Tag Archives: Mega

Google Asked to Delist Pirate Movie Sites, ISPs Asked to Block Them

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/google-asked-to-delist-pirate-movie-sites-isps-asked-to-block-them-171018/

After seizing several servers operated by popular private music tracker What.cd, last November French police went after a much bigger target.

Boasting millions of regular visitors, Zone-Telechargement (Zone-Download) was ranked the 11th most-visited website in the whole of the country. The site offered direct downloads of a wide variety of pirated content, including films, series, games, and music. Until the French Gendarmerie shut it down, that is.

After being founded in 2011 and enjoying huge growth following the 2012 raids against Megaupload, the Zone-Telechargement ‘brand’ was still popular with French users, despite the closure of the platform. It, therefore, came as no surprise that the site was quickly cloned by an unknown party and relaunched as Zone-Telechargement.ws.

The site has been doing extremely well following its makeover. To the annoyance of copyright holders, SimilarWeb reports the platform as France’s 37th most popular site with around 58 million visitors per month. That’s a huge achievement in less than 12 months.

Now, however, the site is receiving more unwanted attention. PCInpact says it has received information that several movie-focused organizations including the French National Film Center are requesting tough action against the site.

The National Federation of Film Distributors, the Video Publishing Union, the Association of Independent Producers and the Producers Union are all demanding the blocking of Zone-Telechargement by several local ISPs, alongside its delisting from search results.

The publication mentions four Internet service providers – Free, Numericable, Bouygues Telecom, and Orange – plus Google on the search engine front. At this stage, other search companies, such as Microsoft’s Bing, are not reported as part of the action.

In addition to Zone-Telechargement, several other ‘pirate’ sites (Papystreaming.org, Sokrostream.cc and Zonetelechargement.su, another site playing on the popular brand) are included in the legal process. All are described as “structurally infringing” by the complaining movie outfits, PCInpact notes.

The legal proceedings against the sites are based in Article 336-2 of the Intellectual Property Code. It’s ground already trodden by movie companies who following a 2011 complaint, achieved victory in 2013 against several Allostreaming-linked sites.

In that case, the High Court of Paris ordered ISPs, several of which appear in the current action, to “implement all appropriate means including blocking” to prevent access to the infringing sites.

The Court also ordered Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo to “take all necessary measures to prevent the occurrence on their services of any results referring to any of the sites” on their platforms.

Also of interest is that the action targets a service called DL-Protecte.com, which according to local anti-piracy agency HADOPI, makes it difficult for rightsholders to locate infringing content while at the same time generates more revenue for pirate sites.

A judgment is expected in “several months.”

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

Kim Dotcom Plots Hollywood Execs’ Downfall in Wake of Weinstein Scandal

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-plots-hollywood-execs-downfall-in-wake-of-weinstein-scandal-171011/

It has been nothing short of a disastrous week for movie mogul Harvey Weinstein.

Accused of sexual abuse and harassment by a string of actresses, the latest including Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow, the 65-year-old is having his life taken apart.

This week, the influential producer was fired by his own The Weinstein Company, which is now seeking to change its name. And yesterday, following allegations of rape made in The New Yorker magazine, his wife, designer Georgina Chapman, announced she was leaving the Miramax co-founder.

“My heart breaks for all the women who have suffered tremendous pain because of these unforgivable actions,” the 41-year-old told People magazine.

As the scandal continues and more victims come forward, there are signs of a general emboldening of women in Hollywood, some of whom are publicly speaking out about their own experiences. If that continues to gain momentum – and the opportunity is certainly there – one man with his own experiences of Hollywood’s wrath wants to play a prominent role.

“Just the beginning. Sexual abuse and slavery by the Hollywood elites is as common as dirt. Tsunami,” Kim Dotcom wrote on Twitter.

Dotcom initially suggested that via a website, victims of Hollywood abuse could share their stories anonymously, shining light on a topic that is often shrouded in fear and secrecy. But soon the idea was growing legs.

“Looking for a Los Angeles law firm willing to represent hundreds of sexual abuse victims of Hollywood elites, pro-bono. I’ll find funding,” he said.

Within hours, Dotcom announced that he’d found lawyers in the US who are willing to help victims, for free.

“I had talks with Hollywood lawyers. Found a big law firm willing to represent sexual abuse victims, for free. Next, the website,” he teased.

It’s not hard to see why Dotcom is making this battle his own. Aside from any empathy he feels towards victims on a personal level, he sees his family as kindred spirits, people who have also felt the wrath of Hollywood executives.

That being said, the Megaupload founder is extremely clear that framing this as revenge or a personal vendetta would be not only wrong, but also disrespectful to the victims of abuse.

“I want to help victims because I’m a victim,” he told TorrentFreak.

“I’m an abuse victim of Hollywood, not sexual abuse, but certainly abuse of power. It’s time to shine some light on those Hollywood elites who think they are above the law and untouchable.”

Dotcom told NZ Herald that people like Harvey Weinstein rub shoulders with the great and the good, hoping to influence decision-makers for their own personal gain. It’s something Dotcom, his family, and his colleagues have felt the effects of.

“They dine with presidents, donate millions to powerful politicians and buy favors like tax breaks and new copyright legislation, even the Megaupload raid. They think they can destroy lives and businesses with impunity. They think they can get away with anything. But they can’t. We’ll teach them,” he warned.

The Megaupload founder says he has both “the motive and the resources” to help victims and he’s promising to do that with proven skills. Ironically, many of these have been honed as a direct result of Hollywood’s attack on Megaupload and Dotcom’s relentless drive to bounce back with new sites like Mega and his latest K.im / Bitcache project.

“I’m an experienced fundraiser. A high traffic crowdfunding campaign for this cause can raise millions. The costs won’t be an issue,” Dotcom informs TF. “There seems to be an appetite for these cases because defendants usually settle quickly. I have calls with LA firms today and tomorrow.

“Just the beginning. Watch me,” he concludes.

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

Private Torrent Sites Allow Users to Mine Cryptocurrency for Upload Credit

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/private-torrent-sites-allow-users-to-mine-cryptocurrency-for-upload-credit-171008/

Ever since The Pirate Bay crew added a cryptocurrency miner to their site last month, the debate over user mining has sizzled away in the background.

The basic premise is that a piece of software embedded in a website runs on a user’s machine, utilizing its CPU cycles in order to generate revenue for the site in question. But not everyone likes it.

The main problem has centered around consent. While some sites are giving users the option of whether to be involved or not, others simply run the miner without asking. This week, one site operator suggested to TF that since no one asks whether they can run “shitty” ads on a person’s machine, why should they ask permission to mine?

It’s a controversial point, but it would be hard to find users agreeing on either front. They almost universally insist on consent, wherever possible. That’s why when someone comes up with something innovative to solve a problem, it catches the eye.

Earlier this week a user on Reddit posted a screenshot of a fairly well known private tracker. The site had implemented a mining solution not dissimilar to that appearing on other similar platforms. This one, however, gives the user something back.

Mining for coins – with a twist

First of all, it’s important to note the implementation. The decision to mine is completely under the control of the user, with buttons to start or stop mining. There are even additional controls for how many CPU threads to commit alongside a percentage utilization selector. While still early days, that all sounds pretty fair.

Where this gets even more interesting is how this currency mining affects so-called “upload credit”, an important commodity on a private tracker without which users can be prevented from downloading any content at all.

Very quickly: when BitTorrent users download content, they simultaneously upload to other users too. The idea is that they download X megabytes and upload the same number (at least) to other users, to ensure that everyone in a torrent swarm (a number of users sharing together) gets a piece of the action, aka the content in question.

The amount of content downloaded and uploaded on a private tracker is monitored and documented by the site. If a user has 1TB downloaded and 2TB uploaded, for example, he has 1TB in credit. In basic terms, this means he can download at least 1TB of additional content before he goes into deficit, a position undesirable on a private tracker.

Now, getting more “upload credit” can be as simple as uploading more, but some users find that difficult, either due to the way a tracker’s economy works or simply due to not having resources. If this is the case, some sites allow people to donate real money to receive “upload credit”. On the tracker highlighted in the mining example above, however, it’s possible to virtually ‘trade-in’ some of the mining effort instead.

Tracker politics aside (some people believe this is simply a cash grab opportunity), from a technical standpoint the prospect is quite intriguing.

In a way, the current private tracker system allows users to “mine” upload credits by donating bandwidth to other users of the site. Now they have the opportunity to mine an actual cryptocurrency on the tracker and have some of it converted back into the tracker’s native ‘currency’ – upload credit – which can only be ‘spent’ on the site. Meanwhile, the site’s operator can make a few bucks towards site maintenance.

Another example showing how innovative these mining implementations can be was posted by a member of a second private tracker. Although it’s unclear whether mining is forced or optional, there appears to be complete transparency for the benefit of the user.

The mining ‘Top 10’ on a private tracker

In addition to displaying the total number of users mining and the hashes solved per second, the site publishes a ‘Top 10’ list of users mining the most currently, and overall. Again, some people might not like the concept of users mining at all, but psychologically this is a particularly clever implementation.

Utilizing the desire of many private tracker users to be recognizable among their peers due to their contribution to the platform, the charts give a user a measurable status in the community, at least among those who care about such things. Previously these charts would list top uploaders of content but the addition of a ‘Top miner’ category certainly adds some additional spice to the mix.

Mining is a controversial topic which isn’t likely to go away anytime soon. But, for all its faults, it’s still a way for sites to generate revenue, away from the pitfalls of increasingly hostile and easy-to-trace alternative payment systems. The Pirate Bay may have set the cat among the pigeons last month, but it also gave the old gray matter a boost too.

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

Supreme Court Denies Kim Dotcom’s Petition Over Seized Millions

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/supreme-court-denies-kim-dotcoms-petition-over-seized-millions-171002/

megaupload-logoFollowing the 2012 raid on Megaupload and Kim Dotcom, U.S. and New Zealand authorities seized millions of dollars in cash and other property.

Claiming the assets were obtained through copyright and money laundering crimes, the U.S. Government launched a separate civil action in which it asked the court to forfeit the bank accounts, cars, and other seized possessions of the Megaupload defendants.

The U.S. branded Dotcom and his colleagues as “fugitives” and won their case. Dotcom’s legal team quickly appealed this verdict, but lost once more at the Fourth Circuit appeals court.

Dotcom then petitioned the US Supreme Court to hear the case.

The crux of the case is whether or not the District Court’s order to forfeit an estimated $67 million in assets was right. The defense held that Dotcom and the other Megaupload defendants were wrongfully labeled as fugitives by the Department of Justice, and wanted the ruling overturned.

The Supreme Court, however, decided not to hear the case, it announced today. The news comes as a setback to Megaupload’s legal team, who had hoped for a better outcome.

“We are disappointed in the US Supreme Court’s denial of the Cert Petition – it is a bad day for due process and international treaties,” Ira Rothken, Kim Dotcom’s counsel, informs TorrentFreak.

“Kim Dotcom has never been to the United States, is presumed innocent, and is lawfully opposing extradition under the US – New Zealand Treaty – yet the US by merely labeling him as a fugitive gets a judgment to take all of his assets with no due process.”

The Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case doesn’t mean that the assets are all lost. Many of the funds are located abroad in New Zealand and Hong Kong, and the defense will now focus its efforts on these jurisdictions.

“The New Zealand and Hong Kong courts, who have authority over the assets, will now need to weigh in on this issue and we are cautiously optimistic that they will take a dim view of the Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine and oppose US efforts to seize such assets,” Rothken says.

The actions of the US Department of Justice violate the prohibition against double jeopardy in the US – New Zealand extradition process, Dotcom’s legal team argues.

With the assets forfeiture, the Megaupload defendants have now been punished for the copyright infringement allegations in the indictment. On top of this they risk a possible extradition to face a second punishment in the US, which places the defendants in double jeopardy, Rothken explains.

So, while the legal options in the United States have run out, the seized assets battle is far from over.

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

Improved Testing on the AWS Lambda Console

Post Syndicated from Orr Weinstein original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/compute/improved-testing-on-the-aws-lambda-console/

(This post has been written by Chris Tate, SDE on the Lambda Console team)

Today, AWS Lambda released three console enhancements:

  • A quicker creation flow that lets you quickly create a function with the minimum working configuration, so that you can start iterating faster.
  • A streamlined configuration page with Lambda function settings logically grouped into cards, which makes locating and making changes much easier.
  • Persisting multiple events to help test your function.

This post focuses on persisting test events, and I discuss how I’ve been using this new feature. Now when you are testing on the Lambda console, you can save up to 10 test events per function, and each event can be up to 6 megabytes in size, the maximum payload size for synchronous invocations. The events are saved for the logged-in user, so that two different users in the same account have their own set of events.

Testing Lambda functions

As a Lambda console developer, when I work on side projects at home, I sometimes use our development server. I’ve been using this new feature to test a Lambda function in one of my projects. The function is probably more complicated than it should be, because it can be triggered by an Alexa skill, Amazon CloudWatch schedule, or an Amazon API Gateway API. If you have had a similarly complicated function, you may have run into the same problem I did:  How do you test?

For quick testing, I used the console but the console used to save only one test event at a time. To work around this, my solution was a text file with three different JSON events, one for each trigger. I would copy whatever event I needed into the Lambda console, tweak it, and choose Test. This would become particularly annoying when I wanted to quickly test all three.

I also switch between my laptop and desktop depending on my mood. For that reason, I needed to make sure this text file with the events were shared in some way, as the console only locally saved one test event to the current browser. But now you don’t have to worry about any of that.

Walkthrough

In the Lambda console, go to the detail page of any function, and select Configure test events from the test events dropdown (the dropdown beside the orange test button). In the dialog box, you can manage 10 test events for your function. First, paste your Alexa trigger event in the dialog box and type an event name, such as AlexaTrigger.

Choose Create. After it saves, you see AlexaTrigger in the Test list.

When you open the dialog box again by choosing Configure test events, you are in edit mode.

To add another event, choose Create new test event. Now you can choose from a list of templates or any of your previously saved test events. This is very useful for a couple of reasons:

  • First, when you want to slightly tweak one of your existing events and still keep the earlier version intact.
  • Second, when you are not sure how to structure a particular event from an event source. You can use one of the sample event templates and tweak them to your needs. Skip it when you know what your event should be.

Paste in your CloudWatch schedule event, give it a name, and choose Create. Repeat for API Gateway.

Now that you have three events saved, you can quickly switch between them and repeatedly test. Furthermore, if you’re on your desktop but you created the test events on your laptop, there’s no problem. You can still see all your events and you can switch back and forth seamlessly between different computers.

Conclusion

This feature should allow you to more easily test your Lambda functions through the console. If you have more suggestions, add a comment to this post or submit feedback through the console. We actually read the feedback, believe it!

Football Coach Retweets, Gets Sued for Copyright Infringement

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/football-coach-retweets-gets-sued-for-copyright-infringement-170928/

When copyright infringement lawsuits hit the US courts, there’s often a serious case at hand. Whether that’s the sharing of a leaked movie online or indeed the mass infringement that allegedly took place on Megaupload, there’s usually something quite meaty to discuss.

A lawsuit filed this week in a Pennsylvania federal court certainly provides the later, but without managing to be much more than a fairly trivial matter in the first instance.

The case was filed by sports psychologist and author Dr. Keith Bell. It begins by describing Bell as an “internationally recognized performance consultant” who has worked with 500 teams, including the Olympic and national teams for the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Fiji, and the Cayman Islands.

Bell is further described as a successful speaker, athlete and coach; “A four-time
collegiate All-American swimmer, a holder of numerous world and national masters swim records, and has coached several collegiate, high school, and private swim teams to competitive success.”

At the heart of the lawsuit is a book that Bell published in 1982, entitled Winning Isn’t Normal.

“The book has enjoyed substantial acclaim, distribution and publicity. Dr. Bell is the sole author of this work, and continues to own all rights in the work,” the lawsuit (pdf) reads.

Bell claims that on or about November 6, 2015, King’s College head football coach Jeffery Knarr retweeted a tweet that was initially posted from @NSUBaseball32, a Twitter account operated by Northeastern State University’s RiverHawks baseball team. The retweet, as shown in the lawsuit, can be seen below.

The retweet that sparked the lawsuit

“The post was made without authorization from Dr. Bell and without attribution
to Dr. Bell,” the lawsuit reads.

“Neither Defendant King’s College nor Defendant Jeffery Knarr contacted Dr.
Bell to request permission to use Dr. Bell’s copyrighted work. As of November 14, 2015, the post had received 206 ‘Retweets’ and 189 ‘Likes.’ Due to the globally accessible nature of Twitter, the post was accessible by Internet users across the world.”

Bell says he sent a cease and desist letter to NSU in September 2016 and shortly thereafter NSU removed the post, which removed the retweets. However, this meant that Knarr’s retweet had been online for “at least” 10 months and 21 days.

To put the icing on the cake, Bell also holds the trademark to the phrase “Winning Isn’t Normal”, so he’s suing Knarr and his King’s College employer for trademark infringement too.

“The Defendants included Plaintiff’s trademark twice in the Twitter post. The first instance was as the title of the post, with the mark shown in letters which
were emphasized by being capitalized, bold, and underlined,” the lawsuit notes.

“The second instance was at the end of the post, with the mark shown in letters which were emphasized by being capitalized, bold, underlined, and followed by three
exclamation points.”

Describing what appears to be a casual retweet as “willful, intentional and purposeful” infringement carried out “in disregard of and with indifference to Plaintiff’s rights,” Bell demands damages and attorneys fees from Knarr and his employer.

“As a direct and proximate result of said infringement by Defendants, Plaintiff is
entitled to damages in an amount to be proven at trial,” the lawsuit concludes.

Since the page from the book retweeted by Knarr is a small portion of the overall work, there may be a fair use defense. Nevertheless, defending this kind of suit is never cheap, so it’s probably fair to say there will already be a considerable amount of regret among the defendants at ever having set eyes on Bell’s 35-year-old book.

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

Julia Reda MEP Likened to Nazi in Sweeping Anti-Pirate Rant

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/julia-reda-mep-likened-to-nazi-in-sweeping-anti-pirate-rant-170926/

The debate over copyright and enforcement thereof is often polarized, with staunch supporters on one side, objectors firmly on the other, and never the twain shall meet.

As a result, there have been some heated battles over the years, with pro-copyright bodies accusing pirates of theft and pirates accusing pro-copyright bodies of monopolistic tendencies. While neither claim is particularly pleasant, they have become staples of this prolonged war of words and as such, many have become desensitized to their original impact.

This morning, however, musician and staunch pro-copyright activist David Lowery published an article which pours huge amounts of gas on the fire. The headline goes straight for the jugular, asking: Why is it Every Time We Turn Over a Pirate Rock White Nationalists, Nazi’s and Bigots Scurry Out?

Lowery’s opening gambit in his piece on The Trichordist is that one only has to scratch below the surface of the torrent and piracy world in order to find people aligned with the above-mentioned groups.

“Why is it every time we dig a little deeper into the pro-piracy and torrenting movement we find key figures associated with ‘white nationalists,’ Nazi memorabilia collectors, actual Nazis or other similar bigots? And why on earth do politicians, journalists and academics sing the praises of these people?” Lowery asks.

To prove his point, the Camper Van Beethoven musician digs up the fact that former Pirate Bay financier Carl Lündstrom had some fairly unsavory neo-fascist views. While this is not in doubt, Lowery is about 10 tens years too late if he wants to tar The Pirate Bay with the extremist brush.

“It’s called guilt by association,” Pirate Bay co-founder Peter Sunde explained in 2007.

“One of our previous ISPs [owned by Lündstrom] (with clients like The Red Cross, Save the Children foundation etc) gave us cheap bandwidth since one of the guys in TPB worked there; and one of the owners [has a reputation] for his political opinions. That does NOT make us in any way associated to what political views anyone else might or might not have.”

After dealing with TPB but failing to include the above explanation, Lowery moves on to a more recent target, Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom. Dotcom owns an extremely rare signed copy of Hitler’s autobiographical manifesto, Mein Kampf (My Struggle) and once wore a German World War II helmet. It’s a mistake Prince Harry made in 2005 too.

“I’ve bought memorabilia from Churchill, from Stalin, from Hitler,” Dotcom said in response to the historical allegations. “Let me make absolutely clear, OK. I’m not buying into the Nazi ideology. I’m totally against what the Nazis did.”

With Dotcom dealt with, Lowery then turns his attention to the German Pirate Party’s Julia Reda. As a Member of the European Parliament, Reda has made it her mission to deal with overreaching copyright law, which has made her a bit of a target. That being said, would anyone really try to shoehorn her into the “White Nationalists, Nazi’s and Bigots” bracket?

They would.

In his piece, Lowery highlights comments made by Reda last year, when she complained about the copyright situation developing around the diary written by Anne Frank, which detailed the horrors of living in occupied countries during World War II.

Anne Frank died in 1945 which means that the book was elevated into the public domain in the Netherlands on January 1, 2016, 70 years after her death. A copy was made available at Wikisource, a digital library of free texts maintained by the Wikimedia Foundation, which also operates Wikipedia.

However, in early February that same year, Anne Frank’s diary became unavailable, since U.S. copyright law dictates that works are protected for 95 years from date of publication.

“Today, in an unfortunate example of the overreach of the United States’ current copyright law, the Wikimedia Foundation removed the Dutch-language text of The Diary of a Young Girl,” said Jacob Rogers, Legal Counsel for the Wikimedia Foundation

“We took this action to comply with the United States’ Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), as we believe the diary is still under US copyright protection under the law as it is currently written,” he added.

Lowery ignores this background in its entirety. He actually ignores all of it in an effort to paint a picture of Reda engaging in some far-right agenda. Lowery even places emphasis on Reda’s nationality to force his point home.

“I don’t really know what to make of her except to say that this German politician really should find something other than the Anne Frank Diary and the Anne Frank Foundation to use as an example of a work that should be freely available in the public domain,” he writes.

“Think of all the copyrighted works out there for which she might reasonably argue a claim of public domain. She decided to pick the Anne Frank diary. Hmm.”

Lowery then accuses Reda of urging people on Twitter to pirate the book, in order to hurt the fight against anti-Semitism and somehow deprive Jewish people of an income.

“After all sales of the book are used by the Anne Frank Foundation to fight anti-semitism. It’s really quite a bad look for any MP, German or not. (Even if it is just the make-believe LARPing RPG EU Parliament),” Lowery writes.

“Or maybe that is the point? Defund the Anne Frank Foundation. Cause you know I read in the twittersphere that copyright producing media conglomerates are controlled by you-know-who.”

At this point, Lowery moves on to Fight For the Future, stating that their lack of racial diversity caused them to stumble into a racially charged copyright dispute involving the famous Martin Luther King speech.

The whole article can be read here but hopefully, most readers will recognize that America needs less division right now, not more hatred.

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

No, Google Drive is Definitely Not The New Pirate Bay

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/no-google-drive-is-definitely-not-the-new-pirate-bay-170910/

Running close to two decades old, the world of true mainstream file-sharing is less of a mystery to the general public than it’s ever been.

Most people now understand the concept of shifting files from one place to another, and a significant majority will be aware of the opportunities to do so with infringing content.

Unsurprisingly, this is a major thorn in the side of rightsholders all over the world, who have been scrambling since the turn of the century in a considerable effort to stem the tide. The results of their work have varied, with some sectors hit harder than others.

One area that has taken a bit of a battering recently involves the dominant peer-to-peer platforms reliant on underlying BitTorrent transfers. Several large-scale sites have shut down recently, not least KickassTorrents, Torrentz, and ExtraTorrent, raising questions of what bad news may arrive next for inhabitants of Torrent Land.

Of course, like any other Internet-related activity, sharing has continued to evolve over the years, with streaming and cloud-hosting now a major hit with consumers. In the main, sites which skirt the borders of legality have been the major hosting and streaming players over the years, but more recently it’s become clear that even the most legitimate companies can become unwittingly involved in the piracy scene.

As reported here on TF back in 2014 and again several times this year (1,2,3), cloud-hosting services operated by Google, including Google Drive, are being used to store and distribute pirate content.

That news was echoed again this week, with a report on Gadgets360 reiterating that Google Drive is still being used for movie piracy. What followed were a string of follow up reports, some of which declared Google’s service to be ‘The New Pirate Bay.’

No. Just no.

While it’s always tempting for publications to squeeze a reference to The Pirate Bay into a piracy article due to the site’s popularity, it’s particularly out of place in this comparison. In no way, shape, or form can a centralized store of data like Google Drive ever replace the underlying technology of sites like The Pirate Bay.

While the casual pirate might love the idea of streaming a movie with a couple of clicks to a browser of his or her choice, the weakness of the cloud system cannot be understated. To begin with, anything hosted by Google is vulnerable to immediate takedown on demand, usually within a matter of hours.

“Google Drive has a variety of piracy counter-measures in place,” a spokesperson told Mashable this week, “and we are continuously working to improve our protections to prevent piracy across all of our products.”

When will we ever hear anything like that from The Pirate Bay? Answer: When hell freezes over. But it’s not just compliance with takedown requests that make Google Drive-hosted files vulnerable.

At the point Google Drive responds to a takedown request, it takes down the actual file. On the other hand, even if Pirate Bay responded to notices (which it doesn’t), it would be unable to do anything about the sharing going on underneath. Removing a torrent file or magnet link from TPB does nothing to negatively affect the decentralized swarm of people sharing files among themselves. Those files stay intact and sharing continues, no matter what happens to the links above.

Importantly, people sharing using BitTorrent do so without any need for central servers – the whole process is decentralized as long as a user can lay his or her hands on a torrent file or magnet link. Those using Google Drive, however, rely on a totally centralized system, where not only is Google king, but it can and will stop the entire party after receiving a few lines of text from a rightsholder.

There is a very good reason why sites like The Pirate Bay have been around for close to 15 years while platforms such as Megaupload, Hotfile, Rapidshare, and similar platforms have all met their makers. File-hosting platforms are expensive-to-run warehouses full of files, each of which brings direct liability for their hosts, once they’re made aware that those files are infringing. These days the choice is clear – take the files down or get brought down, it’s as simple as that.

The Pirate Bay, on the other hand, is nothing more than a treasure map (albeit a valuable one) that points the way to content spread all around the globe in the most decentralized way possible. There are no files to delete, no content to disappear. Comparing a vulnerable Google Drive to this kind of robust system couldn’t be further from the mark.

That being said, this is the way things are going. The cloud, it seems, is here to stay in all its forms. Everyone has access to it and uploading content is easier – much easier – than uploading it to a BitTorrent network. A Google Drive upload is simplicity itself for anyone with a mouse and a file; the same cannot be said about The Pirate Bay.

For this reason alone, platforms like Google Drive and the many dozens of others offering a similar service will continue to become havens for pirated content, until the next big round of legislative change. At the moment, each piece of content has to be removed individually but in the future, it’s possible that pre-emptive filters will kill uploads of pirated content before they see the light of day.

When this comes to pass, millions of people will understand why Google Drive, with its bots checking every file upload for alleged infringement, is not The Pirate Bay. At this point, if people have left it too long, it might be too late to reinvigorate BitTorrent networks to their former glory.

People will try to rebuild them, of course, but realizing why they shouldn’t have been left behind at all is probably the best protection.

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

Perfect 10 Takes Giganews to Supreme Court, Says It’s Worse Than Megaupload

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/perfect-10-takes-giganews-supreme-court-says-worse-megaupload-170906/

Adult publisher Perfect 10 has developed a reputation for being a serial copyright litigant.

Over the years the company targeted a number of high-profile defendants, including Google, Amazon, Mastercard, and Visa. Around two dozen of Perfect 10’s lawsuits ended in cash settlements and defaults, in the publisher’s favor.

Perhaps buoyed by this success, the company went after Usenet provider Giganews but instead of a company willing to roll over, Perfect 10 found a highly defensive and indeed aggressive opponent. The initial copyright case filed by Perfect 10 alleged that Giganews effectively sold access to Perfect 10 content but things went badly for the publisher.

In November 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California found that Giganews was not liable for the infringing activities of its users. Perfect 10 was ordered to pay Giganews $5.6m in attorney’s fees and costs. Perfect 10 lost again at the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

As a result of these failed actions, Giganews is owned millions by Perfect 10 but the publisher has thus far refused to pay up. That resulted in Giganews filing a $20m lawsuit, accusing Perfect 10 and President Dr. Norman Zada of fraud.

With all this litigation boiling around in the background and Perfect 10 already bankrupt as a result, one might think the story would be near to a conclusion. That doesn’t seem to be the case. In a fresh announcement, Perfect 10 says it has now appealed its case to the US Supreme Court.

“This is an extraordinarily important case, because for the first time, an appellate court has allowed defendants to copy and sell movies, songs, images, and other copyrighted works, without permission or payment to copyright holders,” says Zada.

“In this particular case, evidence was presented that defendants were copying and selling access to approximately 25,000 terabytes of unlicensed movies, songs, images, software, and magazines.”

Referencing an Amicus brief previously filed by the RIAA which described Giganews as “blatant copyright pirates,” Perfect 10 accuses the Ninth Circuit of allowing Giganews to copy and sell trillions of dollars of other people’s intellectual property “because their copying and selling was done in an automated fashion using a computer.”

Noting that “everything is done via computer” these days and with an undertone that the ruling encouraged others to infringe, Perfect 10 says there are now 88 companies similar to Giganews which rely on the automation defense to commit infringement – even involving content owned by people in the US Government.

“These exploiters of other people’s property are fearless. They are copying and selling access to pirated versions of pretty much every movie ever made, including films co-produced by treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin,” Nada says.

“You would think the justice department would do something to protect the viability of this nation’s movie and recording studios, as unfettered piracy harms jobs and tax revenues, but they have done nothing.”

But Zada doesn’t stop at blaming Usenet services, the California District Court, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Department of Justice for his problems – Congress is to blame too.

“Copyright holders have nowhere to turn other than the Federal courts, whose judges are ridiculously overworked. For years, Congress has failed to provide the Federal courts with adequate funding. As a result, judges can make mistakes,” he adds.

For Zada, those mistakes are particularly notable, particularly since at least one other super high-profile company was shut down in the most aggressive manner possible for allegedly being involved in less piracy than Giganews.

Pointing to the now-infamous Megaupload case, Perfect 10 notes that the Department of Justice completely shut that operation down, filing charges of criminal copyright infringement against Kim Dotcom and seizing $175 million “for selling access to movies and songs which they did not own.”

“Perfect 10 provided evidence that [Giganews] offered more than 200 times as many full length movies as did megaupload.com. But our evidence fell on deaf ears,” Zada complains.

In contrast, Perfect 10 adds, a California District Court found that Giganews had done nothing wrong, allowed it to continue copying and selling access to Perfect 10’s content, and awarded the Usenet provider $5.63m in attorneys fees.

“Prior to this case, no court had ever awarded fees to an alleged infringer, unless they were found to either own the copyrights at issue, or established a fair use defense. Neither was the case here,” Zada adds.

While Perfect 10 has filed a petition with the Supreme Court, the odds of being granted a review are particularly small. Only time will tell how this case will end, but it seems unlikely that the adult publisher will enjoy a happy ending, one in which it doesn’t have to pay Giganews millions of dollars in attorney’s fees.

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

Kim Dotcom Wants K.im to Trigger a “Copyright Revolution”

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-wants-k-im-to-trigger-a-copyright-revolution-170831/

For many people Kim Dotcom is synonymous with Megaupload, the file-sharing giant that was taken down by the U.S. Government early 2012.

While Megaupload is no more, the New Zealand Internet entrepreneur is working on a new file-sharing site. Initially dubbed Megaupload 2, the new service will be called K.im, and it will be quite different from its predecessor.

This week Dotcom, who’s officially the chief “evangelist” of the service, showed a demo to a few thousand people revealing more about what it’s going to offer.

K.im is not a central hosting service, quite the contrary. It will allow users to upload content and distribute it to dozens of other services, including Dropbox, Google, Reddit, Storj, and even torrent sites.

The files are distributed across the Internet where they can be accessed freely. However, there is a catch. The uploaders set a price for each download and people who want a copy can only unlock it through the K.im app or browser addon, after they’ve paid.

Pick your price

K.im, paired with Bitcache, is basically a micropayment solution. It allows creators to charge the public for everything they upload. Every download is tied to a Bitcoin transaction, turning files into their own “stores.”

Kim Dotcom tells TorrentFreak that he sees the service as a copyright revolution. It should be a win-win solution for independent creators, rightsholders, and people who are used to pirating stuff.

“I’m working for both sides. For the copyright holders and also for the people who what to pay for content but have been geo-blocked and then are forced to download for free,” Dotcom says.

Like any other site that allows user uploaded content, K.im can also be used by pirates who want to charge a small fee for spreading infringing content. This is something Dotcom is aware of, but he has a solution in mind.

Much like YouTube, which allows rightsholders to “monetize” videos that use their work, K.im will provide an option to claim pirated content. Rightsholders can then change the price and all revenue will go to them.

So, if someone uploads a pirated copy of the Game of Thrones season finale through K.im, HBO can claim that file, charge an appropriate fee, and profit from it. The uploader, meanwhile, maintains his privacy.

“It is the holy grail of copyright enforcement. It is my gift to Hollywood, the movie studios, and everyone else,” Dotcom says.

Dotcom believes that piracy is in large part caused by an availability problem. People can often not find the content they’re looking for so it’s K.im’s goal to distribute files as widely as possible. This includes several torrent sites, which are currently featured in the demo.

Torrent uploads?

Interestingly, it will be hard to upload content to sites such as YTS, EZTV, KickassTorrents, and RARBG, as they’ve been shut down or don’t allow user uploads. However, Dotcom stresses that the names are just examples, and that they are still working on partnering with various sites.

Whether torrent sites will be eager to cooperate has yet to be seen. It’s possible that the encrypted files, which can’t be opened without paying, will be seen as “spam” by traditional torrent sites.

Also, from a user perspective, one has to wonder how many people are willing to pay for something if they set out to pirate it. After all, there will always be plenty of free options for those who refuse to or can’t pay.

Dotcom, however, is convinced that K.im can create a “copyright revolution.” He stresses that site owners and uploaders can greatly benefit from it as they receive affiliate fees, even after a pirated file is claimed by a rightsholder.

In addition, he says it will revolutionize copyright enforcement, as copyright holders can monetize the work of pirates. That is, if they are willing to work with the service.

“Rightsholders can turn piracy traffic into revenue and users can access the content on any platform. Since every file is a store, it doesn’t matter where it ends up,” Dotcom says.

Dotcom does have a very valid point here. Many people have simply grown used to pirating because it’s much more convenient than using a dozen different services. In Dotcom’s vision, people can just use one site to access everything.

The ideas don’t stop at sharing files either. In the future, Dotcom also wants to use the micropayment option to offer YouTubers and media organizations to accept payments from the public, BBC notes.

There’s still a long way to go before K.im and Bitcache go public though. The expected launch date is not final yet, but the services are expected to go live in mid-to-late 2018.

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

Mayweather vs. McGregor Caused Massive Surge in Streaming Piracy

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/mayweather-vs-mcgregor-caused-massive-surge-in-streaming-piracy-170828/

The boxing matchup between Mayweather and McGregor was an unusual sporting event in many ways, not least financially.

With close to a billion dollars at stake, various rightsholders did their best to ensure that piracy was kept to a minimum.

However, despite an injunction against pirate streaming sites and mysterious tracking codes embedded in streams, they were easily defeated.

New data published by Canadian broadband management company Sandvine reveals that there was a massive surge in live streaming piracy around the fight. The company monitored traffic at a fixed access tier-1 network in North America and found that many people tuned into pirate IPTV services.

Generally speaking, a single pirate live streaming channel never accounts for more than five percent of the total bandwidth generated by these unauthorized broadcasts. However, it was quite different last weekend.

“On Saturday that all changed, as the report below shows: at its peak, the pirated UFC and PPV channels for the Mayweather/McGregor fight accounted for 50% of all pirate TV streams,” Sandvine notes.

Streaming piracy boost

According to Sandvine, roughly 8% of the sampled subscribers have pirate live streaming devices at their homes and many of these were tuning into the fight between Mayweather and McGregor.

Towards the end of the event, 3.5 percent of total bandwidth consumed on the network came from these pirate streams. To give an illustration of the traffic that was generated, Sandvine notes that the unauthorized boxing streams totaled more traffic than Twitch, Facebook, and Instagram together.

Streaming piracy market share

While the figures are based on a sample of North American fixed access network traffic, Sandvine believes that it provides a good indication of the total traffic. In the near future, the company plans to release more details on this pirate streaming trend, to better understand what’s going on.

Sandvine informed TorrentFreak that the current numbers apply to pirate IPTV services, not the live streams that people watch in their regular browser.

This means that the complete piracy numbers are even higher. There is a wide variety of live streaming options available to pirates, and tracking outfit Irdeto estimates that close to 3 million people watched streams through YouTube, Facebook, Periscope and various pirate streaming sites.

It’s safe to say that in theory, the rightsholders could have made millions more. But then again, with hundreds of millions fresh in the bank, they’re not doing too badly at the moment.

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

Mystery Codes Appear in ‘Pirate’ Mayweather v McGregor Streams

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/mystery-codes-appear-in-pirate-mayweather-v-mcgregor-streams-170827/

For many hardcore boxing fans, it was the fight that should never have taken place. But last night, undefeated legend Floyd Mayweather stepped into the ring against UFC lightweight champion and supposed boxing novice, Conor McGregor.

A known slow starter, Mayweather came out true to form, arguably losing the first three rounds to the brash Irishman who had previously promised to bounce the 40-year-old’s head off the canvas in round one. But by round 10 it was all over, with McGregor running out of gas and with no answer to Mayweather’s increasingly vicious punches. TKO Mayweather.

While viewing figures won’t be in for some time, the event is likely to have been a massive PPV success all over the world, with millions tuning in for what turned out to be a value-for-money event. But despite widespread availability, it’s likely that hundreds of thousands – maybe even millions – tuned into the fight from unofficial sources. Interestingly, some of those had a little extra something thrown in for free.

During the fight, TF received an unsubstantiated report that an unusual watermark was being embedded into streams originally broadcast by Sky Box Office in the UK. The message we received simply told us there were codes on the screen, but we were unable to get any further information from the source who had already gone offline.

Quick inquiries with two other sources watching pirate streams confirmed that codes had appeared on their screens too. One managed to take a series of photographs which are included below. (Note: portions of the code are redacted to protect the source)

The mystery sequence of numbers

The letter and number combinations briefly appeared in 20 to 23 sets of pairs, which according to the images seen by TF stayed the same throughout the broadcast. It is possible there was some variation but nothing we’ve seen suggests that. The big question, of course, is why they were put there and by whom.

According to our sources, these codes didn’t appear when the main action was taking place but when the camera turned to people in each corner. Since no digits appeared over the top of the fight itself, it might suggest that they were put there by a broadcaster, in this instance Sky Box Office, who were licensed to show the fight in the UK.

If that was indeed the case, it’s certainly possible that the sequence of numbers would allow Sky to track the illicit stream back to a subscriber and/or a set-top box tied to a particular account. Since that subscriber has then re-streamed that content back online illegally, the code would act as a homing beacon and could spell bad news for the individual involved.

The other possibility is that the codes were not put there by Sky or another official broadcaster in the chain, but by someone in the illicit streaming market. Pirate streams are vulnerable to being ‘stolen’ in much the same way that official streams are, so it’s possible that a provider wanted to keep tabs on where its streams were ending up.

The big question is why, with all the sophisticated technology available in 2017, were the watermark codes so visible? It’s possible to track content pretty much invisibly these days, so this overt display isn’t really necessary, if it was put there by professionals, that is.

Of course, by being this obvious there might be a little bit of psychological warfare at play by whoever put the codes on the screen. Or, indeed, there might be a more benign explanation relating to certain equipment used in the process.

Only time will tell, but it’s safe to say that neither Mayweather nor McGregor will be too worried, having bagged hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue from the showpiece event.

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

Entire Kim Dotcom Spying Operation Was Illegal, High Court Rules

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/entire-kim-dotcom-spying-operation-was-illegal-high-court-rules-170825/

In the months that preceded the January 2012 raid on file-storage site Megaupload, authorities in New Zealand used the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) spy agency to monitor Kim and Mona Dotcom, plus Megaupload co-defendant Bram van der Kolk.

When this fact was revealed it developed into a crisis. The GCSB was forbidden by law from conducting surveillance on its own citizens or permanent residents in the country, which led to former Prime Minister John Key later apologizing for the error.

With Dotcom determined to uncover the truth, the entrepreneur launched legal action in pursuit of the information illegally obtained by GCSB and to obtain compensation. In July, the High Court determined that Dotcom wouldn’t get access to the information but it also revealed that the scope of the spying went on much longer than previously admitted, a fact later confirmed by the police.

This raised the specter that not only did the GCSB continue to spy on Dotcom after it knew it was acting illegally, but that an earlier affidavit from a GCSB staff member was suspect.

With the saga continuing to drag on, revelations published in New Zealand this morning indicate that not only was the spying on Dotcom illegal, the entire spying operation – which included his Megaupload co-defendants – was too.

The reports are based on documents released by Lawyer Peter Spring, who is acting for Bram van der Kolk and Mathias Ortmann. Spring says that the High Court decision, which dates back to December but has only just been made available, shows that “the whole surveillance operation fell outside the authorization of the GCSB legislation as it was at the relevant time”.

Since Dotcom is a permanent resident of New Zealand, it’s long been established that the GCSB acted illegally when it spied on him. As foreigners, however, Megaupload co-defendants Finn Batato and Mathias Ortmann were previously considered valid surveillance targets.

It now transpires that the GCSB wasn’t prepared to mount a defense or reveal its methods concerning their surveillance, something which boosted the case against it.

“The circumstances of the interceptions of Messrs Ortmann and Batato’s communications are Top Secret and it has not proved possible to plead to the allegations the plaintiffs have made without revealing information which would jeopardize the national security of New Zealand,” the Court documents read.

“As a result the GCSB is deemed to have admitted the allegations in the statement of claim which relate to the manner in which the interceptions were effected.”

Speaking with RadioNZ, Grant Illingworth, a lawyer representing Ortmann and van der Kolk, said the decision calls the entire GCSB operation into doubt.

“The GCSB has now admitted that the unlawfulness was not just dependent upon residency issues, it went further. The reason it went further was because it didn’t have authorization to carry out the kind of surveillance that it was carrying out under the legislation, as it was at that time,” Illingworth said.

In comments to NZHerald, Illingworth added that the decision meant that the damages case for Ortmann and van der Kolk had come to an end. He refused to respond to questions of whether damages had been paid or a settlement reached.

He did indicate, however, that there could be implications for the battle underway to have Dotcom, Batato, Ortmann and van der Kolk extradited to the United States.

“If there was illegality in the arrest and search phase and that illegality has not previously been made known in the extradition context then it could be relevant to the extradition,” Illingworth said.

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

Pirates Leak Copy of Kim Dotcom Documentary Online

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirates-leak-copy-of-kim-dotcom-documentary-online-170824/

In recent years, we have writen dozens of articles on Kim Dotcom, Megaupload’s shutdown, and all the intrigue surrounding the case.

It’s a story worth documenting and not just in writing. This is what the people behind the documentary Kim Dotcom: Caught in the Web realized as well.

With cooperation from the mastermind behind the defunct file-sharing site, they made a thrilling documentary that captures the essence of the story, which is far from over.

This week the film was released to the wider public, made available for sale on various online platforms including iTunes and Amazon Prime. Thus far things are going well, with the movie making its way into various top charts, including a second place in the iTunes documentary category.

However, if we believe entertainment industry rhetoric, this meteoric rise will soon be all over.

Earlier today the first pirated copies of “Caught in The Web” started to appear online. It is widely available on The Pirate Bay, for example, and shows up on various other “pirate” download and streaming sites as well.

The leaked documentary

Leaks happen every day, and this one’s not any different. That being said, people who followed the Dotcom saga may appreciate the irony, since Megaupload was a popular destination for pirates as well. So, a chunk of the site’s former users probably prefers to grab a free version. To sample, of course.

This is especially true for those who hit several roadblocks in trying to access the film from official outlets. Over the past few days, some people complained that “Caught in the Web” isn’t legally available through their preferred legal channel due to geographical restrictions.

Dotcom, still accused by the US Government of depriving copyright holders of $500 million in one of the country’s largest copyright infringement cases, responded appropriately when a Twitter follower pointed this out.

Not available

“They are wondering why people are pirating? If you’re willing to pay but you can’t find it legally, why is it your or my fault?” he wrote.

“If the Megaupload documentary is only available in the US iTunes store then I totally understand if you download or stream it elsewhere,” Dotcom added in another tweet.

The documentary is available in more countries, but not in all Amazon or iTunes stores. So, with the sympathy of the documentary’s main subject, people with no legal alternatives don’t have to feel as bad when they choose to pirate it instead.

That doesn’t make it less illegal, of course, but we doubt that the makers will actively pursue people for it.

Meanwhile, the people who were tasked with distributing the film may want to have another chat with Kim Dotcom. In recent years he has repeatedly sent out a concise list of tips on how to stop piracy.

Worth a read.

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

Why that "file-copy" forensics of DNC hack is wrong

Post Syndicated from Robert Graham original http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/08/why-that-file-copy-forensics-of-dnc.html

People keep asking me about this story about how forensics “experts” have found proof the DNC hack was an inside job, because files were copied at 22-megabytes-per-second, faster than is reasonable for Internet connections.

This story is bogus.
Yes, the forensics is correct that at some point, files were copied at 22-mBps. But there’s no evidence this was the point at Internet transfer out of the DNC.
One point might from one computer to another within the DNC. Indeed, as someone experienced doing this sort of hack, it’s almost certain that at some point, such a copy happened. The computers you are able to hack into are rarely the computers that have the data you want. Instead, you have to copy the data from other computers to the hacked computer, and then exfiltrate the data out of the hacked computer.
Another point might have been from one computer to another within the hacker’s own network, after the data was stolen. As a hacker, I can tell you that I frequently do this. Indeed, as this story points out, the timestamps of the file shows that the 22-mBps copy happened months after the hack was detected.
If the 22-mBps was the copy exfiltrating data, it might not have been from inside the DNC building, but from some cloud service, as this tweet points out. Hackers usually have “staging” servers in the cloud that can talk to other cloud serves at easily 10 times the 22-mBps, even around the world. I have staging servers that will do this, and indeed, have copied files at this data rate. If the DNC had that data or backups in the cloud, this would explain it. 
My point is that while the forensic data-point is good, there’s just a zillion ways of explaining it. It’s silly to insist on only the one explanation that fits your pet theory.
As a side note, you can tell this already from the way the story is told. For example, rather than explain the evidence and let it stand on its own, the stories hype the credentials of those who believe the story, using the “appeal to authority” fallacy.

Curb Your Enthusiasm on Those HBO Leaks

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/curb-your-enthusiasm-on-those-hbo-leaks-170814/

Late July, news broke that a hacker, or hackers, had compromised the network of the American cable and television network HBO.

Those responsible contacted reporters, informing them about the prominent breach, and leaked files surfaced on the dedicated website Winter-leak.com.

The website wasn’t around for long, but last week the hackers reached out to the press again with a curated batch of new leaks shared through Mega.nz. Among other things, it contained more Game of Thrones spoilers, marketing plans, and other confidential HBO files.

Fast forward another week and there’s yet another freshly curated batch of leaks. This time it includes episodes of the highly anticipated return of ‘Curb Your Enthusiasm,’ which officially airs in October, as well as episodes from “Barry,” “Insecure” and “The Deuce,” AP reports.

These shows are part of the treasure trove of 1.5 terabytes that was taken from HBO. These and several other titles were already teased last week in a screenshot the hackers released to the press.

There’s no reason to doubt that the leaks are real, but thus far they haven’t been widely distributed. It appears that the various journalists who received the latest batch of Mega.nz links are not very eager to post them in public.

TorrentFreak scoured popular torrent sites and streaming portals for public copies of the new Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes and came up empty-handed. And we’re certainly not the only ones having trouble spotting the leaks in public.

“I searched around a lot a few hours ago and couldn’t find anything,” one Curb Your Enthusiasm watcher commented on Reddit. “Why can’t these hackers be courteous and place links?” another added.

This is quite different from the leaked episode of Game of Thrones that came out before its official release two weeks ago. That leak was not related to the HBO hack, but before the news broke in the mainstream press, thousands of copies were already available on pirate sites.

HBO, meanwhile, appears to have had enough of the continued enthusiasm the hacker is managing to generate in the press.

“We are not in communication with the hacker and we’re not going to comment every time a new piece of information is released,” a company spokesperson said.

“It has been widely reported that there was a cyber incident at HBO. The hacker may continue to drop bits and pieces of stolen information in an attempt to generate media attention. That’s a game we’re not going to participate in.”

As for the Curb Your Enthusiasm fans who were hoping for an early preview of the new season. They may have to, well… you know. For now at least.

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.

Getting Your Data into the Cloud is Just the Beginning

Post Syndicated from Andy Klein original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/cost-data-of-transfer-cloud-storage/

Total Cloud Storage Cost

Organizations should consider not just the cost of getting their data into the cloud, but also long-term costs for storage and retrieval when deciding which cloud storage solution meets their needs.

As cloud storage has become ubiquitous, organizations large and small are joining in. For larger organizations the lure of reducing capital expenses and their associated operational costs is enticing. For smaller organizations, cloud storage often replaces an unmanageable closet full of external hard drives, thumb drives, SD cards, and other devices. With terabytes or even petabytes of data, the common challenge facing organizations, large and small, is how to get their data up to the cloud.

Transferring Data to the Cloud

The obvious solution for getting your data to the cloud is to upload your data from your internal network through the internet to the cloud storage vendor you’ve selected. Cloud storage vendors don’t charge you for uploading your data to their cloud, but you, of course, have to pay your network provider and that’s where things start to get interesting. Here are a few things to consider.

  • The initial upload: Unless you are just starting out, you will have a large amount of data you want to upload to the cloud. This could be data you wish to archive or have had archived previously, for example data stored on LTO tapes or kept stored on external hard drives.
  • Pipe size: This is the amount of upload bandwidth of your network connection. This is measured in Mbps (megabits per second). Remember, your data is stored in MB (megabytes), so an upload connection of 80 Mbps will transfer no more than 10 MB of data per second and most likely a lot less.
  • Cost and caps: In some places, organizations pay a flat monthly rate for a specified level of service (speed) for internet access. In other locations, internet access is metered, or pay as you go. In either case, there can be internet service caps that limit or completely stop data transfer once you reach your contracted threshold.

One or more of these challenges has the potential to make the initial upload of your data expensive and potentially impossible. You could wait until cloud storage companies start buying up internet providers and make data upload cheap (or free with Amazon Prime!), but there is another option.

Data Transfer Devices

Given the potential challenges of using your network for the initial upload of your data to the cloud, a handful of cloud storage companies have introduced data transfer or data ingest services. Backblaze has the B2 Fireball, Amazon has Snowball (and other similar devices), and Google recently introduced their Transfer Appliance.

KLRU-TV Austin PBS uploaded their Austin City Limits musical anthology series to Backblaze using a B2 Fireball.

These services work as follows:

  • The provider sends you a portable (or somewhat portable) storage device.
  • You connect the device to your network and load some amount of data on the device over your internal network connection.
  • You return the device, loaded with your data, to the provider, who uploads your data to your cloud storage account from inside their own data center.

Data Transfer Devices Save Time

Assuming your Internet connection is a flat rate service that has no caps or limits and your organizational operations can withstand the traffic, you still may want to opt to use a data transfer service to move your data to the cloud. Why? Time. For example, if your initial data upload is 100 TB here’s how long it would take using different network upload connection speeds:

Network Speed Upload Time
10 Mbps 3 years
100 Mbps 124 days
500 Mbps 25 days
1 Gbps 12 days

This assumes you are using most of your upload connection to upload your data, which is probably not realistic if you want to stay in business. You could potentially rent a better connection or upgrade your connection permanently, both of which add to the cost of running your business.

Speaking of cost, there is of course a charge for the data transfer service that can be summarized as follows:

  • Backblaze B2 Fireball — Up to 40 TB of data per trip for $550.00 for 30 days in use at your site.
  • Amazon Snowball — up to 50 TB of data per trip for $200.00 for 10 days use at your site, plus $15/day each day in use at your site thereafter.
  • Google Transfer Appliance — up to 100 TB of data per trip for $300.00 for 10 days use at your site, plus $10/day each day in use at your site thereafter.

These prices do not include shipping, which can range from $100 to $900 depending on shipping method, location, etc.

Both Amazon and Google have transfer devices that are larger and cost more. For comparison purposes below we’ll use the three device versions listed above.

The Real Cost of Uploading Your Data

If we stopped our review at the previous paragraph and we were prepared to load up our transfer device in 10 days or less, the clear winner would be Google. But, this leaves out two very important components of any cloud storage project; the cost of storing your data and the cost of downloading your data.

Let’s look at two examples:

Example 1 — Archive 100 TB of data:

  • Use the data transfer service move 100 TB of data to the cloud storage service.
  • Accomplish the transfer within 10 days.
  • Store that 100 TB of data for 1 year.
Service Transfer Cost Cloud Storage Total
Backblaze B2 $1,650 (3 trips) $6,000 $7,650
Google Cloud $300 (1 trip) $24,000 $24,300
Amazon S3 $400 (2 trips) $25,200 $25,600

Results:

  • Using the B2 Fireball to store data in Backblaze B2 saves you $16,650 over a one-year period versus the Google solution.
  • The payback period for using a Backblaze B2 FireBall versus a Google Transfer Appliance is less than 1 month.

Example 2 — Store and use 100 TB of data:

  • Use the data transfer service to move 100 TB of data to the cloud storage service.
  • Accomplish the transfer within 10 days.
  • Store that 100 TB of data for 1 year.
  • Add 5 TB a month (on average) to the total stored.
  • Delete 2 TB a month (on average) from the total stored.
  • Download 10 TB a month (on average) from the total stored.
Service Transfer Cost Cloud Storage Total
Backblaze B2 $1,650 (3 trips) $9,570 $11,220
Google Cloud $300 (1 trip) $39,684 $39,984
Amazon S3 $400 (2 trips) $36,114 $36,514

Results:

  • Using the B2 Fireball to store data in Backblaze B2 saves you $28,764 over a one-year period versus the Google solution.
  • The payback period for using a Backblaze B2 FireBall versus a Google Transfer Appliance is less than 1 month.

Notes:

  • All prices listed are based on list prices from the vendor websites as of the date of this blog post.
  • We are accomplishing the transfer of your data to the device within the 10 day “free” period specified by Amazon and Google.
  • We are comparing cloud storage services that have similar performance. For example, once the data is uploaded, it is readily available for download. The data is also available for access via a Web GUI, CLI, API, and/or various applications integrated with the cloud storage service. Multiple versions of files can be kept as desired. Files can be deleted any time.

To be fair, it requires Backblaze three trips to move 100 TB while it only takes 1 trip for the Google Transfer Appliance. This adds some cost to prepare, monitor, and ship three B2 Fireballs versus one Transfer Appliance. Even with that added cost, the Backblaze B2 solution will still be significantly less expensive over the one year period and beyond.

Have a Data Transfer Device Owner

Before you run out and order a transfer device, make sure the transfer process is someone’s job once the device arrives at your organization. Filling a transfer device should only take a few days, but if it is forgotten, you’ll find you’ve had the device for 2 or 3 weeks. While that’s not much of a problem with a B2 Fireball, it could start to get expensive otherwise.

Just the Beginning

As with most “new” technologies and services, you can expect other companies to jump in and provide various data ingest services. The cost will get cheaper or even free as cloud storage companies race to capture and lock up the data you have kept locally all these years. When you are evaluating cloud storage solutions, it’s best to look past the data ingest loss-leader price, and spend a few minutes to calculate the long-term cost of storing and using your data.

The post Getting Your Data into the Cloud is Just the Beginning appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

Announcing the Raspberry Jam Big Birthday Weekend 2018

Post Syndicated from Ben Nuttall original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/raspberry-jam-big-birthday-weekend-2018/

For the last few years, we have held a big Raspberry Pi community event in Cambridge around Raspberry Pi’s birthday, where people have come together for a huge party with talks, workshops, and more. We want more people to have the chance to join in with our birthday celebrations next year, so we’re going to be coordinating Raspberry Jams all over the world to take place over the Raspberry Jam Big Birthday Weekend, 3–4 March 2018.

Raspberry Pi Big Birthday Weekend 2018. GIF with confetti and bopping JAM balloons

Big Birthday fun!

Whether you’ve run a Raspberry Jam before, or you’d like to start a new Jam in your area, we invite you to join us for our Big Birthday Weekend, wherever you are in the world. This event will be a community-led, synchronised, global mega-Jam in celebration of our sixth birthday and the digital making community! Members of the Raspberry Pi Foundation team will be attending Jams far and wide to celebrate with you during the weekend.

Jams across the world will receive a special digital pack – be sure to register your interest so we can get your pack to you! We’ll also be sending out party kits to registered Jams – more info on this below.

Need help getting started?

First of all, check out the Raspberry Jam page to read all about Jams, and take a look at our recent blog post explaining the support for Jams that we offer.

If there’s no Jam near you yet, the Raspberry Jam Big Birthday Weekend is the perfect opportunity to start one yourself! If you’d like some help getting your Jam off the ground, there are a few places you can get support:

  • The Raspberry Jam Guidebook is full of advice gathered from the amazing people who run Jams in the UK.
  • The Raspberry Jam Slack team is available for Jam organisers to chat, share ideas, and get help from each other. Just email jam [at] raspberrypi.org and ask to be invited.
  • Attend a Jam! Find an upcoming Jam near you, and go along to get an idea of what it’s like.
  • Email us – if you have more queries, you can email jam [at] raspberrypi.org and we’ll do what we can to help.

Raspberry Jam

Get involved

If you’re keen to start a new Jam, there’s no need to wait until March – why not get up and running over the summer? Then you’ll be an expert by the time the Raspberry Jam Big Birthday Weekend comes around. Check out the guidebook, join the Jam Slack, and submit your event to the map when you’re ready.

Like the idea of running a Jam, but don’t want to do it by yourself? Then feel free to email us, and we’ll try and help you find someone to co-organise it.

If you don’t fancy organising a Jam for our Big Birthday Weekend, but would like to celebrate with us, keep an eye on our website for an update early next year. We’ll publish a full list of Jams participating in the festivities so you can find one near you. And if you’ve never attended a Jam before, there’s no need to wait: find one to join on the map here.

Raspberry Jam

Register your interest

If you think you’d like to run a Jam as part of the Big Birthday Weekend, register your interest now, and you’ll be the first to receive updates. Don’t worry if you don’t have the venue or logistics in place yet – this is just to let us know you’re keen, and to give us an idea about how big our party is going to be.

We will contact you in autumn to give you more information, as well as some useful resources. On top of our regular Raspberry Jam branding pack, we’ll provide a special digital Big Birthday Weekend pack to help you celebrate and tell everyone about your Jam!

Then, once you have confirmed you’re taking part, you’ll be able to register your Jam on our website. This will make sure that other people interested in joining the party can find your event. If your Jam is among the first 150 to be registered for a Big Birthday Weekend event, we will send you a free pack of goodies to use on the big day!

Go fill in the form, and we’ll be in touch!

 

PS: We’ll be running a big Cambridge event in the summer on the weekend of 30 June–1 July 2018. Put it in your diary – we’ll say more about it as we get closer to the date.

The post Announcing the Raspberry Jam Big Birthday Weekend 2018 appeared first on Raspberry Pi.