Casper

2 at the moment

Bloodborne.

Pooh's Heffalump Movie

You have to start it with 20 minutes again and then slowly take it to 45 minutes, 5 days a weak, don't lose hope .Cheers

England

DISH Network and Sling TV are homing in on the alleged operators of SportsBay.org, SportsBay.tv, Live-NBA.stream, and Freefeds.com. In an amended complaint filed this week, the companies now name two defendants who were unmasked after Google, Cloudflare, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, domain companies and others complied with subpoenas. Pirate KeyAn interesting lawsuit filed in a Texas court during the summer last year saw DISH Network and Sling TV partner up to sue the people behind SportsBay.org, SportsBay.tv, Live-NBA.stream, and Freefeds.com. Unlike lawsuits against regular pirate IPTV providers, the platforms were alleged to have circumvented the DRM technologies deployed by Sling TV’s streaming system (Widevine, Fairplay, and PlayReady) in order to provide their users with Sling programming, directly from Sling’s servers, for free. DISH provided considerable detail on how the operation worked while alleging willful violations of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provisions and claiming considerable sums in damages. Sometime in September 2021, all of the sites went offline and still haven’t resurfaced, leaving millions of users high and dry. The reasons for the disappearances haven’t been confirmed but DISH had been granted permission to subpoena a number of major service providers to further its case. Subpoenas Target Major Online Service Providers The targets of the subpoenas included domain registrar Namecheap (plus domain protection service WhoisGuard), Tucows, Cloudflare, Digital Ocean, Google, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. Namecheap was asked to hand over information related to Namecheap or WhoisGuard accounts associated with sportsbay.org, live-nba.stream, freefeds.com, and the IP address 198.54.117.210, from May 2018 through August 3, 2020. This included documents sufficient to identify the full name and contact information (including street addresses, web addresses, email addresses and telephone numbers) for the person that registered each account, plus documents submitted in order to create or make changes to each account. The subpoena also requested the handover of detailed payment information. A similar subpoena requesting almost the same information was filed with domain company Tucows and another with Cloudflare, the latter also containing a demand to identify the names of the hosting companies connected with the four domains. Highlighting a specific server IP address (159.65.35.50), a subpoena sent to Digital Ocean requested the handover of contact, payment and user IP address information, plus all communications sent or received to the accounts. Google was sent a demand to hand over information related to a specific Google Analytics account including names, addresses and contact records, plus all IP address logs and communications sent to or received from related accounts. Facebook, Instagram and Twitter were ordered to hand over all identifying information they hold on the sites’ social media accounts and it appears other providers were required to hand over information too. Subpoenas Enable Plaintiffs to Name Defendants With DISH and Sling apparently leaving no stone unturned, it seemed almost inevitable that one or more of the subpoenas would lead to the identities of one or more of the previously unnamed defendants. That now appears to be the case. In a first amended complaint filed this week, the plaintiffs identify two men – Juan Barcan and Juan Nahuel Pereyra, both residents of Argentina. “Defendant Juan Barcan is an individual residing in Buenos Aires, Argentina that owned and operated the Live-nba.stream, Freefeds.com, Sportsbay.org, and Sportsbay.tv domains and websites,” the complaint reads “Barcan used his PayPal account to make payments to domain registrar Namecheap and GitHub for the Sportsbay Websites. Barcan operated the Sportsbay Websites with CloudFlare, GitHub, and Google accounts.” sportsbay summons “Defendant Juan Nahuel Pereyra is an individual residing in Buenos Aires, Argentina that owned and operated the Live-nba.stream, Freefeds.com, Sportsbay.org, and Sportsbay.tv domains and websites,” it continues. “Pereyra used his PayPal account to make payments to domain registrar Namecheap for the Sportsbay Websites. Pereyra operated the Sportsbay Websites with CloudFlare and Google accounts.” The amended complaint further notes that all of the ‘SportsBay websites’ had similarities among their domain registrars and service providers, and each deployed Cloudflare as a reverse proxy, pass-through security service. According to the plaintiffs, all four domains used the same Google Analytics ID (UA-187547947) which is also referenced on a number of other defunct streaming portals not mentioned in the complaint. Finally, after repeating their calls for damages, DISH and Sling also call for a permanent injunction to prevent the defendants from infringing their rights moving forward, including by circumventing DRM or any other technological protection measures that control access to Sling programming.

nternet provider Cox Communications has asked a Virginia federal court to reconsider the $1 billion piracy judgment that was handed down three years ago. The ISP argues the verdict was the result of deliberate lies from music industry companies who concealed crucial evidence. This new information surfaced in a separate lawsuit against ISP Charter and was unknown at the time. cassette tape pirate musicThree years ago, Internet provider Cox Communications lost its legal battle against a group of major record labels. A Virginia jury held Cox liable for pirating subscribers because it failed to terminate accounts after repeated accusations, ordering the company to pay $1 billion in damages. This landmark ruling is currently under appeal but Cox also discovered new information that could turn the initial verdict on its head. A few months ago the ISP stated that the music companies concealed important evidence and it now asks the Virginia federal court to review these findings. Doubts About Piracy Evidence The new information centers around the copyright infringement notices that were sent by MarkMonitor, the anti-piracy outfit that tracked files downloaded by BitTorrent pirates. To confirm that these files were indeed infringing, they were downloaded and verified by Audible Magic’s fingerprinting technology. Cox has always had doubts about these notices. Before and during the trial, it argued that the underlying evidence was created after the fact. As such, it could be inadmissible. However, the music companies successfully denied that this was not the case. During the jury trial, the music companies presented a hard drive that contained the files, suggesting that they were the original songs that were pirated between 2012 and 2014. This evidence was central to prove direct copyright infringement. ‘Lies and Serious Misconduct’ This eventually resulted in the $1 billion verdict. However, according to Cox, this verdict is based on lies and tainted by serious misconduct. Relying on information that surfaced in a separate lawsuit the music companies filed against Charter, Cox is now convinced that the hard drive evidence was indeed recreated at a later date. This information wasn’t disclosed at trial and Cox accuses the music companies of misrepresenting key evidence and misleading the jury. As such, it has asked the Virginia federal court for relief of judgment, with $1 billion on the line. “As is now clear, evidence produced over Plaintiffs’ objection in their similar litigation against another ISP, Charter Communications, confirms that the unprecedented judgment in this case was based on evidence that was created years after the alleged infringement occurred,” Cox writes. ‘Created After the Fact’ Cox points out that the new revelations show that MarkMonitor compiled the hard drive of the allegedly “infringing” files in 2016, two years after the claim period. These files were allegedly downloaded and verified in 2016, after which the evidence was destroyed. coxlie This information was concealed from Cox during the trial and the ISP argues that it would have crippled the record labels’ case. “The materiality of these misrepresentations and the prejudice to Cox could not be clearer: they were intended to — and did — fend off well-founded challenges to the admissibility of key pieces of evidence, the exclusion of which would have crippled Plaintiffs’ case. “The bottom line is that Plaintiffs lied. They lied to Cox; they lied to the Court; and they lied to the jury. And they rode those lies to a $1 billion judgment,” Cox adds. Cox asks the federal court to indicate that it’s inclined to grant the motion for relief. If that’s the case, the ISP will ask the appeal court to send the case back to the district court so the issue can be resolved there. At the time of writing the music companies have yet to respond to Cox’s allegations. They have roughly a month to do so and will likely contest the motion.

GitHub received 1,828 valid DMCA takedown notices last year, which resulted in the removal of 19,276 projects. Less than one percent of these projects were reinstated following retractions or counter-notices. The developer platform uses automated tools to scan for abuse, but this technology is not used for copyright infringements. github transparencyWith over 200 million code repositories, GitHub takes prides in being the largest and most advanced development platform in the world. As with other platforms that host user-generated content, this massive code library occasionally runs into copyright infringement troubles. In some cases, people use code without permission from the creators, while others use GitHub to store pirated books or even music. And there are also developers whose projects are seen as pirate tools or apps, which often leads to copyright holder complaints. A few high-profile cases have popped up over the years, including the RIAA’s takedown of YouTube-DL, which was later reversed. Other rightsholders were more successful, with GitHub taking down Unblockit proxy service respositories, as well as the reverse engineered GTA games “Re3” and “reVC”. 1,828 DMCA Notices Last Year These examples are just the tip of the iceberg. GitHub’s latest transparency report reveals that the platform received a total of 1,828 valid DMCA takedown notices last year. Just a small number of these, 46, were retracted or reversed. github dmca totals GitHub doesn’t just remove content in response to takedown notices, it can also reach out to developers before taking action. This means developers can sometimes make modifications to prevent entire repositories from going offline. “That way, if the user removes or remediates the specific content identified in the notice, we avoid having to disable any content at all. This is an important element of our DMCA policy, given how much users rely on each other’s code for their projects,” GitHub notes. GitHub already posts copies of all DMCA notices on its own website and, starting this year, it also sends copies to Lumen. This central database, managed by the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University, also archives copies of notices sent to Google, Twitter, and other platforms. 19,276 Projects Taken Down These detailed notices also show how many GitHub projects were targeted last year. This is substantially higher than the number of notices, which can list dozens of projects each. In 2021, DMCA notices took down 19,276 GitHub projects. This can refer to complete repositories and subsets of code or individual files. In response to counternotices or reversals, 85 projects were reinstated, which means that 19,191 stayed down. github projects Github notes that this number is significantly lower than in 2020, when 36,173 projects were pulled offline. The company stresses that the number is also relatively small compared to the total number of repositories hosted on the site. “The number 19,191 may sound like a lot of projects, but it’s less than .01% of the more than 200 million repositories on GitHub in 2021,” GitHub writes. Supporting Developers’ Rights There is no clear explanation for the drop in takedowns. However, GitHub believes that its response to the YouTube-DL debacle, after which it committed strongly to supporting developers’ rights, may have played a role. “We are not able to determine the exact cause of the downtick, however, we suspect that a contributing factor is GitHub’s continued focus on standing up for developers’ rights, including the update to our DMCA review process in late 2020,” GitHub writes. It’s also worth noting that, for the first time, GitHub provides details on its automated scanning filters. The platform doesn’t use these for copyrighted content but it does scan images for child abuse, extremist and terrorist content. This resulted in one hit last year. “In 2021, out of millions of images scanned, we confirmed automated detection of one account with CSEAI, which was reported to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC),” GitHub writes, noting that no terrorist or extremist content was found. GitHub’s full transparency report is available here. In addition to what’s discussed above, it also includes more details on requests for user data, national security letters, takedown requests from governments, and more.

The rise of premium pirate IPTV services is well-documented but sports companies are also concerned about completely free alternatives. So-called "Open Web Piracy" allows internet users to watch pirate IPTV streams without paying a penny. Not only that, anyone with access to a legal stream can easily make it available to the masses, even from their own home. IPTVBy now it’s hardly breaking news that for a small monthly fee, people can subscribe to pirate IPTV services supplying everything from live TV and sports to movies and TV shows. These pay services have surged in popularity but millions of people still prefer to rely on websites that embed or link to pirate streams and offer them for free. Legitimate content companies would like to see these platforms shut down but recent submissions to the European Commission show that the websites are part of an thriving ecosystem, one that allows people to view pirate streams and also share them with the masses. Open Web Piracy vs Closed Web Piracy Major sports rightsholder the Premier League describes subscription-based IPTV services as “Closed Network Piracy” because the content is only available to those who pay for access. “Open Web Piracy”, on the other hand, is described as freely accessible content available on the web without users having to pay anything. The image below submitted to the European Commission provides a basic overview of how “Open Web Piracy” works. The TV screen graphic top/left represents an official broadcast signal (such as a football match) being captured, often by a ‘professional’ pirate. According to the Premier League, this can be achieved by using an HDMI splitter connecting a legitimate set-top box to a computer or by other means. The graphics to the right represent the captured content being sent to a streaming platform (and its servers) from where it can be viewed by users on various devices. It’s important to note that there is also an arrow pointing from the viewers to the streaming platforms. This indicates that users can also become content suppliers if they know how the system works. The Premier League’s report suggests that it’s not at all difficult. Pirate Streams Can Be Viewed and Shared Too To illustrate how internet users can create or capture video content before distributing it to the masses, one needs to look no further than YouTube. It’s the perfect example of how lone creators (or copiers) can reach millions of people with relatively little effort but, for pirates, YouTube is not ideal. YouTube’s Content ID system (and Facebook’s Rights Manager) can quickly identify pirated content, a feature used by the Premier League to take down pirate streams from the platforms in near real-time. But these are not the only platforms that allow users to view pirate streams and upload their own for viewing by others. The Premier League has a shortlist of problematic platforms and other rightsholders are weighing in too. Streaming Platforms Used to Receive & Spread Content The first platform to receive criticism is a blast from the past. Originally marketed under the name Torrent Stream, Ace Stream is a BitTorrent-based peer-to-peer service dedicated to streaming. In common with regular torrent magnet links, Ace Stream content is accessed using special URLs in the format ‘acestream://********’, with the asterisks representing the unique code for a specific stream. Search engines exist for such content and in common with YouTube, the material can range from the entirely legal through to pirated streams. The latter can be found on dedicated indexing sites for those who simply wish to view but for those who have a stream to share, Ace Stream makes things pretty easy too. ace stream-1 As a result, the Premier League is unhappy with Ace Stream’s alleged Ukrainian operators. This type of sharing has been going on for years and there is no cooperation when it comes to takedowns. “Despite thousands of notices being sent to the software operators over many years, and being included in the Premier League’s previous submissions to the Watch List, no action has ever been taken by Acestream to stop infringements,” they note. Other platforms that offer similar but more centralized functionality include Wigistream.to which, in common with Ace Stream, also makes an appearance in the Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance (AAPA) submission. wigistream “The operator of the platform has taken extensive measures to obfuscate their identity, rendering any attempts to enforce against the platform or the streams it offers extremely challenging,” the Premier League complains. The football organization also labels China-based ‘Just Fun’ (zhuafan.tech) as a threat. The platform looks a little like YouTube but appears to carry huge numbers of infringing live sports streams accessible on Just Fun itself and embedded in other sites around the web. Again, users can simply view pirate streams or choose to upload their own for others to watch. “The platform enables individuals to upload live and on-demand content to the platform, with live streams of Matches indexed and accompanied by commentators / anchors provided by the platform,” the submission continues. just fun The separate AAPA submission lists many more additional platforms that operate along similar lines including telerium.tv/teleriumtv.com, assia.tv/org, wstream.to, livestream.com, ezcdn462.net, uzcdn828.net, jokerswidget.com, cloudstream.to, stephn.xyz, wmsxx.com, streammart.club, ragnarp.net, worldwidestream.net and liveonlivetv.com. At the time of writing, availability on some sites seems patchy but given their ability to leverage visitors as both viewers and suppliers of infringing streams, their popularity looks set to continue.

Most pirate sites try not to grab the attention of rightsholders and anti-piracy groups. Spanish torrent site DonTorrent is clearly not on that list because it openly taunts the Motion Picture Association. The site lists MPA's Chief of Global Content Protection Jan Van Voorn as the 'official' owner in its legal disclaimer. dontorrentWith millions of monthly visitors, DonTorrent is a force to be reckoned with. The site is particularly popular in Spain and offers links to a curated selection of torrents. DonTorrent regularly switches domain names to evade ISP blocking efforts, a common practice among pirate sites. It is currently operating from dontorrent.cat and also has a dedicated .onion address so it can be accessed anonymously through the Tor network. ACE and MPA Watch DonTorrent In addition to site blocking, there are other potential risks on the horizon. Anti-piracy coalition ACE is following the site closely. The group previously asked Cloudflare to share all details it holds on the operators of the site, presumably in advance of legal action. ACE tried to obtain this information through a subpoena submitted by MPA’s Chief of Global Content Protection Jan Van Voorn. This is a common practice nowadays, which – in some cases – helps ACE and its members to obtain useful intelligence. Whether Cloudflare shared anything useful on DonTorrent is unknown. However, the site is certainly aware of ACE and MPA’s interest since it’s openly taunting the anti-piracy collectives. According to the site’s disclaimer, DonTorrent is owned by MPA content protection boss Jan Van Voorn. Who Owns DonTorrent? “This website belongs to Jan van Voorn, address 15301 Ventura Boulevard, Building E Sherman Oaks, California 91403 United States,” the disclaimer begins. dontorrent This message isn’t a belated April fools prank, as it has already been in place for weeks. That said, it’s obviously meant as a joke of some kind, as the MPA and Van Voorn are on the other side of the piracy spectrum. The notice is a bold move nonetheless and we assume that ACE and the MPA will only become more determined to find out who’s really behind the scenes. And they may get some help from Spanish law enforcement. MPA’s Close Ties With Spain Two weeks ago, MPA Chairman Charles Rivkin met with Francisco Pardo, the Director General of the Spanish Police, who committed to protecting rightsholders from online piracy. “Director General Francisco Pardo Piqueras told me today that the film/TV/streaming industry needs to be protected from piracy because it ‘creates dreams, hope, and happiness, and that… is magic’,” Rivkin tweeted in response. For now, the Spanish torrent site appears to feel pretty safe. Before publishing, we tried to find out what motivated DonTorrent’s operators to put Van Voorn in change but we didn’t hear back.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Hey, Well come to Invitehawk, enjoy your stay here.

Jasmine

QPL

Time

Hopsin

998