Welcome to InviteHawk - Your Open Source for Sharing Torrent Invites -

  • We're one of the best invite forum on the internet! Here you will find free invites, free seedboxes, free bonuses, and even you can Buy/Sell your torrent invites or accounts
  • InviteHawk gives you the opportunity to get into the best private trackers out there either by buying your way in or just grab free invites given by our members
  • InviteHawk gives you a platform to earn money by selling the extra invites and accounts you have of torrent sites
  • Get the best deals and discounts for various torrent sites only on InviteHawk
  • Never miss a chance to signup on a tracker with open registrations. InviteHawk sends you regular updates about sites with open signups. Just subscribe to our Open Signup Section
  • Get to know everything about a tracker with all the updated information by checking out the tracker reviews



Global Moderator
  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback

  • Points

    2,005 [ Donate ]

Archiee last won the day on July 23

Archiee had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,191 InviteHawk Legend

User Groups

About Archiee

  • User Group: Global Moderator

  • Member ID: 38166

  • Rank: Invite King

  • Post Count: 3,850

  • Post Ratio: 15.52

  • Total Rep: 1,191

  • Member Of The Days Won: 20

  • Joined: 01/20/2018

  • Been With Us For: 248 Days

  • Last Activity:

  • Currently:

  • Age: 24

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Animes |Movies| HD trackers | IT Sector |Musics

Recent Profile Visitors

3,107 profile views
  2. The gaming industry is at a crossroads. Cyber-crime threatens to not only steal revenue from game publishers, but also inhibit future game creation that is only made possible by the sale of popular titles. Not to mention the very real issue of player cheating that threatens to destroy in-game economies and put legitimate gamers in an unfair position. A report from Irdeto notes that if the threat of cybercrime is not addressed, then game publishers may soon find themselves in a losing battle where hackers have the upper hand. The top five threats identified by the report are: Account Takeover and Credential Theft – One of the most common ways for hackers to make a quick buck is to sell a hacked account. The Irdeto cybersecurity investigations team recently conducted an investigation on one site on behalf of a games publisher to determine the extent of stolen accounts for sale. For one game title, the team found more than 53 accounts for sale ranging in price from $5 up to $15,000 depending on what is included in the account purchased. Virtual Goods and Virtual Economy Threats – One tactic often used by hackers is Gold Farming. This criminal strategy, often made possible by implementing a Gold Farming bot, creates resources within the game much faster than usual, causing inflation. Hackers can capitalize on the oversupply by selling these goods at a rapid pace. However, over time, the value of these items decreases significantly. Game Piracy, Cracking and Console Hacking – Console hacking also remains a persistent threat across the gaming industry. Once attackers have gained access to the consoles themselves, they could gain access and download several games either through software packages or additional cracking. In addition, once hackers have access to the consoles, the gamer’s personal information, credit card details, account logins, and passwords, etc. could all be accessed. Distributed-Denial-of-Service Attacks on Gaming Platforms and Servers – Typically, there are two main reasons why a hacker would execute a DDoS attack. The first would be to target other gamers, to knock them off their IP address. It could be financially motivated or just bad blood. The second reason would be to target gaming platforms and servers. A hacker could take down game infrastructure then demand a ransom to stop the attack and bring it back online. Cheating and Reputational Threats – For cheaters, the opportunities to exploit other players are plentiful. The Irdeto cybersecurity investigations team recently conducted research into cheats available online and for every game publisher the Irdeto team found multiple trainers and cheat engines. For some publishers, the Irdeto team identified cheats for more than 10 titles. The first step to combat cybercrime is knowing what you’re up against, says Irdeto. With a better understanding of the most pervasive threats targeting the gaming industry, game publishers are better able to put in place safeguards to protect the creative process and the integrity of the game.
  3. The US Government has reached a new trade agreement with Mexico. The preliminary deal provides strong and effective copyright protection and enforcement, including criminal sanctions against movie cammers. It will also "extend" the minimum copyright term to 75 years, an issue that triggered quite a bit of confusion. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States, Canada, and Mexico was negotiated a quarter century ago. Over the past twenty-five years, trade has changed drastically, especially online, so the United States planned to modernize the international deal. Several negotiation rounds have taken place with all three parties. However, it appears that things are now moving ahead without Canada, which hasn’t been happy with some of the previous US proposals. Yesterday the US and Mexico confirmed that they had reached agreement on key elements of a new trade deal. While everything has yet to be finalized, the US Trade Representative (USTR) frames it as a major improvement. “The United States and Mexico have reached a preliminary agreement in principle, subject to finalization and implementation, to update the 24-year-old NAFTA with modern provisions representing a 21st century, high-standard agreement,” the USTR notes. One of the key achievements, according to the US, is that the new deal includes the most comprehensive enforcement provisions of any trade agreement. The final wording has yet to be released, but a summary of the Intellectual Property chapter shows what’s in store. Among other things, both parties agree to implement criminal measures against camcording in movie theaters, as well as cable and signal piracy. This, on top of a general agreement to enforce against piracy and counterfeiting that takes place on a commercial scale. While these terms remain vague without the full context, they’re not as confusing as the USTR’s statement on an ‘extension’ of the current copyright term. “Extend the minimum copyright term to 75 years for works like song performances and ensure that works such as digital music, movies, and books can be protected through current technologies such as technological protection measures and rights management information,” it reads. Some understood this as an extension of the current US term, which for individuals is life plus 70 years. This is also the case with digital rights group Public Knowledge, which branded it as an outrageous copyright giveaway. “The inclusion of a copyright term extension in the trade agreement announced today is a staggeringly brazen attempt by the entertainment industries to launder unpopular policies through international agreements,” the group wrote. Journalists also jumped on this unusual issue. The USTR initially told reporters that it was indeed the plan to extend the copyright term to life plus 75 years, but according to Techdirt, this was later changed to a 75-year floor. In other words, a minimum that includes the author’s life. This floor would not change much in either country, except for very young creators in US kindergartens, perhaps. One of the hottest topics during the previous negotiations was the “safe harbor” issue. Content industry groups stressed that these should be tightened, while Internet law experts and advocacy groups proposed an expansion of US-style safe harbors to Mexico and Canada. The fact sheet released by the USTR makes it clear that safe harbors are included and that rightsholders will be protected as well, but how this will be implemented remains a question. “Establish a notice-and-takedown system for copyright safe harbors for Internet service providers (ISPs) that provides protection for IP and predictability for legitimate technology enterprises who do not directly benefit from the infringement, consistent with United States law,” it reads. Responding to the announcement, a group of prominent music industry players including ASCAP, BMI, and the RIAA, again called for strong copyright protections. “We are deeply concerned by the efforts of some to use the agreement to lock in flawed interpretations of pre-Internet ‘safe harbors’ perpetuating the theft of American music, creating safe havens preventing successful enforcement efforts within our trading partner nations..,” the music groups write. A more detailed summary of what to expect in the new trade deal is available on the USTR’s website. Without the full agreement, it’s hard to draw any strong conclusions, but no matter to which side the scale tips, this isn’t the last we’ve heard of it. SOURCE - TORRENTFREAK
  4. Music rights company BMG said it has won a “substantial” cash settlement from Cox Communications, stemming from a three-year-old copyright infringement suit against the cable operator, but declined to reveal the exact amount of the award. BMG first sued Cox in 2015, claiming “contributory copyright infringement,” after it claimed Cox internet customers pirated BMG songwriters’ content online. BMG said although the Digital Millennium Copyright Act provides protections to companies that unknowingly enable their customers to infringe on other parties’ copyrights, “they must have systems in place for copyright owners to seek the removal of infringing content or tackle infringing activity.” BMG claimed that Cox was not entitled to take the so-called “safe harbor” defense because despite knowing that several customers repeatedly violated BMG copyrights, they did not terminate their service. A federal court judge agreed with BMG in his ruling November 2015 and the following month the rights company was awarded $25 million in damages and $8.5 million in costs. But that verdict was overturned on appeal, with the appellate court ruling that although Cox wasn’t entitled to safe-harbor protection, the judge in the lower court case misdirected the jury. The company said having achieved the desired ruling, it “concluded that it made sense to accept a substantial settlement.” Cox declined to comment, in keeping with the confidential nature of the agreement, but confirmed it had reached settlement with BMG.
  5. YouTube culture, whether creators dedicate their channels to memes, react videos or commentary, are reliant on fair use. That’s why the entire community is crying foul in wake of KSI’s management team issuing copyright strikes against anyone using short clips of his fight with Logan Paul for their own videos. Creators who post react videos, commentary or short meme clips are being hit with copyright strikes from a content ID company hired to take down illegal streams or illegal uploads, Polygon has confirmed. This includes streamers who streamed the fight illegally on Twitch, which led to more than 1.2 million people streaming the fight for free, and YouTube creators using parts of the fight for their own videos. “We employed the leading content ID company managing illegal take downs,” KSI’s manager, Liam Chivers, told Polygon via email. “They served DMCA notices against all illegal streams. We’re looking into the situation.” RELATED KSI and Logan Paul’s fight was a lesson in the power of YouTube tribalism KSI and Logan Paul’s $10 YouTube fight proved Twitch pirates always win Logan Paul and KSI: the reasons, and moral quandaries, behind YouTube’s biggest fight Illegal streams are one thing. People streaming the entire fight on Twitch were called out by streamers and creators within the community for circumventing DMCA rules. “Disappointed in Twitch today for not actively banning streamers rebroadcasting the #KSIvLogan fight,” Tom “Syndicate” Cassell tweeted. “They may have tried but to see that 1,000,000 we’re still watching it shows they didn’t try hard enough.” “This shit was unacceptable,” Jimmy “Mr. Beast” Donaldson added. “Twitch, if you want to be a top streaming platform that is respected, shit like this can’t be happening. They knew this fight was happening and turned a blind eye.” Most people in the community can agree that streaming a fight, one which KSI’s team invested a fair bit of money into along with sponsors, isn’t cool. They can also agree, however, that not allowing people to make commentary videos about the fight is equally upsetting. Jesse Tyler Ridgway, who goes by McJuggerNuggets on YouTube and has more than 3.4 million subscribers, was forced to reupload a video reacting to Logan Paul and KSI’s fight. The original video included clips of the fight that Ridgway recorded off his television set, and were placed intermittently throughout the video. “Latest video got blocked for ‘copyright,’” Ridgway tweeted, including the title card below on his re-upload. Ridgway Card in Ridgway’s Logan Paul/KSI video. Jesse Tyler Ridgway/YouTube Double Toasted, a popular channel that hosts nightly streaming shows, also received a copyright strike for their conversation about the fight. Much like Ridgway, the video included some footage of the fight spliced up intermittently with conversation and reaction to the event. A part of the video can be seen in Double Toasted’s original tweet below. Double Toasted @doubletoasted_ #LoganPaul VS #KSI a big scam? Probably. Check out Korey and Martin's reaction to the internet's biggest streaming event! What do you think of the result? LIKE, COMMENT, AND SHARE! 1:24 AM - Aug 28, 2018 22 See Double Toasted's other Tweets Twitter Ads info and privacy Creator James Ash ran into similar problems, adding in the same tweet thread that clips shorter than 30 seconds could still be dinged and it wasn’t worth taking the chance. Like Ridgway, he decided to do the entire react video without any fight footage. “Having so many issues uploading the KSI vs Logan Paul fight,” Ash tweeted. “I’ve flipped the footage, muted commentary and played commentary! Got two copyright strikes and multiple issues to even upload. So settling for a reaction with zero footage of the fight not what I wanted but YouTube..!!” Even memes aren’t safe. Dolan Dark, one of YouTube’s most popular memesters, tweeted about his own troubles following the main event. “Main event ends in a draw and you can’t even make memes about the fight because they get blocked worldwide,” Dark said. “Shit event 0/10 would not watch again.” Other popular creators like Boogie2988 have called out KSI and Logan Paul’s teams (in this case, the content ID company working to take down streams) for “going overboard.” “Call off your dogs in this shit,” he tweeted. “They are going overboard now.” Not all commentary videos are being taken down: Kavos, Philip DeFranco, Miniminter and other top creators have uploaded their own commentary, though their videos don’t include any footage from the fight. Each video only uses footage from KSI and Logan Paul’s testy weigh-in that occurred on Aug. 24, and photos from the event. Again, Fair Use is difficult to navigate. Mona Ibrahim, a lawyer focusing on the video game industry, previously told Polygon, “There is no hard and fast rule on whether anything is fair use acceptance.” That often makes it difficult to fight when copyright strikes are applied. YouTube has a set of guidelines it offers creators on its site to keep in mind when using copyrighted work to see if it might be protected under Fair Use. The four guidelines are: The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes — the new video has to be “transformative” The nature of the copyrighted work — Whether the new video takes copyrighted work from fictional entertainment or real life events The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole — This determines whether the clip is short enough for Fair Use, or if it’s too gratuitous The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work — This examines whether or not it harms the original creator or their work The most important guideline is typically the third. People can’t re-upload an entire fight, or even an entire round, but creators are arguing that if the clip is short enough, then it should exist under Fair Use laws. “You can fight that,” YouTube creator Michael Green said in response to Ridgway’s situation. “It’s on the television in your living room while filming a video, there’s rights for that exact scenario lol.” Being able to reference or use an original work in order to create something substantially different is key to most creators’ work. Copyright striking, unless absolutely necessary, is well-regarded among the YouTube community as a cardinal sin. When executed, not only do they hinder a creator’s AdSense, but collect enough and an entire YouTube channel can be deleted. Allowing creators to use some footage to create new videos isn’t just widely accepted, it’s encouraged. Meme reviews offer social clout for funny videos; song covers collect millions of views; video game walkthroughs and Fortnite best-of recaps dominate YouTube; and commentary or react videos are specifically designed to incorporate the original material. Fair Use laws allow this to happen; but culturally, this type of shared content has become an unspoken, accepted aspect of YouTube culture. Creators own their own content, but that doesn’t mean other people can’t use it. Everything comes down to Fair Use still being a vague area for copyright rules and YouTube creators. Technically, the production company does have a right to strike down any video that uses footage of the event. The bigger concern is how this affects YouTube creators, and their entire ecosystem, where an unspoken rule about anything being up for grabs as long as it’s handled with respect has progressed an entire culture.
  6. The Moscow City Court has approved an application by the Gazprom-Media channels TNT, TV-3, 2×2 and Super to have the illegal distribution of their content on the Yandex video search engine blocked. In a statement, Gazprom-Media says that the court has now sent the ruling to the regulator Roskomnadzor to be carried out. It adds that Gazprom-Media is actively fighting the illegal distribution of its content. Each year the company produces over 26,000 hours and there is not a single project that has not been pirated. In the case of Yandex, Yandex.Video gives access to many links containing pirated content. Despite Gazprom-Media’s notices, Yandex continues to violate its copyright. Gazpom-Media also says that this month alone the number of blocked websites that illegally distributed its content reached record levels – over 700, or almost three times as many as in the whole of 2017. In addition, at the company’s request, over 3.5 million web page containing pirated copes of content were deleted.
  7. Thanks for your kind info ! We'll make it reviews soon that you mentioned ! Regards AR !
  8. @Jenny Glad to see you here ! Hope you'll enjoy to stay here.If you have any question then don't be hesitate to ask me. Regards AR !
  9. Bibliotik,U2,Myspleen Account proof received ! Note for everyone: If you are trading high level trackers or are not comfortable going first with the other person, you may request a middleman. You can send a message to Ethan or any other Staff Member in order to request a Middleman. What is a Middleman? A Middleman is a staff member who will help you complete the trade. The middleman takes the tracker details or invite from both the traders. After confirming, he will pass on the information to the respective trader. This ensures that no one is scammed or cheated and adds to your safety. If you have any other questions, feel free to message Ethan or any other Staff Member.
  10. Share yours preferable thinks here.I'll happy to see if everyone participate this poll chat conversation . Regards AR !
  11. Sorry for late response ! I'm on vacation .By the way give me proper some evidence to make him as guilty person. @emitto. And @Felype As i said before that give me your trackers proofs properly otherwise you will ban soon.