+++++ <<<<< logitech Torrent Trackers Store! >>>>> +++++ << Welcome To my Store! >> XXX - Porn Trackers: PornBits CherryKiss Femdomcult Gay-Torrents.org ExoticaZ General Trackers: SceneTime TorrentDay SpeedApp nCore Bemaniso IPTorrents Filelist AvistaZ BitHumen TorrentLeech FunFile Speed.cd Desitorrents AsianCinema GrabThe.Info TorrentHR Sports Trackers: Aussierul.es RacingFor.Me BoxingTorrents MMA-Tracker SportsCult T3nnis.tv TV Trackers: Nebulance TV-Vault Tasmanit.es Gaming Trackers: BitGamer RetroWithin Cartoon/Anime Trackers: CartoonChaos Movie/HD Trackers: 3DTorrents HD-Torrents BluTopia HD-Space Retroflix PT.Upxin Hon3yHD Music Trackers: Orpheus (ex-Apollo) Jpopsuki ProAudioTorrents Metal.iplay.ro TranceTraffic LosslessClub Concertos.live AudioNews E-learning: ABTorrents CGPeers BitSpyder PM me if you are interested in anything. If you do not find on my list then PM and maybe I can get for you. The thread will be updated. Payment Methods: PayPal, Bitcoin

+++++ <<<<< logitech Torrent Trackers Store! >>>>> +++++ << Welcome To my Store! >> XXX - Porn Trackers: PornBits CherryKiss Femdomcult Gay-Torrents.org ExoticaZ General Trackers: SceneTime TorrentDay SpeedApp nCore Bemaniso IPTorrents Filelist AvistaZ BitHumen TorrentLeech FunFile Speed.cd Desitorrents AsianCinema GrabThe.Info TorrentHR Sports Trackers: Aussierul.es RacingFor.Me BoxingTorrents MMA-Tracker SportsCult T3nnis.tv TV Trackers: Nebulance TV-Vault Tasmanit.es Gaming Trackers: BitGamer RetroWithin Cartoon/Anime Trackers: CartoonChaos Movie/HD Trackers: 3DTorrents HD-Torrents BluTopia HD-Space Retroflix PT.Upxin Hon3yHD Music Trackers: Orpheus (ex-Apollo) Jpopsuki ProAudioTorrents Metal.iplay.ro TranceTraffic LosslessClub Concertos.live AudioNews E-learning: ABTorrents CGPeers BitSpyder PM me if you are interested in anything. If you do not find on my list then PM and maybe I can get for you. The thread will be updated. Payment Methods: PayPal, Bitcoin

Thanks for the opportunity to try this seedbox. Here is my review of Sidekick Pro - Premium plan 1Gbit Seedbox is working great, server is located in Netherlands Data Center, 1500GB HDD space, great seedbox panel - many different apps to install, WebUI is very fast, FTP speeds are very good, download and upload speeds are great - i got up to 115 MB/s max speeds, upload traffic is limited to 5 TB/Month, overall experience is very positive ... I recommend using Seedit4.me seedbox provider Thank you very much

+++++ <<<<< logitech Torrent Trackers Store! >>>>> +++++ << Welcome To my Store! >> XXX - Porn Trackers: PornBits CherryKiss Femdomcult Gay-Torrents.org ExoticaZ General Trackers: SceneTime TorrentDay SpeedApp nCore Bemaniso IPTorrents Filelist AvistaZ BitHumen TorrentLeech FunFile Speed.cd Desitorrents AsianCinema GrabThe.Info TorrentHR Sports Trackers: Aussierul.es RacingFor.Me BoxingTorrents MMA-Tracker SportsCult T3nnis.tv TV Trackers: Nebulance TV-Vault Tasmanit.es Gaming Trackers: BitGamer RetroWithin Cartoon/Anime Trackers: CartoonChaos Movie/HD Trackers: 3DTorrents HD-Torrents BluTopia HD-Space Retroflix PT.Upxin Hon3yHD Music Trackers: Orpheus (ex-Apollo) Jpopsuki ProAudioTorrents Metal.iplay.ro TranceTraffic LosslessClub Concertos.live AudioNews E-learning: ABTorrents CGPeers BitSpyder PM me if you are interested in anything. If you do not find on my list then PM and maybe I can get for you. The thread will be updated. Payment Methods: PayPal, Bitcoin

This is my second review after 30 days of using seedbox Here is my review of Sidekick Plan - 1500GB HDD, 1Gbps connection, unmetered bandwidth ... I never used support because all is working great, after signup on site you will get your seedbox ready really fast and you can start using it, great seedbox panel - have many different apps to install and its very easy, i start with small number of torrents and after some time i have about 1000 torrents on seedbox, WebUI is working fast without any problems with so many torrents added, speed is going up to 85 MB/s, just a note - i used only ruTorrent/rTorrent as torrent client, i also tested FTP speed and its going very good, overall experience is again very positive ... I recommend using Seedit4.me

Thanks for the opportunity to try this seedbox. Here is my review of Sidekick Plan - 1500GB HDD, 1Gbps connection, unmetered bandwidth ... Seedbox is great, i never have any problems , WebUI is very fast, add torrents is fast, creating torrents is working good, download and upload speeds are good - i got up to 65 MB/s max speeds, FTP speeds are very good, unmetered bandwidth is plus, overall experience is very positive ... I recommend using Seedit4.me seedbox provider Thank you very much

Google Translation: NorBits 15 years! So now that freeleech is turned off, a little overtime As usual, we increase the limit for freeleech on older torrents. The Freeleech rules are as follows: Freeleech on all torrents from 2005-2014. 50% discount (halfleech) on torrents from 2015. 50% discount (halfleech) on all BluRays. 90% discount on all torrents over 30GB.

Plex has failed in its initial legal action to prevent new streaming service Zee Plex from using the word 'Plex' in its branding. The High Court in Bombay found that low domestic sales for Plex, a fundamental difference in services offered by the parties, plus no evidence of "passing off" or anticipated injuries all went against Plex. Early September, Indian media company Zee Entertainment Enterprises revealed it would soon launch a brand new streaming service with the aim of premiering blockbuster movies directly to people’s homes, partly to combat piracy. Initially reported as the ‘Zee Plex’ service, the product was set for launch last Friday, October 2, 2020. However, the news didn’t sit well with US-based Plex, Inc., the operator of the famous Plex media server software. According to Plex, Inc., Zee Plex operator Zee Entertainment Enterprises’ choice of name meant that its new service would be illegally trading off the hard-earned goodwill of the Plex trademark. Describing Zee Plex as a “competing service”, Plex Inc. took legal action to urgently obtain an injunction to prevent the service launching with the infringing mark. Ad-Interim Application for Injunction Zee Plex launched as planned October 2, 2020, but not before the matter was heard by the High Court in Bombay via video conferencing just a day earlier. The Court heard that Zee Entertainment is a large multi-media conglomerate providing entertainment across a broad range of platforms including the Internet, OTT, satellite and cable. It was acknowledged that Plex Inc. had adopted the Plex trademark in May 2008 in the United States for a software/hardware service that allows a user to take content “wherever he goes”. Plex told the Court that it signed up its first Indian user back in July 2008 and now has 550,000 users and “very high sales” in the country. The Court questioned that, noting that evidence pointed to sales of between US$24,000 to US$30,000. This is important because the volume of domestic business can be used as a factor when considering the value of existing goodwill and reputation. Court Failed to See Similarities Between Plex and Zee Plex In the decision handed down on October 1, 2020, the Court found that on first view, the Plex media server and Zee Plex were “fundamentally different”. Noting that Zee Plex is a “cinema-to-home pay-per-view movie service” and that Plex carries some of its own “curated content”, the Zee Plex service does not have any of the “take your own content with you” services offered by Plex. At this point it’s worth highlighting that Zee says that its service is actually called ZEEPLEX, i.e one word instead of two. According to the Court, this doesn’t amount to much since Plex objects to the word ‘Plex’ being used in any way but from here things didn’t get any better for Plex. No Prima Facie Case of ‘Passing Off’ The Court notes that Plex’s case is based on allegations of deceit by Zee Entertainment, in that it used the Plex name to dupe or mislead consumers into thinking it had somehow tied up with Plex in business. To show such a case, Plex must demonstrate strong reputation and brand recognition in India among consumers but the Court found that, on the surface, the balance tips away from the US-based company. “I do not yet see sufficient material from Plex to be able to establish its reputation at least within India, whatever may be its reputation, registrations and sales in other jurisdictions. In contract, there is the much greater reputation and standing of Zee amongst subscribers across the length and the breadth of the country with a large number of channels in various languages,” the judge’s order reads. Equally, arguments by Plex that it should receive the same kinds of protection enjoyed by companies such as Sony, Disney or Hotstar, were also dismissed by the Court. “Merely pointing to other established and reputed players in the field is not enough, and it is hardly a credible argument to say that ‘if Sony provides content and has a reputation, since I, too, provide content, I must be presumed to have an equivalent reputation. So if Sony could maintain such an action and get an order, so must I.’ “There is no one-size-fits-all approach in these matters. Every claimant in a passing off action stands or falls on his own merits and case,” the order adds. Issues With Plex Trademark in India The Court notes that while Plex has registered trademarks in several jurisdictions, those locations do not include India. The Court adds that when the ZEEPLEX service was announced in September, Plex had applied for but not obtained a trademark registration. However, after the announcement, Plex reportedly went to the registry to make an amendment that indicated that it was proposed to be used back in 2008. “In other words, until it moved the amendment application, its own case in the registry was that at least in India, its mark was not in use, but only had a proposed or anticipated user,” the order notes. Judge Apparently Irritated By Last Minute Injunction Demands While the Court heard the matter in advance of the ZEEPLEX service’s launch, the judge appears to be irritated by companies in intellectual property disputes expecting courts to deal with their cases quickly and at the expense of other matters. “[I] have said this before — that parties in IPR matters cannot expect Courts to push aside all other cases. This happens repeatedly, whether it is movie releases or otherwise. It must stop,” the judge writes in his order. “It is unfair to courts and it is unfair to other litigants waiting their turn. Where a plaintiff has had enough notice and yet chooses to move at the eleventh hour — and makes no allowance at all for any adjustment that may be required — the plaintiff must be prepared to face the consequences.” Plex Injunction Application Fails At This Stage In considering whether to grant an early injunction, the Court weighed several factors but ultimately sided with Zee Entertainment. According to the judge, Plex has no prima facie case, cannot show anticipated injury, and its userbase in India is too small to show that Zee tried to pass off its new channel as being in association with Plex. “The grant of the injunction Plex seeks would, on the other, cause immense and immediate financial loss and harm to Zee. Consequently, I find no reason to grant an ad interim injunction in this passing off action,” the order concludes. While Plex didn’t immediately get the result it had hoped for, the matter isn’t completely over yet. Plex has been granted leave to amend and will be hoping for a different result. The order handed down by the High Court of Bombay can be found here (pdf)

Spooktober 2020 Uploading Event Uploading event To celebrate Halloween, it's an entire month of festivities on Pornbay! The month of October is Spooktober as usual and we're bringing back the fan favorite. To enter the event and have a chance to win the grand prize just upload a torrent featuring Halloween related content. Visit the forum thread to read more and post your submissions: here

Donations donate.php, we need your help once again.

Following a request from a local anti-piracy group, Greek ISPs are required to block access to block over 200 new domain names. Most of the targeted domains are proxies for The Pirate Bay, 1337x, and YTS. The order, issued by a special Government-affiliated commission, also denied one blocking request because the targeted domain is not similar to a previously blocked site. ISP blocking has become a prime measure for the entertainment industry to target pirate sites on the Internet. The practice has been around for over a decade and has gradually expanded to dozens of countries around the world. This is also the case in Greece, where the first blockades were issued in 2018. The Greek blocks are overseen by the IPPC, a special commission at the Greek Ministry of Culture and Sports that acts following complaints from rightsholders. The Greek system is different from that of many other countries because it doesn’t involve a court. It’s an administrative procedure which allows copyright holders to swiftly request pirate site blockades, without the need for lengthy and costly legal proceedings. The most recent blocking request was filed by the Society for the Protection of Audiovisual Works (EPOE), a local anti-piracy group that represents the interests of major Greek copyright holders. The company previously obtained a blocking order against The Pirate Bay, 1337x, and YTS, but requested to expand it. Blocking Pirate Proxies and Alternaitives While the original order does its job, Greek pirates swiftly moved to alternative proxy sites. The anti-piracy group, therefore, asked more than 200 of these Pirate Bay, 1337x, and YTS proxies to be blocked as well. Following careful deliberation, the IPPC decided to expand the Greek pirate site blockade. The Government organization concluded that, for the vast majority of the domains, the database, structure, graphics, and user-interface were substantially similar to the sites that were blocked originally. In addition to The Pirate Bay, 1337x, and YTS, several subtitle domains, and local pirate sites including GamaTV were targeted as well. One Request Denied Before issuing a new order, the owners of the domains were given the option to object to the request. This includes the administrator of subtitle site subs4series.com, who claimed that his site was wrongfully targeted. The blocking application claimed that subs4series.com was similar to the previously blocked subs4free.info, which the site’s administrator denied. The Government organization agreed and rejected the requested blockade. “After the relevant research, it appears that the site with the domain name subs4series.com does not redirect to the site with the domain name subs4free.info. Therefore, according to the relevant allegation of the applicant, there is no violation, as it concerns the no. 3/2018 decision of the Commission for the Internet Infringement of Intellectual Property,” IPPC writes. The blocking order is valid for three years and applies to all Greek Internet providers. They’re given 48 hours to add the 264 new domains to their blocklists, including more than 120 Pirate Bay proxies. If the companies fail to comply they risk a fine of €850 per day. —- A copy of the most recent blocking order, issued by IPPC, is available here (pdf) This also includes a list of all targeted domains

Google Translation: GLOBAL FREELEECH IS ACTIVE [Expires in: 7d 2h 13m 58s] ----------------------- Goodbye dear T*** Sad, shocked and in pain, we say goodbye today to our colleague and friend T***. Far too early and far too young he left us. A common condition that then had complications took him from us. We ask those who knew him personally not to divulge information about his death, as well as about his life. Goodbye dear T***. Forum topic: Goodbye dear T***

The Spanish pirate streaming giant Megadede will shut down within a week. The site's operators announced their surprise decision without providing any further detail. Megadede is among the 100 most visited sites in the country and will be missed by many. However, there certainly is no shortage of alternatives, as other sites are queuing up to welcome stranded pirates. Spain is an interesting country when it comes to piracy. On the one hand, it has one of the highest piracy rates worldwide, but there is no shortage of enforcement actions either. In recent years there have been several criminal investigations into unauthorized IPTV streaming, torrent and streaming portals have been taken to court, and ISPs have been ordered to block pirate sites as well. It appears that, despite all the legal pressure and threats, new pirate sites and services continue to appear online. Unlike in some other countries, these are often localized as well. Names such as “Don Torrent,” “DivxTotaL,” and “Megadede” are relatively unknown in most parts of the world. However, in Spain, they are listed among the 100 most visited sites in the country, mixed in with major brands such as Google, Wikipedia, Amazon, Facebook, and Netflix. Local Piracy Giant Megadede Shuts Down This week one of these giants announced its demise. In a message posted on the site, Megadede.com’s operators write that they are “forced” to announce that the site shuts down within a week. “The members of the team are forced to announce that in less than a week megadede will come to an end. We hope you have enjoyed this time with us and take the opportunity to download your lists. Thanks for everything #megabye.” It’s not clear who forced the operators to take action, but it is possible that legal pressure played a role. Unlike many other streaming sites, Megadede required an account to view all content. It didn’t rely on search traffic but had a dedicated user base. Megadede is one of the largest sites in Spain but has only been around for two years. It took over from Plusdede in 2018 after that site was ordered to shut down by the authorities. Plusdede, wasn’t unique either, as it was reportedly built based on the database of Pordede, which shut down after being hacked. Takeover is an Option While Megadede will soon be gone, there is room for a takeover of the domain name or even the entire project. In the site’s help and support section the operators write that they are willing to sell to a good bidder. “If someone wants to buy the domain or the project, you can send an offer through the contact page. We will only answer offers that may interest us,” they write. This means that Megadede may possibly continue under new ownership. However, there is no shortage of alternatives either. After the site announced its shutdown decision several competitors said they were ready to take over the traffic. Some, including DivMax.com, even offered to enable support for Megadede user ‘playlists’ to enable a smooth transition. “The DixMax administration welcomes you. Due to the recent closure of Megadede we invite you to meet and discover DixMax.com and all its applications available for free. Downloaded Megadede playlists will soon be added,” the site writes on Twitter.

We've come a long way since the days of shortwave radio and analog pirate radio stations. The Internet promised a lot, allowing broadcasters to reach an international audience keen to soak up culture from all over the world. Sadly, the latest actions by the UK music industry against TuneIn feel like an attempt to bomb radio fans back to the stone age. When it comes to copyright infringement matters, especially when that involves commercial players doing battle to prevent the wholesale spread of content, my basic position is that all is fair in love and war. If a torrent site, IPTV provider or streaming platform has a specific role to distribute premium copyrighted content to the masses for profit, then they should expect a robust response. This is someone’s content and it should come as no surprise that powerful people will attempt to protect it. Even if only quietly, all players in this space understand the rules. Every now and again, however, copyright enforcement can hit a nerve even with the most understanding and pragmatic among us. It can be particularly jarring when the end result amounts to a reduction in previously enjoyed freedoms when that should not be the case. TuneIn Radio Index Deemed to Be Copyright-Infringing For those out of the loop, during the past few days TuneIn radio, a major aggregator of streaming radio links already in existence on the web, took the decision to conduct widespread geo-blocking of content in the UK. This was due to a High Court order obtained by record labels Sony and Warner who successfully argued that the service essentially became a broadcaster when it offered links to a ‘new public’ in the UK. Purely on a legal footing and based on existing case law in the UK and EU, the decision makes quite a lot of sense. When access to unlicensed content is facilitated to a new audience, whether delivered via Internet radio stations or other Internet-based platforms, that generally amounts to a breach of copyright law. On the ground, however, we are already seeing that the effects can be much more profound. TuneIn’s decision to block access to a huge range of stations broadcasting content NOT owned by Sony or Warner shows that the chilling effect is already underway and sadly it’s only likely to get worse. Be Warned: TuneIn is Not the Only Aggregator Anyone with a hardware-based Internet radio in the UK will probably have been sold it on the premise that it provides access to between 20,000 and 40,000 stations from around the world. These devices are the modern-day equivalent of AM or even shortwave radio, allowing us to listen to broadcasts without borders, from the most diverse and secluded regions and covering a massive range of niche topics and cultures. Thanks to the decision by the High Court, however, this access could soon be a distant memory. Hardware receivers, (of which I own two excellent ones, both Revo) are completely useless on the Internet radio side without access to an external index of radio stations and their related URLs. These massive indexes are not colorful like the one provided by TuneIn but they are functionally similar. One can search by station name and other parameters such as genre or region. This type of curation was deemed unacceptable by the High Court in the TuneIn case. The big question now, of course, is how long will these platforms be able to offer services to users in the UK without facing the same kind of pressure applied to TuneIn? How long before they too start censoring access to global stations on the basis that they might breach the rights of the two labels that brought the action against TuneIn in the UK? As per the comment received by TorrentFreak this week from TuneIn, “Over the past several months, we have worked with broadcasters to confirm their licensing status, removing from our platform those radio stations whose licensing status we are unable to verify at this time.” “Unable to verify at this time” does not mean absolutely unlicensed. Neither does it mean that all removed stations breached the rights of the labels. TuneIn appears to be erring on the side of caution because it’s terrified that under-blocking won’t get the job done and could leave it liable for copyright infringement. With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility Anyone can set up an Internet radio stream in minutes and broadcast content that is not licensed for use in the UK because it doesn’t need to be as it breaches nobody’s rights. How does one go about proving that status to an index like TuneIn? Proving you don’t need a license is much harder than simply having one to show. The great charm of Internet radio is that it can be used to find fresh or unusual content that isn’t owned by major labels like Sony and Warner, largely because it’s not considered popular enough. In fact, platforms not broadcasting that type of content is a major plus for me personally as I have Spotify for that, should I need it. So why were some of my favorite stations dedicated to promoting new artists and music who want to be promoted blocked by TuneIn this week in response to this lawsuit? To draw a parallel, how would we feel if we turned on our regular radios to tune into a distant broadcast only to be greeted by a high-pitched tone put there to prevent us from listening? We wouldn’t accept that and it’s my opinion people shouldn’t accept this either – this is not exclusively about two labels’ rights. In the 90s, when I spent quite a bit of time in Poland, I liked nothing better than to flick a hotel radio to AM to listen to a distant broadcast of what was then TalkRadio. Now, Polish citizens in the UK, who previously enjoyed a local channel from back home, face the prospect of it not being available in their second home via TuneIn, thanks to the fear of TuneIn breaching a High Court ruling. The labels will argue this isn’t their problem, as any blocking only needs to be done when a station breaches their rights. And they would be completely correct. But their actions have led to this situation and now everyone has to suffer, regardless of whether their international listening habits were covered by the lawsuit or not. But there are other issues too. Driving Pirate Radio Back Onto the Streets is a Bad Idea With great power comes great responsibility and bombing Internet radio back to the stone age to protect the rights of the few is overkill and counterproductive. Fully-blown pirate/unlicensed radio stations are of course illegal in most countries but they serve a purpose. They existed and exist to bring niche content to a wider public completely underserved by licensed operations. In the 80s, for example, early dance, plus soul, reggae, and funk music weren’t broadcast on any legal station in the UK in any meaningful way, a gap that pirates like the then-illegal Kiss were happy to fill. And just look at the size of the market now, raking in countless millions for labels like Sony and Warner. It took years for mainstream providers to catch up on these niches yet they’re still miles behind today if quality and quantity are considered. Bluntly, they don’t get involved until they see an audience because that’s where the money is. Pirate radio stations incubated those audiences and still do today. Admittedly, broadcasting via traditional antenna was and is both illegal and potentially dangerous. In recent years, however, many of these broadcasts have been switched to the Internet, reducing airwave pollution while continuing to serve fans with niche content that licensed broadcasters couldn’t care less about. If this High Court ruling runs to its logical conclusion, aggregators will be too scared to index any of them. That could be a way off, but the stage has been set. Big Music has the opportunity to step back now but history tells us that won’t be the case. Fortunately, where there’s a will there’s a way. Labels can tear up the radio ‘phonebook’ operated by TuneIn and their counterparts but they can’t block every station on the Internet, even though they’d probably like the power to. The Future and What it May Hold If a ruling can be obtained in the UK to compel geo-blocking of international stations, then it doesn’t seem far-fetched to conclude that decisions could be obtained elsewhere too. How long before United States aggregators must block all UK-based stations? How long before listeners in the Netherlands are barred from content broadcast to German or French audiences? When will Canadians be prevented from enjoying content from their cousins south of the border? Could we even face a situation where stations based anywhere in the world are forcibly removed from aggregators for not respecting their geographic licensing regions? It may sound alarmist, and hopefully it is, but what people might have to prepare for in a worst-case scenario is radio aggregators being treated like illegal torrent indexes that are either forced offline or made to persistently teeter on the edge of a lawsuit. The stations themselves are still broadcasting of course but listeners will probably have to get used to finding them another way. It might be a good time to get familiar with how to do that right now, before it’s too late.

Google Translation: [Shifang Guizhong] Week 2 results are out Congratulations to ‘****’ for winning the first place in the second week of [Shifang Guizhong]. Since this user is a member of the working group, the VIP reward for one week will be replaced with 200,000 mana! I hope you can participate more and get results if you work hard. Come on! 【Shifang Guizhong】【3rd week】2020/09/20 ~ 2020/09/26 more here

Earlier this week the Piratebay.org domain was sold at auction for $50,000. The domain was previously owned by the official TPB team who apparently forgot to extend the registration. The new owner could monetize the domain through advertising feeds or start a Pirate Bay copy, but that's not the case. Instead, it's being put up for sale again by "PirateBay Pictures" who say they are crowdfunding a new film; The Torrent Man. The real Pirate Bay website operates from ThePiratebay.org, but the site always had many backup domains in place, just in case. This included Piratebay.org (without the) as well as ThePiratebay.com. The former was sold for $50,000 at auction earlier this week after the previous owner seemingly forgot to extend the registration. The .com domain also lapsed and will be auctioned off this weekend. The high price tag is quite unusual for a Pirate Bay domain. Many domain brokers buy these types of domains to monetize them through advertising feeds, but at this price, it isn’t really a good deal. This made us wonder what the buyer was up to. Could he or she be planning to start a Pirate Bay copy, hoping to take over part of the torrent site’s traffic? Could it become a malware invested ‘pirate trap’, or even a honeypot? PirateBay Pictures Announces ‘The Torrent Man’ A few hours ago the plan became more became clear but it’s not what anyone expected. People who visit Piratebay.org today will see a message from “PirateBay Pictures,” in collaboration with “I’m Feeling Lucky Studios,” announcing their film project; The Torrent Man. “Yes, it’s official, the PirateBay Pictures is starting to film The Torrent Man, an indie feature movie about the darknet, torrenting world, crypto, and the real people behind them,” they announce. While that sounds intriguing, it appears that thus far, the aspiring filmmakers don’t have much else. After spending $50,000 on the Piratebay.org domain they now hope to sell the domain for nearly $2 million to raise funds for their project. Crowdsourcing Everything In addition, they also need a film script, and pretty much the entire film crew, which they hope to crowdsource. “We need actors, crew members, and authors (!) as we are crowdsourcing the movie script. Any unusual twists you can think of, any characters you want to see, crazy storylines?” This is all highly unusual, to say the least. Based on the information that’s presented in public it seems that the people behind the site basically have nothing, except for a title. While that could be an ‘artsy peer-to-peer’ way of creating content, caution is warranted. Skeptical Notes The domain experts we’ve spoken with say that asking $2 million for the domain isn’t realistic at all. That makes sense, as the brokers who were previously interested already bid in this week’s auction and bailed out when the price went too high. That said, ‘The Torrent Man’ idea will get plenty of attention for the Piratebay.org domain, which makes it more valuable with an increased number of backlinks. We’re not saying that this is the true goal but without more information, we’re a bit skeptical. Perhaps we’re being too cautious, but without more information, the entire plan seems quite confusing. For example, the site mentions that the “original shoot got pushed back due to Covid,” which is odd as there was no script or crew yet. We have reached out to “PirateBay Pictures” for more details and are looking forward to hearing more. We will update this article when their answers come in.

Several pirate IPTV providers and resellers, including the popular Streams For Us, have decided to close their doors under pressure from global anti-piracy coalition ACE. Precise details on the decisions behind some of the closures aren't yet clear but an ACE cease-and-desist notice against a primary provider may have had a domino effect. As the popularity of pirate IPTV suppliers, sellers, and resellers continues to grow, entertainment industry companies – which were initially quite slow to combat the threat – are now piling on the pressure. The momentum arrives via the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), the huge anti-piracy coalition featuring the combined power of Hollywood, Netflix, Amazon, plus a broad array of global entertainment industry names. While ACE’s press office sits quietly by, knowing all but saying pretty much nothing, news of fresh ACE activity hits TF’s newsdesk several times every month and regularly features action against IPTV providers. This week offers no let-up in that trend. ‘Streams For Us’ Shuts Down Under ACE Pressure There are hundreds of IPTV brands on offer today and Streams For Us was one of the better-known providers. Until this week, that is, when it suddenly shut down. As always, rumors varied from the operators “doing a runner” with the cash to being forced out of business due to actual or potential legal action. From the information received by TF thus far on the matter, it appears that the latter applies in this case. It is extremely common for ACE pressure to begin with a cease-and-desist notice. At this point it’s up to the IPTV entity to decide on the direction – ignore it and carry on or comply with its terms. Streams for Us was placed under pressure by ACE and subsequently shut down. That will almost certainly not be the end of the matter though, as ACE also likes to tie up loose ends, including taking over domains and perhaps reaching a settlement offer. The terms of any settlement are almost always confidential but depending on how quickly an agreement can be reached, it’s likely that Streams For Us domains will be transferred to the MPA shortly after. Precisely when this pressure to close began isn’t clear but according to reports, the Streams For Us 24/7 VOD channels were removed a few days ago. So-called 24/7 channels specialize in a particular TV series, showing episodes constantly. While popular with customers, these channels require copies of the episodes to be stored on – and distributed from – a server, a breach of copyright law and a clear head above the parapet for those seeking to exploit the ‘streaming loophole‘. At the time of writing, streamsforus.net and forushosting.com are both down along with the service’s social media accounts. Other IPTV Brands Go Down, Potentially Due to the Above After Streams For Us went down, other IPTV brands – some of which appear to have connections to the targeted provider – also disappeared according to users. Thunder IPTV, Commando IPTV, Nue Media, Net Streams are all reportedly down at the time of writing, with reports suggesting that some acted as resellers or rebrandings of the Streams For Us service. TheHeroTV also appears to have gone down during the past few days too but we were unable to establish if connections exist to the above. Whether any of these brands were targeted individually by ACE is currently unknown but if the claims of reliance on Streams For Us channels are true, cutting off the head may have achieved the desired result without that being necessary.

One of the alleged key members of piracy group SPARKS has pleaded not guilty to US Government charges that he was involved in a conspiracy that cost movie companies tens of millions of dollars. Jonatan Correa, aka 'Raid', has been granted bail on a $75,000 bond with a number of conditions attached. On August 25, unofficial reports began to circulate that something big was underway in the top-tier piracy world known as The Scene. So-called topsites, the servers where masses of copyright-infringing content are stored, began shutting down globally as it became clear that law enforcement action was underway. Within hours, the US Department of Justice announced that three key members of the piracy groups known as SPARKS, GECKOS, DRONES and SPLiNTERS had been indicted, charged with a range of offenses connected to movie and TV show piracy. As reports of wider arrests filtered in from law enforcement entities in Europe, the status of the indicted trio was clarified in the United States. George Bridi, 50, a citizen of Great Britain, had been detained in Cyprus on an INTERPOL Red Notice. Norway resident Umar Ahmad (aka ‘Artist’), 39, was still at large. Jonatan Correa (aka ‘Raid’), 36, had been arrested on US soil in Olathe, Kansas, and placed into custody. Jonatan Correa (aka ‘Raid’) The USDOJ alleges that Correa was involved in the ‘Sparks Conspiracy’ (the collective name for the prosecution) from around January 2011 through to August 2020. This differs from the charges against Bridi and Ahmad, whose ‘conspiracy’ charges run from January 2011 to January 2020. The reasons for this remain unclear. All three are charged with causing “tens of millions of dollars” in losses to film production studios. According to a superseding indictment, Correa and the others fraudulently obtained copies of discs containing movies and TV shows in advance of their official release dates. It is further claimed that Correa remotely accessed a computer belonging to a co-conspirator in Westchester County in order to “illegally record and reproduce” copyrighted TV shows. At this stage, the identity of this alleged co-conspirator is being kept under wraps by the authorities. While Correa’s co-defendants face additional charges including wire fraud and transporting stolen property, Correa faces a single charge of conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement. Correa Arrested, Quickly Released, Pleads Not Guilty After being arrested in Kansas on August 25 at 07:00, court records reveal that Correa was presented before the Kansas district court on August 26 and released the very same day. Other documents that might offer additional information persistently return a “not found” error on records portal PACER, while access to others is simply denied. However, additional detail is available relating to Correa’s status and plea. Records indicate that Correa was released on bail with a $75,000 bond, secured by cash or property. His release comes with pre-trial supervision conditions, including that he must surrender all travel documents and submit to a ban on all new travel document applications. In addition, Correa has agreed to participate in a drug testing and treatment program and is forbidden from possessing firearms, other weapons, or any “destructive devices”. He is further ordered to abstain from contact with co-defendants and witnesses, with conditions. “Defendant shall have no contact with any co-defendant, witnesses known to Defendant, or any other members of the Sparks Group without the presence of counsel,” a bail document reads, adding that Correa must not engage in any of the conduct alleged in his charging document either. Perhaps most importantly of all, exactly one week ago on September 1, 2020, Correa appeared remotely before United States Magistrate Judge James L. Cott and was arraigned on the superseding indictment. Correa pleaded not guilty to the charges against him. Whether that position will change later down the line remains to be seen but right now, his alleged co-conspirators don’t yet appear to be in US custody. Alleged Co-Conspirators Bridi and Ahmad According to the most recent official information, Ahmad (Artist) is reportedly still at large, perhaps in Norway, while Bridi is located some 5,500 miles away from New York on the island of Cyprus in the Mediterranean Sea. Since the unsealing of his indictment and from the filings made available to date, Ahmad hasn’t been mentioned in court documents. In respect of Bridi, however, the US Government has requested and obtained multiple certified copies of his indictment and arrest warrant for the “purposes of extraditing the defendant to the United States.” When that will take place is unknown but at least as far as Correa’s cases is concerned, Acting United States Attorney Audrey Strauss told the court last week that the parties are currently in discussion over discovery and a pre-trial disposition. A conference has been set for October 26, 2020, for these discussions to continue. As previously reported, the action against SPARKS has negatively affect pirated releases from The Scene, with a steep decline observed in volumes of content being made available. Source documents here (1,2,3)

The latest IP Crime and Enforcement Report, published by the UK Government, signals a wide variety of ongoing and emerging piracy threats. Pirate IPTV services remain a growing problem that could become worse with the rollout of 5G, it reads. There are also concerns about the use of cryptocurrencies and the growth of stream-rippers. Last week the UK Government’s Intellectual Property Office published its annual IP Crime and Enforcement Report. The report provides an overview of the latest anti-piracy achievements of copyright holders and also signals emerging threats. Like every year, the general consensus is that piracy and counterfeiting remain a problem. However, specifics and priorities change over time. When the first report was published fifteen years ago P2P file-sharing was the top concern. Today, this is a relatively small part of the piracy landscape. The 120-page report covers a wide range of “IP crimes” but we will zoom in on some of the top piracy threats and responses as reported by the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT), the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU), and PRS for Music. The Growing IPTV Piracy Problem To begin, FACT highlights that the number of IPTV piracy complaints increased sharply over the past few years. In 2014 there were just three complaints but by last year this number had grown to 682. “Over the past 6 years, FACT has seen a steady year-on-year increase in public complaints regarding suppliers of illegal IPTV services,” the group notes, showing that its intel on these IPTV services has grown as well. As a result of this development, FACT’s enforcement efforts are prioritized on IPTV piracy. This has resulted in various successes including “Operation Saturn” where several people associated with IPTV services stopped their activities after a visit from FACT investigators. PIPCU, the dedicated IP-crime department of the City of London Police, also mentioned IPTV as a growing threat. According to the police, this problem may worsen when 5G is rolled out across the UK. “IPTV services are likely to increase, a reason for this is that 5G is being rolled out across the country allowing broadband to increase in availability,” the police unit forecasts in the report. Police Keep an eye on Cryptocurrencies The use of cryptocurrencies by pirate sites and services is far from new. The Pirate Bay, for example, started accepting Bitcoin donations many years ago and various pirate services have a cryptocurrency payment option. In the most recent IP Crime and Enforcement Report, cryptocurrencies receive several noteworthy mentions nonetheless. The report highlights these financial mechanisms as part of sophisticated business models that are used by copyright infringers. According to PIPCU, the police are keeping a close eye on these crypto transactions, which they signal as a threat that will get worse over time. “Payment using cryptocurrencies has now been a feature of PIPCU investigations. It is predicted that payment by cryptocurrency will be an increasing threat due to the level of anonymity cryptocurrency provides,” the report reads. PRS also mentions cryptocurrencies as a problem. The music group notes that the majority of the stream-ripping sites, which include YouTube rippers, rely on advertising as the prime source of revenue but cryptocurrencies are up and coming. “Donations by cryptocurrency have been observed for the first time as a revenue source for 3% of stream-ripping services,” PRS reports. Stream-Ripping is the Music Industry’s Main Piracy Threat These same stream-ripping sites remain the music industry’s top anti-piracy priority. They were identified as the top threat years ago but the problem has only increased. According to new data shared by PRS, stream-rippers account for more than 80% of all top music pirate sites. This is a significant increase compared to a few years ago. This dominance is also reflected in the graph below, where other pirate sites follow at a distance. The website y2mate.com is seen as the largest threat of all with the most traffic, according to PRS. Aside from dedicated sites, stream-ripping apps and browser add-ons are also viewed as a major threat. However, on this front, the enforcement efforts of PRS’s Rights Protection Unit have been rather effective. “By using a range of methods, the RPU’s greatest successes have been in tackling stream-ripping plug-ins and stream-ripping download apps where a 100% success rate in both areas was achieved. “Stream-ripping plug-ins were removed from the Google Chrome browser and stream-ripping download apps were removed or the ripping functionality was disabled from the apps available on the Apple App store,” the report adds. All in all, the latest IP Crime and Enforcement Report doesn’t include many surprises. It is mostly a summary of past achievements paired with a broad overview of the current piracy landscape. However, it does clearly show where the current priorities lie, and how these have changed over time.

The Players Klub was a popular IPTV service that initially offered live TV channels and a VOD package at prices starting at just $5. Over the years the prices began to rise then the service rebranded, reportedly due to a hostile takeover. It now transpires that the Alliance For Creativity and Entertainment has taken over the portals through which the service was sold. In 2020, people looking for a pirate IPTV supplier are presented with dozens upon dozens of options. While it’s believed there are relatively few groups supplying high-level sources for much of the content, many smaller providers plus sellers and resellers are saturating the marketplace, each looking for a piece of what has become a massive market. The Players Klub During 2017 or thereabouts, a new brand entered the market with a splash. Labeled The Players Klub (TPK), the service attracted a loyal following with pretty cheap plans (including what appears to have been limited free giveaways) offering a wide range of live TV channels plus a comprehensive movie and TV show VOD platform. Late 2019, The Players Klub reported ‘changes’ to the service, reporting that it had suffered a “hostile takeover within the business” and as a result would be rebranding under a different name. The new name, ‘TopDog’ (or TPKTopDog) didn’t appear to last long, however. It’s difficult to pinpoint exactly when the change took place but the ‘TopDog’ branding was later changed to ‘Game Masters’ but even that appeared problematic. According to the service, someone who used to work for the platform (but left under a cloud) was spreading fake information in order to cause trouble. In a tit-for-tat move, the warring parties asked users to report each others’ pages to Facebook for abusive practices. The Players Klub Declared Dead…. One thing that remained relatively constant (at least through early name changes and disruption which continued until recently) was the ability to acquire TPK/TopDog using various sites under the MintPanel branding. However, those domains proved themselves to be unreliable, with various options – MintPanel.net, MintPanel.co and MintPanel.digital – all appearing and then dropping out of use, to the apparent frustration of customers. The sequence of events is muddy, to say the least, but we can confirm without any shadow of a doubt that none of those domains remain in the possession of TPK/TopDog/Game Masters. In fact, they are all under new management at the Motion Picture Association (MPA), which is clearly not a good sign. Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment There’s no easy way of knowing when global anti-piracy coalition ACE, with MPA at the helm, started to put pressure on the variously-branded IPTV providers using the MintPanel domains. What we can be sure of, however, is that early this month they changed hands and now sport the ownership details of the MPA. While MintPanel.net was transferred on September 1, 2020, MintPanel.co took a little longer and was transferred over to Hollywood control four days later, the same day as Mintpanel.digital. All now show the familiar Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment seizure banner before redirecting users (including prospective and existing customers) to the ACE anti-piracy portal for an unwelcome surprise. Game Masters IPTV Lives On? Around three months ago, a long thread developed on Reddit after a Game Masters customer alleged that the IPTV supplier wasn’t providing service after taking payment. The problems appear to have raised their heads after the payment portal used at the time (Gmasterpanel.com) suffered difficulties along with a Discord support channel, that also disappeared. However, Gmasterpanel.com isn’t in the hands of the MPA/ACE, neither is its alleged replacement Gamers.services. It currently doesn’t seem possible to sign up to Game Masters from that domain itself but according to various reports, the underlying service is working, although who is providing that now is anyone’s guess. The ACE Juggernaut Rolls On As reported last week, ACE is currently pressuring Android piracy app TVZion to shut down but that action, like this against TPK/TopDog (and potentially Game Masters), has gone completely unreported by the anti-piracy group. In fact, just a tiny proportion of ACE actions are made public by the coalition itself, possibly due to confidentiality agreements reached with piracy players but, at least in some instances, because ACE isn’t ready to reveal its achievements in public yet. Part of the problem, at least potentially, is that some services agree to die then morph into something else.

Every week we take a close look at the most pirated movies on torrent sites. What are pirates downloading? 'Mulan' tops the chart, followed by ‘Bill & Ted Face the Music'. 'Project Power' completes the top three. The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only. These torrent download statistics are meant to provide further insight into the piracy trends. All data are gathered from public resources. This week we have three new entries in the list. Disney’s action drama “Mulan” crushed all competition and is the most downloaded title this week, by far. At the time of writing, tens of thousands of people are actively sharing the film, which is a rare sight. The film eventually came out on Disney+ last week after the box office release was delayed several times due to the COVOD-19 pandemic. The most torrented movies for the week ending on September 7 are: Movie Rank Rank last week Movie name IMDb Rating / Trailer Most downloaded movies via torrent sites 1 (…) Mulan 5.7 / trailer 2 (2) Bill & Ted Face the Music 6.5 / trailer 3 (3) Project Power 6.1 / trailer 4 (…) Tenet 7.9 / trailer 5 (1) Ava 5.4 / trailer 6 (…) The Owners 4.6 / trailer 7 (7) The War With Grandpa 5.0 / trailer 8 (4) Peninsula 5.6 / trailer 9 (5) Hard Kill 3.0 / trailer 10 (8) Greyhound 7.1 / trailer Note: We also publish an updating archive of all the list of weekly most torrented movies lists.

13th anniversary - Extended discounts The amount of people participating in the contests held these days have surprised us in a very good way Because awarding the prizes will be finalized Tuesday (2020-08-09) at the latest, we took the decision to extend the date of the Shop discounts until 2020-09-09 23:59 so that even the people that didn't get their prizes yet will be able to enjoy the discounts. P.S.: The anniversary gift will be left in place until the same date. Thank you for participating in such amazing numbers! Happy birthday, FileList!

New movie titles 'leak' online pretty much every day, but some get more attention than others. Tenet is one of those titles that made worlwide headlines, including numerous articles about the film being leaked. This prompted a flurry of takedown requests from copyright holders, which accidentally targeted some of those news reports. When a major blockbuster title leaks online, it sets a series of intruiging processes in motion. It was no different this week when low-quality CAM versions of Christopher Nolan’s sci-fi thriller ‘Tenet’ surfaced. Immediately after this happened thousands of seasoned pirates flocked to their favorite download portals, grabbing a copy. At the same time, anti-piracy outfits sprang into action to issue a continuous stream of takedown requests. The leak was also a heads up to scammers and other dubious actors. While fake Tenet copies were already circulating, a real leak tends to increase the demand. And indeed, over the past days, we’ve seen scammy links being posted on many legitimate sites including Medium.com, Opensource.com, Shopify.com and Schooltube.com. There were also news outlets who jumped on the story, including the undersigned. In the days after the leak came out, hundreds of sites referenced it. While some reports are better than others, the news articles are certainly not infringing anyone’s copyrights. Nonetheless, we noticed this week that several takedown requests targeted real leaked copies, scammy links, and also news reports. One notice sent by the Estonian branch of ACME Film stands out as it combines all three. The screenshot below starts with a link to a Pirate Bay proxy, followed by a list of scammy postings on legitimate sites such as Sourceforge and Openlibrary. At the very bottom, there are two links to ‘news’ reports. In total, there are five URLs of news reports in that takedown notice alone. That notice doesn’t come alone, there’s another one that flags a news report as infringing as well. We are pretty sure that these were all reported ‘accidentally’ but still, a quick glance by an actual person could have easily prevented it. We fully understand that writing this article is not without risk at all. After all, writing about news reports that were targeted because they covered the Tenet leak, may trigger takedown requests as well. However, we’re willing to take a chance. Also, Google is known to be quite good at spotting these errors. When we checked, most takedown requests for the news articles were being ignored, which means that they are still in the search results.

With IPTV piracy seemingly still on an upwards trajectory, the powerful Copyright Alliance is urging Congress to close a loophole in US law that places limits on how cases can be prosecuted. Despite being against copyright law, streaming piracy is currently just a misdemeanor, rendering it "virtually immune from meaningful prosecution." Last month, entertainment industry-backed group Digital Citizens Alliance and content protection company NAGRA published a new study that estimated the pirate IPTV market to be worth a billion dollars each year in the US alone. These types of piracy studies are nothing new but what is interesting about this particular market is that even the biggest ‘pirate’ US players, if they take caution in what type of content they offer and how, are unlikely to find themselves on the wrong end of an aggressive criminal prosecution. There are caveats and exclusions but in general terms, streaming piracy is not a felony in the United States. The ‘Streaming Loophole’ That such a loophole exists in the United States under what many believe are some of the most strict copyright laws in the world is a surprise in itself. But exist it does and here’s how it came to be. Under existing criminal copyright laws, felony penalties are only available for infringements that breach the exclusive rights of reproduction and distribution, i.e the unlawful copying of content and distribution to others. In many cases, however, streaming is viewed as infringing public performance rights, which is considered a misdemeanor. The end result is that, regardless of the scale of a pirate streaming operation and how much revenue is generated by it, the hands of the authorities are effectively tied in respect of offenses that would otherwise attract years in prison. Exceptions Exist, It’s Not a Complete Free-For-All As ongoing cases against Megaupload and Jetflicks demonstrate, streaming offenses can sometimes enter the criminal realm. While some streaming services exploit the loophole cited above, others can face criminal charges when they are deemed to have breached reproduction and distribution rights, by copying infringing content and distributing it to others. Also, as highlighted by the Department of Justice in a letter to the Senate last year, criminal prosecutions may also follow when unlicensed streaming operations are alleged to have committed other crimes, such as money laundering and racketeering, charges also being faced by Kim Dotcom and his Megaupload co-defendants. Pressure Building To Close The Loophole In an opinion piece published in The Hill yesterday, Keith Kupferschmid, chief of powerful industry group Copyright Alliance, again raised the issue of the loophole. Echoing the sentiments of law enforcement groups, entertainment companies, filmmakers and sports groups that have contributed to the debate thus far, he urged Congress to ensure that “in appropriate large-scale commercial cases”, felony penalties are available to federal prosecutors. “Virtually every significant form of willful, commercial piracy can be prosecuted as a felony under appropriate circumstances — including copying CDs, illegal file sharing, and even ‘camripping’ movies in the theater,” he wrote. “But unlike all of these, streaming piracy — no matter how widespread or organized, and regardless of the amount of damage done — can only be prosecuted as a misdemeanor simply because when the laws were drafted streaming video wasn’t an option.” Indeed, the laws that currently limit felony penalties to infringements involving reproduction and distribution were put in place almost three decades ago. At that time, widespread Internet use wasn’t yet a thing and the possibility of streaming movies or TV shows to the public was a distant dream. Congress “Working Hard” to Close the Loophole “Fortunately, Congress is working hard to solve this problem — convening negotiations and developing a simple two-page proposal that would close this ‘streaming loophole’ and ensure that in appropriate large-scale commercial cases, felony penalties are available to federal prosecutors,” Kupferschmid wrote. “The resulting proposal is a consensus product with broad-based support. It is narrowly tailored to address the serious problem of commercial streaming piracy ensuring ordinary internet users, legitimate businesses, and non-commercial actors have nothing to fear from this proposal.” The mention of ordinary Internet users remaining unaffected by these proposals is of interest. The last time a bill was presented to amend the relevant sections of the law – 17 U.S.C. § 506 and 18 U.S.C. § 2319 – to render criminal breaches of public performance rights punishable as felonies, things didn’t go well for copyright holders. The Commercial Felony Streaming Act Back in 2011, Bill S.978 – labeled the Commercial Streaming Felony Act – was introduced to the Senate in an effort to render unauthorized streaming of copyrighted content for “commercial advantage or personal financial gain” a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. However, despite assurances that the intent wasn’t to penalize regular Internet users, concern began to build that ‘normal’ people (such as Justin Bieber who launched his career by posting cover versions of songs to YouTube) could be considered felons under the amendments. Ultimately, however, the contents of the proposed amendments, which later formed part of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), were never passed due to unprecedented public outcry. Not a Done Deal, But Momentum is Building While companies that rely on streaming and physical product sales are desperate for the “streaming loophole” to be well and truly closed, this time around they will not have to contend with the scale of the uproar that accompanied the far-reaching SOPA bill. Indeed, there seems to be optimism that Congress will see fit to accept the proposals which, according to Kupferschmid, are being formed with the assistance of tech companies, not potentially at their expense as per last time around. “This highly transparent and rigorous process which included participation from groups and organizations of all perspectives — including the creative community and victims of streaming piracy as well as those representing internet users, technology companies, internet service providers and civil society — has been lauded across Capitol Hill as a model way to vet and develop new proposals,” he wrote in The Hill. “It’s time for Congress to close the streaming loophole.” Given all of the circumstances and developments of the last decade, particularly considering the rise of legal and illegal streaming, the environment today is literally and figuratively years apart from SOPA. As a result, it arguably presents the perfect opportunity for Congress to deliver.

Internet provider RCN has failed to have the piracy liability claims of several major music companies dismissed. The ISP argued that it's not responsible for allegedly pirating customers, discrediting much of the evidence that was presented. The New Jersey federal court, however, sees the music companies' allegations as sufficient at this stage but did dismiss similar claims against RCN’s management company Patriot. Last year, several major record labels, helped by the RIAA, filed a lawsuit against Internet provider RCN accusing it of turning a blind eye to pirating subscribers. The lawsuit is in many regards similar to the ones filed against other ISPs, such as Cox, Grande, and Charter, which were all accused of failing to terminate the accounts of repeat infringers. According to the labels, RCN knew that some of its subscribers were frequently distributing copyrighted material, but failed to take any meaningful action in response. To compensate for this alleged inaction the music companies demand damages, which have the potential to run to hundreds of millions of dollars. RCN didn’t recognize itself in this description. The company countered the accusations and filed a motion to dismiss the case. Among other things, the company argued that it can’t stop infringement and that it has no direct financial benefit from pirating customers. This week US District Court Judge Michael A. Shipp ruled on the request. After hearing the arguments from both sides, he chose to deny the motion to dismiss. This means the case will continue. At this stage of the case, the court has to review the evidence ‘in the light most favorable’ to the plaintiffs, which are the music companies. In this view, the music companies’ contributory and vicarious copyright infringement claims both survive. For example, there’s enough evidence to allege that RCN knew of the copyright-infringing activities of its customers and that it contributed to them by providing Internet access. Those are two key elements of contributory copyright infringement. Vicarious copyright infringement is generally harder to prove. That requires evidence that the ISP has the ability to control or supervise the activity and that it enjoyed a direct financial benefit. In other words, did the ISP profit from piracy it could have stopped or limited? In his order, Judge Shipp notes that other courts have been divided on this issue in similar cases. While RCN cited a case where similar allegations were dismissed, the uncertainty on this matter is not enough to throw the claim out at this point. “Here, construing the allegations of the Amended Complaint in Plaintiffs’ favor, and considering the lack of binding or persuasive authority on the issue of direct financial benefit, the Court finds RCN has failed to meet its burden at this stage of the litigation,” Judge Shipp writes. As such, the contributory and vicarious copyright infringement claims against RCN are not dismissed and the case will continue. This is a victory for the music companies, but Judge Shipp’s order also brings some bad news for them. The complaint also lodged the same copyright infringement claims against RCN’s management company Patriot. These were dismissed. The music companies argued that Patriot effectively makes all policy decisions for RCN, including the repeat infringer policy. However, according to Judge Shipp, the complaint lacks evidence to back up these and other claims. — A copy of US District Court Judge Shipp’s order on RCN’s motion to dismiss is available here (pdf)