Tag Archives: FISC

Pirate Site Admins Receive Suspended Sentences, Still Face €60m Damages Claim

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-site-admins-receive-suspended-sentences-still-face-e60m-damages-claim-180313/

After being founded in 2009, French site Liberty Land (LL) made its home in Canada. At the time listed among France’s top 200 sites, Liberty Land carried an estimated 30,000 links to a broad range of unlicensed content.

Like many other indexes of its type, LL carried no content itself but hosted links to content hosted elsewhere, on sites like Megaupload and Rapidshare, for example. This didn’t save the operation from an investigation carried out by rightsholder groups SACEM and ALPA, which filed a complaint against Liberty Land with the French authorities in 2010.

Liberty Land

In May 2011 and alongside complaints from police that the people behind Liberty Land had taken extreme measures to hide themselves away, authorities arrested several men linked to the site in Marseille, near Le Havre, and in the Paris suburb of Montreuil.

Despite the men facing a possible five years in jail and fines of up to $700,000, the inquiry dragged on for nearly seven years. The trial of its alleged operators, now aged between 29 and 36-years-old, finally went ahead January 30 in Rennes.

The men faced charges that they unlawfully helped to distribute movies, TV series, games, software, music albums and e-books without permission from rightsholders. In court, one defended the site as being just like Google.

“For me, we had the same role as Google,” he said. “We were an SEO site. There is a difference between what we were doing and the distribution of pirated copies on the street.”

According to the prosecution, the site made considerable revenues from advertising, estimated at more than 300,000 euros between January 2009 and May 2011. The site’s two main administrators reportedly established an offshore company in the British Virgin Islands and a bank account in Latvia where they deposited between 100,000 and 150,000 euros each.

The prosecutor demanded fines for the former site admins and sentences of between six and 12 months in prison. Last week the Rennes Criminal Court rendered its decision, sentencing the four men to suspended sentences of between two and three months. More than 176,000 euros generated by the site was also confiscated by the Court.

While the men will no doubt be relieved that this extremely long case has reached a conclusion of sorts, it’s not over yet. 20minutes reports that the claims for damages filed by copyright groups including SACEM won’t be decided until September and they are significant, totaling 60 million euros.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Hollywood Commissioned Tough Jail Sentences for Online Piracy, ISP Says

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/hollywood-commissioned-tough-jail-sentences-for-online-piracy-isp-says-180227/

According to local prosecutors who have handled many copyright infringement cases over the past decade, Sweden is nowhere near tough enough on those who commit online infringement.

With this in mind, the government sought advice on how such crimes should be punished, not only more severely, but also in proportion to the damages alleged to have been caused by defendants’ activities.

The corresponding report was returned to Minister for Justice Heléne Fritzon earlier this month by Council of Justice member Dag Mattsson. The paper proposed a new tier of offenses that should receive special punishment when there are convictions for large-scale copyright infringement and “serious” trademark infringement.

Partitioning the offenses into two broad categories, the report envisions those found guilty of copyright infringement or trademark infringement “of a normal grade” may be sentenced to fines or imprisonment up to a maximum of two years. For those at the other end of the scale, engaged in “cases of gross crimes”, the penalty sought is a minimum of six months in prison and not more than six years.

The proposals have been criticized by those who feel that copyright infringement shouldn’t be put on a par with more serious and even potentially violent crimes. On the other hand, tools to deter larger instances of infringement have been welcomed by entertainment industry groups, who have long sought more robust sentencing options in order to protect their interests.

In the middle, however, are Internet service providers such as Bahnhof, who are often dragged into the online piracy debate due to the allegedly infringing actions of some of their customers. In a statement on the new proposals, the company is clear on why Sweden is preparing to take such a tough stance against infringement.

“It’s not a daring guess that media companies are asking for Sweden to tighten the penalty for illegal file sharing and streaming,” says Bahnhof lawyer Wilhelm Dahlborn.

“It would have been better if the need for legislative change had taken place at EU level and co-ordinated with other similar intellectual property legislation.”

Bahnhof chief Jon Karlung, who is never afraid to speak his mind on such matters, goes a step further. He believes the initiative amounts to a gift to the United States.

“It’s nothing but a commission from the American film industry,” Karlung says.

“I do not mind them going for their goals in court and trying to protect their interests, but it does not mean that the state, the police, and ultimately taxpayers should put mass resources on it.”

Bahnhof notes that the proposals for the toughest extended jail sentences aren’t directly aimed at petty file-sharers. However, the introduction of a new offense of “gross crime” means that the limitation period shifts from the current five years to ten.

It also means that due to the expansion of prison terms beyond two years, secret monitoring of communications (known as HÖK) could come into play.

“If the police have access to HÖK, it can be used to get information about which individuals are file sharing,” warns Bahnhof lawyer Wilhelm Dahlborn.

“One can also imagine a scenario where media companies increasingly report crime as gross in order to get the police to do the investigative work they have previously done. Harder punishments to tackle file-sharing also appear very old-fashioned and equally ineffective.”

As noted in our earlier report, the new proposals also include measures that would enable the state to confiscate all kinds of property, both physical items and more intangible assets such as domain names. Bahnhof also takes issue with this, noting that domains are not the problem here.

“In our opinion, it is not the domain name which is the problem, it is the content of the website that the domain name points to,” the company says.

“Moreover, confiscation of a domain name may conflict with constitutional rules on freedom of expression in a way that is very unfortunate. The issues of freedom of expression and why copyright infringement is to be treated differently haven’t been addressed much in the investigation.”

Under the new proposals, damage to rightsholders and monetary gain by the defendant would also be taken into account when assessing whether a crime is “gross” or not. This raises questions as to what extent someone could be held liable for piracy when a rightsholder maintains damage was caused yet no profit was generated.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Friday Squid Blogging: The Symbiotic Relationship Between the Bobtail Squid and a Particular Microbe

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2018/02/the_symbiotic_r.html

This is the story of the Hawaiian bobtail squid and Vibrio fischeri.

As usual, you can also use this squid post to talk about the security stories in the news that I haven’t covered.

Read my blog posting guidelines here.

Sweden Considers Six Years in Jail For Online Pirates

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/sweden-considers-six-years-in-jail-for-online-pirates-180218/

Ever since the infamous Pirate Bay trial more than a decade ago, prosecutors in Sweden have called for a tougher approach to breaches of copyright law. In general terms, the country has been painted as soft on infringement but that could all be about to change.

After reaching the conclusion that penalties in Sweden “appear to be low” when compared to those on the international stage, the government sought advice on how such crimes can be punished, not only more severely, but also in proportion to the alleged damage caused.

In response, Minister for Justice Heléne Fritzon received a report this week. It proposes a new tier of offenses with “special” punishments to tackle large-scale copyright infringement and “serious” trademark infringement.

Presented by Council of Justice member Dag Mattsson, the report envisions new criminal designations and crime being divided into two levels of seriousness.

“A person who has been found guilty of copyright infringement or trademark infringement of a normal grade may be sentenced to fines or imprisonment up to a maximum of two years,” the government notes.

“In cases of gross crimes, a person may be convicted of gross copyright infringement or gross trademark infringement and sent to prison for at least six months and not more than six years.”

Last year the Supreme Court found that although prison sentences can be handed down in such cases, there were no legislative indications that copyright infringement should be penalized via a term of imprisonment.

For an idea of the level of change, one only need refer to The Pirate Bay case, which would undoubtedly be considered as “gross infringement” under the new proposals.

Under the new rules, defendants Peter Sunde, Fredrik Neij and Carl Lundström would be sentenced to a minimum of six months and a maximum of six years. As things stood, with infringement being dealt with via fines or up to two years’ imprisonment, they were sentenced to prison terms of eight, ten and four months respectively.

Under the new proposals, damage to rightsholders and monetary gain by the defendant would be taken into account when assessing whether a crime is “gross” or not. This raises the question of whether someone sharing a single pre-release movie could be deemed a gross infringer even if no money was made.

Also of interest are proposals that would enable the state to confiscate all kinds of property, both physical items and more intangible assets such as domain names. This proposal is a clear nod towards the Pirate Bay case which dragged on for several years before the state was able to take over its thepiratebay.se domain.

“Today there is organized online piracy that has major consequences for the whole community,” Minister Fritzon said in a statement.

“Therefore, it is good that the punishments for these crimes have been reviewed, as the sentence will then be proportional to the seriousness of the crime.”

The legislative amendments are proposed to enter into force on July 1, 2019.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Man Handed Conditional Prison Sentence for Spreading Popcorn Time Information

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/man-handed-conditional-prison-sentence-spreading-popcorn-time-information-180208/

In August 2015, police in Denmark announced they had arrested a man in his thirties said to be the operator of a Popcorn Time-focused website. Popcorntime.dk was subsequently shut down and its domain placed under the control of the state prosecutor.

“The Danish State Prosecutor for Serious Economic and International Crime is presently conducting a criminal investigation that involves this domain name,” a seizure notice on the site reads.

“As part of the investigation the state prosecutor has requested a Danish District Court to transfer the rights of the domain name to the state prosecutor. The District Court has complied with the request.”

In a circumstance like this, it’s common to conclude that the site was offering copyright-infringing content or software. That wasn’t the case though, not even close.

PopcornTime.dk was an information resource, offering news on Popcorn Time-related developments, guides, plus tips on how to use the software while staying anonymous.

PopcornTime.dk as it appeared in 2015

Importantly, PopcornTime.dk hosted no software, preferring to link to other sites where the application could be downloaded instead. That didn’t prevent an aggressive prosecution though and now, two-and-half years later, the verdict’s in and it’s bound to raise more than a few eyebrows.

On Wednesday, a court in Odense, Denmark, handed the now 39-year-old man behind PopcornTime.dk a six-month conditional prison sentence for spreading information about the controversial movie streaming service.

Senior prosecutor Dorte Køhler Frandsen from SØIK (State Attorney for Special Economic and International Crime), who was behind the criminal proceedings, described the successful prosecution as a first-of-its-kind moment for the entire region.

“Never before has a person been convicted of helping to spread streaming services. The judgment is therefore an important step in combating illegal streaming on the Internet and will reverberate throughout Europe,” Frandsen said.

According to a statement from the prosecutor, the 39-year-old earned 506,003 Danish Krone ($83,363) in advertising revenue from his website in 2015. In addition to forfeiting this amount and having his domain confiscated, the man will also be required to complete 120 hours of community service.

“The verdict is a clear signal to those who spread illegal pirate services. The film industry and others lose billions in revenue each year because criminals illegally offer films for free. It’s a loss for everyone. Also the consumer,” Frandsen added.

The convicted man now has two weeks to decide whether he will take his appeal to the Østre Landsret, one of Denmark’s two High Courts.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

ISP: We’re Cooperating With Police Following Pirate IPTV Raid

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/isp-were-cooperating-with-police-following-pirate-iptv-raid-180113/

This week, police forces around Europe took action against what is believed to be one of the world’s largest pirate IPTV networks.

The investigation, launched a year ago and coordinated by Europol, came to head on Tuesday when police carried out raids in Cyprus, Bulgaria, Greece, and the Netherlands. A fresh announcement from the crime-fighting group reveals the scale of the operation.

It was led by the Cypriot Police – Intellectual Property Crime Unit, with the support of the Cybercrime Division of the Greek Police, the Dutch Fiscal Investigative and Intelligence Service (FIOD), the Cybercrime Unit of the Bulgarian Police, Europol’s Intellectual Property Crime Coordinated Coalition (IPC³), and supported by members of the Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance (AAPA).

In Cyprus, Bulgaria and Greece, 17 house searches were carried out. Three individuals aged 43, 44, and 53 were arrested in Cyprus and one was arrested in Bulgaria.

All stand accused of being involved in an international operation to illegally broadcast around 1,200 channels of pirated content to an estimated 500,000 subscribers. Some of the channels offered were illegally sourced from Sky UK, Bein Sports, Sky Italia, and Sky DE. On Thursday, the three individuals in Cyprus were remanded in custody for seven days.

“The servers used to distribute the channels were shut down, and IP addresses hosted by a Dutch company were also deactivated thanks to the cooperation of the authorities of The Netherlands,” Europol reports.

“In Bulgaria, 84 servers and 70 satellite receivers were seized, with decoders, computers and accounting documents.”

TorrentFreak was previously able to establish that Megabyte-Internet Ltd, an ISP located in the small Bulgarian town Petrich, was targeted by police. The provider went down on Tuesday but returned towards the end of the week. Responding to our earlier inquiries, the company told us more about the situation.

“We are an ISP provider located in Petrich, Bulgaria. We are selling services to around 1,500 end-clients in the Petrich area and surrounding villages,” a spokesperson explained.

“Another part of our business is internet services like dedicated unmanaged servers, hosting, email servers, storage services, and VPNs etc.”

The spokesperson added that some of Megabyte’s equipment is located at Telepoint, Bulgaria’s biggest datacenter, with connectivity to Petrich. During the raid the police seized the company’s hardware to check for evidence of illegal activity.

“We were informed by the police that some of our clients in Petrich and Sofia were using our service for illegal streaming and actions,” the company said.

“Of course, we were not able to know this because our services are unmanaged and root access [to servers] is given to our clients. For this reason any client and anyone that uses our services are responsible for their own actions.”

TorrentFreak asked many more questions, including how many police attended, what type and volume of hardware was seized, and whether anyone was arrested or taken for questioning. But, apart from noting that the police were friendly, the company declined to give us any additional information, revealing that it was not permitted to do so at this stage.

What is clear, however, is that Megabyte-Internet is offering its full cooperation to the authorities. The company says that it cannot be held responsible for the actions of its clients so their details will be handed over as part of the investigation.

“So now we will give to the police any details about these clients because we hold their full details by law. [The police] will find [out about] all the illegal actions from them,” the company concludes, adding that it’s fully operational once more and working with clients.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Combine Transactional and Analytical Data Using Amazon Aurora and Amazon Redshift

Post Syndicated from Re Alvarez-Parmar original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/combine-transactional-and-analytical-data-using-amazon-aurora-and-amazon-redshift/

A few months ago, we published a blog post about capturing data changes in an Amazon Aurora database and sending it to Amazon Athena and Amazon QuickSight for fast analysis and visualization. In this post, I want to demonstrate how easy it can be to take the data in Aurora and combine it with data in Amazon Redshift using Amazon Redshift Spectrum.

With Amazon Redshift, you can build petabyte-scale data warehouses that unify data from a variety of internal and external sources. Because Amazon Redshift is optimized for complex queries (often involving multiple joins) across large tables, it can handle large volumes of retail, inventory, and financial data without breaking a sweat.

In this post, we describe how to combine data in Aurora in Amazon Redshift. Here’s an overview of the solution:

  • Use AWS Lambda functions with Amazon Aurora to capture data changes in a table.
  • Save data in an Amazon S3
  • Query data using Amazon Redshift Spectrum.

We use the following services:

Serverless architecture for capturing and analyzing Aurora data changes

Consider a scenario in which an e-commerce web application uses Amazon Aurora for a transactional database layer. The company has a sales table that captures every single sale, along with a few corresponding data items. This information is stored as immutable data in a table. Business users want to monitor the sales data and then analyze and visualize it.

In this example, you take the changes in data in an Aurora database table and save it in Amazon S3. After the data is captured in Amazon S3, you combine it with data in your existing Amazon Redshift cluster for analysis.

By the end of this post, you will understand how to capture data events in an Aurora table and push them out to other AWS services using AWS Lambda.

The following diagram shows the flow of data as it occurs in this tutorial:

The starting point in this architecture is a database insert operation in Amazon Aurora. When the insert statement is executed, a custom trigger calls a Lambda function and forwards the inserted data. Lambda writes the data that it received from Amazon Aurora to a Kinesis data delivery stream. Kinesis Data Firehose writes the data to an Amazon S3 bucket. Once the data is in an Amazon S3 bucket, it is queried in place using Amazon Redshift Spectrum.

Creating an Aurora database

First, create a database by following these steps in the Amazon RDS console:

  1. Sign in to the AWS Management Console, and open the Amazon RDS console.
  2. Choose Launch a DB instance, and choose Next.
  3. For Engine, choose Amazon Aurora.
  4. Choose a DB instance class. This example uses a small, since this is not a production database.
  5. In Multi-AZ deployment, choose No.
  6. Configure DB instance identifier, Master username, and Master password.
  7. Launch the DB instance.

After you create the database, use MySQL Workbench to connect to the database using the CNAME from the console. For information about connecting to an Aurora database, see Connecting to an Amazon Aurora DB Cluster.

The following screenshot shows the MySQL Workbench configuration:

Next, create a table in the database by running the following SQL statement:

Create Table
ItemID int NOT NULL,
Category varchar(255),
Price double(10,2), 
Quantity int not NULL,
OrderDate timestamp,
DestinationState varchar(2),
ShippingType varchar(255),
Referral varchar(255),

You can now populate the table with some sample data. To generate sample data in your table, copy and run the following script. Ensure that the highlighted (bold) variables are replaced with appropriate values.

import MySQLdb
import random
import datetime

db = MySQLdb.connect(host="AURORA_CNAME",

states = ("AL","AK","AZ","AR","CA","CO","CT","DE","FL","GA","HI","ID","IL","IN",

shipping_types = ("Free", "3-Day", "2-Day")

product_categories = ("Garden", "Kitchen", "Office", "Household")
referrals = ("Other", "Friend/Colleague", "Repeat Customer", "Online Ad")

for i in range(0,10):
    item_id = random.randint(1,100)
    state = states[random.randint(0,len(states)-1)]
    shipping_type = shipping_types[random.randint(0,len(shipping_types)-1)]
    product_category = product_categories[random.randint(0,len(product_categories)-1)]
    quantity = random.randint(1,4)
    referral = referrals[random.randint(0,len(referrals)-1)]
    price = random.randint(1,100)
    order_date = datetime.date(2016,random.randint(1,12),random.randint(1,30)).isoformat()

    data_order = (item_id, product_category, price, quantity, order_date, state,
    shipping_type, referral)

    add_order = ("INSERT INTO Sales "
                   "(ItemID, Category, Price, Quantity, OrderDate, DestinationState, \
                   ShippingType, Referral) "
                   "VALUES (%s, %s, %s, %s, %s, %s, %s, %s)")

    cursor = db.cursor()
    cursor.execute(add_order, data_order)



The following screenshot shows how the table appears with the sample data:

Sending data from Amazon Aurora to Amazon S3

There are two methods available to send data from Amazon Aurora to Amazon S3:

  • Using a Lambda function

To demonstrate the ease of setting up integration between multiple AWS services, we use a Lambda function to send data to Amazon S3 using Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose.

Alternatively, you can use a SELECT INTO OUTFILE S3 statement to query data from an Amazon Aurora DB cluster and save it directly in text files that are stored in an Amazon S3 bucket. However, with this method, there is a delay between the time that the database transaction occurs and the time that the data is exported to Amazon S3 because the default file size threshold is 6 GB.

Creating a Kinesis data delivery stream

The next step is to create a Kinesis data delivery stream, since it’s a dependency of the Lambda function.

To create a delivery stream:

  1. Open the Kinesis Data Firehose console
  2. Choose Create delivery stream.
  3. For Delivery stream name, type AuroraChangesToS3.
  4. For Source, choose Direct PUT.
  5. For Record transformation, choose Disabled.
  6. For Destination, choose Amazon S3.
  7. In the S3 bucket drop-down list, choose an existing bucket, or create a new one.
  8. Enter a prefix if needed, and choose Next.
  9. For Data compression, choose GZIP.
  10. In IAM role, choose either an existing role that has access to write to Amazon S3, or choose to generate one automatically. Choose Next.
  11. Review all the details on the screen, and choose Create delivery stream when you’re finished.


Creating a Lambda function

Now you can create a Lambda function that is called every time there is a change that needs to be tracked in the database table. This Lambda function passes the data to the Kinesis data delivery stream that you created earlier.

To create the Lambda function:

  1. Open the AWS Lambda console.
  2. Ensure that you are in the AWS Region where your Amazon Aurora database is located.
  3. If you have no Lambda functions yet, choose Get started now. Otherwise, choose Create function.
  4. Choose Author from scratch.
  5. Give your function a name and select Python 3.6 for Runtime
  6. Choose and existing or create a new Role, the role would need to have access to call firehose:PutRecord
  7. Choose Next on the trigger selection screen.
  8. Paste the following code in the code window. Change the stream_name variable to the Kinesis data delivery stream that you created in the previous step.
  9. Choose File -> Save in the code editor and then choose Save.
import boto3
import json

firehose = boto3.client('firehose')
stream_name = ‘AuroraChangesToS3’

def Kinesis_publish_message(event, context):
    firehose_data = (("%s,%s,%s,%s,%s,%s,%s,%s\n") %(event['ItemID'], 
    event['Category'], event['Price'], event['Quantity'],
    event['OrderDate'], event['DestinationState'], event['ShippingType'], 
    firehose_data = {'Data': str(firehose_data)}

Note the Amazon Resource Name (ARN) of this Lambda function.

Giving Aurora permissions to invoke a Lambda function

To give Amazon Aurora permissions to invoke a Lambda function, you must attach an IAM role with appropriate permissions to the cluster. For more information, see Invoking a Lambda Function from an Amazon Aurora DB Cluster.

Once you are finished, the Amazon Aurora database has access to invoke a Lambda function.

Creating a stored procedure and a trigger in Amazon Aurora

Now, go back to MySQL Workbench, and run the following command to create a new stored procedure. When this stored procedure is called, it invokes the Lambda function you created. Change the ARN in the following code to your Lambda function’s ARN.

									IN Category varchar(255), 
									IN Price double(10,2),
                                    IN Quantity int(11),
                                    IN OrderDate timestamp,
                                    IN DestinationState varchar(2),
                                    IN ShippingType varchar(255),
                                    IN Referral  varchar(255)) LANGUAGE SQL 
  CALL mysql.lambda_async('arn:aws:lambda:us-east-1:XXXXXXXXXXXXX:function:CDCFromAuroraToKinesis', 
     CONCAT('{ "ItemID" : "', ItemID, 
            '", "Category" : "', Category,
            '", "Price" : "', Price,
            '", "Quantity" : "', Quantity, 
            '", "OrderDate" : "', OrderDate, 
            '", "DestinationState" : "', DestinationState, 
            '", "ShippingType" : "', ShippingType, 
            '", "Referral" : "', Referral, '"}')

Create a trigger TR_Sales_CDC on the Sales table. When a new record is inserted, this trigger calls the CDC_TO_FIREHOSE stored procedure.

  SELECT  NEW.ItemID , NEW.Category, New.Price, New.Quantity, New.OrderDate
  , New.DestinationState, New.ShippingType, New.Referral
  INTO @ItemID , @Category, @Price, @Quantity, @OrderDate
  , @DestinationState, @ShippingType, @Referral;
  CALL  CDC_TO_FIREHOSE(@ItemID , @Category, @Price, @Quantity, @OrderDate
  , @DestinationState, @ShippingType, @Referral);

If a new row is inserted in the Sales table, the Lambda function that is mentioned in the stored procedure is invoked.

Verify that data is being sent from the Lambda function to Kinesis Data Firehose to Amazon S3 successfully. You might have to insert a few records, depending on the size of your data, before new records appear in Amazon S3. This is due to Kinesis Data Firehose buffering. To learn more about Kinesis Data Firehose buffering, see the “Amazon S3” section in Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose Data Delivery.

Every time a new record is inserted in the sales table, a stored procedure is called, and it updates data in Amazon S3.

Querying data in Amazon Redshift

In this section, you use the data you produced from Amazon Aurora and consume it as-is in Amazon Redshift. In order to allow you to process your data as-is, where it is, while taking advantage of the power and flexibility of Amazon Redshift, you use Amazon Redshift Spectrum. You can use Redshift Spectrum to run complex queries on data stored in Amazon S3, with no need for loading or other data prep.

Just create a data source and issue your queries to your Amazon Redshift cluster as usual. Behind the scenes, Redshift Spectrum scales to thousands of instances on a per-query basis, ensuring that you get fast, consistent performance even as your dataset grows to beyond an exabyte! Being able to query data that is stored in Amazon S3 means that you can scale your compute and your storage independently. You have the full power of the Amazon Redshift query model and all the reporting and business intelligence tools at your disposal. Your queries can reference any combination of data stored in Amazon Redshift tables and in Amazon S3.

Redshift Spectrum supports open, common data types, including CSV/TSV, Apache Parquet, SequenceFile, and RCFile. Files can be compressed using gzip or Snappy, with other data types and compression methods in the works.

First, create an Amazon Redshift cluster. Follow the steps in Launch a Sample Amazon Redshift Cluster.

Next, create an IAM role that has access to Amazon S3 and Athena. By default, Amazon Redshift Spectrum uses the Amazon Athena data catalog. Your cluster needs authorization to access your external data catalog in AWS Glue or Athena and your data files in Amazon S3.

In the demo setup, I attached AmazonS3FullAccess and AmazonAthenaFullAccess. In a production environment, the IAM roles should follow the standard security of granting least privilege. For more information, see IAM Policies for Amazon Redshift Spectrum.

Attach the newly created role to the Amazon Redshift cluster. For more information, see Associate the IAM Role with Your Cluster.

Next, connect to the Amazon Redshift cluster, and create an external schema and database:

create external schema if not exists spectrum_schema
from data catalog 
database 'spectrum_db' 
region 'us-east-1'
IAM_ROLE 'arn:aws:iam::XXXXXXXXXXXX:role/RedshiftSpectrumRole'
create external database if not exists;

Don’t forget to replace the IAM role in the statement.

Then create an external table within the database:

 CREATE EXTERNAL TABLE IF NOT EXISTS spectrum_schema.ecommerce_sales(
  ItemID int,
  Category varchar,
  Quantity int,
  OrderDate TIMESTAMP,
  DestinationState varchar,
  ShippingType varchar,
  Referral varchar)

Query the table, and it should contain data. This is a fact table.

select top 10 * from spectrum_schema.ecommerce_sales


Next, create a dimension table. For this example, we create a date/time dimension table. Create the table:

CREATE TABLE date_dimension (
  d_datekey           integer       not null sortkey,
  d_dayofmonth        integer       not null,
  d_monthnum          integer       not null,
  d_dayofweek                varchar(10)   not null,
  d_prettydate        date       not null,
  d_quarter           integer       not null,
  d_half              integer       not null,
  d_year              integer       not null,
  d_season            varchar(10)   not null,
  d_fiscalyear        integer       not null)
diststyle all;

Populate the table with data:

copy date_dimension from 's3://reparmar-lab/2016dates' 
iam_role 'arn:aws:iam::XXXXXXXXXXXX:role/redshiftspectrum'
dateformat 'auto';

The date dimension table should look like the following:

Querying data in local and external tables using Amazon Redshift

Now that you have the fact and dimension table populated with data, you can combine the two and run analysis. For example, if you want to query the total sales amount by weekday, you can run the following:

select sum(quantity*price) as total_sales, date_dimension.d_season
from spectrum_schema.ecommerce_sales 
join date_dimension on spectrum_schema.ecommerce_sales.orderdate = date_dimension.d_prettydate 
group by date_dimension.d_season

You get the following results:

Similarly, you can replace d_season with d_dayofweek to get sales figures by weekday:

With Amazon Redshift Spectrum, you pay only for the queries you run against the data that you actually scan. We encourage you to use file partitioning, columnar data formats, and data compression to significantly minimize the amount of data scanned in Amazon S3. This is important for data warehousing because it dramatically improves query performance and reduces cost.

Partitioning your data in Amazon S3 by date, time, or any other custom keys enables Amazon Redshift Spectrum to dynamically prune nonrelevant partitions to minimize the amount of data processed. If you store data in a columnar format, such as Parquet, Amazon Redshift Spectrum scans only the columns needed by your query, rather than processing entire rows. Similarly, if you compress your data using one of the supported compression algorithms in Amazon Redshift Spectrum, less data is scanned.

Analyzing and visualizing Amazon Redshift data in Amazon QuickSight

Modify the Amazon Redshift security group to allow an Amazon QuickSight connection. For more information, see Authorizing Connections from Amazon QuickSight to Amazon Redshift Clusters.

After modifying the Amazon Redshift security group, go to Amazon QuickSight. Create a new analysis, and choose Amazon Redshift as the data source.

Enter the database connection details, validate the connection, and create the data source.

Choose the schema to be analyzed. In this case, choose spectrum_schema, and then choose the ecommerce_sales table.

Next, we add a custom field for Total Sales = Price*Quantity. In the drop-down list for the ecommerce_sales table, choose Edit analysis data sets.

On the next screen, choose Edit.

In the data prep screen, choose New Field. Add a new calculated field Total Sales $, which is the product of the Price*Quantity fields. Then choose Create. Save and visualize it.

Next, to visualize total sales figures by month, create a graph with Total Sales on the x-axis and Order Data formatted as month on the y-axis.

After you’ve finished, you can use Amazon QuickSight to add different columns from your Amazon Redshift tables and perform different types of visualizations. You can build operational dashboards that continuously monitor your transactional and analytical data. You can publish these dashboards and share them with others.

Final notes

Amazon QuickSight can also read data in Amazon S3 directly. However, with the method demonstrated in this post, you have the option to manipulate, filter, and combine data from multiple sources or Amazon Redshift tables before visualizing it in Amazon QuickSight.

In this example, we dealt with data being inserted, but triggers can be activated in response to an INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE trigger.

Keep the following in mind:

  • Be careful when invoking a Lambda function from triggers on tables that experience high write traffic. This would result in a large number of calls to your Lambda function. Although calls to the lambda_async procedure are asynchronous, triggers are synchronous.
  • A statement that results in a large number of trigger activations does not wait for the call to the AWS Lambda function to complete. But it does wait for the triggers to complete before returning control to the client.
  • Similarly, you must account for Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose limits. By default, Kinesis Data Firehose is limited to a maximum of 5,000 records/second. For more information, see Monitoring Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose.

In certain cases, it may be optimal to use AWS Database Migration Service (AWS DMS) to capture data changes in Aurora and use Amazon S3 as a target. For example, AWS DMS might be a good option if you don’t need to transform data from Amazon Aurora. The method used in this post gives you the flexibility to transform data from Aurora using Lambda before sending it to Amazon S3. Additionally, the architecture has the benefits of being serverless, whereas AWS DMS requires an Amazon EC2 instance for replication.

For design considerations while using Redshift Spectrum, see Using Amazon Redshift Spectrum to Query External Data.

If you have questions or suggestions, please comment below.

Additional Reading

If you found this post useful, be sure to check out Capturing Data Changes in Amazon Aurora Using AWS Lambda and 10 Best Practices for Amazon Redshift Spectrum

About the Authors

Re Alvarez-Parmar is a solutions architect for Amazon Web Services. He helps enterprises achieve success through technical guidance and thought leadership. In his spare time, he enjoys spending time with his two kids and exploring outdoors.




Swedish Police Set to Take Over Pirate Bay Domains

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/swedish-police-set-to-take-over-pirate-bay-domains-171222/

Way back in 2013, anti-piracy prosecutor Fredrik Ingblad filed a motion targeting two key Pirate Bay domain names – ThePirateBay.se and PirateBay.se.

Ingblad filed a complaint against Punkt SE (IIS), the organization responsible for Sweden’s top level .SE domain, arguing that the domains are tools that The Pirate Bay uses to infringe copyright.

In April 2015 the case was heard and a month later the Stockholm District Court ruled that The Pirate Bay should forfeit both ThePirateBay.se and PirateBay.se to the state. The case later went to appeal.

In May 2016, the Svea Court of Appeal handed down its decision which upheld the decision of the Stockholm District Court, finding that since they assisted with crimes, the domains could be seized.

With that established a question remained – should the domains be seized from Pirate Bay co-founder and domain owner Fredrik Neij or from IIS, the organization responsible for Sweden’s top-level .SE domain?

The Court subsequently found that domain names should be considered a type of intellectual property, property owned by the purchaser of the domain. In this case, therefore, IIS was not considered the owner of the Pirate Bay domains, Fredrik Neij was.

Neij subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the District Court and the Court of Appeal wrongly concluded that a domain name is a type of property that can be confiscated.

Today the Supreme Court handed down its decision, siding with the lower courts and determining that the domains – ThePirateBay.se and PirateBay.se – can indeed be seized by the state.

“The Supreme Court declares that the right to domain names constitutes property that may be forfeited as the Court of Appeal previously found,” its judgment reads.

Since the decision was handed down, things have been moving quickly. Kjetil Jensen of Online Group, the parent company of domain registry Binero, informs TorrentFreak that the police have already moved to take over the domains in question.

“Today Binero, Binero.se, (registrar for thepiratebay.se and piratebay.se) received an executive request from Swedish Police to take over ownership of the domain names thepiratebay.se and piratebay.se because the Swedish Supreme Court now allows the domain names to be seized,” Jensen says.

“The WHOIS of the domain names shows that the domain names no longer have any active name servers and the next step in this process is that the Police will take over the ownership of the domain names.”

WHOIS entry for ThePirateBay.se

While Binero will cooperate with the authorities, the company doesn’t believe that seizure will solve the online copyright infringement problem.

“Binero considers that the confiscation of a domain name is an ineffective approach to prevent criminal activity on the internet,” Jensen says.

“Moving a site to another top-level domain is very easy. And even if you want to close the domain, content is still available over the internet, using both the IP address and search engines etc.”

Indeed, The Pirate Bay saw this day coming a long way off and has already completely migrated to its original domain, ThePirateBay.org.

Despite the ruling, the site remains fully accessible, but it appears a line has been drawn in the sand in Sweden when it comes to domains that are used to break the law. They will be easier to seize in future, thanks to this lengthy legal process.

The judgment is available here (PDF, Swedish)

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Trolls Want to Seize Alleged Movie Pirates’ Computers

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/trolls-want-to-seize-alleged-movie-pirates-computers-171101/

Five years ago, a massive controversy swept Finland. Local anti-piracy group CIAPC (known locally as TTVK) sent a letter to a man they accused of illegal file-sharing.

The documents advised the man to pay a settlement of 600 euros and sign a non-disclosure document, to make a threatened file-sharing lawsuit disappear. He made the decision not to cave in.

Then, in November 2012, there was an 8am call at the man’s door. Police, armed with a search warrant, said they were there to find evidence of illicit file-sharing. Eventually the culprit was found. It was the man’s 9-year-old daughter who had downloaded an album by local multi-platinum-selling songstress Chisu from The Pirate Bay, a whole year earlier.

Police went on to seize the child’s Winnie the Pooh-branded laptop and Chisu was horrified, posting public apologies on the Internet to her young fans. Five years on, it seems that pro-copyright forces in Finland are treading the same path.

Turre Legal, a law firm involved in defending file-sharing matters, has issued a warning that copyright trolls have filed eight new cases at the Market Court, the venue for previous copyright battles in the country.

“According to information provided by the Market Court, Crystalis Entertainment, previously active in such cases, filed three new copyright cases and initiated five pre-trial applications in October 2017,” says lawyer Herkko Hietanen.

The involvement of Crystalis Entertainment adds further controversy into the mix. The company isn’t an official movie distributor but obtained the rights to distribute content on BitTorrent networks instead. It doesn’t do so officially, instead preferring to bring prosecutions against file-sharers’ instead.

Like the earlier ‘Chisu’ case, the trolls’ law firms have moved extremely slowly. Hietanen reports that some of the new cases reference alleged file-sharing that took place two years ago in 2015.

“It would seem that right-holders want to show that even old cases may have to face justice,” says Hietanen.

“However, applications for enforceability may be a pre-requisite for computer confiscation by a bailiff for independent investigations. It is possible that seizures of the teddy bears of the past years will make a comeback,” he added, referencing the ‘Chisu’ case.

Part of the reason behind the seizure requests is that some people defending against copyright trolls have been obtaining reports from technical experts who have verified that no file-sharing software is present on their machines. The trolls say that this is a somewhat futile exercise since any ‘clean’ machine can be presented for inspection. On this basis, seizure on site is a better option.

While the moves for seizure are somewhat aggressive, things haven’t been getting easier for copyright trolls in Finland recently.

In February 2017, an alleged file-sharer won his case when a court ruled that copyright holders lacked sufficient evidence to show that the person in question downloaded the files, in part because his Wi-Fi network was open to the public

Then, in the summer of 2017, the Market Court tightened the parameters under which Internet service providers are compelled to hand over the identities of suspected file-sharers to copyright owners.

The Court determined that this could only happen in serious cases of unlawful distribution. This, Hietanen believes, is partially the reason that the groups behind the latest cases are digging up old infringements.

“After the verdict of the summer, I assumed that rightsholders would have to operate with old information, at least for a while,” he says. “Rightsholders want to show that litigation is still possible.”

The big question, of course, is what people should do if they receive a settlement letter. In some jurisdictions, the advice is to ignore, until proper legal documentation arrives.

Hietanen says the matter in Finland is serious and should be treated as such. There’s always a possibility that after failing to receive a response, a copyright holder could go to court to obtain a default judgment, meaning the alleged file-sharer is immediately found guilty.

In the current cases, the Market Court will now have to decide whether unannounced seizures are required to preserve evidence. For cases already dating back two years, there will be plenty of discussions to be had, for and against. But in the meantime, Hedman Partners, the company representing the copyright trolls, warn that more cases are on the way.

“We have put in place new requests for information after the summer. We have a large number of complaints in preparation. More are coming,” lawyer Joni Hatanmaa says.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

The Pirate Bay’s .SE Domain is Back in Action

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bays-se-domain-is-back-in-action-171024/

Last week The Pirate Bay’s .SE domain name expired and, soon after, it was deactivated.

As a result, many people could no longer use their old bookmarks, which traditionally pointed them to the most recent domain of the notorious torrent site.

This appeared to mark the end of this historic domain but today it’s clear that this is not the case. For the past few hours, Thepiratebay.se has been operating as usual again, directing visitors to the current .org domain.

A quick look at the Whois information shows that the domain has been reactivated and the registration updated to October next year. This means that it’s safe, at least for a while.

Thepiratebay.se back in action

At the time of writing it’s unclear whether the Pirate Bay listed the deactivation or if this was done on behalf of the Swedish Court of Appeal.

In 2013, a local anti-piracy group filed a motion to have it seized. This resulted in a lengthy legal battle where the Swedish Court of Appeal eventually ruled that The Pirate Bay’s domain had to be confiscated and forfeited to the state.

The forfeiture has yet to take place, though, as the case is still pending at the Supreme Court. Because of this, the Pirate Bay’s owners are not allowed to change the domain details, which may be why it expired initially.

However, without re-registering it, the domain would be released to the public again. This means that outsiders could pick it up, which isn’t supposed to happen, and this is likely why it’s now active again.

The Pirate Bay has yet to comment on the domain issue. When we hear from the team this article will be updated accordingly.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Pirate Bay’s Iconic .SE Domain has Expired (Updated)

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bays-iconic-se-domain-has-expired-and-is-for-sale-171016/

When The Pirate Bay first came online during the summer of 2003, its main point of access was thepiratebay.org.

Since then the site has burnt through more than a dozen domains, trying to evade seizures or other legal threats.

For many years thepiratebay.se operated as the site’s main domain name. Earlier this year the site moved back to the good old .org again, and from the looks of it, TPB is ready to say farewell to the Swedish domain.

Thepiratebay.se expired last week and, if nothing happens, it will be de-activated tomorrow. This means that the site might lose control over a piece of its history.

The torrent site moved from the ORG to the SE domain in 2012, fearing that US authorities would seize the former. Around that time the Department of Homeland Security took hundreds of sites offline and the Pirate Bay team feared that they would be next.

Thepiratebay.se has expired

Ironically, however, the next big threat came from Sweden, the Scandinavian country where the site once started.

In 2013, a local anti-piracy group filed a motion targeting two of The Pirate Bay’s domains, ThePirateBay.se and PirateBay.se. This case that has been dragging on for years now.

During this time TPB moved back and forth between domains but the .se domain turned out to be a safer haven than most alternatives, despite the legal issues. Many other domains were simply seized or suspended without prior notice.

When the Swedish Court of Appeal eventually ruled that The Pirate Bay’s domain had to be confiscated and forfeited to the state, the site’s operators moved back to the .org domain, where it all started.

Although a Supreme Court appeal is still pending, according to a report from IDG earlier this year the court has placed a lock on the domain. This prevents the owner from changing or transferring it, which may explain why it has expired.

The lock is relevant, as the domain not only expired but has also been put of for sale again in the SEDO marketplace, with a minimum bid of $90. This sale would be impossible, if the domain is locked.

Thepiratebay.se for sale

Perhaps the most ironic of all is the fact that TPB moved to .se because it feared that the US controlled .org domain was easy prey.

Fast forward half a decade and over a dozen domains have come and gone while thepiratebay.org still stands strong, despite entertainment industry pressure.

Update: We updated the article to mention that the domain name is locked by the Swedish Supreme Court. This means that it can’t be updated and would explain why it has expired.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Private Torrent Site Legal Battle Heard By Court of Appeal

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/private-torrent-site-legal-battle-heard-by-court-of-appeal-170908/

Founded way back in 2006, SwePiracy grew to become one of the most famous private torrent sites on the Swedish scene. Needless to say, it also became a target for anti-piracy outfits.

Six years after its debut and following an investigation by anti-piracy group Antipiratbyrån (now Rights Alliance), during 2012 police in Sweden and the Netherlands cooperated to shut down the site and arrest its operator.

In early 2016, more than four years on, SwePiracy’s then 25-year-old operator appeared in court to answer charges relating to the unlawful distribution of a sample 27 movies between March 2011 and February 2012. The prosecution demanded several years in prison and nearly $3.13 million (25 million kronor) in damages.

SwePiracy defense lawyer Per E. Samuelsson, who previously took part in The Pirate Bay trial, said the claims against his client were the most unreasonable he’d seen in his 35 years as a lawyer.

In October 2016, three weeks after the full trial, the Norrköping District Court handed down its decision. Given some of the big numbers being thrown around, the case seemed to turn out relatively well for the defendant.

While SwePiracy’s former operator was found guilty of copyright infringement, the prosecution’s demands for harsh punishment were largely pushed aside. A jail sentence was switched to probation plus community service, and the millions of dollars demanded in damages were reduced to ‘just’ $148,000, payable to movie outfit Nordisk Film. On top, $45,600 said to have been generated by SwePiracy was confiscated.

Almost immediately both sides announced an appeal, with the defendant demanding a more lenient sentence and the prosecution naturally leaning the other way. This week the case was heard at the Göta Court of Appeal, one of the six appellate courts in the Swedish system.

“We state that the District Court made an inaccurate assessment of the damages. So the damages claim remains at the same level as before,” Rights Alliance lawyer Henrik Pontén told Sweden’s IDG.

“There are two different approaches. We say that you have to pay for the entire license [for content when you infringe]. The District Court looked at how many times the movies were downloaded during the period.”

According to Pontén, the cost of such a license is hypothetical since there are no licenses available for distributing content through entities such as torrent sites, which have no mechanisms for control and no limits on sharing. That appears to have motivated the prosecution to demand a hefty price tag.

In addition to Rights Alliance wanting a better deal for their theoretical license, the official prosecutor also has issues with the amount of money that was confiscated from the platform.

“The operator has received donations to run the site. I have calculated how much money was received and the sum that the District Court awarded was almost half of my calculations,” Henrik Rasmusson told IDG.

Only time will tell how the Court of Appeal will rule but it’s worth noting that the decision could go either way or might even stand as it is now. In any event, this case has dragged on for far too long already and is unlikely to end positively for any of the parties involved.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Police Confiscate 245 ‘Pirate’ Media Players

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/police-confiscate-245-pirate-media-players-170829/

More and more people are starting to use “fully-loaded” set-top boxes to stream video content directly to their TVs.

Although the media players themselves can be used for perfectly legal means, third-party add-ons turn them into pirate machines, providing access to movies, TV-shows and IPTV channels.

Over the past several years, there has been little enforcement effort on this front. However, this changed earlier this year, when the European Court of Justice ruled that selling devices pre-configured to obtain copyright-infringing content is illegal.

The hardware can still be sold and media player software such as Kodi is legal too, but vendors who ship boxes with pirate add-ons could get a letter or visit from rightsholders. Dutch anti-piracy outfit BREIN is particularly active on this front and has convinced hundreds of sellers to clean up shop.

One of these vendors, located in The Hague, recently promised that it would stop offering these boxes. However, BREIN discovered that while the pirate media players disappeared from the online store, they were still sold in the bricks-and-mortar store.

The anti-piracy group obviously wasn’t happy with this and reported the shop owner to the local police, who went in and confiscated 245 “pirate” media players a few days ago.

“We summoned this merchant to stop but, despite his promise to do so, he continued. We have therefore reported it to the police. These players cause great damage because people no longer pay for the movies and series they watch,” BREIN director Tim Kuik says.

It is now up to the authorities to determine if any further action is needed. BREIN expects that the prosecutor’s office will try to settle the case with a fine, but if the vendor refuses to pay it may also lead to a prosecution. At the same time, BREIN also has the option to file a civil case.

Although BREIN’s actions usually don’t result in criminal prosecutions, the anti-piracy group continues to pressure people who are involved in selling and developing these platforms. Ultimately, they hope that this will deter others from getting involved.

Earlier this year the Motion Picture Association described pirate media players as a major threat, dubbing them “Piracy 3.0.” While this threat is far from over, it has definitely become riskier for people to get involved in developing and selling these boxes.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

MPAA Revenue Stabilizes, Chris Dodd Earns $3.5 Million

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-revenue-stabilizes-chris-dodd-earns-3-5-million170813/

Protecting the interests of Hollywood, the MPAA has been heavily involved in numerous anti-piracy efforts around the world in recent years.

Through its involvement in the shutdowns of Popcorn Time, YIFY, isoHunt, Hotfile, Megaupload and several other platforms, the MPAA has worked hard to target piracy around the globe.

Perhaps just as importantly, the group lobbies lawmakers globally while managing anti-piracy campaigns both in and outside the US, including the Creative Content UK program.

All this work doesn’t come for free, obviously, so the MPAA relies on six major movie studios for financial support. After its revenues plummeted a few years ago, they have steadily recovered and according to its latest tax filing, the MPAA’s total income is now over $72 million.

The IRS filing, covering the fiscal year 2015, reveals that the movie studios contributed $65 million, the same as a year earlier. Overall revenue has stabilized as well, after a few years of modest growth.

Going over the numbers, we see that salaries make up a large chunk of the expenses. Former Senator Chris Dodd, the MPAA’s Chairman and CEO, is the highest paid employee with a total income of more than $3.5 million, including a $250,000 bonus.

It was recently announced that Dodd will leave the MPAA next month. He will be replaced by Charles Rivkin, another political heavyweight. Rivkin previously served as Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs in the Obama administration.

In addition to Dodd, there are two other employees who made over a million in 2015, Global General Counsel Steve Fabrizio and Diane Strahan, the MPAA’s Chief Operating Officer.

Looking at some of the other expenses we see that the MPAA’s lobbying budget remained stable at $4.2 million. Another $4.4 million went to various grants, while legal costs totaled $7.2 million that year.

More than two million dollars worth of legal expenses were paid to the US law firm Jenner & Block, which represented the movie studios in various court cases. In addition, the MPAA paid more than $800,000 to the UK law firm Wiggin, which assisted the group in local site-blocking efforts.

Finally, it’s worth looking at the various gifts and grants the MPAA hands out. As reported last year, the group handsomely contributes to various research projects. This includes a recurring million dollar grant for Carnegie Mellon’s ‘Initiative for Digital Entertainment Analytics’ (IDEA), which researches various piracy related topics.

IDEA co-director Rahul Telang previously informed us that the gift is used to hire researchers and pay for research materials. It is not tied to a particular project.

We also see $70,000+ in donations for both the Democratic and Republican Attorneys General associations. The purpose of the grants is listed as “general support.” Interestingly, just recently over a dozen Attorneys General released a public service announcement warning the public to stay away from pirate sites.

These type of donations and grants are nothing new and are a regular part of business across many industries. Still, they are worth keeping in mind.

It will be interesting to see which direction the MPAA takes in the years to come. Under Chris Dodd it has booked a few notable successes, but there is still a long way to go before the piracy situation is somewhat under control.

MPAA’s full form 990 was published in Guidestar recently and a copy is available here (pdf).

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

TV Giant Canal Plus Decides to Stop Paying Artists & Creators, Gets Sued

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/tv-giant-canal-plus-decides-to-stop-paying-artists-creators-gets-sued-170705/

It’s common for anti-piracy groups to accuse torrent, streaming, and other download sites of not paying licensing fees. As a result, dozens have been sued over the years, often with catastrophic results for the platforms involved.

It is extremely rare, however, for a bone fide broadcasting company to simply declare that it won’t be paying artists, authors, and creators, for the content they provide. Amazingly, that’s the situation playing out in France with pay TV company Canal Plus.

Owned by giant Vivendi, Canal Plus has decided that its current deals with content providers are unfavorable to the company and wants to renegotiate them. In the meantime, tens of millions of euros in royalties owed to SACEM (Society of Authors, Composers and Publishers of Music), SACD (Society of Dramatic Authors and Composers), SCAM (The Civil Society of Multimedia Authors) and ADAGP (Society of Authors in the Graphic and Plastic Arts) are going unpaid.

The decision has caused outrage among the collecting societies, with SACEM (the group that caused the closure of What.CD and French torrent giant T411) deriding Canal Plus for denying artists what is rightfully theirs.

“We are receiving many calls from panic-stricken authors who are finding themselves without the wages due to them,” a spokesman from SACEM said. “Some of them will find themselves facing serious difficulties and how will they continue to create if they have not been paid?”

Hervé Rony, general manager of The Civil Society of Multimedia Authors (SCAM) directly attacked the TV provider.

“I’ve never seen such brutality. Never has another player in the audiovisual industry deployed such methods,” Rony said.

Even filmmakers are affected by the decision to withhold royalties, with the Association of Authors, Directors, Producers (L’ARP) noting that it was “deeply shocked” at what it describes as an act of “violence.”

Although a broad range of creators is affected, local media reports say that Canal Plus’ decision not to pay copyright fees will hit the music sector first, with today being the day that payments should have been made. As a result, SCAM is warning that it may not be able to meet its obligations for the fiscal year.

Telerama reports that Canal Plus is trying to negotiate an 80% discount worth tens of millions of euros to support its cost-cutting agenda, but those demands are meeting a wall of defiance among the collecting societies.

“We only discuss between people in good faith, when they have already settled what they owe and do not renege on contracts already signed,” Rony said. “Nobody wants the death of Canal Plus. But the prerequisite for any discussion is the resumption of payments.”

In comments made by SACEM yesterday, the copyright group indicated that beyond paying what it owes now, Canal Plus only has two options available, both involving the inside of a courtroom. The first would involve a lawsuit over breach of contract and the second would see it being sued for using copyright works without a license – piracy, effectively.

“In this case, we will seek penalties for infringement. They do not have much latitude,” SACEM said.

Several of the groups owed money by Canal Plus have published statements, with SACD, SACEM, SCAM, and ADAGP indicating they will be joining forces to tackle the broadcaster, who they accuse of undermining the right of creators to get paid.

“SACEM, along with the other authors’ societies, would have liked the constructive dialogue it had conducted over the last few weeks to have resulted in Canal Plus fulfilling its contractual obligations, but failing that, was obliged to take appropriate measures, including Judicial rights, so that the rights of its members are preserved,” SACEM wrote.

With a meeting between those affected scheduled for Friday, the suggestion that legal action is already underway has now been confirmed by Variety. Citing an industry source, the publication says that Canal Plus is being sued in the Paris High Court for around 50 million euros.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Court Hands Internet Textbook Pirates Suspended Sentences

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/court-hands-internet-textbook-pirates-suspended-sentences-170624/

All types of media content can be exploited online with movies, TV shows, and music among the most popular among pirates. However, in recent years books have proven desirable, especially those that otherwise have hefty price tags.

Textbooks are particularly well known for their stiff pricing, something which presents a thorn in the side for thousands of students every year. Making matters worse, books are often marginally tweaked per revision, ensuring that second owner books lose their value. This isn’t something that affects pirates though.

Over the years, many file-sharing sites have catered to people seeking textbooks for free, with many building up a dedicated following. Others, however, have seen the opportunity to make some money, offering broad but illegal access to textbooks for a nominal fee.

That was the case with Denmark-based website LendStudy. It provided students with access to hundreds of textbooks for a comparatively reasonable price of 300 kroner ($45.00) per semester. Unfortunately, that attracted the attention of anti-piracy outfit Rights Alliance, who pursued a case against its operators.

In court this week, three men aged 26, 31 and 71 stood accused of scanning and then making available at least 198 copyrighted textbooks to paying members. Between August 2013 and October 2014 it was alleged the textbooks were downloaded from the site 2,574 times, netting the men revenues of around $3,500.

According to local media, all three men initially pleaded not guilty but later admitted being operators of the site.

The court heard how RightsAlliance tried to create an account on LendStudy but its request for membership was discovered and rejected by the site’s operators. Other evidence presented by the prosecution included photographs of the men loading computers, scanners, and other IT equipment into a car.

“It is expensive for students to acquire new knowledge. Lendstudy wanted to spread knowledge in the form of books that give students more opportunities for new knowledge,” the 31-year-old defendant said in court.

Unfortunately for the site’s operators, the desire to enrich the minds of students failed to persuade the court that piracy could be ignored. All three were found guilty of criminal copyright infringement and handed four-month conditional jail sentences. The LundStudy.dk domain was confiscated.

The notice on the LendStudy site

“If textbooks are made freely available or sold illegally, publishers have less incentive to produce textbooks,” said Martin Lindø Westeraaard from University Press of Southern Denmark.

“It will be detrimental both for publishers and for the students, who will lose the opportunity to read Danish-language textbooks.”

A claim for damages against the men will now be pursued by Rights Alliance in a civil case.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Three Men Sentenced Following £2.5m Internet Piracy Case

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/three-men-sentenced-following-2-5m-internet-piracy-case-170622/

While legal action against low-level individual file-sharers is extremely rare in the UK, the country continues to pose a risk for those engaged in larger-scale infringement.

That is largely due to the activities of the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit and private anti-piracy outfits such as the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT). Investigations are often a joint effort which can take many years to complete, but the outcomes can often involve criminal sentences.

That was the profile of another Internet piracy case that concluded in London this week. It involved three men from the UK, Eric Brooks, 43, from Bolton, Mark Valentine, 44, from Manchester, and Craig Lloyd, 33, from Wolverhampton.

The case began when FACT became aware of potentially infringing activity back in February 2011. The anti-piracy group then investigated for more than a year before handing the case to police in March 2012.

On July 4, 2012, officers from City of London Police arrested Eric Brooks’ at his home in Bolton following a joint raid with FACT. Computer equipment was seized containing evidence that Brooks had been running a Netherlands-based server hosting more than £100,000 worth of pirated films, music, games, software and ebooks.

According to police, a spreadsheet on Brooks’ computer revealed he had hundreds of paying customers, all recruited from online forums. Using PayPal or utilizing bank transfers, each paid money to access the server. Police mentioned no group or site names in information released this week.

“Enquiries with PayPal later revealed that [Brooks] had made in excess of £500,000 in the last eight years from his criminal business and had in turn defrauded the film and TV industry alone of more than £2.5 million,” police said.

“As his criminal enterprise affected not only the film and TV but the wider entertainment industry including music, games, books and software it is thought that he cost the wider industry an amount much higher than £2.5 million.”

On the same day police arrested Brooks, Mark Valentine’s home in Manchester had a similar unwelcome visit. A day later, Craig Lloyd’s home in Wolverhampton become the third target for police.

Computer equipment was seized from both addresses which revealed that the pair had been paying for access to Brooks’ servers in order to service their own customers.

“They too had used PayPal as a means of taking payment and had earned thousands of pounds from their criminal actions; Valentine gaining £34,000 and Lloyd making over £70,000,” police revealed.

But after raiding the trio in 2012, it took more than four years to charge the men. In a feature common to many FACT cases, all three were charged with Conspiracy to Defraud rather than copyright infringement offenses. All three men pleaded guilty before trial.

On Monday, the men were sentenced at Inner London Crown Court. Brooks was sentenced to 24 months in prison, suspended for 12 months and ordered to complete 140 hours of unpaid work.

Valentine and Lloyd were each given 18 months in prison, suspended for 12 months. Each was ordered to complete 80 hours unpaid work.

Detective Constable Chris Glover, who led the investigation for the City of London Police, welcomed the sentencing.

“The success of this investigation is a result of co-ordinated joint working between the City of London Police and FACT. Brooks, Valentine and Lloyd all thought that they were operating under the radar and doing something which they thought was beyond the controls of law enforcement,” Glover said.

“Brooks, Valentine and Lloyd will now have time in prison to reflect on their actions and the result should act as deterrent for anyone else who is enticed by abusing the internet to the detriment of the entertainment industry.”

While even suspended sentences are a serious matter, none of the men will see the inside of a cell if they meet the conditions of their sentence for the next 12 months. For a case lasting four years involving such large sums of money, that is probably a disappointing result for FACT and the police.

Nevertheless, the men won’t be allowed to enjoy the financial proceeds of their piracy, if indeed any money is left. City of London Police say the trio will be subject to a future confiscation hearing to seize any proceeds of crime.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

The Dangers of Secret Law

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/06/the_dangers_of_.html

Last week, the Department of Justice released 18 new FISC opinions related to Section 702 as part of an EFF FOIA lawsuit. (Of course, they don’t mention EFF or the lawsuit. They make it sound as if it was their idea.)

There’s probably a lot in these opinions. In one Kafkaesque ruling, a defendant was denied access to the previous court rulings that were used by the court to decide against it:

…in 2014, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) rejected a service provider’s request to obtain other FISC opinions that government attorneys had cited and relied on in court filings seeking to compel the provider’s cooperation.


The provider’s request came up amid legal briefing by both it and the DOJ concerning its challenge to a 702 order. After the DOJ cited two earlier FISC opinions that were not public at the time — one from 2014 and another from 2008­ — the provider asked the court for access to those rulings.

The provider argued that without being able to review the previous FISC rulings, it could not fully understand the court’s earlier decisions, much less effectively respond to DOJ’s argument. The provider also argued that because attorneys with Top Secret security clearances represented it, they could review the rulings without posing a risk to national security.

The court disagreed in several respects. It found that the court’s rules and Section 702 prohibited the documents release. It also rejected the provider’s claim that the Constitution’s Due Process Clause entitled it to the documents.

This kind of government secrecy is toxic to democracy. National security is important, but we will not survive if we become a country of secret court orders based on secret interpretations of secret law.

NSA Abandons "About" Searches

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/05/nsa_abandons_ab.html

Earlier this month, the NSA said that it would no longer conduct “about” searches of bulk communications data. This was the practice of collecting the communications of Americans based on keywords and phrases in the contents of the messages, not based on who they were from or to.

The NSA’s own words:

After considerable evaluation of the program and available technology, NSA has decided that its Section 702 foreign intelligence surveillance activities will no longer include any upstream internet communications that are solely “about” a foreign intelligence target. Instead, this surveillance will now be limited to only those communications that are directly “to” or “from” a foreign intelligence target. These changes are designed to retain the upstream collection that provides the greatest value to national security while reducing the likelihood that NSA will acquire communications of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with one of the Agency’s foreign intelligence targets.

In addition, as part of this curtailment, NSA will delete the vast majority of previously acquired upstream internet communications as soon as practicable.


After reviewing amended Section 702 certifications and NSA procedures that implement these changes, the FISC recently issued an opinion and order, approving the renewal certifications and use of procedures, which authorize this narrowed form of Section 702 upstream internet collection. A declassification review of the FISC’s opinion and order, and the related targeting and minimization procedures, is underway.

A quick review: under Section 702 of the Patriot Act, the NSA seizes a copy of all communications moving through a telco — think e-mail and such — and searches it for particular senders, receivers, and — until recently — key words. This pretty clearly violates the Fourth Amendment, and groups like the EFF have been fighting the NSA in court about this for years. The NSA has also had problems in the FISA court about these searches, and cites “inadvertent compliance incidents” related to this.

We might learn more about this change. Again, from the NSA’s statement:

After reviewing amended Section 702 certifications and NSA procedures that implement these changes, the FISC recently issued an opinion and order, approving the renewal certifications and use of procedures, which authorize this narrowed form of Section 702 upstream internet collection. A declassification review of the FISC’s opinion and order, and the related targeting and minimization procedures, is underway.

And the EFF is still fighting for more NSA surveillance reforms.