Posts Tagged ‘Censorship’

Censoring The Pirate Bay is Futile, ISPs Reveal

All around the world the copyright lobby is pushing for increased censorship of ‘pirate’ websites, The Pirate Bay in particular. Thus far this has resulted in court-ordered blockades in several countries including the UK, the Netherlands and Belgium. However, in recent months evidence has started to stack up showing that these blocking efforts are futile. BitTorrent traffic is not decreasing and the blockades may actually be counterproductive.

The Pirate Bay is arguably the most censored website on the Internet.Image is Loading....

Courts all around the world have ordered Internet providers to block subscriber access to the torrent site, and more are expected to follow.

The idea behind these blockades is that they will help to decrease online piracy. However, more and more evidence is appearing that suggests that this aim is not being fulfilled. In fact, the blocking attempts may actually be having the opposite effect.

Last week, Dutch Internet provider XS4All revealed that after they started to enforce the Pirate Bay blockade, BitTorrent traffic went up instead of down. The ISP looked at the traffic on its network and found that over the past year traffic increased on ports that are commonly used for BitTorrent.

Today, two other major ISPs in the Netherlands – KPN and UPC – have made statements suggesting that censoring The Pirate Bay does little to stop BitTorrent traffic.

KPN saw no traffic decrease at all after the blockade was implemented. UPC initially observed a small decline in download traffic, but this went back to normal shortly after. While the data says little about the legality of the files being downloaded, it’s a clear indication that most BitTorrent users don’t quit their habit despite the apparent obstacles.

A third ISP, Ziggo, says it is keeping its download data confidential until their appeal against the blockade has been heard in court. However, the provider did point to earlier findings by researchers from the University of Amsterdam, which showed that the blockade has had no impact on the number of BitTorrent pirates.

In this study the researchers compared the number of Dutch participants in popular BitTorrent swarms, before and after The Pirate Bay was blocked, and found no difference.

The results are not really unexpected, as there are countless other ways to download the torrents available on The Pirate Bay. There are also countless other BitTorrent sites out there plus hundreds of proxy websites that allow blocked subscribers to access The Pirate Bay.

One of the most popular proxy websites for The Pirate Bay is operated by the UK Pirate Party. And according to Party leader Loz Kaye the censorship efforts are not only ineffective, but they are also engaging the public in the politics surrounding these issues.

“The Pirate Party’s website is now in the top 500 websites in the UK – above any other political party. If the aim was to change people’s behavior, the most noticeable change we have seen is an upsurge in interest in our kind of politics. I doubt this was the BPI’s intention,” Kaye writes in The Guardian today.

Considering the above, the entertainment industry might be better off pumping money into business models that give customers what they want, legally. The censorship route doesn’t seem to work out for now.

Dropbox Bans BitTorrent Startup Boxopus Over Piracy Concerns

Dropbox has banned the new BitTorrent startup Boxopus from accessing its API. The company fears that BitTorrent’s piracy stigma may rub off on the successful cloud storage service. The Boxopus team is disappointed by this anti-innovation move. Thousands of dollars in developments costs have gone down the drain for what they believe is an irrational fear imposed by a growing copyright lobby.

Recently we covered Boxopus, a new startup that allows people to download torrents Image is Loading.....directly to their dropbox folders.

The news was quickly picked up by many other technology sites and as a result the service’s member count surged to more than 50,000. Boxopus didn’t go unnoticed by the people at Dropbox either.

However, where most reviews heralded the usefulness of the service, Dropbox sees it as a threat.

Although Boxopus is a neutral technology, BitTorrent’s piracy stigma is something Dropbox wants to stay far away from. Apparently, the company believes that a ‘perceived’ link to piracy is enough to ban Boxopus from accessing its API.

A few hours ago the Boxopus team received the following email from one of Dropbox’s engineers (emphasis added):

“It’s come to our attention that latest Boxopus features could be perceived as encouraging users to violate copyright using Dropbox.”

“Violating copyright is against our terms of service, so we are terminating your app’s API access. Once your access is revoked, any API calls your app makes will fail.”

Shortly after this email the API access was pulled, effectively killing the Boxopus service.

To the developers the news came as a shock. Not only was Boxopus adhering to all DMCA requirements, Dropbox also explicitly approved an alpha version of Boxopus weeks earlier.

At the time no alarm bells went off, so the developers continued investing in the product.

“Once the alpha version was approved we were pretty sure that Dropbox was okay with it, so we put our efforts into optimizing the service. It took us 3 months to finish the product with a team of 5 people, which was a $30,000 USD investment,” Boxopus founder Alex tells us.

But now, just a few days after the service had its breakthrough online, the service is dead. Aside from the massive financial loss, the Boxopus team is also disappointed by the way innovation has been stifled by Dropbox due to a perceived threat that may not even be justified.

“This behavior makes it hard to believe that developers are treated fairly and innovation is welcomed at Dropbox. It seems like legit and pre-approved applications may be blocked simply by someone’s will although they act within the scope of company’s terms and international laws,” Alex says.

The Boxopus developers are not blind to the fact that people use BitTorrent to share copyrighted files, but that was in no way what their service was designed for.

“Many people see BitTorrent as a synonym of piracy, however, a lot of interesting legal stuff can be found in BitTorrent networks and this is what Boxopus is made for.”

Nevertheless, Dropbox has made up its mind and a BitTorrent download service is not allowed. To save what’s left the Boxopus team is now negotiating with other cloud storage services to continue their business with a more tolerant partner.

TV Network Censors Journalist Who Criticized BitTorrent News Report

A large European media group recently broadcast a TV show which reported on the activities of two major BitTorrent trackers. The show was panned by opponents who criticized the creators for misleading the audience with biased reporting. One critic, a reporter who took the time to create a 30 minute podcast, found himself censored after the TV network had his report removed from YouTube on copyright grounds.

Far beyond Bulgaria’s borders, millions of file-sharers worldwide are familiar with Image is Loading......Zamunda and ArenaBG, the country’s largest and most famous BitTorrent trackers. Whenever online piracy is discussed in Bulgaria, it’s rare for these sites to avoid a mention.

At the end of May a TV channel owned by Central European Media Enterprises, a company with more than 50 million viewers and one in which Time Warner has a 34% stake, broadcast ‘Copyright’, a TV show which investigated the activities of Zamunda and ArenaBG.

The show made many claims about the sites, not least that users are compelled to pay to use them and that Zamunda generates more than 150,000 euros in revenue every month as a result, allegations the site denies.

The show went on to press the one-download-one-lost-sale mantra, suggested that a “3 strikes” regime should be considered to deal with infringement, and criticized local ISPs for providing high-speed connections used for pirating.

BTV also claimed to have contacted the operators of Zamunda so that their side of the story could be heard, but a source close to the site told us that after initially making contact and getting Zamunda’s attention (just 3 days before the show was aired), the show failed to respond to further contact from the site.

The end result, critics say, was an ‘investigative’ report biased towards rightsholders at a time when bTV is not only promoting its just-launched Voyo PPV service, but simultaneously running an anti-torrent site campaign of its own.

One critic who went further than most was author, journalist and blogger Ivan Stamenov. He recorded a detailed rebuttal of the show’s claims in a 30 minute podcast titled “bTV and Torrents: A Shock Dose of Ignorance” and posted it on YouTube.

“I created a podcast exposing extremely biased reporting on bTV. The story was about torrents, piracy and internet censorship,” Stamenov told us.

Stamenov said he was surprised by the popularity and favorable reception his podcast received. As a bonus the show also reached the ears of its main target – bTV – but their response was not exactly what Stamenov had hoped for.

Image is Loading......
“To put it simply, they censored my podcast on YouTube, claiming it was their own intellectual property. Well, my voice is not their property. The soundtrack I used in the background was not their property either,” Stamenov told us. An additional copy posted to a site called Vbox fared no better.

But as illustrated by the image below, one thing that Stamenov did include in the YouTube video was an intro which partially featured an image of the bTV logo. He fears that bTV used the inclusion of this graphic as an excuse to take down the entire video.

Image is Loading......
“The only way for bTV to get out of this mess with dignity is to apologize to viewers for its foul and treacherous anti-piracy campaign, and revise their attitude,” Stamenov concludes.

Currently, Bulgarian copyright law is undergoing revision. According to an activist who spoke with us, leaked documents suggest that the proposed changes, including making copyright infringement a more serious offense, are almost exclusively in the favor of rightholders.

Future tightening up of the law aside, silencing other people’s content today appears to be a mere flick of a switch away.

Pirate Bay Pesters Copyright Holders with Yet Another New IP-Address

In the UK and the Netherlands The Pirate Bay is widely censored, but that doesn’t mean the site is entirely unavailable. In fact, The Pirate Bay is enjoying the whack-a-mole game they’re playing. After several ISPs added the site’s new IP-address to their filters, the infamous torrent site has just added another, plus an IPv6 address. Meanwhile, the site’s operators are wondering how much court filings cost each time an IP address has to be blocked.

Copyright holders around the world are growing increasingly annoyed with The Pirate Bay.Image is Loading....

After expensive legal battles they managed to get ISPs to block the site in the UK, the Netherlands and elsewhere. But despite these orders the BitTorrent site remains widely available. To make matters even worse, the increased media attention has boosted the site’s visitor count.

Besides the many proxy sites that exists, The Pirate Bay team found out that simply adding a new IP-address circumvents the blockades as well. They added 194.71.107.80 last month, which allowed subscribers to access the site again, for a while.

Responding to the move, Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN had to return to court again to get the new IP-address added to the filter. They succeeded, but now that the ISPs have started to block this address, The Pirate Bay has responded by adding a new one today.

“We wonder what it costs BREIN to file for these injunctions, as we have hundreds more IPs we can add,” the Pirate Bay team told us jokingly.

In the UK, where the procedure to add new domains and IP-addresses is part of a “”private agreement,” it’s no different. Virgin Media recently expanded their filter and blocked the .80 address. However, affected subscribers can now access the site via .81, circumventing the blockade.

And that’s not all.

The Pirate Bay team informs us that they have added an IPv6 address as well, opening a can of new unblocking options. As none of the court orders lists IPv6-addresses, using a compatible connection should re-enable access the site. Not to mention the IPv6 -> IPv4 tunnels that become fully operational proxies now.

The above once again shows that it’s virtually impossible to completely prevent people from accessing The Pirate Bay. There are simply too many options for people to route around the blockades.

Worst of all for the copyright holders, The Pirate Bay team appears to be enjoying themselves.

In The UK O2 said it will start blocking access to The Pirate Bay tonight, but this blockade will already be outdated when it goes online. BT, the last ISP to comply to the court order, is expected to follow suit later.

#1

RIAA Wants Search Engines to Censor “Pirate Sites”

In a testimony before Congress on “The Future of Audio” today, RIAA CEO Cary Sherman will stress that more needs to be done to stop online piracy. In particular, search engines such as Google and Bing have to take responsibility and come up with appropriate technological solutions. The RIAA wants these search engines to censor pirate sites from their search results while giving priority to legitimate music services.

Later today RIAA CEO Cary Sherman will take part in the “The Future of Audio” hearing at Img Loading.....the U.S. House of Representatives.

While the music industry group’s main aim at the hearing is to convince legislators to close a loophole that allows radio stations to play music without paying performance rights, the topic of online piracy will not go undiscussed.

In a prepared statement, Sherman begins by pointing out that the image of the music business as an innovation-shy industry is misplaced. DRM-free downloads, unlimited streaming, free ad-supported streaming and music backups in the cloud are a few highlighted examples of innovative developments.

But despite all these services, piracy is still rampant. More needs to be done.

According to Sherman the music industry is more frequently steering towards voluntary agreements, and with success. They have struck a deal with ISPs to punish copyright infringers, helped payment processors to reduce payments to pirate sites, and encouraged major advertisers to discontinue business with “rogue” websites.

If the RIAA has its way, Google and other search engines will also collaborate on a similar agreement. Ideally, these search engines would no longer link to “infringing sites” such as The Pirate Bay and isoHunt.

“We hope other intermediaries like search engines will follow suit in negotiating voluntary marketplace best practices to prevent directing users to sites that are dedicated to violating property rights,” Sherman says in his speech.

We asked the RIAA to provide more details on what they see as an ideal scenario. Without going into specifics, we were directed to the following statements which reveal a bit more about the RIAA’s demands.

“Sites that engage in infringing activity should not appear as the first results when searching for what entertainment content to download or stream. This just leads to more piracy and popularity of the site,” the RIAA states.

“Rather, whether a site is authorized or unauthorized to make copyrighted works available to the public should be a significant indicator in determining ranking of the result, with unauthorized sites having lower rankings than authorized sites.”

In other words, “legitimate” search results should be boosted while “illegitimate” sites are degraded. The RIAA further suggests that the massive amount of DMCA complaints can be reduced by “technical changes,” a fancy way to describe censorship.

“Google should investigate why it has such a high volume of complaints from copyright holders, and whether additional procedural or technical changes could be made to assure legal activity, thereby lessening complaints.”

The above is in line with a set of demands copyright holders handed out to Google, Bing and Yahoo during a behind-closed-doors meeting facilitated by the UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

In this proposed “Voluntary Code of Practice” the copyright holders ask search engines to de-index substantially infringing sites.

While there is no sign yet that Google and others are open to these suggestions, it is a clear sign that the RIAA and others see broader search engine control as the way forward.