TorrentFreak Email Update

ACS:Law Take Alleged File-Sharers To Court – But Fail On a Grand Scale
Truly Decentralized BitTorrent Downloading Has Finally Arrived
ISP 3 Strikes Anti-Piracy Strategy Rewarded By Big Four Music Service

ACS:Law Take Alleged File-Sharers To Court – But Fail On a Grand Scale

Posted: 09 Dec 2010 01:30 AM PST

Andrew Crossley, owner of the now infamous anti-piracy lawfirm ACS:Law, has always insisted that he has no fear of taking contested file-sharing cases to court. Now it has emerged that he recently tried to get a court to issue default judgments against individuals who offered no defense, but the hearing failed on so many levels its difficult to know where to start. Nevertheless, we'll have a go.

catfish The Patents County Court in the UK has slammed a messy attempt by law firm ACS:Law to get default judgments against 8 internet connection owners who it is claimed infringed or allowed others to infringe copyrights.

The case between Media C.A.T Limited and 8 unnamed and unrepresented defendants was heard before Judge Birss QC. ACS:Law must’ve thought they were going to shoot fish in a barrel. What they didn’t expect was that they and Media C.A.T turned out to be the fish and it was the judge, not them, holding the gun.

“This judgment deals with a series of Requests for Judgment made by the claimant in eight parallel actions. The claimant is the same but the defendant is a different individual in each case. The cases are separate but they raise issues in common and the requests for judgment were received by the Court at the same time. It is convenient to deal with them together,” began Judge Birss in his ruling.

The claimant in the case was Media C.A.T, a company which “represents various owners or exclusive licensees of copyrighted works (“Rights Owners”) to monitor and protect their copyrighted works from acts of infringement.”

For those unfamiliar with Media C.A.T, it is a kind of ‘front company’ for rightsholders being represented in the UK’s well known ‘speculative invoicing’ schemes which target illicit file-sharers. It produces nor owns any media of its own.

Each defendant in the case was described by ACS:Law as either the infringer or “someone authorised by him to use his internet connection, or someone who gained access to the defendant’s internet connection due to the router to that connections having no or no adequate security..[..]”

Monitoring of alleged infringements was carried out by NG3 Systems Limited (a company referred to heavily in the ACS:Law leaked emails). It was noted that the company logged infringements between 30 May 2009 and the end of November 2009.

The Particulars of Claim in the case state:

“By reason of the infringement(s) the claimant has suffered loss and damages and by this claim seeks compensation for the loss and damages suffered together with an injunction against the defendant to prevent repetition of the infringement and/or an injunction to compel the defendant to take adequate measures to effectively secure their internet connection.”

Judge Birss somewhat politely described the cases presented as having “a number of unusual features.”

1. The claimant, Media C.A.T, is not the rights holder of the works in question. A copyright case can only be brought by by the owner of a copyright or an exclusive licensee. Indeed, the Judge later noted that: “There is no plea that the works qualify for copyright protection at all.”

2. “The Particulars of Claim include allegations about unsecured internet connections. I am aware of no published decision in this country which deals with this issue in the context of copyright infringement,” wrote Judge Birss.

3. “The plea that ‘allowing’ others to infringe is itself an act restricted by s16 (1)(a) and 17 of the 1988 Act is simply wrong,” noted Judge Birss. “The term used by those sections of the Act is ‘authorising’ and the difference may be very important if the allegation is about unauthorised use of an internet router by third parties.”

Judge Birss later noted: “A key part of the plea of infringement rests on an assertion [by ACS:Law] that ‘allowing’ others to infringe is itself an infringing act, when it is not.”

4. “The injunction claimed in the prayer is unusual too,” he continued. “There is no claim for an injunction to restrain copyright infringement, as one would ordinarily expect to see in a copyright claim. The injunction claimed relates to ‘safeguarding’ the defendant’s internet connection. This relates to the previous points.”

Judge Birss then goes on to explain that the Particulars of Claim presented by ACS:Law “are defective on a number of somewhat technical but important grounds”, including non-compliance with at least four Civil Procedure Rules.

ACS:Law took these cases to court on November 30 where they asked for default judgments, stating:

The defendant has not filed an admission or defence to my claim, or an application to contest the court’s jurisdiction and the time for doing so has expired. I request that judgment be entered for an amount including costs, to be decided by the court.

In respect of two defendants, the Judge decided that they had failed to respond to court papers, which meant that they were, in principle, in default. However, in three other cases, defendants had actually responded to the court papers with their defense.

“There is no conceivable basis for default judgment in these two cases,” wrote Judge Birss. “The requests for judgment should never have been filed.”

The Judge offered his summary as follows:

“In two cases it appears the defendant is in default, in three others there is simply no evidence proceedings have been served and I refuse to find that they have been and in the final three cases the defendant has responded to the claim, filed a defence and is not in default at all.”

The end result was that ACS:Law were denied default judgments in each and every case.

“I should end by recording that I am not sorry to have reached the conclusion I have in refusing all the requests for default judgment,” noted Judge Birss, later adding:

“In all these circumstances, a default judgment arrived at without notice by means of an essentially administrative procedure, even one restricted to a financial claim, seems to me to be capable of working real injustice.”

So, rather than living up to his word that he would bring proper, full and properly defended cases to court, ACS:Law owner Andrew Crossley has again taken what will be viewed by many as the coward’s way out. Those same observers will be absolutely delighted that these bullying tactics have failed in such epic fashion.

Article from: TorrentFreak.

Truly Decentralized BitTorrent Downloading Has Finally Arrived

Posted: 08 Dec 2010 01:26 PM PST

BitTorrent is a great technology to share files both quickly and efficiently, but like all other P2P-technologies it has an Achilles' heel. The download process relies in part on central servers that can crash or go offline for a variety of reasons. To address this vulnerability the first truly decentralized BitTorrent/P2P client has been developed, meaning that no central trackers, or even BitTorrent search engines are required to download movies, software and music.

BitTorrent is branded as a peer-to-peer technology, but despite this label the downloading process still relies heavily on central servers. In the first place there are the BitTorrent search engines and indexes such as The Pirate Bay and isoHunt. These are needed to search for content and to grab the .torrent file one needs to download a file.

Besides these torrent sites, most BitTorrent downloads are still managed by so-called trackers. These servers coordinate the download process and make sure that people can find others who are sharing the files they want to download. To a certain degree, trackers are no longer needed with ‘trackerless’ technology such as DHT, but even DHT often uses a central server to get a torrent started.

Finally central servers are used by moderators to help hunt spam and malware. All file sharing programs without such central checking have become practically useless over time.

In the last years these ‘central server’ vulnerabilities have caused a number of minor inconveniences for torrent users. When trackers go offline, downloads usually slow down or may stop entirely, and when a torrent search engine such as The Pirate Bay has technical issues, users have to search for alternatives.

To address these issues, ideally BitTorrent downloads should no longer require a central server. P2P technology should not only facilitate the downloading and sharing process, but also the searching and storage of torrent files. This may sound like a technology that might only become available in the distant future, but in reality it already exists.

The latest version of the Tribler BitTorrent client (Win, Mac and Linux), released only a few minutes ago, is capable of all the above and many more things that could be described as quite revolutionary. The client combines a ‘zero-server’ approach with features such as instant video streaming, advanced spam control and personalized content channels, all bundled into a single application.

The Tribler team has come a long way to reach the point they’re at now. We first reported on the ‘tax-payer-funded’ BitTorrent client in 2006, and in the years that followed tens of millions of dollars have been spent on the client’s development resulting in the latest 5.3 release.

Triber: search, download and play (large).

tribler

Despite the fact that only a few thousand people are using Tribler on a monthly basis, in technological terms it is one of the most advanced clients. People who install the client will notice that there’s a search box at the top of the application, similar to that offered by other clients. However, when one does a search the results don’t come from a central index. Instead, they come from other peers.

In fact, Tribler’s search functionality even has an auto-suggest function which is also built to work based on P2P data instead of a central server. Remarkably enough the response times for the searches and the auto suggest are both pretty fast, under a second in 99% of cases.

As for the downloads themselves, if one clicks on a ‘torrent’ in the search result, the meta-data is pulled in from another peer and the download starts immediately. Tribler is based on the standard BitTorrent protocol and uses regular BitTorrent trackers to communicate with other peers. But, it can also continue downloading when a central tracker goes down.

Tribler users can choose if they want to play the downloading file directly (if it’s video) with the built in VLC player, or wait for it to finish first. In addition to searching for files, users can also create their own channels or subscribe to those of others. Again, this is all based on technology that doesn’t require a central server. Other new features are subtitle integration, support for magnet links and advanced spam controls.

Tribler Channels

tribler

Spam control in a P2P program that actually works is something not seen before. The Tribler spam mechanism revolves around user generated “channels”, which may contain several thousands of torrents.
When people like a channel they can indicate this with “mark as favorite”. When more people like a channel, the associated torrents get a boost in the search results.

The idea is that spam and malware will automatically be pushed down to non-existence in search results and the majority of users will favor the channels they love. In scientific terms, this is a classic case of survival of the fittest and group selection at work. Again, this is done without central servers.

With the combination of P2P-based search, torrent downloads and moderation, BitTorrent sites have been almost rendered obsolete. Although we don’t see torrent sites going away any time soon it’s ‘assuring’ to see that there are alternatives. Tribler’s cutting edge technology allows users to search for torrents and download files without the need for any central server. A revolution, not only for BitTorrent but for P2P in general.

As mentioned before, the Tribler project is funded by tax payers money, most of which comes from EU grants. However, according to Dr. Johan Pouwelse, leader of the Tribler project at Delft University of Technology, those who complain that spending all this money on the development of a BitTorrent client is a waste, are wrong.

“Tax payer money is going into Internet research, which happens to use a very powerful technology called BitTorrent. That’s different. On a wider scale a few hundred million euros of research money is being spent on making computer networks more robust and improving video streaming. I think that is money well spent,” Pouwelse told TorrentFreak.

Eventually, Pouwelse and his team hope to shape the future of Internet-based video delivery, and this won’t just be limited to PCs either. “Our architecture has unbounded scalability and in principle can work on all TVs, phones and other devices in the world simultaneously,” he said.

“22 scientists are working full time in the P2P research team i’m coordinating at Delft University of Technology. A lot of the algorithms and Open Source code we write ends up in Tribler. Roughly 6 other universities or organisations contribute code regularly to Tribler. It’s by far the largest science-driven P2P effort around,” Pouwelse added.

Aside from the fact that the technology itself is both exciting and fully operational in the real world, there are some issues that have to be overcome. Due to the low userbase of Tribler, the total number of torrents that are findable is relatively low. About 20,000, which is quite low compared to the millions of torrents most BitTorrent sites index.

This means that most of the popular content is available but that obscure files will be harder to find. The only way to really change this is when more people start to use the client, which might take a few more domain seizures than we’ve seen thus far.

Article from: TorrentFreak.

ISP 3 Strikes Anti-Piracy Strategy Rewarded By Big Four Music Service

Posted: 08 Dec 2010 06:57 AM PST

ISP Eircom, the company pioneering a 3 strikes scheme for illicit file-sharers in Ireland, has been outlining the details of the regime it will implement in conjunction with the music industry. Eircom customers will be offered a music streaming service as part of their subscription but for those who choose to continue to share files, 12 months disconnections are on the horizon.

eircom Today, Eircom has been outlining details of a new service it will offer to its customer base. The Irish ISP will offer a new product called MusicHub which will allow subscribers to stream music from the big labels including Universal Music, Sony, EMI, Warner Music and Merlin.

According to Eircom, MusicHub will provide subscriber access to unlimited streaming of all tracks in the above labels’ catalogs, with no restrictions and with no advertising.

If MusicHub users would like to download songs they can do that too. Monthly packages will start at 15 tracks for €5.99 up to 40 tracks for €12.99.

While the MusicHub deal is the product of cooperation between Eircom and the music industry, it is born out of conflict. In February 2009, IRMA – representing EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner – reached an 11th hour out of court settlement with Eircom on the controversial issue of illicit file-sharing.

The implementation of the agreement was held up over legal argument, but earlier this year the High Court in Dublin gave it the green light. The deal would see Eircom introduce a graduated response system for dealing with errant subscribers so now, along with today’s MusicHub carrot, comes the 3 strikes stick.

“Eircom is proceeding with implementation of the protocol which could result in the suspension and ultimately disconnection of broadband service for those customers who deliberately and persistently infringe copyright,” the company said today in a statement.

As expected, Eircom will send out warnings to subscribers suspected of illicit file-sharing in the first instance to “encourage them to change their behaviour”, then it intends to get tough.

“If a customer persists with the illegal activity it may result in a seven day suspension or yearlong disconnection of their broadband service,” the company warns.

A seven day suspension will be triggered when the music industry monitors a user sharing illicit files for the third time. Any further notice will activate the 12 month disconnection.

Eircom notes that the scheme has been operating on a trial basis since June this year and the number of notifications being processed have now reached 1,000 per month.

In stark contrast to its earlier neutral position (on which IRMA took the ISP to court), Eircom now says it has a responsibility to deal with the copyright infringements of its customers on behalf of the music industry.

“The company believes that it has a duty to ensure that the rights of artists and the laws of the state, including copyright law, are upheld, and to take action when illegal activity is brought to our attention,” it notes.

Nevertheless, Eircom adds that “our obligations to our customers remain paramount, and the primacy of their rights, in particular their rights to privacy, are reflected in the phased structure of the protocol, and in the Eircom MusicHub service launched today. Eircom is of the view that these obligations are part of a role that all responsible companies must serve.”

To this end, Eircom is guaranteeing that it will never hand subscribers’ personal details to the music industry and will never monitor their online activities. They will, however, take the word of the music industry and their monitors on face value and presume it is accurate as a matter of course.

Other ISPs in Ireland, such as UPC, have refused to play ball. In a recent court case it was decided that a 3 strikes regime could not be forced on an Internet service provider.

However, as detailed in our earlier report, the government is appealing for the music industry and ISPs to get together to try and reach some sort of compromise. According to its announcement today, Eircom will position itself as some kind of broker in the negotiations.

“Today Eircom confirmed that it will continue to play a leadership role with the music industry, other ISPs, and key stakeholders including Government to find a long term sustainable solution that addresses the issues of illegal file sharing while minimising the impact on customers.”

What remains to be seen now is how the ISP market pans out. Will customers stop pirating and switch to Eircom to gain access to the MusicHub service, or will they stay with the likes of UPC in order to carry on pirating without worry of disconnections? Will the disconnections at Eircom have the desired effect, or will customers simply switch to another ISP? The next few months should prove very interesting.

Article from: TorrentFreak.

loveislife

Pages

Thursday, December 9, 2010