• Visit us on Facebook
  • Visit us on Twitter
  • RSS


Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 141 to 153 of 153
  1. #141
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Google’s Anti-Piracy Efforts Pass IPO’s Test With Flying Colors

    Today, Google released a report of its latest progress on the anti-piracy front. Among other things, it stresses that pirate site demotion in search results has helped the company to stay well within the thresholds agreed with the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO), which are part of the voluntary deal with UK rightsholders.

    The entertainment industries have repeatedly accused Google of not doing enough to limit piracy while demanding tougher action.

    For its part, Google regularly publishes updates on the extensive measures it takes to limit piracy on its platforms.

    The company has today released the latest iteration of its “How Google Fights Piracy” report. It highlights how the company generates billions in revenue for the entertainment industries while at the same time takes measures to counter copyright infringement.

    The company explains that its anti-piracy efforts are guided by five principles, starting with more and better legal alternatives.

    “Piracy often arises when consumer demand goes unmet by legitimate supply. The best way to battle piracy is with better, more convenient, legitimate alternatives to piracy, which can do far more than attempts at enforcement can,” Google writes.

    The other principles include a “follow-the-money” approach, effective and scalable anti-piracy solutions, protection against abuse such as fabricated copyright infringement allegations, and transparency.

    A large portion of the report describes Google’s policies and results regarding web search. The company stresses that it doesn’t want to link to any pirated content, but that it relies on copyright holders to pinpoint these URLs.

    “Google does not want to include links to infringing material in our search results, and we make significant efforts to prevent infringing webpages from appearing,” the company writes.

    “The heart of those efforts is cooperation with creators and rightsholders to identify and remove results that link to infringing content and to present legitimate alternatives.”

    Aside from removing more than three billion URLs in recent years, the search engine also helps to promote legal alternatives. This includes “knowledge cards” (which, incidentally,
    have featured pirate links too), as well as offering copyright holders SEO advice.

    Earlier this year we reported that the number of takedown notices was
    starting to decrease for the first time in years, and Google confirms that observation in its report.

    “The number of URLs listed in takedown requests decreased by 9%, reversing a long-term trend where the number of URLs requested for removal increased year-over-year,” the company writes.

    Last year, Google was asked to remove 882 million URLs in total, of which 95% were removed. In addition, more than
    65,000 sites that were flagged persistently have been demoted in search results, lowering their visibility.

    This demotion measure is “extremely effective” according to the search giant.

    “Immediately upon launching improvements to our demotion signal in 2014, one major torrent site acknowledged traffic from search engines had dropped by 50% within the first week,” Google notes, citing
    a TorrentFreak report.

    Perhaps more importantly, Google’s demotion measures also passed the tests that were carried out under the
    Voluntary Code of Practice that Google entered into alongside Microsoft and major UK rightsholder organizations.

    This agreement was signaled by the rightsholders as a landmark deal and, reportedly, Google is doing well.

    Thus far, four rounds of tests have been carried out to check whether search engines sufficiently limit the availability of infringing content. These are based on guidelines set by the UK’s Intellectual Property Office (IPO). Google passed them all.

    “Thanks to the demotion signal and our other efforts to surface legitimate results in response to media-related queries, Google Search has passed the test every time with flying colors — scoring considerably under the thresholds agreed with the IPO,” Google reveals.

    This suggests that the search engine doesn’t have much to fear from the UK Government, which previously warned that “legislative” measures could follow if search engines didn’t step up their game.

    While Google says that it’s doing its best, the company is convinced that search is not a major driver to pirate sites and stresses that they don’t control what is on the web.

    The company reiterates its earlier position that removing entire domains from search results is unacceptable, as that would restrict access to legitimate content as well. Similarly, “filtering” the entire web for pirated content is not an option either.

    “It is a myth that Google could create a tool to filter the web for allegedly infringing material and remove images, video, and text from our search results proactively. Such a system is both infeasible and unnecessary,” Google writes.

    Aside from search, Google has also removed content from its other services including YouTube, Google Drive, and Google images. Some of these services were
    extensively abused by streaming sites last year, but Google says it has taken steps to counter this.

    Finally, no anti-piracy report these days would be complete without a Kodi mention. The streaming software, which is perfectly legal in its own right, is regularly used in combination with third-party piracy add-ons.

    Google, which banned the term Kodi
    from its auto-complete feature, says it removed several set-top boxes with “suspicious” add-ons from Google Shopping. In addition, the Play Store is closely monitored to flag apps with pre-installed pirate Kodi add-ons before they appear online.

    In closing, Google notes that it remains committed to fighting piracy on all fronts, albeit not at all costs.

    “Through continued innovation and partnership, we’re committed to rolling back bad actors while empowering the creative communities who make everything we love about the internet today.”




    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  2. #142
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Denuvo Cites Huge ‘Losses’ For AAA Game Not Using its Anti-Piracy Tech

    Anti-piracy outfit Denuvo has published figures that suggest huge 'losses' for games not using its anti-tamper technology. The company says that an unnamed AAA sports title was downloaded more than 355,000 times by BitTorrent users in its first two weeks online, with 12% of those shares happening in the first day. A fortnight of protection, it now suggests, is Denuvo's window of opportunity.

    Ever since computer and video games have been available to the masses, players have been able to pirate them. From the early days of cassettes and floppy disks to today’s digital downloads, games are pirated as quickly as pirates can manage.

    Over the years, dozens of anti-piracy mechanisms have attempted to stem the tide, with one thing in common – all have eventually failed to prevent piracy. With billions in revenue at stake, it’s a huge and competitive market that games companies wish to protect.

    In recent years, one particular product has found itself on the frontlines. Denuvo’s anti-tamper technology protects perhaps the most vulnerable of titles – PC games – and for the longest time managed to thwart even the most competent of games ‘crackers’

    However, in recent years, the technology has been under attack, mainly because of its deployment on the world’s most popular games but partially because the technology presents such a challenge to those attempting to circumvent it. Slowly but surely, the unstoppable Denuvo has proven to be fallible, with several cracking groups unpicking its digital locks.

    With the period of Denuvo protection diminishing from many, many months down to a few days in some cases, the company has attempted to position itself not as invulnerable, but the people to turn to if protecting early sales are important. And, according to a new statement by the company, they are very important indeed.

    In a statement issued by Denuvo owner Irdeto (the
    latter acquired the former earlier this year), the company states that it tracked pirate downloads of an unnamed ‘AAA’ (big budget, major studio) title during the first few days after its release. Without Denuvo protection it was quickly cracked and made available on P2P networks and from there, pirates did their thing.

    “Irdeto tracked the downloads of a major sports title on P2P networks after the title, which did not include anti-tamper protection, was cracked on the same day of its release,” the company says.

    “During the first two weeks, Irdeto detected 355,664 torrent downloads of the illegal copy of the title. Given the retail price of the game, this puts the total potential loss of revenue from P2P downloads at $21,336,283.”

    Irdeto highlights the first 14 days following release as the most critical for such a game, claiming that up to 80% of sales take place during the period. An impressive 50% of those sales take place within the first four days, the company adds.

    It’s worth noting that while Denuvo games are often cracked very quickly, it’s definitely not uncommon for protection to stand up to the first two weeks of attacks. Denuvo can usually hold off crackers for the first four days, so these figures are obvious marketing tools for a technology that has been somewhat diminished after various cracking groups began taking its challenge personally.

    But just in case Denuvo only manages a single day of protection, owner Irdeto suggests that the effort is worth it – even dropping down to the importance of standing firm for an hour.

    “The research also found that the first day of release alone is crucial for the protection of a AAA title, as 12% of the illegal P2P downloads occurred within the first day of the cracked copy appearing on the P2P networks (and a substantial number of these in the first hour),” the company adds.

    During the past couple of years, with many Denuvo-protected games finding themselves cracked within days and weeks, the company has positioned itself as a necessary speedbump, one that can make a difference straight after launch. With Denuvo limiting the above statistics to the first two weeks, there’s a suggestion that’s where its confidence lies.

    “Piracy is a threat that is firmly established in the games industry and, as our research suggests, it can result in potentially huge revenue losses for publishers if their games are compromised within the 14-day window following release,” said Reinhard Blaukovitsch, Managing Director of Denuvo, Irdeto.

    “With this in mind, it is crucial for publishers to implement security strategies that make their games as difficult as possible to crack and reverse engineer. This way they will be able to better protect the revenues that allow them to continue to create such compelling games.”

    While the challenge presented by Denuvo protection has never proven popular with pirates, many hoped that the technology would prove unpopular with developers and publishers too. However, as a sarcastic graphic posted by a Reddit
    user yesterday shows, there doesn’t appear to be much lack of uptake.

    New game contains Denuvo? We know…..


    https://torrentfreak.com/images/denuvo-aaa.png

    All that said, it appears that no variant of Denuvo is invulnerable. Even since the company managed to
    shut down Bulgarian cracker Voksiearlier this year, new and old players have been taking the company’s protection apart.

    According to a useful table published by
    /r/crackwatch, cracking group CODEX recently defeated the protection on Dragon Quest XI in 13 days while Soul Caliber 6 took them just four. (Note: There’s that four-day period mentioned by Irdeto above)

    A previously unheard of group ‘FCKDRM’ appeared on the scene in November, defeating Mega Man 11 in just over a month and Football Manager 2019 in just four days (there it is again). Notably, these two latter titles used Denuvo’s latest technology, labeled as 5.1 and 5.2.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  3. #143
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Dutch Govt Agency Warns Against Fake ‘Piracy’ Fines

    The Dutch Government's Telecom Agency is alerting the public that its name is being abused by scammers to demand piracy fines. In a warning issued today, it recommends recipients not to respond to these emails. It appears that scammers are capitalizing on the news that rightsholders may soon start sending 'fines' to alleged pirates.

    It is no secret that copyright holders are monitoring unauthorized downloads around the world.

    In most cases this results in harmless takedown notices but increasingly, these warnings are triggering
    settlement demands or automated fines.

    Rightsholders in the Netherlands are planning similar action. Dutch Filmworks initially said it would send the first settlement demands
    last Autumn but a year later, this is yet to happen.

    Local anti-piracy group BREIN also
    announced a similar effort, targeting frequent seeders. This campaign isn’t live either.

    Considering the above, it came as a surprise when several people received emails demanding a ‘fine’ over alleged illegal downloading in recent days. The emails in question claim to be from the Dutch Government’s
    Telecom Agency (Agentschap Telecom), which carries some weight.

    The emails may look pretty legitimate, especially to people who are unfamiliar with these type of demands, but the Telecom Agency
    issued awarning today which explains that they are fake.

    “There appear to be fake emails in circulation that supposedly come from the Telecom Agency. These are fake e-mails regarding fines for illegal downloading of films. These are bogus e-mails. They are not from the Telecom Agency,” the warning notes.

    “Have you received such an e-mail? Do not respond to the message, do not click on any links and never leave your details behind.”

    It appears that the scammers are using the news that ‘fines’ will soon be sent out to alleged pirates to add legitimacy to their efforts. Interestingly, this isn’t the first time that this has happened.

    Last year we reported on a similar scheme where fake piracy fines were sent out, supposedly on behalf of Dutch Filmworks. This was a scam as well and the movie distributor advised recipients to throw the letters in the trash.

    “There is a fake letter in circulation. This letter is NOT sent by Dutch Filmworks. Do not pay and throw the letter away,” the movie Dutch Filmworks
    warned at the time.

    Being a Government agency, it’s unlikely that the Telecom Agency will ever send out piracy fines. These are more likely to come from rightsholders or their representatives.

    How far along BREIN and Dutch Filmworks are with their real ‘fine’ schemes remains unknown.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  4. #144
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Publishing Giants Ask to Join Landmark Anti-Piracy Agreement

    A landmark anti-piracy agreement between rightsholders and technology companies in Russia might soon have a new signature. Major publishers have asked to join the scheme, which will see the creation of a centralized database of infringing content and rapid takedowns. Meanwhile, search giant Yandex might avoid a legal battle with TV companies after signing the document last week.

    Several Russian tech giants and media companies signed a landmark anti-piracy agreement last week. It’s designed to make infringing content less visible by sanitizing search results and rapidly removing content.

    The memorandum was signed by media companies Channel One, the National Media Group, Gazprom-Media, the Internet Video Association, and the Association of Film and Television Producers. Yandex, Rambler Group, Mail.Ru Group, vKontakte, and RuTube signed on the tech platform side.

    A centralized database, populated with links to sites that the entertainment industry groups claim are infringing their intellectual property, will be created in a matter of weeks. Search engines and hosting platforms will query the database every five minutes and remove infringing content with six hours.

    While the agreement had broad support, Russia’s publishing companies were not present during the initial signing. However, telecoms regular Roscomndazor indicated that other rightsholders and tech companies were welcome to join following a successful application.

    The publishers have now shown their hand in a letter from the Russian Book Union to Roscomnadzor head Alexander Zharov.

    “I ask you to assist in organizing the signing of a memorandum with the Internet Copyright Association [AZAPI] representing the interests of most major Russian publishing houses,” the letter
    reads.

    “Direct communications between the Internet Copyright Association (AZAPI) and Roskomnadzor will remove links from search engines issued on the basis of a constructive dialogue, without waiting for the adoption of the law to develop an optimal test model.

    The memorandum signed last week is valid until September 1, 2019. By then, the signatories expect new copyright legislation to be introduced, enshrining the terms of the memorandum in law.

    In recent months, Yandex, in particular, has been under increasing pressure to do something about the large amounts of pirate content appearing in search results. Early September, before the signing of the memorandum, the battle again moved to the legal system.

    In
    lawsuits filed with the Moscow City Court, Gazprom-Media outlets including TNT, TV-3, 2×2, complained that Yandex should “stop creating technical conditions that ensure the placement of [copyrighted] works on the Yandex.ru website.”

    While that matter is still pending, the agreement reached last week (Yandex and Gazprom-Media both signed) could mean that GazProm-Media withdraws its complaints against Yandex. Speaking with TASS, spokesperson Ekaterina Trofimova declined to rule out the possibility of peace breaking out before the trial, provisionally arranged for December 5, 2018.

    Meanwhile, the Russian
    IPChain Association, which earlier this year signed an agreement to digitize the patent archives of Kyrgyzstan using blockchain technology, has said it’s ready to provide a technological solution for the anti-piracy database detailed in the memorandum.

    “The main infrastructure solution for implementing the conditions of the memorandum is, of course, distributed registry technology,” said a letter penned by Maxim Proksh of the government-backed innovation group,
    Skolkovo Foundation.

    “Based on this technology, a number of projects have already been created that have passed the pilot stage and have been commercialized. This is how the IPChain intellectual property management system would work to provide a technological solution for the implementation of the memorandum.”

    Through the use of blockchain technology, it’s envisioned that trust will be built between companies like Yandex and Gazprom-Media.

    “It is important that the blockchain will create and cultivate an environment of trust between search engines and rightsholders. Flat registries in the form of tables are hopelessly outdated, both technologically and morally,” Proksh
    added.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  5. #145
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Publishing Giants Ask to Join Landmark Anti-Piracy Agreement

    A landmark anti-piracy agreement between rightsholders and technology companies in Russia might soon have a new signature. Major publishers have asked to join the scheme, which will see the creation of a centralized database of infringing content and rapid takedowns. Meanwhile, search giant Yandex might avoid a legal battle with TV companies after signing the document last week.

    Several Russian tech giants and media companies signed a landmark anti-piracy agreement last week. It’s designed to make infringing content less visible by sanitizing search results and rapidly removing content.

    The memorandum was signed by media companies Channel One, the National Media Group, Gazprom-Media, the Internet Video Association, and the Association of Film and Television Producers. Yandex, Rambler Group, Mail.Ru Group, vKontakte, and RuTube signed on the tech platform side.

    A centralized database, populated with links to sites that the entertainment industry groups claim are infringing their intellectual property, will be created in a matter of weeks. Search engines and hosting platforms will query the database every five minutes and remove infringing content with six hours.

    While the agreement had broad support, Russia’s publishing companies were not present during the initial signing. However, telecoms regular Roscomndazor indicated that other rightsholders and tech companies were welcome to join following a successful application.

    The publishers have now shown their hand in a letter from the Russian Book Union to Roscomnadzor head Alexander Zharov.

    “I ask you to assist in organizing the signing of a memorandum with the Internet Copyright Association [AZAPI] representing the interests of most major Russian publishing houses,” the letter
    reads.

    “Direct communications between the Internet Copyright Association (AZAPI) and Roskomnadzor will remove links from search engines issued on the basis of a constructive dialogue, without waiting for the adoption of the law to develop an optimal test model.

    The memorandum signed last week is valid until September 1, 2019. By then, the signatories expect new copyright legislation to be introduced, enshrining the terms of the memorandum in law.

    In recent months, Yandex, in particular, has been under increasing pressure to do something about the large amounts of pirate content appearing in search results. Early September, before the signing of the memorandum, the battle again moved to the legal system.

    In
    lawsuits filed with the Moscow City Court, Gazprom-Media outlets including TNT, TV-3, 2×2, complained that Yandex should “stop creating technical conditions that ensure the placement of [copyrighted] works on the Yandex.ru website.”

    While that matter is still pending, the agreement reached last week (Yandex and Gazprom-Media both signed) could mean that GazProm-Media withdraws its complaints against Yandex. Speaking with TASS, spokesperson Ekaterina Trofimova declined to rule out the possibility of peace breaking out before the trial, provisionally arranged for December 5, 2018.

    Meanwhile, the Russian
    IPChain Association, which earlier this year signed an agreement to digitize the patent archives of Kyrgyzstan using blockchain technology, has said it’s ready to provide a technological solution for the anti-piracy database detailed in the memorandum.

    “The main infrastructure solution for implementing the conditions of the memorandum is, of course, distributed registry technology,” said a letter penned by Maxim Proksh of the government-backed innovation group,
    Skolkovo Foundation.

    “Based on this technology, a number of projects have already been created that have passed the pilot stage and have been commercialized. This is how the IPChain intellectual property management system would work to provide a technological solution for the implementation of the memorandum.”

    Through the use of blockchain technology, it’s envisioned that trust will be built between companies like Yandex and Gazprom-Media.

    “It is important that the blockchain will create and cultivate an environment of trust between search engines and rightsholders. Flat registries in the form of tables are hopelessly outdated, both technologically and morally,” Proksh
    added.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  6. #146
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Greek ISPs Ordered to Block 38 Domains, Including The Pirate Bay

    Following a request from a local anti-piracy group, Greek Internet service providers are required to block access to The Pirate Bay, 1337x, YTS, and several other pirate sites. The order, issued by a special Government-affiliated commission, also targets several popular subtitle sites.

    Copyright holders are increasingly demanding that ISPs should block access to pirate sites in order to protect their business.

    As the bastion of online piracy, The Pirate Bay has become one of the main targets. The site has been blocked in roughly two-dozen countries already, mostly in Europe.

    Earlier this week we reported that Romania had joined in on the action, following a
    court order, and only a few days later Greek Internet providers are now ordered to block the notorious torrent site as well.

    The blocking request was filed this spring by the Society for the Protection of Audiovisual Works (EPOE), a local anti-piracy group which represents the interests of major Greek copyright holders.

    The group filed an application with the IPPC, a special commission that falls under the Greek Ministry of Culture and Sports, which decided that ISPs must block a total of 38 domain names.

    The targeted sites include The Pirate Bay, 1337x, YTS, as well as several popular local sites, such as Xrysoi, Gamatotv, and Tainiomania. With Subztv.club, Subtitles.gr, and others, subtitle sites are thrown into the mix as well.

    According to the Government-affiliated commission, it is apparent that all the targeted sites are involved in large-scale copyright infringement.

    The commission has set a tight deadline of 48 hours for ISPs to comply with the order. Those who fail to do so face a fine of 850 euros per day, Lawspot
    reports.

    The order stands for three years and it specifically states that offenses committed by users are not covered.

    It’s worth noting that this wasn’t the first attempt to block The Pirate Bay and other pirate sites in Greece. AEPI previously launched a civil court case, but at the time the court ruled that pirate site blocks were
    disproportionate and unconstitutional.

    It’s questionable whether this would hold up today, though, as the EU Court of Justice ruled otherwise
    last year.

    Whether the current blockades will help to deter piracy in a meaningful way has yet to be seen. As usual, there are several options to bypass ISP blockades, and the targeted sites themselves often offer alternative domains.



    The full list of domain names is posted below and a copy of the order can be found here.

    1. https://xrysoi.online
    2. xrysoi.se
    3. xrysoi.eu
    4.
    http://gamatotv.me
    5. thegmtv.org,
    6. gamatotv.to
    7. https: //onlinemoviestar.xyz
    8. onlinemoviestar.com
    9. tainies.online
    10. tenies.online
    11.
    https://tenies-online.com
    12. teniesonline.ucoz.com
    13. https: // oipeirates .online
    14. oipeirates.eu
    15. oipeirates.se
    16.
    http://tainio-mania.com
    17. tainiomania.ucoz.com
    18. https: // liomenoi.com
    19. moviecinema.gr
    20. moviecinematv.online
    21.
    http://tainiesonline.tv
    22.
    https://magico.info
    23.
    http://www.subs4free.com
    24. small-industry.com
    25. rnedium-industry.com
    26.
    https://subztv.club
    27. http: // www .greeksubtitles.info
    28. htt : //
    www.subtitles.gr
    29.
    https://thepiratebay.org
    30. thepiratebay.se
    31. thepiratebay.me
    32. thepiratebay3.org
    33.
    https://yts.am
    34. https: //www.1337x.to
    35. 1337x.st
    36. 1337x.ws
    37. 1337x.eu
    38. 1337x.se

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  7. #147
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    MPAA Considers a ‘Makeover’ As It Faces Shrinking Budget

    Disney's acquisition of 20th Century Fox has been one of the major entertainment industry stories this year. Indirectly, it also impacts Hollywood's industry group the MPAA, which loses one of its six members. This prompted insiders to rethink the organization's future and reportedly, streaming giants such as Netflix are being considered as future members.

    The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has protected Hollywood’s interest for nearly a century now.

    In recent years the organization’s anti-piracy efforts have made the headlines repeatedly. Not just domestically, but around the world, through its site-blocking efforts for example.

    Traditionally, the MPAA obtains most of its revenue from the six major Hollywood studios. The latest public filings show that these membership dues totaled nearly $50 million.

    This number is significantly less than before, as
    we reported earlier, but new information suggests that it may drop even further.

    As a result of Disney’s acquisition of 20th Century Fox, the MPAA stands to lose one-sixth of its membership dues. Disney promised to pay Fox’s share for another year after the deal is finalized, but what happens next is uncertain.

    According to a
    report from The Information, the MPAA is now discussing a makeover of the organization.

    While no crystalized plans have been released, several insiders said that the group is considering accepting new members, including streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon. This would add more revenue, but also broaden the organization’s mandate.

    It is unknown how concrete these plans are or whether the MPAA approached potential new members already. Whatever the eventual direction may be, it won’t be an easy task.

    “This can’t just be an economic exercise,” one of the people familiar with the discussions told The Information. “It has to be a come-to-Jesus moment.”

    Although Amazon and Netflix have a shared interest with Hollywood on some fronts, both have their differences as well. The MPAA has been at odds with major tech companies over the years, companies that are closely aligned with the streaming giants.

    That said, Amazon, Netflix, and the MPAA already work together in another anti-piracy initiative. They are all part of the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), which counts 30 companies in total.

    The ACE coalition is, in fact,
    running on the MPAA’s anti-piracy resources, including personnel. That brings up the next makeover option.

    If the MPAA can’t continue in its current form and is unable to add more members, whether those are traditional movie studios or streaming providers, some people suggested that it could fold into ACE.

    That’s an even more complex path, perhaps, since the MPAA does more than fighting piracy. But in theory, the MPAA could continue as is in a slimmed down version, while its anti-piracy efforts move to ACE.

    For now, it’s all just speculation. But it’s clear that the MPAA has more on its mind than fighting pirates.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  8. #148
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Researchers Report Elsevier to EU Anti-Competition Authority

    Academic publisher Elsevier has repeatedly made the news for its battle with Sci-Hub, the "Pirate Bay" of science. However, while Elsevier is using copyrights to protect its business, academic-insiders accuse the publisher of "anti-competitive" actions.

    Academia certainly isn’t our prime focus here at TorrentFreak, but we have mentioned Elsevier repeatedly throughout the years.

    With a net income of roughly $3 billion and operating profits exceeding $1 billion, Elsevier is one of the largest academic publishers in the world. One that protects its business
    with vigor.

    The company
    has sued ‘pirate’ sites “Sci-Hub and “LibGen” for the unauthorized distribution of millions of scientific papers, for example.

    This resulted in a
    million dollar verdict in favor of the publisher, which was also able to seize several domain names. While Sci-Hub and LibGen are still around, Elsevier recently stepped up its game by obtaining an ISP blocking order against the sites in question.

    So far, these efforts run parallel to what we see in the media piracy world. Torrent sites such as The Pirate Bay have been sued as well, and are now blocked in countries all over the world.

    There is a significant difference though. The major movie studios who sue pirates sites have a good reputation in the industry, while Elsevier is heavily criticized by universities and researchers.

    This criticism is
    far from new, but where the battle was previously fought in op-eds and on social media, it’s now on the agenda of the European Union as well. Pressure is mounting.

    The first
    complaint comes from researchers Dr. Jonathan Tennant and Prof. Dr. Björn Brembs, who referred Elsevier’s parent company RELX Group to the EU Anti-Competition Authority late last month.

    A serious allegation, but it turned out to be just the start.

    This week, it was followed by a similar call from the European University Association (EUA), which represents over 800 higher education institutions in 47 countries throughout Europe.

    In a letter (
    pdf) to the European Commission, the organization shares its concern about the lack of transparency and competition in Europe’s academic publishing sector, mentioning Elsevier and similar publishers.

    One of the main frustrations is that researchers and universities provide the manpower and articles for these publishers, work that’s often funded with public money. This is then sold back to them by the publishers at high prices.

    Or as EUA puts it:

    “As a well-known allegory says: ‘Imagine a farmer who owns, feeds and milks his cow in order to give away the milk for free to a dairy company – and then finally buys it back in a milk carton at a very high price’. This is the business model of big research publishers.”

    While publishers such as Elsevier use copyrights to protect and exploit their work, the nature of the “competition” issue is more complex.

    Jonathan Tennant, who filed the first complaint with the EU Anti-Competition Authority, tells TorrentFreak that competition is hard to achieve when every academic article is unique and valuable. The articles are not substitutable, you either have access to it or you don’t.

    The second problem is that Elsevier and others keep their pricing agreements secret, often through non-disclosure agreements, which is widely seen as an anti-competitive practice.

    “Both of these things together, as well as issues to do with copyright, ‘marketplace’ concentration, obscenely high profits, and vendor lock-in all create an unsuitable ‘market’ around scholarly publishing, which has a negative impact across the entire research sector,” Tennant tells us.

    Tennant and Brembs don’t provide any recommendations in their report. They’re leaving it up to the European Commission to decide what’s appropriate, but they believe that banning non-disclosure clauses and providing more transparency are two possible steps.

    In an ideal world, one could argue that all academic research should be available for free. In the current system, many researchers don’t have access to some of the research in their field due to financial reasons, which hinders the progress of science.

    This is also the main reason why Alexandra Elbakyan started the pirate research library Sci-Hub several years ago. Many researchers rely on it as a source, but Tennant says that he has some sort of love-hate relationship with the controversial pirate library.

    “I think what Alexandra and Sci-Hub have done is phenomenal in emphasing the incredible dysfunction in research access from a greedy corporate publishing sector. It has demonstrated that access to knowledge is simple to provide.

    “I think it also helps to level the playing field, from an industry whose business model is based on knowledge discrimination based on elite/financial status. For these things, and for being a symptom of a broken industry, I think it is wonderful,” he adds.

    However, Tennant argues that it has also had some negative consequences. As founder of
    Open Science MOOC, he is a strong supporter of Open Access research, where papers are published without paywalls, and believes Sci-Hub may hinder the progress of this movement.

    “Because Sci-Hub provides a simple, easy shortcut to free access (not Open Access), it removes some of the incentives for researchers to engage with Open Access in a more sustainable manner. For example, by self-archiving their work for free,” he notes.

    That said, Tennant doesn’t think that terms such as ‘piracy’ and ‘theft’ necessarily apply to Sci-Hub. At least, not any more than it could apply to some of the major publishers themselves.

    “Sometimes I think that it is the scholarly publishing industry themselves who are the thieves, blackmailing content/copyright from researchers and then preventing access to it as their business model.

    “Depends which side of the ethical fence you fall on – private or public gain,” he adds.

    Tennant hopes that the European Commission will pick up the ball to end to what he sees as an abuse of power and copyright. Where Sci-Hub tries to “tear down the paywalls” through force, ultimately he believes that it’s more sustainable to change the publishing system itself.

    Tennant, who was at a blockchain for science conference this week, has some ideas of his own. Ideally, the future of academic publishing should be open, flexible, and relying on modern technologies.

    “My ideal scenario would be a much more granular and lightweight system of continuous editing and review – something like GitHub combined with Stack Exchange combined with Wikipedia,” he says.

    “Community-owned, low cost, open source, open everything, sustainable, inherently reproducible, less biased, non-profit, collaborative, instantaneous, fair, and equitable.

    “Something like that would be inherently easy to create, should we start again from scratch today,” Tennant concludes.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  9. #149
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Corel Wrongly Accuses Licensed User of Piracy, Disables Software Remotely

    [I]Earlier this year, Corel obtained a patent which enables the company to offer software pirates an amnesty deal via a messaging system. While this can be a smart approach, it is not without its flaws. This week, the company remotely disabled the software of a fully-licensed user of Paintshop Pro and left his medical-related business unable to meet customer needs.

    While the majority of computing devices come with sophisticated operating systems installed, users will almost certainly need to buy additional software to meet their needs.

    Open Source software can usually be obtained for free but millions of users opt for paid products that need to be licensed by the companies offering them.

    Of course, piracy is a significant problem for the developers behind the majority of premium products. Most are available from torrent sites or file-hosting platforms, often arriving with a ‘crack’ that allows users to enjoy without paying.

    Companies often have sophisticated systems to detect unlicensed products, sometimes with the reasonable aim of attempting to convert pirates into paying consumers. Earlier this year we reported on Corel’s efforts in this space after the company
    obtained a patent for a system which is able to offer an amnesty to illegal users via a popup.

    “The amnesty offer may, for example, agree not to bring criminal charges in exchange for the user purchasing a legitimate copy of the product,” Corel’s patent reads.

    “In this manner, the user of the pirated version is given the opportunity to purchase a legitimate copy which, if acted on, increases revenue for the manufacturer.”

    While this is fair enough, what happens when it all goes wrong? Earlier this week, TorrentFreak was contacted by an angry Corel customer who was witnessing first hand what can happen when a piracy detection system blows a fuse.

    “I am a valid and licensed user and Corel support has records of my license key and right to use this software on my work PC,” he told us.

    Despite paying the company as required, he received the following popup instead.

    Scary message from Corel

    https://torrentfreak.com/images/corel-warning.png

    The message couldn’t be more clear. Corel states that the copy in use is illegal and as a result, its functionality has been severely limited. “All save, export and print features will be permanently disabled,” it warns.

    According to Corel, all of these problems can be solved with a click of the blue “BUY A LEGAL COPY NOW” button, something that made our contact extremely angry.

    “I get this extortion popup and threat to my means to make a living. I feel like Corel has hijacked my computer, my artwork and images and is preventing me from making a living just to sell another upgrade. This is wrong, and something needs to be done about his practice,” he told us.

    It’s not surprising that the user was upset at Corel remotely disabling his software. Aside from having a valid license, his work ground to a halt. Initial emails back and forth had him messing around in his computer’s registry in an effort to fix the problem but all the time he was unable to carry on with his job.

    “I have owned a licensed copy of Corel PrintShop Pro since 9/2016 and use it multiple times each day for work. I use it for editing and creating graphics and logos for customers that host events and in the medical field for patient wristbands at hospitals and clinics,” he told TF.

    “These images are used to identify and even categorize different types of patients and attendees at events. At this time, I’m unable to meet the needs of my customers because I can’t save any new artwork for them. This has now gone on for more than 24 hours.”

    Eventually, after lengthy email exchanges, the problem got fixed, albeit after Corel’s customer had been unable to use his software for an extended period. He says that the problem has left a bad taste in his mouth and wonders how many other people are getting the message and, crucially, whether less technical users are paying to have the anti-piracy message removed.

    “I’m not sure how [the steps Corel took] corrected my license issue or if it just took me off the ‘hit list’ of victims of what I still feel was some kind of scam. Still no apology from Corel for the problems caused or the delays it forced on me,” he added.

    TorrentFreak contacted Corel requesting information and received a response from Gerard Metrailler, EVP of Global Products, whose name is on the patent issued earlier this year.

    “Our anti-piracy measures are designed specifically to protect our IP. And as part of this process, we offer an amnesty program on many of our products that gives users an easy way to purchase a legitimate version of our software at an affordable price,” Metrailler explained.

    “Unfortunately, some users who believe they are running legitimate versions of our software are surprised to receive a notification that their license is invalid. In many of these cases, the products were purchased from online marketplaces, often at very low prices, and the users were not aware they were buying illegitimate software.

    “It’s critical to note that customers should always purchase our software from authorized resellers or Corel directly,” he added.

    Given comments on Corel’s forums about unlicensed resellers, early in the week TF checked with the user where he’d obtained his license. According to an original purchase receipt reviewed by TF, it was obtained from the company’s own online store and everything was in order.

    Corel did, however, suggest that a customer could receive the anti-piracy warning in error and said any customers who believe they are affected should contact the company right away.

    n the very rare event of a mis-identification, I can assure you that we will work quickly to get the issue corrected. We agree that even one customer affected by a mistake like this is one customer too many,” Metrailler said.

    We asked Corel how many customers take them up on their offer of reduced price software as part of an amnesty but the company provided no details. We asked if there were any safeguards to prevent licensed users paying up in error but received no response.

    Corel did, however, give TF a contact email address so that their customer can get directly in touch, and we’ve forwarded that to him. In the meantime, directly with the customer and independently of our discussions with him and the company, Corel support offered him a 5% discount on future purchases.

    “I want to ask them if that 5% is good for Photoshop,” the customer commented dryly.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  10. #150
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    MPAA: Switzerland Remains “Extremely Attractive” For Pirate Sites

    In a recent submission to the US Trade Representative, the MPAA again states that Switzerland’s copyright law is wholly inadequate, making it extremely attractive to host illegal sites there. The European country has plans to update its laws, but the proposed changes are no significant improvement, Hollywood's trade group notes.

    While the European Union has worked hard to strengthen its copyright laws in recent years, one country in the heart of the continent chooses its own path.

    Switzerland is not part of the EU, which means that its policies deviate quite a bit from its neighbors. According to Hollywood, that’s not helping creators.

    Responding to recent submission to the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the MPAA has identified several foreign “trade barriers” around the world. In Hollywood’s case, many of these are related to piracy.

    One of the countries that’s highlighted, in rather harsh terms, is Switzerland. According to the MPAA, the country’s copyright law is “wholly inadequate” which, among other things, makes it “extremely attractive” to host illegal sites.

    “Switzerland’s copyright law is wholly inadequate, lacking crucial mechanisms needed for enforcement in the digital era,’ MPAA writes.

    “Switzerland lacks meaningful remedies and effective enforcement against online copyright infringement. Switzerland’s inadequate legal framework and robust technical infrastructure make it an extremely attractive host for illegal sites.”

    One of the concerns is that the Swiss currently have no requirement for Internet services to remove infringing content. In addition, services can’t be held liable for infringements of customers.

    The Hollywood group says this should change, adding that it also wants ISPs to aid their piracy battle, and to make sure that “copying” from unauthorized sources is outlawed. The MPAA proposes several changes the Swiss should implement, which include:

    1) Ensuring liability under Swiss law for parties who facilitate, encourage, and profit from widespread infringement
    2) Engaging ISPs in the fight against online piracy
    3) Affirming that current law does not permit copying from unauthorized sources
    4) Implementing adequate civil and criminal enforcement tools

    While this sounds like a rather pressing matter, these recommendations and the associated problems are far from new. The MPAA’s submission does at times read like a broken record, using the exact same language as four years ago, as seen below.


    These ‘copied’ sections appear throughout the report, also affecting other countries. For example, Hollywood still wants tougher penalties for Australian camcording pirates,
    using the same text as in 2014.

    This suggests that, in some cases, no progress has been made at all. In Switzerland, however, that’s not the case.

    With a
    new copyright law proposed last year, the Swiss aim to address the critique.

    For example, the country addresses the hosting problem by introducing a “take-down-and-stay-down” policy. Internet services will be required to remove infringing content from their platforms and prevent that same content from reappearing. Failure to comply will result in prosecution.

    In addition, the controversial Logistep ruling, which prevents companies from harvesting the IP addresses of file-sharers, will also be addressed.

    The MPAA is far from impressed though. In a freshly written paragraph, it notes that the new law is still insufficient.

    The Hollywood group explains that under the proposed law it will remain legal for people to download or stream pirated content privately, while website blocking remains unavailable.

    “The draft Copyright Act shows significant shortcomings and will not significantly improve copyright protection. The Swiss government has refused to introduce basic elements of internationally accepted anti-piracy legislation into Swiss law,” the MPAA writes.

    “For instance, the government dropped any access blocking mechanisms from the draft. Instead of proposing a legal source requirement for private use, the draft cements the understanding that private use of illegal sources is permitted.”

    It’s clear that Hollywood is not happy with how things are going in Switzerland, and it hopes that the US Government can help to steer things in the right direction.

    Unless that happens, we might see the same text appear again in the years to come. Copied from an authorized source, of course.




    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  11. #151
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Pro-Copyright Bias is Alive, Well, and Still Hiding the Full Story

    In 2007 and as recently as January 2018, the director of the movie The Man From Earth was championing the promotional effects of piracy. Last week, out of nowhere, he appeared to do a complete turnaround, branding the phenomenon as a threat to all creators. Something didn't feel right about this apparent change of heart. Diving into the details, a bigger picture begins to emerge.

    In 2007, the movie The Man From Earth
    leaked on file-sharing networks, with unexpected results. Instead of proving nothing but damaging, the title gained almost universal praise, rocketing the sci-fi flick to stardom via word-of-mouth advertising.

    Director Richard Schenkman and producer Eric Wilkinson embraced the development and enthused over the attention their work was receiving online. Given the positive experience, during January 2018 the team deliberately ‘leaked’ the sequel – The Man from Earth: Holocene – on The Pirate Bay.

    Given that filmmakers tend to view piracy as the enemy, TorrentFreak enthusiastically reported both events. Sadly, we had less positive news to convey this week when, out of the blue, Schenkman published an article on the site of pro-industry, anti-piracy alliance CreativeFuture, in which he heavily
    criticized piracy.

    There can be little doubt that the piece was a gift to CreativeFuture and everyone who viewed Schenkman and Wilkinson’s place in the piracy debate as something positive for unauthorized sharing. The movie’s story had become a ray of light and here it was being shredded, a disastrous episode from which nothing good had come.

    At TorrentFreak, however, we had our doubts about the tone of the piece. Never before had we seen such a turnaround, particularly when reviewing all previous correspondence with Schenkman. Something didn’t add up.

    Mainly due to timezone differences, Schenkman responded to our questions after our article was published. However, his responses only served to increase our suspicions that what had been published on CreativeFuture wasn’t representative of his overall position on piracy.

    First of all, Schenkman was rightfully furious about his movie being distributed in Russia after being professionally dubbed, with his donation requests removed from the resulting copy. That, most people will agree, is a flat-out insult to someone who has bent over backward to accommodate piracy.

    He had every right to be annoyed but it’s worth noting that his anger was directed at one site, not necessarily pirates in general. In fact, Schenkman told us that plenty of positives have come out of the releases of both movies.

    “The only reason that people all over the world knew and loved the original ‘Man from Earth’ was because of piracy, so while I’m disappointed that we’ve (still) made so little money from the first film, I’m deeply grateful that so many people have been able to see my movie,” he told TF this week.

    “I’m still quite enthusiastic about, and deeply grateful for, the thousands of people who have written to us with kind words about the films, and who have made donations, large or small,” he added.

    “I well understand that once we released the movie into the pirate ecosystem, nobody was under any obligation whatsoever to send us one penny, so the fact that so many have made donations is stunning to me, and I’ll never cease to be appreciative and impressed by the number of people who embraced the honor system. And luckily, donations continue to come in every day.”

    For those wondering whether Schenkman’s piece in CreativeFuture and his comments to us might’ve been penned by a different author, assumption forgiven. From our contacts with him in 2007 right through to the present day, we have found Schenkman to be an honest man and a pleasure to deal with. He has never said anything to suggest that piracy is an “existential threat” to creators as mentioned in his piece. So why the sudden negativity?

    We all know that life events can shape perceptions, so when the movie’s website and donation portal were hacked around six weeks ago, things began to take a turn for the worse. No revenue for weeks (and thousands in costs to bring it back) appear to have negatively affected the experience for the director. Then other types of piracy happened, ones that ensured that donations would be reduced.

    “I learned that there were other people who ignored our requests to share only the version we uploaded, and ripped the movie from BluRay, so that there are versions floating around without my donation preface, even though we DID upload a full HD (BD quality) version of the picture,” Schenkman told TorrentFreak.

    Even given the above events, however, the piece in CreativeFuture appears unnecessarily one-sided for a man who still had confidence in the piracy ecosystem a few months ago. Indeed, Schenkman told us this week that his team planned hard for the ‘pirate’ release of Holocene.

    “In the case of the new film, we worked for months to promote awareness, so that there would be a groundswell of interest from fans of the original film. I would say that this effort at least partially worked,” he explained.

    “In the first week of the pirate release, many thousands of people a day downloaded it, so there was a clear pent-up demand. And we’ve seen more donations come from the ‘Holocene’ release than we ever did from [Man From Earth] alone. So yes, in that sense, the ‘authorized leak’ of the new film has definitely helped spread awareness.

    “The movie would have been pirated regardless; by doing it ourselves, we were, to some degree, able to control the narrative, and indeed it became more of a ‘story’, just the same way that ‘producers thank pirates’ became a story at the time of the original film’s release,” he added.

    In a long email exchange, Schenkman told us that plenty of fans who didn’t even particularly like his sequel contacted him to congratulate him on choosing the honor system, while donating $5 as a ‘thank you’.

    “You’d be surprised at how many of those messages I’ve gotten,” he told us.

    But while Schenkman might be surprised at this generosity, we certainly aren’t surprised that none of this came out in the CreativeFuture piece.

    It’s understandable that CreativeFuture want to fight their corner with a flawless, polished, and invulnerable anti-piracy narrative, but thankfully we aren’t afraid of calling out both sides of this war, when it’s called for. People deserve that honesty.

    For example, Schenkman wanted to speak about some of his frustrations with movie distribution in his article. He believes that the international distribution system is flawed because there isn’t an efficient and fair commercial way to make an indie movie available everywhere, on the same day, unless Netflix buys it.

    Those sentiments didn’t make the CreativeFuture piece but we’re happy to let him have a voice here.

    “Even now, there isn’t a fair, equitable way for an indie filmmaker like me to make their movie available everywhere around the world at once. Even Amazon, which is in virtually every country, doesn’t allow you to simply upload your movie and with the click of a button make it available everywhere,” he says.

    “I think they’ll eventually get there, but not anytime soon. If Netflix buys your movie, great — but if they don’t, you’re back to the antiquated system of going to international film markets and trying to sell you film country by country, a costly, inefficient, and time-consuming process (and again, you’re totally at the mercy of the ‘gatekeepers’).

    “When we first released ‘Holocene’ we also made it available at Vimeo and MovieSaints, two platforms which allow access to viewers from most countries. Moviesaints has a unique system allowing both for a partial refund if you don’t like the movie, as well as a ‘tip the filmmaker’ function if you want to provide more support,” he adds.

    And then comes an even stronger hint as to why Schenkman’s important comments didn’t make his own article.

    “While we’ve seen revenue from both of these platforms, it doesn’t approach the total we’ve earned from donations. So the good news is that thousands of people who watched ‘Holocene’ via the pirate ecosystem have kindly, generously made donations to help support independent film,” he says.

    Of course, in the interests of fair reporting we’re absolutely unafraid of publishing the not-so-good news too, so here it is – warts and all.

    “The bad news is that hundreds of thousands (or millions) more have not, and thus we are still a long way from breaking even on this very low-budget movie. I really don’t see a sustainable business model for a truly independent filmmaker creating these kinds of thoughtful, serious movies, although I remain open to ideas!” Schenkman concludes.

    While CreativeFuture are absolutely entitled to publish whatever they see fit on their own site, it seems clear from Schenkman’s article (and his comments to us spanning more than a decade) that they are only interested in a tightly-controlled narrative that leaves room for criticism of piracy, but none to detail some of the self-inflicted reasons behind much of it.

    Piracy is certainly controversial and it can be bad, we’ve acknowledged as much in this piece. But hiding important parts of the full story – especially when they highlight flaws in the distribution system that contributes to piracy’s existence – is just as corrosive.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  12. #152
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Hitman 2’s Denuvo Protection Cracked Three Days Before Launch

    Hitman 2 is due to hit the streets on November 13, protected by the most up-to-date variant of Denuvo's anti-tamper technology. However, a cracking group appears to have obtained a version of the game destined for pre-order buyers, cracked it, and released it online three days early. Just last week, Denuvo suggested that four days protection could prove significant for game sales.

    Protecting video games from piracy has become big business over the years. The latest games consoles from Sony and Microsoft appear relatively secure but the same cannot be said about PC titles.

    Due to the fact that PC games are loaded onto a platform that is instantly accessible to hackers, it’s almost inevitable that any games worth having will have their piracy protections removed at some point and leak online for all to download.

    The company on the anti-piracy frontlines is Denuvo. Its anti-tamper technology is fiendishly difficult to crack and as such it regularly finds its way on to many of the gaming world’s most cherished titles. However, Denuvo is not infallible so regularly finds itself targeted by crackers.

    This weekend, the technology suffered yet another disappointing blow. The long-awaiting stealth game Hitman 2 – which comes ‘protected’ by the latest variant of Denuvo (v5.3) – leaked online. Aside from having its protection circumvented, this happened three days before the title’s official launch on November 13.

    It appears that a relatively new cracking group called FCKDRM (more on them in a moment) obtained a version of Hitman 2 that was only available to those who pre-ordered the game. There are some reports of the crack failing at times on some machines but nevertheless, this leak is important on a number of fronts.

    Firstly, the game leaked online three days early, rendering the protection when the game finally comes out much less useful. Secondly, presuming the original copy of the game was obtained on Friday when the pre-order copy was delivered, it took just a single day for the group to crack Denuvo’s latest protection.

    Considering an
    announcement made by Denuvo just last week, this is a pretty embarrassing turn of events. Denuvo’s aim is to protect games in their initial release window and according to the company, having no protection can result in millions of dollars in potential lost revenue in just a couple of weeks.

    To be on the safe side, however, the company also highlighted the importance of protecting games for just four days (notably a couple of Denuvo-protected titles recently withstood attack for the same number period). Winding back further still, the company said that even providing protection for an hour is worthwhile. Clearly, minus three days didn’t figure into Denuvo’s plans.

    While several groups have been chipping away at Denuvo for some time, FCKDRM is a new entrant (at least by branding) to the cracking scene. Notably, FCKDRM isn’t a ‘Scene’ group but one that works in P2P circles. At least for now, their identities remain a secret but their choice of name is interesting.

    FCKDRM is the official name for the
    anti-DRM initiative recently launched by GOG, a digital distribution platform for DRM-free video games and video.

    There’s no suggestion at all that GOG is involved in the cracking of Denuvo, of course, but the FCKDRM group are using GOG’s
    FCKDRM logowhen announcing releases, which certainly has the potential to confuse casual pirates.

    Given that Denuvo 5.3 was cracked so quickly (some crashing issues aside) it raises questions about other upcoming titles set to use similar technology. They include Battlefield V from EA/DICE, which has its official full release on November 20 but is already available to early access players.

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

  13. #153
    Amias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Last Online
    Today
    Posts
    1,269
    Post Thanks / Like
    Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week on BitTorrent – 11/12/18

    The top 10 most downloaded movies on BitTorrent are in again. 'Mission: Impossible - Fallout' tops the chart this week, followed by ‘The Equalizer 2'. 'The Meg' completes the top three.

    This week we have three newcomers in our chart.

    Mission: Impossible – Fallout is the most downloaded movie.

    The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only. All the movies in the list are Web-DL/Webrip/HDRip/BDrip/DVDrip unless stated otherwise.

    RSS feed for the articles of the recent weekly movie download charts.

    This week’s most downloaded movies are:

    Movie Rank Rank last week Movie name IMDb Rating / Trailer
    Most downloaded movies via torrents
    1 (…) Mission: Impossible – Fallout 8.0 / trailer
    2 (1) The Equalizer 2 6.9 / trailer
    3 (2) The Meg 5.9 / trailer
    4 (3) Incredibles 2 8.0 / trailer
    5 (5) Mile 22 6.1 / trailer
    6 (…) Outlaw king 7.1 / trailer
    7 (6) Alpha 6.9 / trailer
    8 (4) The Nun (subbed HDRip) 5.7 / trailer
    9 (…) Kin 5.6 / trailer
    10 (9) BlacKkKlansman 7.7 / trailer

    Source: Torrentfreak.com

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Similar Threads

  1. ScanBytes | SCB | General | News Thread
    By Amias in forum BitTorrent News
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Yesterday, 01:07 PM
  2. The Shinning | TSH | General | News Thread
    By Amias in forum BitTorrent News
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: Yesterday, 08:12 AM
  3. Lesaloonv2.0 | LS | General | News Thread
    By Amias in forum BitTorrent News
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-11-2018, 08:55 AM
  4. HeBits | HB | General | News Thread
    By Amias in forum BitTorrent News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-10-2018, 02:58 PM
  5. TorrentLeech | TL | General | News Thread
    By Amias in forum BitTorrent News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 17-09-2018, 09:05 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •