Archive for the ‘Twist’ Category

Google’s Piracy Filter Cuts “Pirate Bay” Searches in Half, But…

A few months ago Google quietly expanded its search blacklist to include many of the top file-sharing sites on the Internet, including The Pirate Bay. A review of search volumes before and after this change shows that the number of people searching for “Pirate Bay” has been cut in half. However, other and uncensored variations quickly took the place of these blocked terms, suggesting that the filter is a futile attempt to discourage interest in the site.

For more than a year Google has been filtering“piracy-related” terms from its Image is Loading....‘Autocomplete‘ and ‘Instant‘ services.

Google users searching for terms like “torrent”, “BitTorrent” and “RapidShare” will notice that no suggestions or search results appear before they type the full word. The underlying idea is that Google will curb piracy by driving fewer visitors to these sites.

Last November several Pirate Bay related keywords were added, and to a certain degree Google’s efforts have been remarkably effective. If we inspect the search volumes for “The Pirate Bay” and “Pirate Bay” we see that the number of searches has been cut in half.

However, the real question is whether this actually does something to prohibit people from using The Pirate Bay website.

 “Pirate Bay” Search Drop

Image is Loading....It could be that fewer people accidentally stumble upon the notorious torrent site than before. Previously “The Pirate Bay” showed up as the top suggestion when people typed in “The,” which probably led to a few hundred curious visitors a day. This is no longer the case.

However, the majority of the people who search for “Pirate Bay” are existing users who use this as a shortcut instead of having to type the full URL. It is doubtful that these people suddenly stopped using the torrent site.

Indeed, as is usually the case with censorship, the net routes around it. In this case Google’s algorithm picked up a new popular search that allows Pirate Bay users to access their favorite site with just three keystrokes. Where searches for “Pirate Bay” plunged, the alternative “thepiratebay.org” skyrocketed.

“thepiratebay.org” Going Up

Image is Loading....

As a result, Google now suggests “thepiratebay.org” when users type in “pir”.

Just three keystrokes away

Image is Loading....That is, for as long as it lasts, since Google may now add this new search to their piracy filter as well. And so the inevitable anti-piracy whack-a-mole continues as usual.

A Pirate Bay spokesperson told us that they are not in the least bit hurt by Google’s half-baked attempts to keep people away from their site. They haven’t noticed a decrease in referrers from Google, and even if that was the case it wouldn’t be a problem as only a tiny percentage of The Pirate Bay’s traffic comes from search engines.

The real problem, according to The Pirate Bay, is that Google is willing to censor its search functions on behalf of the copyright lobby.

Google, on the other hand, is determined to continue and expand their anti-piracy efforts. Aside from adding more “pirate” keyword to the ban list, they will also prioritize authorized media in the search results and prevent rogue sites from advertising their services through AdSense.

#1

Lonely ISP Wants Other Providers To Disconnect Pirates

Having originally resisted the notion that it should stop its subscribers sharing copyright works, in a little under 4 years Ireland’s ISP Eircom has come completely about-face. Not only did it come to a private agreement with the music industry to implement a 3 strikes-style regime, but now its asking other ISPs to join them in doing so. It’s lonely being this kind of ‘pioneer’, especially when it puts your company at a commercial disadvantage.

In 2008, the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA) took legal action against Eircom, Ireland’s largest ISP.

The so-called Big Four labels – EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner – wanted the ISP to install proactive filtering technology aimed at stopping unauthorized file-sharing among Eircom’s customers. Eircom refused, IRMA sued, and the case ended up in court – but not for very long.

At the 11th hour in February 2009 the companies came to an agreement which would see Eircom introduce a graduated response system for dealing with errant subscribers.

However, Eircom needed something in return. The agreement had left Eircom in the unenviable position of being the only ISP in Ireland with an official policy of disconnecting customers on the mere allegations of the music industry.

But the first recording industry target, ISP UPC, refused to play ball and after being sued it eventually won its case.

While the labels did ‘reward’ Eircom’s compliance with the MusicHub service, the product has been labeled lacklaster and when PaidContent asked how many users the service had, Eircom refused to tell them.

So with Eircom now at a commercial disadvantage and no immediate sign that the industry will force any other ISP to implement 3 strikes, the ISP is being left to go it alone. In making the best out of a bad situation it’s now describing what it is doing as an “obligation”.

“Eircom is of the view that these obligations are part of a role that all responsible companies must serve,” Eircom’s consumer managing director Stephen Beynon said.

Eircom insist that they want to respect their customers’ right to privacy but from fighting IRMA in 2008/9, they now believe that other ISPs should do as they have done, and do a deal with the recording group.

“We think that it would be better for everyone if the industry and the rights-holders found a way to tackle this problem. It’s not going to go away. The current situation is not ideal but we could create something that moved the issue forward if we worked together,” Beynon added.

Or in other words, the water’s great, come on in.

Beynon says that Eircom believes it has an obligation to uphold the law when illegal activity is brought to its attention but it’s taking the word of a private P2P tracking company as final and there is no judicial oversight, something that causes controversy in every jurisdiction it’s suggested.

It’s interesting to note that if Eircom had held its ground back in 2008 when it was sued by the labels to proactively filter subscriber upload data, by now it would have heard Europe’s highest court dismiss what they were being asked to do as illegal.

Had they known that in 2009, would they have felt so compelled to do the 3 strikes deal?

Kim Dotcom Becomes Proud Dad Of Twin Girls

Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom became the proud father of twin girls this week. The healthy twins are the fourth and fifth children of Dotcom and his wife Mona, who gave birth to the girls at the National Women’s Hospital in Auckland. Jokingly, Dotcom instructed hospital personnel to send the placenta to the FBI for forensic analysis.

A month after Kim Dotcom was released from prison on bail, his wife Mona has given birth to healthy twin girls. The twins were born in the National Women’s Hospital in Auckland weighing 2.4kg and 2.8kg.

Dotcom and Mona already had three children - Kimmo, Kaylo and Kobi.

The Megaupload founder was delighted to report the news and the now five-time father proudly posed with the new Dotcoms.

“Two healthy Kiwis were born yesterday. All good,” Dotcom texted us on Friday.

“When they asked me if I would like to keep the placenta (weird question) I said yes, and please send it to the FBI for forensic analysis so they can verify there is no pirate DNA ;-) ,” he added.

Kim Dotcom and his twin daughters 

Image is Loading.....No names have been mentioned for the latest additions to the Dotcom household, but it’s a safe bet those on the shortlist begin with ‘K’.Dotcom is currently preparing his defense against the indictment of the US Government, which he says will be “enlightening and maybe entertaining.” More news on this will arrive during the coming week.

Megaupload Seizure Order “Null and Void” Says High Court

In another astonishing development in the Megaupload saga, a judge in New Zealand’s High Court has declared the order used to seize Kim Dotcom’s assets as “null and void”. The blunder, which occurred because the police applied for the wrong type of court order, means that the Megaupload founder could have his property returned.

Just when it seemed that the handling of the Megaupload case couldn’t get any more Image is Loading....controversial, a development from New Zealand has taken things to the next level.

Following the raids on Kim Dotcom’s mansion in January, police seized millions of dollars worth of property belong to the Megaupload founder. But thanks to a police blunder, he could now see all of those assets returned.

On Friday, Justice Judith Potter in the High Court declared the order used to seize Dotcom’s property “null and void” after it was discovered that the police had acted under a court order that should have never been granted.

The error dates back to January when the police applied for the order granting them permission to seize Dotcom’s property. Rather than applying for an interim restraining order, the Police Commissioner applied for a foreign restraining order instead, one which did not give Dotcom a chance to mount a defense.

According to New Zealand Herald, on January 30th prosecution lawyer Anne Toohey wrote to the court explaining that the wrong order had been applied for and detailed five errors with the application.

Justice Potter said that police commissioner Peter Marshall tried to correct the error by applying for the correct order after the raids were completed and retrospectively adding the Image is Loading....items already seized.

Although the correct order was eventually granted albeit on a temporary basis, Potter said she will soon rule on whether the “procedural error” will result in Dotcom having his property returned.

The Crown is arguing that since the new order was granted the earlier error no longer matters, but Dotcom’s legal team framed it rather differently by describing the seizure of assets as “unlawful”.

Whether the assets are returned will rest on Dotcom’s legal team showing a lack of “good faith” in connection with the blunder. A hearing to decide if the assets will be returned will take place next week.

#1

App Developer Fights Pirate With Politeness

Most major music and movie industry outfits go out guns blazing against those who dare to copy their content. They often label these people, who also make up a great portion of their legitimate customers, as thieves and criminals. App developer and owner of the website Word of the Day decided to take another route, and crushed a potential pirate with politeness instead.

Piracy presents content creators with a mind-twisting dilemma. No one wants to see the work they have to live off being copied for free, but in today’s age not being pirated is probably even worse. Being overlooked in this way generally means that the public is not interested in what you have to offer.

The situation gets even more complicated when one realizes that ‘pirates’ are often legitimate customers too. As previously highlighted, music pirates are the ones who spend the most money on legitimate music. In a way, speaking out against pirates is speaking out against one’s biggest fans.

So how does a content creator approach such a multi-layered species when he or she spots one in the wild?

If we look at Chris Baker, app developer and owner of the The Fucking Word of the Day website, confrontational politeness might turn out to be a good choice. Yesterday, Chris spotted a potential pirate on the xSellize forums, who posted the following request:

“Can someone please crack The F-ing Word of the Day app. Please.”

Although many content creators would have cringed upon reading the message, perhaps tempted to shout the pirate down, Chris opted for a more peaceful reply to the poster “HiDefinition”.

“Hello! I’m the creator of the *** Word of the Day website and more particularly the F-ing Word of the Day App. First of all, this is a huge compliment! As a person who pirates content, I’ve always placed the moment people are pirating MY goods as the exact time of my arrival, as it were.”

Chris Baker goes on to explain that, although he has a decent job in New York, he’s by no means rich. The app and website are his pet projects and he works on them during his free time in the hope that the public might learn something. Then he continues with giving the prospective pirate his virtual blessing.

“What’s my point in all this? Go ahead and pirate the app. It cost me 1500 bucks to have programmed. It’s not even a month’s rent for me. But if you think the site is cool, and you want to pay for one eighth of a Stella Artois for me, hook me up with 99 cents. The rapture will be here soon, I could use the drink.”

The above might not have been the response HiDefinition had been hoping for, but it did make an impact. Suddenly, the prospect of getting a pirated App without paying didn’t seem as appealing as it did before.

HiDefinition replied:

“Wow, I wasn’t expecting the developer to comment. Sorry, about that. You know I was only looking to get the IPA for free only because I have no credit, credit cards, or any kind of banking services. However, your attitude has seal[ed] the deal for me. It might end up costing me a couple extra dollars in nominal fees to figure out how to pay for it but I’d be glad to contribute towards that Stella fund raiser you’ve got going on.

“Besides, I really appreciate your response and I fully support your work. I hope no one actually cracks your app [and] for sake of respect, consider my request revoked. Thanks again Chris and have a good one bro!”

It appears that with his polite reply, Chris eliminated at least one potential pirate. But that wasn’t the end of the matter. Instead of eagerly waiting for HiDefinition’s 99 cents, Chris offered to buy the App for him, asking for a positive rating in return.

Chris then concluded:

“I hope this comment thread goes down as one of the more unexpected things that happens to you online. I like the unexpected. And I like making people happy, even when something stupid like learning vocabulary is involved.”

The thread is memorable for sure, and shows that the blazing guns strategy might not always be the best one, especially not for indie content creators. This doesn’t necessarily mean that ‘pirates’ should be cuddled, but it might be a good idea to try a more balanced response every now and then.

We got in touch with Chris, who shared his remarkable encounter on Reddit, and he told us that he expected people to pirate his app and that it’s not a problem.

“I knew people would try to pirate my app and I’d rather have people trying to pirate my app than not pirate it. If no one is trying to pirate you, you’re irrelevant,” Chris said.

In fact, Chris admits that he too has pirated software since he was eight or nine. Whether it is the moral thing to do is not up to the developers he believes, it’s something every ‘pirate’ has to decide for him or herself.

“The morality of pirating an app will be a topic that gets debated forever,” Chris told us. “If a starving kid steals a loaf of bread to feed himself, is that wrong? If a starving designer pirates a copy of a 700 dollar version of Photoshop, is that wrong?”

“A creative storyteller could produce narratives that make you see both sides to each story,” he concludes.

Read