French Court - Private Copying is Not a Right torrent downloads.

BitTorrent Inc. Collaborate to Help ISPs Speed Up P2P Traffic torrent downloads.

Warner Music Proposes File-Sharing Tax for College Tuition torrent downloads.

BitTorrent Inc. Shutters BitTorrent Entertainment Network, Reverts to Torrent Search torrent downloads.

Swedish Gov't Mulls New Anti-File-Sharing Law torrent downloads.

Duke Now Requires RIAA to Have Proof of Illegal File-Sharing torrent downloads.

The law will make it easier for copyright holders to get a court order in order to force ISPs to release the customer info linked to a suspect IP-address. The Local reports that, although the law is based on a EU directive, the current draft goes further than that.

In order to obtain the personal details, copyright holders will have to prove that there is “probable cause” that a person, or rather an IP-address, has actually shared copyrighted material with others. With the current state of evidence gathering, where mistakes and false accusations are fairly common, this may not be that easy to achieve.

The many unsecured Wireless routers complicate the evidence gathering even further, and BitTorrent trackers have also implemented countermeasures of their own. Earlier this week we reported that the Pirate Bay tracker software automatically inserts several “random IP addresses” that are not actually downloading data. This is done on purpose, to pollute the evidence gathering of anti-piracy outfits.

The new law is also heavily opposed by Swedish Pirate Party Chairman Rick Falkvinge who told TorrentFreak: “These laws are written by digital illiterates who behave like blindfolded, drunken elephants trumpeting about in an egg packaging facility. They have no idea how much damage they’re causing, because they lack today’s literacy: an understanding of how the Internet is reshaping the power structures at their core.”

“We have good hope of putting an end to these ridiculous developments. Either the existing politicians start to understand what they’re actually doing at work all day, or they will escalate the conflict to the point where we’re replacing them in office. Either way, copyright will be scaled back,” Falkvinge added.

It is to be expected that opposition against the new anti-piracy law will be great, similar to the public outrage when Sweden introduced a wiretapping law earlier this year, and after the raid on The Pirate Bay in 2006. It wouldn’t surprise us if The Pirate Bay fights this battle at the front, clashing with local politicians and media once again.

Post from: TorrentFreak

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

Sweden to Introduce Controversial Anti-Piracy Law torrent downloads.

This year’s Wikipedia edition for schools is the largest since the project started back in 2006. With 34,000 images and 20 million words, it is comparable to a twenty volume encyclopedia captured on a single DVD.

Without a doubt, it is the most successful “checked content” project based on the English Wikipedia, used by hundreds of schools in first and third world countries. The project was originally aimed at schools in developing countries, but because of the high quality articles - all based around the UK curriculum with an absence of adult content - it is often used on intranets in first world schools too.

To save on resources, Wikipedia for schools is only available online via BitTorrent, which practically reduces the charity’s distribution costs to zero. SOS Children CEO Andrew Cates, who is a Wikipedia administrator himself, said that they have no other choice than to use BitTorrent, since the 2.9 GB download would crush their server.

“BitTorrent was a bit disappointing in that it got us the only substantial criticisms we received online,” Cates said in an interview with Wikinews. “A lot of people find it too much effort to use. However for the period we offered a straight http: download we had huge problems with spiders eating vast bandwidth.”

“As per last year therefore our main two channels will be free download by BitTorrent and mailing the DVDs free all over the world. At a pinch we will (as before) put straight copies up for individuals who cannot get it any other way, and we have some copies on memory sticks for on distributors,” Cates added.

The .torrent file is available for download on the SOS Children’s Villages website. For those who don’t want to install a BitTorrent client, the DVD can also be downloaded from any web browser with BitLet.

A final word of advice from SOS Children’s Villages: “It helps our charity if you keep µTorrent running after your download is finished.”

Post from: TorrentFreak

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

Wikipedia DVD Released on BitTorrent torrent downloads.

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

isoHunt: 'Copyright Infringers Aren't Wrong, the Law Is' torrent downloads.

As far as anti-piracy headlines go, the IFPI would prefer those coming from Denmark recently to be kept as quiet as possible. Back in September, Danish ISPs rejected the IFPI “3 strikes” proposals and then the anti-piracy group lost two court cases where alleged file-sharers used the so-called ‘wireless defense’.

This week, however, the IFPI and Danish Antipiratgruppen achieved a small victory in the case of a middle-aged man from Aalborg who used Direct Connect (DC) to share around 13,000 music files in 2005.

According to a Comon.dk report, the IFPI/Antipiratgruppen tracked activity which it linked to an IP address registered to the man. Obviously - as in all such cases - it was not possible to positively identify the person at the keyboard simply via the IP address, but the man made some admissions in what appears to be a generally weak defense, and these seem to help seal his fate.

Having previously lost his case in the district court, the man appealed and the case went to the Vestre Landsret, one of Denmark’s highest courts.

The defendant claimed that he couldn’t figure out how to use Direct Connect but admitted visiting the software’s homepage, albeit on an old PC which dated back to the mid 1990’s. It was also made clear in court that the man did not operate any type of wireless network, eliminating a defense which proved successful in other cases.

The ruling from the Vestre Landsret which was announced yesterday morning, stated that the man was guilty of copyright infringement. “The Court held that no person other than him [the defendant] could have used the IP address, and therefore he was sentenced,” said Antipiratgruppen lawyer, Maria Fred Lund.

The defendant was ordered to pay 160,000 kroner ($24,400) in damages, which was substantially less than the 440,000 kroner ($67,200) the anti-pirates wanted. He was also ordered to delete the music files he had obtained illegally.

Although the damages are less than the IFPI would’ve liked, the defendant’s lawyer, Per OverBech, says they could appeal to get the damages reduced. The court calculated the damages based on the losses estimated to have been suffered following the breach of copyright. The Vestre Landsret set an amount of 80,000 kroner ($12,200) and used the principle of ‘double-up’ to reach a final figure of 160,000 kroner ($24,400).

The ‘double up’ provision in Danish law is comprised of two parts. The first part covers the losses estimated to have been suffered following the breach of copyright. The court then doubles this amount to cover the actual losses and the documenting of such losses, which Antipiratgruppen and IFPI did not do.

“It is worth noting that it certainly pays to deal critically with the requirements of Antipiratgruppen,” said Per OverBech. “But in this case, the Vestre Landsret applied the principle of double-up, and I do not think there is reason for this,” noting that Antipiratgruppen provided no evidence to prove that sales had declined due to the alleged file-sharing activities of his client.

OverBech admits that it is unlikely that he will achieve an acquittal for his client but could go to the Supreme Court to contest the ‘double up’ principle applied by Vestre Landsret.

Thanks Peter_Pan

Post from: TorrentFreak

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

IFPI Wins Danish File-Sharing Case torrent downloads.

This is not the first time that Gilbert Gonzales, also known as “MikeyG”, has been to court for his sharing habits. Last year, we reported that he was identified as the leader of ‘an online gay porn piracy ring’, against which Titan Media filed a lawsuit.

Titan Media advertise themselves as ‘the premier creator of all-male erotica’ (aka ‘gay porn’), and they are known to go after sites and individuals who they say are illegally using their content. Gilbert Gonzales, who regularly posted infringing files on his weblog, was one of the key players according to the company,

In April, Gonzales was served with a $1.275 million default judgment for uploading 17 films to file hosting sites, but that didn’t stop him. He continued to share the work of Titan Media and its parent company Io Group Inc., and often accompanied his uploads with the message: ‘I will never stop sharing what I have with others.’

According to a report from AVN, the court was not amused by Gonzales’ repeated and defiant offenses. Judge Marilyn Hall Patel wrote in a second order for injunctive relief that, if he continues to share infringing material, “the court shall issue a warrant for the arrest of Gilbert Michael Gonzales.”

Since the regular anti-piracy outfits (MediaDefender excluded) don’t want to be associated with companies such as Titan Media, with the CEO of BayTSP saying: “We don’t want to be known in the porn space,” they had to go after the pirates themselves. With some success it seems, as the company managed to track down the remaining 21 “John Doe’s” that were listed in last year’s complaint.

Most of the 21 others have already decided to settle for a substantial, but undisclosed amount. Among these men were architects, restaurant owners and several married men, according to Io Group vice president Keith Webb, as if that should be some sort of surprise.

Post from: TorrentFreak

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

Judge Spanks Insatiable Gay Porn Pirate torrent downloads.

Tennessee Governor Signs Campus Piracy Bill into Law torrent downloads.

Earlier this week, researchers from Yale University and The University of Washington presented the latest findings from their P4P research. P4P is a new technology that could make any filesharing application (including BitTorrent) cheaper for ISPs, as it tries to connect to local peers as much as possible. Local traffic is cheaper for ISPs and reduces the load on the network. In addition, P4P enabled filesharing clients will download files faster than regular clients.

In theory this is a great idea. However, P4P requires collaboration between the developers of filesharing clients and ISPs, which might be a problem. Indeed, most P2P companies TorrentFreak talked to are not that excited about the initiative, but they wont say that out loud, and play along for the time being.

There might even be a darker side to the project, as the P4P working group includes some prominent members of the entertainment industry and well known anti-piracy lobbyists. Besides that, we argue that it is likely that the technology might slow down transfers of people who are on ISPs that don’t end up supporting the technology, raising serious Net Neutrality issues.

Let’s start off by looking at the mission statement of the P4P working group, which was founded last year. One of the key objectives of the group, quoted from their official mission statement (pdf) is as follows (emphasis added).

[to] Determine, validate, and encourage the adoption of methods for ISPs and P2P software distributors to work together to enable and support consumer service improvements as P2P adoption and resultant traffic evolves while protecting the intellectual property (IP) of participating entities

It might of course be that the P4P group included this objective to cover their asses. However, we have our doubts. For now, the technical specs give no reason to believe that the new technology will support piracy filters or other anti-piracy measures. But, when you consider that the MPAA, NBC Universal and several other representatives from the entertainment industry are members of the working group, this might very well be suggested in the next phase of the project.

One might wonder, why is the MPAA involved in all this? Obviously their agenda is to stop copyright infringement, so we have no reason to believe that they will try to steer P4P in this direction as well. This would not be a big surprise really. The P4P working group was founded by The Distributed Computing Industry Association (DCIA), a collaboration of the entertainment industry, ISPs and P2P companies. The purpose of the DCIA is clear, as we can read on their website (emphasis added):

Our number one priority clearly is the elimination of copyright infringement and, because DCIA advocates the commercial development of distributed computing (as opposed for example to trying to stop it), our key strategy centers on proliferating legitimate commercial services to displace unauthorized media file sharing currently being conducted by consumers on a massive scale.

This shows the P4P working group from a whole other perspective doesn’t it? We have no doubt that the researchers involved in this have the best of intentions, and that they really want to develop a new technology that benefits P2P users and ISPs. We also believe, however, that the MPAA and other rights holders who are part of the project, will push their agenda forward sooner of later.

The DCIA collaboration is an initiative from Hollywood’s big shots and several of the larger technology corporations. Back in 2002, both sides got together and decided that it would be a good idea to start a working group to keep an eye on future technological developments. Below, we quote a paragraph from one of the original letters (pdf) discussing the matter, signed by the CEOs of the MPAA, Walt Disney, Sony Pictures, AOL Time Warner, Vivendi Universal, Metro-Goldwyn- Mayer, Viacom and News America (emphasis added).

We thus propose the establishment of a new high level working group, independent or as part of an existing process, to find technical measures that limit unauthorized peer-to-peer trafficking in movies, music and other entertainment content.

And so the DCIA was born, which later started the P4P workgroup. We will leave it up to the readers to decide whether this is a serious threat or not, we will find out sooner or later anyway.

There is one other “dark” aspect of P4P we want to mention though, something that hasn’t been reported elsewhere, even though it can have some very negative consequences for P2P users.

By looking at the latest P4P research report, we come to the conclusion that P4P might slow down the downloads of people who use non-P4P clients, or those who are on an ISP that doesn’t support P4P. This is because P4P users will be more likely to share with local peers, while regular P2P users share with everyone (note that both can be in the same swarm). This goes against Net Neutrality principles, although this depends on how one defines Net Neutrality.

Since P4P prioritizes local traffic, P4P users will share less with users who do not use the technology. This will affect both the upload and the download side, but the data in the report seems to suggest that the give and take ratio is worse when P4P is enabled, so they take more from other ISPs (relatively) than they give back (mild leeching). This is most likely facilitated by the fact that upload speeds tend to be slower than download speeds.

Let’s conclude by saying that the researchers from Yale University and The University of Washington came up with a promising technology that could potentially speed up P2P downloads, at least for some users. Getting ISPs and filesharing developers to embrace this new technology will not be easy though. ISPs will sure be motivated, as it will save them money. Hoever, we’re not so sure that BitTorrent client developers (and others) will adopt it so easily, since it might degrade performance on non P4P ISPs.

The largest threat (as usual) might come from the anti-piracy lobby, as they will probably push for content filters or other anti-piracy measures. They haven’t done this so far, but to us this seems to be inevitable.

This is an article from: TorrentFreak

Uncovering The Dark Side of P4P

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

Uncovering The Dark Side of P4P torrent downloads.

CRTC: 'Bell Canada Can Throttle BitTorrent - For Now' torrent downloads.

Sir Paul McCartney Doesn't Object to FileSharing torrent downloads.

The TorrentPrivacy software has been developed so that anybody can use it, from BitTorrent novices through to experts. TorrentPrivacy uses a pre-configured version of v1.7.7 uTorrent, so there are no settings that have to be entered manually.

It pretty much works straight out of the box. First you have to chose a connection point - at the moment they have servers in Europe, USA, Canada. The closer the connection point is to your true location, the faster the speeds you will get from the service. Then, after you’ve chosen a connection point, just click connect and the program will connect to the server. The connection is made through the SSH protocol with 128bit encryption, which prevents traffic shaping and keeps your traffic ambiguous to prying eyes.

TorrentFreak briefly tested the application and it worked surprisingly well. People who are used to uTorrent wouldn’t notice any difference, besides the fact that they are using version 1.7.7 instead of 1.8 which was released earlier this week. The download speeds we got were decent as well, perhaps 5% less than normal, but that’s to be expected, and is acceptable for an SSH tunnel.

Alex, who runs Torrentreactor.net and TorrentPrivacy, told TorrentFreak: “We started the TorrentPrivacy project at the end of 2007. The idea was to give torrent users an anonymous BitTorrent service from a party they can trust. TorrentReactor has been online for approximately 4 years, and we believe that when people see that TorrentPrivacy uses ns1/ns2.torrentreactor.net as DNS servers, they won’t have any questions about a possible government setup of torrentprivacy.com.”

When we asked Alex about his motivation to start the project, he said that he wanted to make it as easy as possible for BitTorrent users to be anonymous, and get the RIAA and MPAA off their backs. “We don’t like the situation where two organizations from the USA believe they can rule the world. The Pirate Bay showed them that other countries have other laws and American laws don’t work outside of USA. We want to be the pain in their asses, and allow users to download what they want without fear of a sudden door knock.”

One of the possible downsides to the project is that you have to use their client, which is Windows only. For now there are no plans to offer SSH accounts separately, Alex told us. They do offer some other goodies though. As TorrentPrivacy only secures you while you’re using torrents, they have also developed a web proxy, listing 300 torrent sites which you can visit anonymously as an extra service.

Sounds great, right? Yes it does, but unfortunately the service is not free. TorrentPrivacy currently has three payment options. $2.95 per week, $9.95 per month and $99.95 per year. I guess it’s up to you whether you think it’s worth it or not.

This is an article from: TorrentFreak

Download Torrents Anonymously with TorrentPrivacy

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

Download Torrents Anonymously with TorrentPrivacy torrent downloads.

Similar to other consumer rights organizations, the Norway Consumer Council (Forbrukerrådet) is dedicated to representing the interests of consumers, operating independently of the commercial interests of others. It aims to influence business, at the same time as educating and providing help to consumers, and has been vocal in its opposition of iTunes DRM.

Back in March this year, the Council (NCC) entered the file-sharing debate, when it advised members of the public not to comply with the demands of a Norwegian law firm. The law firm, Simonsen, had sent out letters to ISPs demanding that alleged pirates sign legal agreements accepting that they had shared files, and promising never to do it again. The NCC legal officer, Hans Marius Graasvold, said that the signing of such a letter (which is very similar indeed to the letters sent out by UK lawyers Davenport Lyons) makes the consumer liable for all past and future acts of file-sharing in his household, and should be avoided at all costs. This intervention by NCC led to the Norwegian ISP association advising their members not to pass on the lawyers letters.

NCC is also opposed to any “3 strikes” type legislation, calling it a “grossly disproportionate” response, with Hans Marius Graasvold stating that consumers facing such allegations are deprived of due process and their right to privacy. Internet access should be provided by an ISP on “neutral terms” with “legal protection against arbitrary termination of the contract.”

Presumably trying to find some middle-ground in this file-sharing debate, which includes the sticky issues of citizen’s rights, due process and privacy, the NCC has started discussions with representatives of the copyright industry and ISPs, with a view to the creation of an independent committee empowered to act in cases of alleged copyright infringement. Major Norwegian ISPs have apparently welcomed the initiative.

The proposals suggest that such a committee should be run by a public authority, and act as a mechanism for alternative dispute resolution and in other cases, a complaint board. When an alleged pirate is approached with allegations by a copyright holder, the consumer would then have the opportunity to send the complaint to the committee for its consideration, with any decision subject to appeal.

The NCC hopes to put its proposals to the Norwegian government by mid 2009.

Ofcom, the UK’s independent regulator for the communications industry has also indicated that it could get involved in the file-sharing debate, in trying to find an alternative to the doomed “3 strikes” proposals, although it hasn’t suggested that it would offer any arbitration services.

Post from: TorrentFreak

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

Norway Mulls Anti-Piracy ‘Complaint Board’ Proposal torrent downloads.

The methods universities use to reduce piracy on their networks have been scrutinized in our ‘Tackling College Piracy’ series. Most of them have been found to be technologically ineffective, working only at the psychological level. The main problem with the “technological approach” is that it’s impossible to distinguish authorized from unauthorized network traffic. Nonetheless, these anti-piracy efforts are quite expensive.

First of all, the amount of time spent dealing with allegations of infringement are huge, according to the study by the Campus Community Project. IT personnel alone spend a mean time of 750 hours at public universities, while private university IT personnel spend around 620 hours a year on this. The shorter time for private institutions generally comes about because of their smaller size, and so smaller search size, and less frequent notifications.

Overall, the costs that come with them are larger than most would expect. It was concluded that between $350,000 and $500,000 is spent annually per institution - directly and indirectly - dealing with copyright infringement notices. The quality of US education has already been questioned (most recently by US presidential candidate Barack Obama in the 3rd Presidential Debate), especially in contrast to the high cost of it. In this light, the costs incurred dealing with copyright infringements are nonsensical.

The study reports that 25% of public universities use a form of technological filtering, such as Copysense, to try and reduce infringements. As noted before, such measures are fairly inaccurate and rarely work. Less common are educational methods, which may be linked with p2p access, as at Missouri S&T. However, most universities and colleges simply disconnect pirating students from the network, and make them promise to never do it again when they want to get back on. Financial penalties are also given, but this is not yet commonplace. We will deal with this in an upcoming piece.

Post from: TorrentFreak

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

Tackling College Piracy: At What Cost? torrent downloads.

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

South African Music Industry Group Closes that Country's Largest BitTorrent Site torrent downloads.

Google Launches 'Flu Trends' to Track Outbreaks for the Feds torrent downloads.

Duke Now Requires RIAA Have Proof of Illegal File-Sharing torrent downloads.

uTorrent for Mac Beta Released torrent downloads.

Atari Drops File-Sharing Lawsuit Dragnet torrent downloads.

The site, which closed in December 04, after Hanff and the site’s administrators heard about raids in Holland, was not administered by Hanff, but by some online friends of his. Shortly after this dawn raid by a process server, Hanff -who had just started a new job- appeared on an episode of the BBC show “NewsNight”. The day after it aired, he was fired, for having views on copyright that the company felt were incompatible with its own, and for not disclosing the case.

That was the situation at the end of 2005 anyway. And now, more than two years have passed and he has heard nothing new. Despite the claims in the letters he has received, Hanff doesn’t think the case went any further, and was quietly dropped. “The last thing I had was a letter from the MPAA lawyers with a copy of a motion for a default [judgment]”, he told TorrentFreak. “That was November 2005 – had that motion been granted I should have heard from the courts.” The hearing in question would have been around the middle of December 2005. “I haven’t even received anything from the court about that hearing – which I should have done – so I am sceptical as to whether or not it actually went ahead”

Perhaps the MPAA felt they didn’t need to proceed any more, after all, thanks to the case, Mr Hanff lost his job, and they didn’t have to run the risk of an adverse judgment in court. As has been discussed in the past, the anti-filesharing litigation campaigns seems to be less about compensating the artists, and more about harassment, and manufacturing cases to boost lobbying efforts. It would appear that this is just more of the same – mudslinging in lieu of any actual case. The document received by Mr. Hanff is certainly full of accusations, threats, and exaggerations – something that recently cost a French Lawyer her ability to practice law.

It does bring into some doubt the ability or the desire for the MPAA to litigate outside the cozy confines of the US. It also seems to indicate the way the oink case will go, as it just had it’s bail date extended again, although it is a criminal case, whilst dvdr-core is a civil case. Nevertheless, the extension of the case with no action except the initial accusation does draw the similarities closer.

In the meantime, Mr Hanff has been spending his energies tacking Phorm, the illegal and widespread invasion of browsing privacy to target adverts via deep packet inspection in association with UK ISPs. His dissertation on the subject can be read here.

This is an article from: TorrentFreak

MPAA Silently Drops Case Against BitTorrent Site

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

MPAA Silently Drops Case Against BitTorrent Site torrent downloads.

It is hard to make a definite list of the most popular BitTorrent sites. Over the years we’ve made quite a few lists, and reported some of the latest trends. Most lists we published were based on Alexa’s ranking, mainly because it was pretty much the only traffic source that was available. Recently, however, Google started to rank websites as well, including a traffic estimate.

So, let’s see how well Google does, and how their traffic estimation and ranking compares to actual traffic data and Alexa’s ranking respectively.

One of the interesting features of Google’s site comparison is that it gives an estimation of the daily traffic when you’re logged in on a Google account. The data used for the traffic statistics comes from Google analytics, consumer panels, and other third-party market research.

The traffic data seem to be quite accurate, for some sites at least. The daily (absolute) unique visitors for Mininova, for example, is estimated to be slightly above 2 million a day, which matches with real traffic stats we got from the Mininova team.

As we look at the graph below we can clearly see that Mininova is in the lead judging by the number of visitors, followed by The Pirate Bay. isoHunt and Torrentz compete for the third place. After these four sites there is a huge gap to other BitTorrent sites such as BTjunkie, TorrentReactor and TorrentPortal.

It is interesting to see how many similarities there are between Google’s ranking, and the daily reach according to Alexa.

The regional differences in popularity of the sites are also worth mentioning. The Pirate Bay, for example, is more popular than Mininova in the US, and especially in Sweden. Torrentz, on the other hand, does really well in India, while isoHunt has a relatively large fanbase in Japan.

Overall it seems that BitTorrent sites are still growing, especially The Pirate Bay, since they nearly doubled their traffic in a yeah. This is pretty much in line with the growth in the number of peers on The Pirate Bay trackers, which went from 5 to well over 10 million in the last 12 months.

This is an article from: TorrentFreak

Top Torrent Sites Ranked by Google

torrentlog.com - Full movie downloads (dvdrips and divx)

Top Torrent Sites Ranked by Google torrent downloads.