemn the Government for censoring the Internet without proper cause. According to the court order the sites are being blocked because they threaten the morality and decency of Indians, which a local official has now confirmed. “Free and open access to porn websites has been brought under check. We don’t want them to become a social nuisance,” a spokesman at the Department of Telecommunications told Reuters. The Government order is quite broad, and not just because of the high number of domain names involved. A leaked copy which list all of the affected domains reveals some unsuspected entries. For example, the list contains two of the largest torrent sites, Kickass.to and H33t.to. The first is now operating under the new Kat.cr domain name and the latter site is down, so the effects of the blockade are minimal. blockedcollegeWhile blocking these torrent sites may be justified as both sites do link to pornographic content, the same can’t really be said for CollegeHumor and 9Gag, which are also on the blacklist. The same goes for Liveleak, which has plenty of ‘immoral’ videos but isn’t really known for its vast amounts of porn. Finally, the list also includes nonvegjokes.com, a site specializing in dirty jokes. The blocking order was issued under Rule 12 of the local Information Technology Rules, which allows the Government to block access to sites that are deemed to violate the integrity or security of India. The Government still has to justify its blocking request before the end of the month. If those arguments prove insufficient, the court order may be overturned again. In the meantime, the interest in circumvention tools such as VPN services and proxy sites is expected to skyrocket. Source torrentfreak.com