Tag Archives: tpb

Copyright Holders Have to ‘Resend’ Millions of Pirate Bay Takedown Notices

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/copyright-holders-have-to-resend-millions-of-pirate-bay-takedown-notices-200418/

After several weeks of absence, The Pirate Bay became accessible again through its main .org domain last weekend.

At first sight the site looked more or less the same but there are some significant changes, both under the hood and in appearance.

Many users immediately noticed that the site doesn’t work well with several ad blockers. Whether this is a bug or a feature is the question, but it was both frustrating and annoying for some.

“Your adblock may block important javascript components, check that main.js is loaded or the webpage won’t work,” a message on The Pirate Bay warns. And indeed, whilelisting this file appears to resolve the problem.

The Pirate Bay’s search results are also presented differently. While it’s still possible to order by date, size, seeders, and leechers, that’s not immediately obvious to everyone. Again, this was cause for some confusion.

It’s safe to say that every new design comes with drawbacks and other changes people have to get used to. However, there’s also a structural change that will be harder to overcome, one that mostly affects copyright holders.

With the new Pirate Bay design also comes a new URL structure. Instead of the old torrent pages that were accessible through thepiratebay.org/torrent/12345, the format has now changed to thepiratebay.org/description.php?id=12345.

Other URLs, including categories, the top lists, and user pages, all updated as well. To give another example, the 100 most-active torrents on the site can now be accessed from thepiratebay.org/search.php?q=top100:all, instead of the old thepiratebay.org/top/all.

For users, this isn’t a problem. All old links simply redirect to new ones. However, for copyright holders, it’s an outright disaster as it means that they will have to resend all their takedown notices. And we’re not talking about a few thousand here, but many millions.

Looking at Google’s transparency report we see that copyright holders have asked the search engine to remove more than five million URLs. Pretty much all of these notices have been rendered useless.

For example, this 2012 takedown notice from Paramount Pictures removed the link to The Pirate Bay’s top 100 video torrents. However, after the update, the same page reappeared under a new URL. Another consideration is that Google is just one search engine, so the same applies to other search engines too.

While that’s already quite bad, it’s really just the tip of the iceberg. In addition to the millions of URLs of thepiratebay.org, there are also hundreds of millions of Pirate Bay proxy URLs that have changed. All the notices for these sites have to be resent as well.

While search engines need time to pick up all the new links, the first takedown notices are already trickling in. As shown above, this also includes proxy sites.

It is safe to say that The Pirate Bay’s updates are having a more significant impact than it may seem at first sight. While it’s not entirely clear what motivated the changes, they are likely intended to make the site operate more smoothly.

At the time of writing, however, there are still some issues. Comments are not working, for example, and the Tor site is also offline. We tried to get more info from the Pirate Bay team, but thus far we have yet to hear back.

Drom: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also have an annual VPN review.

The Pirate Bay Suffers Extended Downtime

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-suffers-extended-downtime-200309/

During the past weekend many people have been unable to access The Pirate Bay and, at the time of writing, the site’s main domain remains inaccessible.

For most people, the site currently displays a Cloudflare error message across the entire site, with the CDN provider mentioning that the “connection timed out.”

This error suggests that there’s a problem on TPB’s end which is preventing the CDN provider from connecting to the site’s server.

No further details are available to us and there is no known ETA for the site’s full return. Judging from past experience, however, it’s likely a technical issue that has to be addressed. There are no known issues with Cloudflare or the domain name itself.

TorrentFreak hasn’t heard anything from the TPB team but these type of outages are not unusual. The Pirate Bay has suffered many of these outages in the past and the popular torrent site usually returns after a few hours, or days.

While the notorious torrent site remains inaccessible through the regular route, many proxy sites are still online. TPB is also still available via its new .onion address on the Tor network, accessible using the popular Tor Browser, for example.

Both the Tor domain and the proxies still feature fresh content. This means that user uploads and the upload bots are still operational as well.

In the past, the official Pirate Bay forums could point people to the latest status of the site. However, it appears that this feature is also suffering some technical issues as it reports everything to be down.

As always, the best remedy for hardcore Pirate Bay users is patience. But that should be a given by now.

Drom: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, torrent sites and more. We also have an annual VPN review.

Rightsholders Asked Google to Remove Five Million ThePirateBay.org URLs

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholders-asked-google-to-remove-5-million-thepiratebay-org-urls-200212/

The Pirate Bay is widely known for its refusal to remove content based on copyright infringement claims. Those who tried in the past found themselves mocked instead.

This means that copyright holders have to find other ways to minimize the site’s impact. That includes sending takedown requests to search engines, to lower the site’s presence there.

Most of these takedown notices are sent to Google, which receives requests to remove thousands of Pirate Bay links every day. These quickly add up and have now surpassed five million requests against Thepiratebay.org URLs alone.

Like many other pirate sites, The Pirate Bay has many proxy sites and previously used other domains as well. If we added all of these together, the totals would run into the dozens of millions.

The vast majority of thepiratebay.org URLs were reported since 2016, when the iconic torrent site returned to its original .org domain name, as can be seen in the graph below.

Targeted thepiratebay.org urls

The figures reported in Google’s transparency report count all the URLs that were submitted by copyright holders. This also includes duplicate requests. In other words, it doesn’t mean that five million search results were removed.

Of the 5,047,397 reported URLs, nearly two-thirds (66.5%) resulted in removed links. Little over 10% are duplicates that were sent in before by other copyright holders and 22.2% of the URLs were not indexed by Google in the first place.

It may seem odd that copyright holders ask Google to remove content that isn’t in its search engine. However, the company previously explained that it accepts these requests, which are put on a preemptive blacklist, to ensure that they are not added in the future.

When all of the above is taken into account there is still 0.8% left. These are reported URLs for which Google took no action. This can happen when the takedown request has clear errors, or if the reported URL isn’t copyright infringing.

As we previously reported, rightsholders have repeatedly asked Google to remove thepiratebay.org’s homepage. However, since this doesn’t link to any infringing content, Google keeps this page in its search results.

Google does, however, downgrade The Pirate Bay searches for some content. Because the site is repeatedly targeted, the search engine lowers its ranking in results for movies and other types of media.

While five million targeted URLs is significant, it is by no means a record. Several other sites including 4shared.com, Rapidgator.net, and Chomikuj.pl have been reported dozens of millions of times.

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

Swedish Court Issues ‘Dynamic’ Pirate Bay Blocking Order

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/swedish-court-issues-dynamic-pirate-bay-blocking-order-200124/

In recent years, Swedish movie outfits and Hollywood studios, including Disney, Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros, have been working hard to get local ISPs to block The Pirate Bay.

The first success came a few years ago when a blocking order was issued against local Internet provider Bredbandsbolaget. This was later followed by an interim order against Telia, Sweden’s largest ISP, which was struck down on appeal and sent back to the lower court.

During the second try of the case movie companies again requested a blocking order against The Pirate Bay, as well as three other sites, Dreamfilm, FMovies, and NyaFilmer.

Last month this case was decided in favor of the rightsholders, with the court not only issuing a blocking injunction but also one that can be extended

The Swedish Patent and Market Court ordered Telia to block access to the four pirate sites to prevent these from facilitating further copyright infringement. In addition, the rightsholders are also allowed to add new domain names and IP-addresses going forward.

The movie companies requested this expansion option since blocking orders are often circumvented through new domains and proxy sites. Telia objected to the request for such a “dynamic” blocking order, but the court sided with the copyright holders.

“It is clear that the services change domain names and URLs and that this is a quick, easy and inexpensive way to bypass the effect of a blocking procedure,” the court writes.

“A blocking injunction should, therefore, in order to effectively serve the rights holders’ interest in preventing infringements, not merely target specified domain names and URLs,” the order adds.

This effectively means that Telia must update its blocklist when it’s made aware of changes. Any new URLs and IP-addresses have to provide access to any of the four pirate sites, including The Pirate Bay.

Telia also objected to the general blocking order and questioned whether the rightsholders had shown any proof of infringement. However, the court refuted these arguments and stressed that, under EU law, ISP can be ordered to stop pirating subscribers.

The case resulted in a clash between several rights that are defined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In this instance, the property rights of the movie companies weigh stronger than Telia’s right to entrepreneurial freedom.

Hans Eriksson, Senior Associate at the law firm  Westerberg & Partners, highlighted the case at IPKat, believes that dynamic injunctions, which can be updated regularly, will become more and more common.

“Dynamic injunctions like this one are likely to be the future for blocking injunctions in Europe,” Eriksson tells TorrentFreak.

The Market Court’s injunction is valid for three years. If Telia fails to properly implement the blockades, it risks a penalty of 500,000 Swedish Krona (€47,500). Telia is not happy with the outcome, however, and has already filed an appeal.

A copy of the Patent and Market Court’s order, in Swedish, is available here (pdf).

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

The Pirate Bay’s Seeded ‘Archive’ Grows to 2.5 Petabytes

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bays-seeded-archive-grows-to-2-5-petabytes-200107/

This year, The Pirate Bay will celebrate its 17th anniversary.

That’s quite an achievement for any website but particularly for a pirate site when considering the mounting legal pressures.

Over the years The Pirate Bay has certainly weathered a few storms. There were raids, technical problems, and hosting complications, but the site has always returned. This year it even regained its position as the most popular torrent site of all, after a year of absence from the top spot.

While the infamous torrent site often makes the news, surprisingly little is known about what happens behind the scenes. The site’s operator, who goes by the nickname “Winston,” rarely comments in public. At the start of the new year, however, he made an exception.

For the first time ever, TPB’s operator has publicly shared statistics on how much data are ‘uploaded’ through the site. These files, including movies, software, and music, don’t actually hit its servers. They can be shared through the torrent and magnet links on the site though.

TPB’s operator reveals that, in 2019, the uploaded torrents linked to a massive 776 terabytes of data. More than half of these (405 terabytes) are still actively shared or seeded, as it’s called in BitTorrent terminology.

This is a lot of data, but it’s only a subsection of everything that’s available via The Pirate Bay. In total, more than 6,720 terabytes, or 6.7 petabytes have been ‘uploaded’ to the site. Of this data, over 2.5 petabytes are still being seeded.

The chart below shows how this uploaded data evolved over time. Older content is obviously seeded by fewer people, but that’s not the only thing that stands out. Most visible is the continued increase in uploads between 2004 and 2014, and the significant drop after that.

This drop can be explained by The Pirate Bay’s prolonged downtime around the end of 2014 and the start of 2015. Following a raid by the Swedish police, the torrent site remained offline for roughly two months, which substantially hurt the upload numbers.

After the downtime, the ‘uploaded’ data was roughly cut in half. This coincided with a drop in visitor numbers. Even today the site hasn’t fully recovered to the pre-raid numbers, but volumes are increasing year by year.

An archive of more than six petabytes is certainly impressive. According to TPB’s own calculations, it would cost $168,000 to put it all on Amazon’s cheapest 14TB hard drives. It’s certainly not impossible, as the Internet Archive hosts 48 petabytes, but it’s costly.

The Pirate Bay doesn’t have to store much though. All the torrent files combined make up a few gigabytes at most, as the full files are stored and shared by users. While this is cost-effective, it does come at a price.

Since more than half of TPB’s archive is no longer seeded, more than four petabytes of data are not available for download. This may change if people seed again, but the general trend is that availability goes down as time passes.

In order to keep decentralized distribution working, people have to share. TPB’s Winston notes that the ability to share not just files but also costs and resources is BitTorrent’s main advantage.

“This is where bittorent shines, as long as we all keep seeding, especially the rarer and older stuff, one or a few don’t have to take all the cost,” Winston says.

“We all contribute a few cents or dollars per month, on internet connections we already have, and unused storage on our computers, and everyone worldwide can continue to enjoy the torrents for years and decades to come,” he adds, while wishing the site’s users a happy new year.

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

Pirate Bay Replaced Its Iconic Logo to Get Some Extra Revenue

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-replaced-its-iconic-logo-to-get-some-extra-revenue-191202/

To many people, the Pirate Bay logo is the icon of free entertainment. For more than 15 years, the site has been the goto place for pirate content.

Although the site has faced regular downtime and connectivity issues in recent years, it remains online today.

In recent weeks, however, we noticed that The Pirate Bay’s logo was regularly replaced with something else. This isn’t entirely new, as the site often used to swap the iconic pirate ship graphic to send a message.

The more recent changes are noteworthy though, as they are – at least in part – used to generate revenue.

The Pirate Bay never displayed standard ads on the site’s homepage. And while there are still no network ads, TPB has swapped its logo several times to promote the “Pirate Bay approved” VPN provider AzireVPN, as shown below.

The VPN provider confirmed to TorrentFreak that The Pirate Bay asked to join its affiliate program, which it uses to generate some extra revenue. In addition to the homepage banner that appeared several times, there’s a “VPN” link to AzireVPN on all TPB pages as well.

Another new logo that showed up recently promotes the file-hosting service TMP.ninja. It’s not clear whether this is an advertisement, or perhaps a promotion for a ‘friend,’ but there must be a good reason to show the banner.

We reached out to TMP.ninja to find out more but, at the time of writing, we have yet to hear back. As with the VPN, TMP.ninja also has a sitewide link on the site, under the “filehosting” tag.

Finally, there’s The Pirate Bay’s promotion of the blockchain project Hex, which describes itself as the first high-interest savings account on the blockchain. Like most crypto projects it’s not without controversy. However, TPB believes it can get something out of it.

The torrent site currently displays a Hex.win banner on its homepage which comes with a referral link. This means that TPB gets a 20% bonus minted for everyone who signs up through the site.

It’s unclear whether the logo swaps are a temporary thing or if they will happen more frequently in the future. Over the past few weeks, the ‘promo’ logos have been appearing on an off, with Hex being the most recent addition.

In any case, people shouldn’t be surprised to see a slightly different look when they access the TPB homepage.

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

Planned .Org Registry Sale Puts The Pirate Bay at Risk

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/planned-org-registry-sale-puts-the-pirate-bay-at-risk-191129/

There are plenty of options for copyright holders to frustrate the operations of pirate sites, but one of the most effective is to attack their domain names.

In recent years, various entertainment industry groups have called on the domain name industry to help out on this front.

As a result, the MPAA signed a landmark agreement with the Donuts registry under which the movie industry group acts as a “trusted notifier” of “pirate” domains. A similar deal was later announced with the Radix registry.

Not all registrars and registries are welcoming these types of voluntary actions. The Public Interest Registry (PIR), which oversees the registrations of .org domains, was previously asked by the RIAA to suspend The Pirate Bay’s domain name. However, the organization chose not to do so.

Many registrars and registries don’t like the idea of acting as “content police.” Instead, they prefer these matters to be handled through the courts instead. This is one of the main reasons why The Pirate Bay, after more than 15 years, is still accessible on its .org domain.

Ironically, the infamous torrent site moved to over a dozen other domains in the past, fearing a .org domain seizure. However, while many other the other domains were suspended or taken by court order, thepiratebay.org stands tall.

The question is whether things will remain this way, as PIR is in the process of being sold to private equity firm Ethos Capital. At the moment, PIR is part of the Internet Society, which is critical of stringent copyright policies, but its new owner may see things differently.

Possible policy changes are also a concern many organizations and groups have. A few days ago, EFF, Wikimedia, Internet Archive, Creative Commons, Demand Progress, and several others, sent a letter to Internet Society President Andrew Sullivan, urging him to stop the sale.

The groups are concerned that Ethos may raise domain name prices and that it will implement rights protection mechanisms. In addition, they caution that domain names could be suspended for alleged illegal activity, without any judicial oversight.

Ethos will have “the power to implement processes to suspend domain names based on accusations of ‘activity contrary to applicable law’,” the letter reads.

The organizations are concerned that this will put NGOs at risk. However, the same issues are very relevant for The Pirate Bay as well. After all, that will be one of the prime candidates for a voluntary domain name suspension.

Thus far there is no indication that Ethos has any plans to do so. However, if we look closely at the company we do notice something worth sharing. Erik Brooks, the founder and CEO of Ethos Capital, served (or serves) on the board of the Donuts registry.

Yes, that’s the same Donuts the MPAA has an agreement with to suspend copyright-infringing domains. Brooks joined the board after that deal was struck, but it’s an interesting observation nonetheless.

TorrentFreak reached out to both the Internet Society and Ethos Capital for further details but at the time of writing, we have yet to hear back.

We doubt that The Pirate Bay is worried about any of this. While it may become more likely that they’ll lose their original .org domain sometime in the future, the site always has alternatives ready. We have little doubt that they still have a few lined up, just in case.

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

Pirate Bay Downtime ‘Caused by Malicious Attack, Proxies May be to Blame’

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-downtime-caused-by-malicious-attack-proxies-may-be-to-blame/

Over the past several weeks, The Pirate Bay has suffered prolonged downtime. For many people, the popular torrent site was completely unreachable.

The reason for the persistent issues has not been revealed directly by the site’s operators. Users and staffers, including the moderators, had no idea what was wrong.

This lack of communication is nothing new. Usually, the site returns to normal after a while, to continue as if nothing ever happened. And indeed, starting a few hours ago some people were able to access the site again.

TorrentFreak spoke to someone who directly communicated with the operators. According to this reputable source, the recent Pirate Bay problems were likely caused by malicious actors who DDoSed the site’s search engine with specially crafted search queries.

This person, or persons, overwhelmed The Pirate Bay with searches that break the Sphinx search daemon, effectively crashing the site. Sphinx is an open-source search server and The Pirate Bay reportedly used an older version of the software.

Data corruption…

Due to the high volume of malicious search queries, it wasn’t possible to log the errors and send a bug report, which complicated matters. However, our contact informed us that the Pirate Bay updated Sphinx to a newer version yesterday, which resolved the crashes.

TorrentFreak was unable to independently confirm the above, but our source is generally well informed.

When we tried accessing The Pirate Bay this morning, it was still returning a Cloudflare 522 error in some regions. However, elsewhere the site was coming through fine with plenty of new uploads being listed. It’s unclear why it doesn’t work everywhere, but the site appears to be recovering.

The question that remains is who targeted The Pirate Bay with these harmful search queries and why?

We didn’t speak to The Pirate Bay’s operators directly, but our source believes that this isn’t the work of anti-piracy outfits. Instead, he suspects that a malicious proxy site (or sites) is likely to blame.

Taking The Pirate Bay out drives more traffic to proxy sites. And by holding off the attacks for a while every now and then, there would be enough time for new scripted uploads to be added to the site, so the proxy site could still scrape fresh content.

For now, this remains speculation, but all the signs suggest that someone was purposefully targeting The Pirate Bay.

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

The Pirate Bay Suffers Extended Downtime, Tor Access is Buggy Too

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-suffers-extended-downtime-tor-access-is-buggy-too-191024/

The Pirate Bay has been hard to reach for more than a week.

For most people, the site currently displays a Cloudflare error across the entire site, with the CDN provider mentioning that a “bad gateway” is causing problems.

Others see the dreaded “database maintenance” message, with a prompt to check back in 10 minutes. If they do, the exact same notification usually pops up.

As is often the case with TPB, no further details are available to us and there is no known ETA for the site’s full return. However, judging from past experience, it’s likely some type of technical issue that needs fixing.

Error 522

TorrentFreak reached out to a Pirate Bay staffer who informed us that the downtime is a mystery to most staffers as well. The technical part of the site is managed by “Winston,” who hasn’t yet provided an explanation.

We also contacted another person who managed the site in the distant past, but he had no further information on the present issues either.

The Pirate Bay has had prolonged downtime in the past and always returned thus far. There is no indication that things are different now, but the duration of the current problems certainly is longer and more widespread than usual.

TPB is still occasionally available via its .onion address on the Tor network, which is accessible using the popular Tor Browser, for example. However, as the official status page reveals, the Tor version is also experiencing some issues.

TPB’s status page

This isn’t the first setback for Pirate Bay visitors this year. As reported previously, new registrations to the site were disabled a few months ago to prevent spam floods. This remains the case today.

The trouble has motivated some Pirate Bay users to move elsewhere for the time being. Some have switched to unofficial proxy sites, which may still be somewhat operational, while others are utilizing other torrent sites.

For the rest, it’s just the usual waiting game. If we look at the past, the site will likely reappear eventually, and then continue as if nothing ever happened.

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

RIAA Believes The Pirate Bay Blocks US Visitors, But it Doesn’t

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-believes-the-pirate-bay-blocks-us-visitors-but-it-doesnt/

The Pirate Bay is without a doubt one of the most blocked websites around the world.

The first court-ordered blockade against the site was issued in Denmark, more than a decade ago, and dozens of other countries have followed since.

We have come to a point where ‘yet another’ Pirate Bay blockade is hardly newsworthy, but this week something quite unusual appeared on our radar. Apparently, The Pirate Bay itself jumped on the bandwagon by starting to block US visitors, its largest userbase, out of the blue.

This revelation comes from the widely respected music industry group RIAA, which keeps a close eye on the popular torrent site.

A few days ago the group sent its latest overview of “notorious markets” to the US Trade Representative. As usual, The Pirate Bay was prominently featured. It is the single most popular BitTorrent index site in the world, the RIAA says, then adding that for some reason the site no longer accepts American visitors.

“Earlier this year, thepiratebay began blocking U.S. IP addresses. However, the site remains easily accessible using a free proxy service that makes it appear the user is accessing the site from another jurisdiction,” the RIAA writes in its submission to the USTR.

That’s odd, to say the least. While the site has had some (localized) connectivity issues, perhaps due to routing problems, we had never heard of such a blockade. Interestingly, The Pirate Bay team itself has no clue what the RIAA is referring to either.

TorrentFreak reached out to a TPB moderator, who wasn’t aware of any US visitor ban and through a trusted source we learned that the people running the site are not blocking anything.

This makes sense, as we spoke to several people who can still access the site just fine from the US. Also, the United States remains the top traffic source for the site by far, as SimilarWeb data shows. That certainly wouldn’t be the case if US visitors were not allowed.

We have no idea why the RIAA believes otherwise. Perhaps the group was confused by an earlier outage that mainly affected US visitors, but it can be ‘assured’ that this is definitely not intended by the Pirate Bay team.

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

Pirate Bay is Not Getting Rich From Bitcoin Donations…

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-is-not-getting-rich-from-bitcoin-donations-or-190922/

The Pirate Bay has been both an early adopter and a pioneer when it comes to cryptocurrencies.

The popular torrent site first embraced Bitcoin in 2013 and soon after many other pirate sites followed suit.

The advantage of bitcoin donations is that they are relatively anonymous. This is an upside for the operators, but also a major concern for rightsholders who feared that it may become a stable revenue stream that can’t be touched.

The RIAA, for example, previously told the U.S. Trade Representative that Bitcoin could make it harder to crack down on pirate sites.

“There are no central authority or banks involved which makes it very difficult to seize or trace Bitcoin funds,” the music industry group wrote in a letter.

While it’s no secret that Bitcoin is indeed fueling some criminal operations, The Pirate Bay’s donations certainly can’t keep the notorious torrent site afloat. Today, more than six years after the site first accepted cryptocurrency donations, it adds up to little more than a small daily tip.

If we take a look at The Pirate Bay’s most recent Bitcoin legacy address, which it started advertising late 2017, we see that a total of 0.49 Bitcoin was received. Translated to US dollars (current value for simplicity purposes), this is $4,838, or $7.63 per day.

The Bitcoin Segwit address looks more promising. Here we see a total of 1.48 BTC coming in. However, on closer inspection, most of that comes from one transaction which was sent by TPB’s old Bitcoin wallet, so we scrapped that.

This leaves us with 0.33, or $3,255, which adds another $5.13 per day. It’s worth noting that more than half of this came from one donation. It came from a rather generous person apparently, as he or she also sent roughly the same amount to ProtonMail.

Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency The Pirate Bay accepts of course. The torrent site also lists a Litecoin and Monero address. Monero can’t be tracked, but the Litecoin address received 3.40 LTC, or $252, which is $0.40 per day.

When we add up all these figures we come to a total of $13.16 per day, which clearly can’t keep The Pirate Bay afloat.

That said, the Bitcoin donation income is relatively stable. When we did the same calculations a few years ago, we arrived at a donation average of $9.34 per day. At the time, one Bitcoin was about $425, so if the site didn’t sell any, the value will have gone up remarkably.

That brings us to the unavoidable “what if.” Looking back further, we see other Pirate Bay Bitcoin wallets dating back as far as 2013, which received dozens of BTC. At the time that wasn’t worth that much (1BTC ~ $120, May 2013), but the position is different today. If the team kept those, of course.

Perhaps that’s TPB’s long-term exit strategy. If one Bitcoin eventually reaches a value of over a million dollars, The Pirate Bay crew may start thinking of their retirement and buying an island. Sealand anyone?

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

Prolific Pirate Bay User Agrees to Pay $2,900 to Movie Outfits

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/prolific-pirate-bay-user-agrees-to-pay-2900-to-movie-outfits-190617/

Every year, thousands of people are sued in the United States for allegedly sharing pirated video, mostly through BitTorrent.

These efforts share a familiar pattern. After the film companies acquire a subpoena to obtain the personal details of an alleged pirate, they contact this person with a settlement request.

In 2017, movie companies used this strategy to identify the then 72-year-old Mr. Harding from Hawaii, whose Internet connection was used to share more than 1,000 torrents. 

The film companies reached out to the man and offered a hefty $3,900 settlement, which would increase to $4,900 if he failed to respond in time. However, Mr. Harding denied downloading the files, describing the pay-up-or-else demand as “absolutely absurd.”

The accusations eventually made the local press and after a careful review of the matter movie company attorney Kerry Culpepper decided to dismiss the case against the elderly man.

However, that didn’t mean that the downloads were completely disregarded. After digging into the matter, the movie companies learned that, while the offending IP-address was linked to Mr. Harding, the home in question was used by someone else. 

The movie companies ‘ UN4 Productions ‘ and ‘Millennium Funding’ eventually found out that the resident or tenant in question was Mr. Graham. This prompted the rightsholders to file a new federal lawsuit, targeting this man, who they believed was the true ‘pirate.’

This time the accusations were indeed lodged against a prolific downloader. In a declaration submitted to the court Mr. Graham, who is in his fifties, admits that he regularly used The Pirate Bay to download files.

“Since approximately 2016, I have been downloading torrent files of motion pictures from websites of the Pirate Bay at my residence. I believed that it was acceptable to do so because the websites are completely open with their objective to share files,” he states. 

According to the declaration, Mr. Graham often downloaded so many files that he doesn’t remember the names of many torrents. As such, he is not confident that he downloaded the movies “Boyka: Undisputed IV” and Mechanic: Resurrection,” which are listed in the complaint.

The account holder of the Internet connection, who was initially accused, was not aware of this activity.  Mr. Graham, meanwhile, apologized to the rightsholders and agreed not to use The Pirate Bay going forward. 

“I agree to stop using the Pirate Bay,” Mr. Graham writes.

While the man denies liability, he does admit to downloading copyrighted movies through The Pirate Bay and in a consent judgment, submitted to the court, he agrees to a $2,900 settlement to cover costs, fees, and damages. 

In addition, the stipulated consent judgment includes a permanent injunction prohibiting Mr. Graham from infringing the copyrights of the two movie companies going forward. 

A copy of the stipulated consent judgment is available here (pdf).

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

Pirate Bay Registrations are Closed Due to Spam Flood

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-closes-registrations-due-to-spam-flood-190606/

It’s been relatively smooth sailing for The Pirate Bay in recent months. 

After a tough 2018 with several days of downtime, the popular torrent site hasn’t had any major outages in a while. 

However, for prospective users who want to upload new torrents, all is not well. For more than two weeks now, The Pirate Bay has closed the site to new users. 

People who try to register an account are out of luck. While the registration page is still up, it persistently returns the following error message: “Wrong code x. The username and/or e-mail address is already in use.

Error…

While this may appear to be some kind of coding mistake, it is in fact intentional. TPB admin ‘Winston’ closed registrations following a request from the crew, staff member Spud17 informs TorrentFreak.

“Registrations are closed at the request of one of the crew members, as TPB was being battered by floods of malware torrents,” Spud17 says.

“We’ve asked Winston to make it so that new uploaders cannot upload 1000 fakes in 2 seconds.” 

Closing registrations does indeed fix this, but it’s a pretty drastic measure. The crew hopes that a more permanent spam control feature will be introduced and that registrations will then open up again. 

At the time of writing the crew doesn’t know when this issue will be dealt with. It could be a matter of days, but a few more weeks is also possible. Patience is the only advice they can give. 

The people who already had an account can still upload torrents, of course, so most regular users won’t even notice that there’s an issue. If they do, it’s probably because there is less spam than usual. 

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

The Pirate Bay’s Oldest Torrents Survived 15 Years of Turmoil

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bays-oldest-torrents-survived-15-years-of-turmoil-190519/

When The Pirate Bay launched in the second half of 2003, the World Wide Web looked nothing like it does today.

Mark Zuckerberg was still preoccupied with “Facemash,” the “hot or not” site he launched before Facebook was invented. YouTube wasn’t around yet either, nor were Twitter and Instagram, which launched years later.

At the time nearly everyone used regular computers to access the web. Smartphones and tablets didn’t exist, and high-quality online video streaming was unthinkable on most residential Internet connections. If there was anything to stream at all.

People interested in watching a movie could use the Internet to buy a DVD at one of the early webshops or sign up with Netflix, which shipped DVDs through the mail. There were no download stores yet.

Given this context, imagine the appeal of a website that offered a high-quality archive of digital movies and tv-series to download, for free.

That site was The Pirate Bay.

TPB in 2014

Remarkably, many of the videos that were posted on the site during the early days remain available today. In fact, quite a few torrents on The Pirate Bay have been around longer than some of the site’s users.

This is quite an achievement, as torrents require at least one person with a full copy of the file to keep it alive. This prompted us to take a look at the oldest Pirate Bay torrents that are still being shared today.

During the early months of the site, it appears that some torrents were purged or otherwise lost. The oldest ones we can find data back to March 2004, which means that they are well over 15 years old today. 

An episode of “The High Chaparral” has the honor of being the oldest torrent. The file was originally uploaded on March 25, 2004, and although it lists zero seeders in search results, there are still several people actively sharing the torrent.

Many of the other torrents in the list above need some help. However, the Top Secret Recipes E-Books and a copy of the documentary Revolution OS, which covers the history of Linux, GNU, and the free software movement, are doing very well.

While these torrents have survived one-and-a-half decades of turmoil, including two raids, they’re still going strong. In part, perhaps, because some people want to keep history alive.

“To maintain history, I will gladly put this on my seedbox forever,” one commenter writes below the High Chaparral torrent, with another one adding “I will save this torrent for history!!!”

History indeed, as it is clear that things have changed over the past 15 years. In the early days, The Pirate Bay wasn’t just popular because people didn’t have to pay. It was often the only option to get a digital copy of a movie, TV-show, or even a music album. It was a revolution in a way.

This is still the case to a certain degree in some countries, but to many, the magical appeal has gone now that there are so many legal alternatives online.

It’s worth keeping in mind, though, that these legal alternatives were in part a direct answer to sites such as The Pirate Bay.

In fact, if piracy hadn’t existed the world might have looked entirely different today. Piracy showed the entertainment industries that people wanted instant online access to media, a demand that was later fulfilled by iTunes, Netflix streaming, Spotify, and many others.

Today The Pirate Bay remains online. Despite several raids, criminal prosecutions, dozens of website blockades, and other anti-piracy measures, the site continues to thrive. And so do its torrents.

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

ISP Telenor Will Block The Pirate Bay in Sweden Without a Shot Fired

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/isp-telenor-will-block-the-pirate-bay-in-sweden-without-a-shot-fired-180520/

Back in 2014, Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, Nordisk Film and the Swedish Film Industry filed a lawsuit against Bredbandsbolaget, one of Sweden’s largest ISPs.

The copyright holders asked the Stockholm District Court to order the ISP to block The Pirate Bay and streaming site Swefilmer, claiming that the provider knowingly facilitated access to the pirate platforms and assisted their pirating users.

Soon after the ISP fought back, refusing to block the sites in a determined response to the Court.

“Bredbandsbolaget’s role is to provide its subscribers with access to the Internet, thereby contributing to the free flow of information and the ability for people to reach each other and communicate,” the company said in a statement.

“Bredbandsbolaget does not block content or services based on individual organizations’ requests. There is no legal obligation for operators to block either The Pirate Bay or Swefilmer.”

In February 2015 the parties met in court, with Bredbandsbolaget arguing in favor of the “important principle” that ISPs should not be held responsible for content exchanged over the Internet, in the same way the postal service isn’t responsible for the contents of an envelope.

But with TV companies SVT, TV4 Group, MTG TV, SBS Discovery and C More teaming up with the IFPI alongside Paramount, Disney, Warner and Sony in the case, Bredbandsbolaget would need to pull out all the stops to obtain victory. The company worked hard and initially the news was good.

In November 2015, the Stockholm District Court decided that the copyright holders could not force Bredbandsbolaget to block the pirate sites, ruling that the ISP’s operations did not amount to participation in the copyright infringement offenses carried out by some of its ‘pirate’ subscribers.

However, the case subsequently went to appeal, with the brand new Patent and Market Court of Appeal hearing arguments. In February 2017 it handed down its decision, which overruled the earlier ruling of the District Court and ordered Bredbandsbolaget to implement “technical measures” to prevent its customers accessing the ‘pirate’ sites through a number of domain names and URLs.

With nowhere left to go, Bredbandsbolaget and owner Telenor were left hanging onto their original statement which vehemently opposed site-blocking.

“It is a dangerous path to go down, which forces Internet providers to monitor and evaluate content on the Internet and block websites with illegal content in order to avoid becoming accomplices,” they said.

In March 2017, Bredbandsbolaget blocked The Pirate Bay but said it would not give up the fight.

“We are now forced to contest any future blocking demands. It is the only way for us and other Internet operators to ensure that private players should not have the last word regarding the content that should be accessible on the Internet,” Bredbandsbolaget said.

While it’s not clear whether any additional blocking demands have been filed with the ISP, this week an announcement by Bredbandsbolaget parent company Telenor revealed an unexpected knock-on effect. Seemingly without a single shot being fired, The Pirate Bay will now be blocked by Telenor too.

The background lies in Telenor’s acquisition of Bredbandsbolaget back in 2005. Until this week the companies operated under separate brands but will now merge into one entity.

“Telenor Sweden and Bredbandsbolaget today take the final step on their joint trip and become the same company with the same name. As a result, Telenor becomes a comprehensive provider of broadband, TV and mobile communications,” the company said in a statement this week.

“Telenor Sweden and Bredbandsbolaget have shared both logo and organization for the last 13 years. Today, we take the last step in the relationship and consolidate the companies under the same name.”

Up until this final merger, 600,000 Bredbandsbolaget broadband customers were denied access to The Pirate Bay. Now it appears that Telenor’s 700,000 fiber and broadband customers will be affected too. The new single-brand company says it has decided to block the notorious torrent site across its entire network.

“We have not discontinued Bredbandsbolaget, but we have merged Telenor and Bredbandsbolaget and become one,” the company said.

“When we share the same network, The Pirate Bay is blocked by both Telenor and Bredbandsbolaget and there is nothing we plan to change in the future.”

TorrentFreak contacted the PR departments of both Telenor and Bredbandsbolaget requesting information on why a court order aimed at only the latter’s customers would now affect those of the former too, more than doubling the blockade’s reach. Neither company responded which leaves only speculation as to its motives.

On the one hand, the decision to voluntarily implement an expanded blockade could perhaps be viewed as a little unusual given how much time, effort and money has been invested in fighting web-blockades in Sweden.

On the other, the merger of the companies may present legal difficulties as far as the court order goes and it could certainly cause friction among the customer base of Telenor if some customers could access TPB, and others could not.

In any event, the legal basis for web-blocking on copyright infringement grounds was firmly established last year at the EU level, which means that Telenor would lose any future legal battle, should it decide to dig in its heels. On that basis alone, the decision to block all customers probably makes perfect commercial sense.

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

Security updates for Tuesday

Post Syndicated from ris original https://lwn.net/Articles/726568/rss

Security updates have been issued by Arch Linux (expat and poppler), Debian (unrar-nonfree and vlc), Fedora (chromium and mercurial), Gentoo (freeradius, kauth, and libreoffice), Mageia (glibc, irssi, kernel, kernel-linus, kernel-tmb, and rpcbind/libtirpc), openSUSE (libgcrypt, netpbm, and sudo), Oracle (sudo), Scientific Linux (mercurial), Slackware (kernel), SUSE (jakarta-taglibs-standard, kernel, and kernel-source), and Ubuntu (apache2).

Съд на ЕС: за достъпа до The Pirate Bay

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2017/06/15/the-pirate-bay-5/

Вчера беше публикувано решението на Съда на ЕС по дело C‑610/15 Stichting Brein срещу Ziggo BV и XS4ALL Internet BV.

Решението засяга функционирането и достъпа до The Pirate Bay.

Спорът

9 Ziggo и XS4ALL са доставчици на достъп до интернет. Значителна част от техните абонати ползват платформата за онлайн споделяне TPB, индексатор на BitTorrent файлове. BitTorrent е протокол, чрез който потребителите (наричани „равноправни устройства“ или „peers“) могат да споделят файлове. Съществената характеристика на BitTorrent се състои в това, че файловете, които се споделят, са разделени на малки сегменти, като по този начин отпада необходимостта от централен сървър за съхраняване на тези файлове, което облекчава тежестта на индивидуалните сървъри в процеса на споделянето. За да могат да споделят файлове, потребителите трябва най-напред да свалят специален софтуер, наречен „BitTorrent клиент“, който не се предлага от платформата за онлайн споделяне TPB. Този BitTorrent клиент представлява софтуер, който позволява създаването на торент файлове.

10      Потребителите (наричани „seeders“ [сийдъри]), които желаят да предоставят файл от своя компютър на разположение на други потребители (наричани „leechers“ [лийчъри]), трябва да създадат торент файл чрез своя BitTorrent клиент. Торент файловете препращат към централен сървър (наричан „tracker“ [тракер]), който идентифицира потребители, които могат да споделят конкретен торент файл, както и прилежащия към него медиен файл. Тези торент файлове се качват (upload) от сийдърите (на платформа за онлайн споделяне, каквато е TPB, която след това ги индексира, за да могат те да бъдат намирани от потребителите на платформата за онлайн споделяне и произведенията, към които тези торент файлове препращат, да могат да бъдат сваляни (download) на компютрите на последните на отделни сегменти чрез техния BitTorrent клиент.

11      Често пъти вместо торенти се използват магнитни линкове. Тези линкове идентифицират съдържанието на торента и препращат към него чрез цифров отпечатък.

12      Голямото мнозинство от предлаганите на платформата за онлайн споделяне TPB торент файлове препращат към произведения, които са обект на закрила от авторски права, без да е дадено разрешение от носителите на авторското право на администраторите и на потребителите на тази платформа за извършване на действията по споделянето.

13      Главното искане на Stichting Brein в производството пред националната юрисдикция е да разпореди на Ziggo и на XS4ALL да блокират имената на домейни и интернет адресите на платформата за онлайн споделяне TPB с цел да се предотврати възможността за ползване на услугите на тези доставчици на достъп до интернет за нарушаване на авторското и сродните му права на носителите на правата, чиито интереси защитава Stichting Brein.

Въпросите

 При тези обстоятелства Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Върховен съд на Нидерландия) решава да спре производството по делото и да постави на Съда следните преюдициални въпроси:

„1)      Налице ли е публично разгласяване по смисъла на член 3, параграф 1 от Директива 2001/29 от страна на администратора на уебсайт, ако на този уебсайт не са налице защитени произведения, но съществува система […], с която намиращи се в компютрите на потребителите метаданни за защитени произведения се индексират и категоризират за потребителите по начин, по който последните могат да проследяват, да качват онлайн, както и да свалят закриляните произведения?

2)      При отрицателен отговор на първия въпрос:

Дават ли член 8, параграф 3 от Директива 2001/29 и член 11 от Директива 2004/48 основание за издаването на забрана по отношение на посредник по смисъла на тези разпоредби, който по описания във въпрос 1 начин улеснява извършването на нарушения от трети лица?“.

Вече имаме заключението на Генералния адвокат Szpunar, според което

обстоятелството, че операторът на уебсайт индексира файлове, съдържащи закриляни с авторско право произведения, които се предлагат за споделяне в peer-to-peer мрежа, и предоставя търсачка, с което позволява тези файлове да бъдат намирани, представлява публично разгласяване по смисъла на член 3, параграф 1 от Директива 2001/29, когато операторът знае, че дадено произведение е предоставено на разположение в мрежата без съгласието на носителите на авторските права, но не предприема действия за блокиране на достъпа до това произведение.

Решението

Понятието „публично разгласяване“ обединява два кумулативни елемента, а именно „акт на разгласяване“ на произведение и „публичност“ на разгласяването (решение от 26 април 2017 г., Stichting Brein, C‑527/15, EU:C:2017:300, т. 29 и цитираната съдебна практика). За да се прецени дали даден ползвател извършва акт на публично разгласяване по смисъла на член 3, параграф 1 от Директива 2001/29, трябва да се отчетат няколко допълнителни критерия, които не са самостоятелни и са взаимозависими.

  • ключовата роля на потребителя и съзнателния характер на неговата намеса. Всъщност този потребител извършва акт на разгласяване, когато, като съзнава напълно последиците от своето поведение, се намесва, за да предостави на клиентите си достъп до произведение, което е обект на закрила, и по-специално когато без неговата намеса тези клиенти по принцип не биха могли да се ползват от разпространеното произведение. (вж. в този смисъл решение от 26 април 2017 г., Stichting Brein, C‑527/15, EU:C:2017:300, т. 31 и цитираната съдебна практика).
  • понятието „публично“ се отнася до неопределен брой потенциални адресати и освен това предполага наличие на доста голям брой лица (решение от 26 април 2017 г., Stichting Brein, C‑527/15, EU:C:2017:300, т. 32 и цитираната съдебна практика).
  • закриляното произведение трябва да бъде разгласено, като се използва специфичен технически способ, различен от използваните дотогава, или, ако не е използван такъв способ — пред „нова публика“, тоест публика, която не е била вече взета предвид от носителите на авторското право при даването на разрешение за първоначалното публично разгласяване на произведението им (решение от 26 април 2017 г., Stichting Brein, C‑527/15, EU:C:2017:300, т. 33 и цитираната съдебна практика).
  • дали публичното разгласяване  е извършено с цел печалба (решение от 26 април 2017 г., Stichting Brein, C‑527/15, EU:C:2017:300, т. 34 и цитираната съдебна практика).

42 В случая, видно от акта за преюдициално запитване, значителна част от абонатите на Ziggo и XS4ALL са сваляли медийни файлове чрез платформата за онлайн споделяне TPB. Както следва и от представените пред Съда становища, тази платформа се използва от значителен брой лица, като администраторите от TPB съобщават на своята платформа за онлайн споделяне за десетки милиони „потребители“. В това отношение разглежданото в главното производство разгласяване се отнася най-малкото до всички потребители на тази платформа. Тези потребители могат да имат достъп във всеки момент и едновременно до защитените произведения, които са споделени посредством посочената платформа. Следователно това разгласяване се отнася до неопределен брой потенциални адресати и предполага наличие на голям брой лица (вж. в този смисъл решение от 26 април 2017 г., Stichting Brein, C‑527/15, EU:C:2017:300, т. 45 и цитираната съдебна практика).

43      От това следва, че с разгласяване като разглежданото в главното производство закриляни произведения действително се разгласяват „публично“ по смисъла на член 3, параграф 1 от Директива 2001/29.

44      Освен това, що се отнася до въпроса дали тези произведения са разгласяват на „нова“ публика по смисъла на съдебната практика, цитирана в точка 28 от настоящото съдебно решение, следва да се посочи, че в решението си от 13 февруари 2014 г., Svensson и др. (C‑466/12, EU:C:2014:76, т. 24 и 31), както и в определението си от 21 октомври 2014 г., BestWater International (C‑348/13, EU:C:2014:2315, т. 14) Съдът е приел, че това е публика, която носителите на авторските права не са имали предвид, когато са дали разрешение за първоначалното разгласяване.

45      В случая, видно от становищата, представени пред Съда, от една страна, администраторите на платформата за онлайн споделяне TPB са знаели, че тази платформа, която предоставят на разположение на потребителите и която администрират, дава достъп до произведения, публикувани без разрешение на носителите на правата, и от друга страна, че същите администратори изразяват изрично в блоговете и форумите на тази платформа своята цел да предоставят закриляните произведения на разположение на потребителите и поощряват последните да реализират копия от тези произведения. Във всички случаи, видно от акта за преюдициално запитване, администраторите на онлайн платформата TPB не може да не са знаели, че тази платформа дава достъп до произведения, публикувани без разрешението на носителите на правата, с оглед на обстоятелството, което се подчертава изрично от запитващата юрисдикция, че голяма част от торент файловете, които се намират на платформата за онлайн споделяне TPB, препращат към произведения, публикувани без разрешението на носителите на правата. При тези обстоятелства следва да се приеме, че е налице разгласяване пред „нова публика“ (вж. в този смисъл решение от 26 април 2017 г., Stichting Brein, C‑527/15, EU:C:2017:300, т. 50).

46      От друга страна, не може да се оспори, че предоставянето на разположение и администрирането на платформа за онлайн споделяне като разглежданата в главното производство се извършва с цел да се извлече печалба, тъй като тази платформа генерира, видно от становищата, представени пред Съда, значителни приходи от реклама.

47      Вследствие на това трябва да се приеме, че предоставянето на разположение и администрирането на платформа за онлайн споделяне като разглежданата в главното производство, съставлява „публично разгласяване“ по смисъла на член 3, параграф 1 от Директива 2001/29.

48      С оглед на всички изложени съображения на първия въпрос следва да се отговори, че понятието „публично разгласяване“  трябва да се тълкува в смисъл, че  в неговия обхват попада предоставянето на разположение и администрирането в интернет на платформа за споделяне, която чрез индексиране на метаданните относно закриляните произведения и с предлагането на търсачка позволява на потребителите на платформата да намират тези произведения и да ги споделят в рамките на мрежа с равноправен достъп (peer-to-peer).

Масовите коментари са, че решението засилва позициите на търсещите блокиране организации.

Filed under: Digital, EU Law, Media Law Tagged: съд на ес

Съд на ЕС: блокиране на достъпа до The Pirate Bay

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/%D1%81%D1%8A%D0%B4-%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D0%B5%D1%81-%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B5-%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8A%D0%BF%D0%B0-%D0%B4%D0%BE-the-pirate-bay/

Стана известно заключението на Генералния адвокат Szpunar по дело C‑610/15 Stichting Brein срещу Ziggo BV и XS4ALL Internet BV.

В това дело  Съдът трябва да конкретизира правните основания и обхвата на евентуалната отговорност за нарушенията, извършени от  уебсайтове като The Pirate Bay („TPB“). TPB е един от най-големите и най-известни уебсайтове за споделяне на файлове, съдържащи музикални и кинематографични произведения. Споделянето е безплатно и при повечето от тези произведения — в нарушение на авторските права.

Генералният адвокат напомня скорошни решения на Съда на ЕС, свързани с правото на публично разгласяване на произведения в интернет  – Svensson  и GS Media,  ново е и решението  Filmspeler – тези дела се отнасят до вторичното разгласяване на вече достъпни в интернет произведения.

Ответниците в главното производство  Ziggo BV и XS4ALL Internet BV  са дружества, учредени по нидерландското право, чиято дейност   е доставка на достъп до интернет на потребители. Ищецът Stichting Brein представлява носителите на авторски права.

Stichting Brein иска да се разпореди на Ziggo и на XS4ALL да блокират достъпа на получателите на техните услуги до интернет адресите на уебсайта TPB, който е торент индексатор за споделяне на файлове на принципа peer-to-peer. Искането се основава на обстоятелството, че получателите на услугите на ответниците в главното производство използват посочените услуги чрез този уебсайт индексатор и така извършват масови нарушения на авторските права, като споделят помежду си файлове, в които се съдържат закриляни обекти (главно музикални и кинематографични произведения), без разрешението на носителите на тези права.

Преюдициални въпроси:

„1)      Налице ли е публично разгласяване по смисъла на член 3, параграф 1 от Директива 2001/29 от оператора на уебсайт, ако на този уебсайт няма защитени произведения, но съществува система […], с която намиращи се на компютрите на потребителите метаданни за защитени произведения се индексират и категоризират за потребителите, и посредством която потребителите могат да намират, качват и свалят защитените произведения?

2)      При отрицателен отговор на въпрос 1:

–        дават ли член 8, параграф 3 от Директива 2001/29 и член 11 от Директива 2004/48 основание за издаването на забрана по отношение на посредник по смисъла на тези разпоредби, който по описания във въпрос 1 начин улеснява извършването на нарушения от трети лица?“.

В т.т.19-29 Генералният адвокат обяснява функционирането на peer-to-peer мрежите. Според  тази картина сайтове като TPB снабдяват ползвателите с карти за намиране на незаконно съдържание.

В т.т. 30-42 се исяснява кога има публично разгласяване според правото на ЕС. След което се анализира хипотезата, при която закриляни с авторско право произведения са споделяни в peer-to-peer мрежа. Според ГА операторите на уебсайтове като TPB, които позволяват произведенията да бъдат намирани и достъпни,  организират системата, която позволява на потребителите да получат достъп до произведения, предоставяни на разположение от други потребители. Ето защо според ГА тяхната роля може да се приеме за необходима – и още:

Вярно е, че такъв уебсайт само регистрира наличното съдържание в peer-to-peer мрежата, т.е. метаданните, свързани с произведенията, които се предлагат за споделяне от потребителите в мрежата. Следователно операторът на уебсайта по принцип няма никакво влияние върху присъствието на дадено произведение в тази мрежа. Той е само посредник, който позволява на потребителите да споделят съдържанието на принципа peer-to-peer. При това положение не може да му бъде отреждана решаваща роля за публичното разгласяване на дадено произведение, ако той не знае, че произведението е било неправомерно предоставено на разположение, или ако, след като бъде предупреден за неправомерния характер на това предоставяне, предприема коректни действия, за да отстрани това. Ако обаче от момента, в който операторът узнае, че предоставянето на разположение е извършено в нарушение на авторските права, и той не предприеме действия, за да блокира достъпа до въпросното произведение, неговото поведение може да се счита за насочено към изрично позволяване неправомерното предоставяне на разположение на произведението да продължи и следователно това поведение може да се счита и за съзнателно.(51)

Нататък позицията на ГА вече е предвидима:

53.      Следователно намесата на тези оператори отговаря на изведените в съдебната практика критерии за необходим и съзнателен характер. Поради това според мен следва да се приеме, че тези оператори, едновременно и съвместно с потребителите на мрежата, са също така инициатори на предоставянето на публично разположение на споделяните в мрежата произведения без съгласието на носителите на авторските права, когато съзнават, че това е неправомерно, но не предприемат действия за блокиране на достъпа до тези произведения.

54.      Ето защо на първия преюдициален въпрос следва да се отговори, че обстоятелството, че операторът на уебсайт индексира файлове, съдържащи закриляни с авторско право произведения, които се предлагат за споделяне в peer-to-peer мрежа, и предоставя търсачка, с което позволява тези файлове да бъдат намирани, представлява публично разгласяване по смисъла на член 3, параграф 1 от Директива 2001/29, когато операторът знае, че дадено произведение е предоставено на разположение в мрежата без съгласието на носителите на авторските права, но не предприема действия за блокиране на достъпа до това произведение.

Съответствието на блокирането с основните права

 Според ГА преценката за законосъобразност на такава мярка трябва да се прави за всеки отделен случай, като се анализира пропорционалността между, от една страна, мярката и произтичащото от нея лишаване от достъп до информация, и от друга страна, значението и тежестта на нарушенията на авторските права, извършени чрез този уебсайт. Предприетите мерки не трябва да лишават неоснователно интернет потребителите от възможността за правомерен достъп до предоставяната информация. Все пак е несъмнено, че мярка за блокиране на достъп до уебсайт лишава интернет потребителите от достъп до наличната информация, независимо дали тя е правомерна или не.

Окончателната преценка за пропорционалност на предвидената мярка е задача на националните юрисдикции.

Освен това, мярката трябва да има за резултат да предотврати или поне да направи трудно осъществими неразрешените посещения на закриляни обекти и в значителна степен да разубеждава интернет потребителите, които ползват услугите на адресата на разпореждането, да посещават тези обекти, предоставени на тяхно разположение в нарушение на авторските права. С други думи, мярката трябва да има за цел да се преустанови и избегне нарушаване на авторски права и при преследването на тази цел тя трябва да бъде ефективна в разумни граници.

 

Filed under: Digital, EU Law, Media Law Tagged: съд на ес