At the end of July 2009, new anti-piracy legislation took effect in South Korea which aggressively targeted illicit file-sharers and other online copyright infringers. The laws, created by the country’s Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, gave the authorities the power to disconnect pirates for up to 6 months.

According to the annual report of state-run piracy monitor the Korea Copyright Commission, it detected 35,345 cases of copyright infringement from so-called ‘cyberlocker’ services and P2P sites in 2009, nearly three times as many as the 2008 total of almost 12,000. Video and music infringements accounted for around 32% of all violations. Cases against individual file-sharers are still to be revealed.

This tough legislation was welcomed by the IFPI, who in their Digital Music Report 2010 labeled the action as the correct response to a “crisis”. The music group noted that digital sales had jumped 53% in the first 9 months of 2009, although sales of the same had already risen by 18% in the first 6 months of the year – pre-legislation – largely due to the fresh availability of legal alternatives.

However, according to the results of a survey carried out by Hong Kong-based Music Matters of 8,500 people in 13 countries, South Koreans still committed the second greatest number of online music infringements in 2009.

Released at the 2010 MIDEM event, the results revealed that the top spot was taken by the Chinese, with around 68% of users admitting they had downloaded music without paying for it. The South Koreans took second position with 60% with the Spanish coming in third with 46%.

The South Korean Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism has cast doubt on the report though. Apparently the question asked by Music Matters to those surveyed was a rather ambiguous “Have you downloaded music from the internet without payment?”

It’s impossible to say if the respondents felt that, for example, an ad-supported service like Spotify or other legitimately free services should be taken into account when giving a response.

In the meantime, the South Korean government has asked news outlets not to publish the results of the survey until they’ve had a chance to look into its validity. Those calls have been widely ignored.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Baidu has become increasingly popular with the Chinese population for its MP3 indexing abilities. While its “MP3 Search” provides algorithm-generated links to millions of undoubtedly illicit copyright tracks hosted by others (so-called “deep-linking”), Baidu has always insisted that the provision of such links alone is entirely legal. Needless to say, IFPI, the global music group, disagrees strongly with this assertion.

“The music industry in China wants partnership with the technology companies – but you cannot build partnership on the basis of systemic theft of copyrighted music and that is why we have been forced to take further actions,” said John Kennedy, Chairman and Chief Executive of IFPI, in a February 2008 statement.

Bolstered by an earlier ruling against Yahoo China, by further actions Kennedy unsurprisingly meant “legal actions.” In early 2008, IFPI (Sony BMG, Universal Music and Warner Music) sued Baidu.com for $9m. Today the result of that case has been made public.

Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court has cleared Baidu on accusations of copyright infringement, with a court statement showing that simply providing search results does not breach Chinese copyright law. According to lawyer Sun Yan, the case against the search giant fell because IFPI failed to identify the actual sites hosting the illegal music downloads.

IFPI has challenged Baidu – and lost – in the Beijing No.1 Intermediate Court before. In September 2005, IFPI filed claims regarding nearly 200 music tracks it claimed were made available via Baidu. In 2006, the Court ruled Baidu was not infringing copyright. IFPI appealed to the Beijing Higher People’s Court which upheld the earlier ruling.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

As demand grew Tony’s business expanded year after year, but by 2001 and although still busy, profits were being squeezed. By 2004 demand started to fall dramatically and in 2005 he had to close down his factory unit. Tony told TorrentFreak there was a new competitor in town.

“File-sharing, P2P – call it what you like. When you asked a customer why he wasn’t buying anything, 9 times out of 10 it was ‘BitTorrent this, LimeWire that’. Add that to the fact that huge numbers of PC users have burners and fast broadband and it’s obvious why I had to get out and earn a living another way. We had it good for a while but I don’t think those days are coming back.”

Cheap pirate media had just got even cheaper. With the advent of super-fast broadband there was little point in visiting the local counterfeiter when everything was just a few clicks away for free on increasingly user-friendly BitTorrent and other file-sharing sites. But what happens to the physical piracy market when the file-sharing sites are no more? Maybe China is about to find out.

During the last month Chinese authorities shut down hundreds of video sites, including some of the biggest BitTorrent trackers such as BTChina, for operating without an appropriate government license.

Now, according to a Chinese illegal DVD vendor, these shutdowns could be set to bring him and his competitors a sudden windfall – the exact mirror image of what happened to Tony several years ago.

“Pirated DVDs are the cheapest choice for people without free downloads online,” he said. “I expect my sales to triple before Christmas.”

While it’s still early days, officials in charge of clearing illicit vendors from the streets said that they had not yet witnessed a surge in demand for illegal DVDs. A spokesman for a Chinese IP lawfirm said that while there could be an increased demand short-term, file-sharers are resilient.

“Simply shutting down those websites might have an immediate impact, but where there’s a will, there’s a way,” he said. “The problem is, if you shut down the top two BitTorrent sites, then people are simply going to go to number three, number four or number five on the list,” he said. “You can cut off the head but sooner or later two more will grow back.”

Time will tell if an Internet crackdown on video sites will force customers back onto the streets, but perhaps more intriguing is the answer to this question – will it push them back into the arms of the legitimate vendors of movies and music? It seems unlikely.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Following the announcement came a two month investigation to ensure that sites were complying with the new rules – inevitably some fell foul. In March the authorities announced that dozens of websites would face penalties or be shut down for broadcasting material described as obscene, violent or fear-inspiring, or that could be detrimental to national security. Many were punished for simply not having the appropriate government certification.

Around a year later the government flexed its muscles again, shutting down more than 150 more video sites, bringing the total to more than 400 since the new regulations were announced.

In early November 2009, SARFT said it would continue cracking down on what it described as “unlicensed” video websites.

Continuing with its earlier justification, the government said it wished to provide a healthy environment for the country’s 200 million online video consumers, to eradicate what it described as lewd, obscene and violent content which had “severely undermined” the health of the country’s children. Although they weren’t initially mentioned, this time round authorities did included copyright issues as one of the reasons that the sites were to be closed.

Included in this swoop were several BitTorrent sites, including the very popular BT @ China. A notice on the site’s homepage explains that in the absence of an appropriate audio/visual license, the site has been ordered to shut down.

Another site, UUbird, which lists dozens of US shows such as Desperate Housewives, Prison Break, Heroes and Lost, said it would delete all links to TV shows and movies by mid-February.

As reported here on TorrentFreak a few days ago, BitTorrent is very popular China, with its main torrent client usage even surpassing that of uTorrent.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

What is new to many is that contrary to most other parts of the world, people from China also prefer to use a local BitTorrent client to manage their downloads. This new insight comes from data collected from three of the largest BitTorrent trackers adding up to a sample of 357 million unique peer IDs.

With the help of other tracker operators, EZTV’s NovaKing has gathered statistics from the OpenBitTorrent, PublicBitTorrent and Denis Stalker trackers. Spanning over a week, the overall statistics show that it’s not uTorrent but actually the Chinese BitTorrent client Thunder (also known as Xunlei) that has the largest market share.

We have to admit that this data came as a complete surprise to us and that we initially doubted its validity, but TorrentFreak is assured that these statistics are indeed correct. Previously we have reported on the market share of the various BitTorrent clients, but Thunder never made it into the list of most used clients. In this list below, however, Thunder/Xunlei actually beats uTorrent.

The logical explanation for this surprising result is that the previous statistics were gathered from a sample of torrents that did not include many Chinese downloaders. Apparently the Chinese prefer to use a local client (and local content) that’s available in Chinese, instead of uTorrent or Vuze which have a dominant market share in the rest of the world.

When we go through the rest of the stats we see that uTorrent has a small lead over Vuze (formerly Azureus). However, the difference is much smaller than our previous market share reports have suggested. This is another indication that the sample used for our previous reports was not as representative as it should have been, despite the large sample size.

Transmission and BitComet have a market share of 3.3 and 4 percent respectively, which is in line with previous reports. In ninth place we find another Chinese client, Tuotu, which is listed as Unknown in the list above.

The new data sheds a new light on the market share of BitTorrent clients. More than anything it reveals that there are quite a few regional differences when it comes to BitTorrent habits. By itself this is nothing new, but that a BitTorrent client used by tens of millions of people can fly under the radar for so long outside China has certainly surprised us.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Torrent sites have been the target of these removal requests more than once, and Google usually removes the ‘infringing’ torrent detail pages from their search results fairly quickly.

According to Google the altered search results are caused by DMCA complaints the company receives from copyright holders. One of the most recent takedown requests, sent by a company that protects the copyrights of porn producers, was targeted at The Pirate Bay.

“In response to a complaint we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed X result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint that caused the removal(s) at ChillingEffects.org,” Google users can now read beneath the search results for The Pirate Bay and similar terms.

Now this wouldn’t be that odd if only a few adult film torrents were removed from the search results. However, those who take a closer look will notice that the takedown request resulted in a ban of the Pirate Bay frontpage from the search results.

As can be seen from the picture above the rest of the Pirate Bay domain is still indexed, but not the frontpage. This is not the end of the world of course but since there are no torrents listed on the Pirate Bay frontpage, Google has clearly made a mistake here.

The details of the takedown notice that was sent by Removeyourcontent are not yet available, but it may be that it included the Pirate Bay frontpage and that Google removed it without checking whether the claim was legitimate.

TorrentFreak has contacted Google for a response, but thus far we haven’t heard back from them. If it is indeed a mistake we assume that it will be corrected soon. Perhaps they can delete the scammy PirateBay.com site while they’re at it?

Update: Destined Enterprises, the company that operates the site that sent the takedown requests according to Google, claims they haven’t asked Google to remove the Pirate Bay homepage from the search results (although they are not completely sure). In a letter (pdf) the company’s lawyer has sent to Google a few minutes ago, they request a copy of the takedown notice, fearing that someone else might use their name to send these takedown notices.

Update 2: Google has lifted the Pirate Bay ban. The homepage appears in the search results again. The DMCA notice in question is also published and the Pirate Bay homepage is not listed there, so it’s likely that Google made a mistake.

Update 3 Google says the mistake was due to “takedown request that erroneously listed thepiratebay.org.” The company that sent the takedown notice denies this. “They are blaming us but it’s ok. We are used to it,” they told TorrentFreak.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

There have been many cases where bands and music labels have been publicly vocal about the fact that their album has been heavily pirated. Complaining that their business has been torn apart, most of them appear to ignore the link between accumulating many unauthorized downloads and the retail success of their product. Short and sweet – if your product is good, thousands will buy it. If your product is good, thousands will pirate it too – the two scenarios go hand in hand.

One band who thought that evil pirates were taking all their money are Sweden-based Stockholm Stoner. In a recent interview picked up by brokep of The Pirate Bay, the band explained that since releasing their album on January 21st this year, they had sold a pretty-unimpressive 379 copies.

Apparently, however, their music is a smash hit on BitTorrent, racking up an impressive 80,000 downloads. This ratio of legal to unauthorized downloads seems unprecedented and the band were quick to express their dismay. While noting that they aren’t specifically against P2P networks, the band said it “would be fun” to get paid for their work and that “adults must understand that they can not steal,” while saying that the Internet should be filtered – “..the Chinese can do it after all,” they said.

But this is the Internet, and not everything is how it seems. What could be worse than getting pirated 210 copies to every one sold? How about… not getting pirated at all? Unfortunately for the band the download stats for their album were gathered from entirely the wrong place, via scammy links on a torrent meta search engine. As can be seen from this search for Stockholm Stoner, the site shows many thousands of downloads. They are fake – you can type anything in that search box and the site will return ’stats’.

Rather than being relieved, I can’t help but think that having found out that they’re not popular with pirates after all, the band would be hugely disappointed. Searching in the usual places, TorrentFreak couldn’t find any significant downloads of this band at all. Better to be popular and downloaded, than not downloaded at all, surely?

Another artist who claims to be hugely popular with pirates is Indiana “The Internet Police Are Coming” Gregg. In an interview with the BBC, Gregg claimed that one of her albums had been downloaded 250,000 times – a figure we found just too outrageous to be taken seriously, with our own calculations indicating this assessment was inflated by around 240,000 downloads.

Using the publicity from her spat with The Pirate Bay to great effect, Gregg went on to create Kerchoonz – a site paid for by £250,000 of public money where people could download and listen to music for free. Trying to convert ‘pirates-with-morals’ to the site, every listen or download would result in the artists getting paid, emphasized Gregg.

Indiana Gregg herself is touting her own music on the site and is actually the #4 artist in the Kerchoonz ‘Top 100′ list. Since she’s so popular with pirates (250,000 downloads remember?) she must be tearing it up on Kerchoonz. Wrong. Current stats indicate that her tracks have been streamed 1180 times and downloaded just 310 times. Presuming she’s getting paid at the same rates as the other artists on the site, Gregg netted $2 for this effort, which is exactly $2 more than she accused The Pirate Bay of giving her.

Overall it seems that getting heavily pirated is an indication of success, and a pointer that good money is to be made at retail – The Dark Knight was pirated at least a million times but has already made over $1 billion dollars worldwide.

If no-one wants to pirate your music or download it for free, don’t expect to be able to sell it either. Come back pirates, the music industry needs you.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

It soon became apparent that VeryCD was not the only P2P website to be hijacked. A host of BitTorrent sites, including Mininova, isoHunt and The Pirate Bay were also affected. People in the Beijing area who attempted to access the sites were promptly redirecting to Baidu, China’s Google.

The domain hijacks continued for more than two days straight, but were lifted yesterday. According to some sources, there was never an attempt to censor the BitTorrent sites, claiming that a DNS error cause the problems. This doesn’t seem very plausible though, as the diversions almost exclusively involved P2P related sites, which are hosted right across the globe. Also, DNS issues can’t explain why all the P2P sites were suddenly redirected to another website.

Mininova co-founder Niek, whose domain was also redirected to Baidu told TorrentFreak: “We had the questionable honor of joining Wikipedia and YouTube on the list of websites that (at some point) were censored in China. Fortunately the people in charge made the right decision, and realized that blocking a search engine like Mininova wasn’t such a good idea.”

“I’m happy to see that the block is removed now, though it would be nice to talk to the people who made this decision so we can understand their motives,” Niek added. The true reason behind the hijack attempt will probably never come to light. Most importantly, the ‘problems’ are resolved now, and all BitTorrent sites are accessible again.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

The most popular copy of the speech comes from the leading TV-torrent distribution group , EZTV. Novaking, one of the admins at EZTV told TorrentFreak that they simply couldn’t ignore this historic presidential election. “It would have been idiotic for us not to supply it,” he said. EZTV had also distributed copies of the debates, but the demand for these didn’t come close to that of Obama’s final speech.

Interest in the speech was not simply limited to the United States. A more detailed look at the geographical location of the people who downloaded the file via BitTorrent, shows that more than half of them come from outside the United States. However, the remaining 46.2% is a significantly greater share for US downloaders than for the average TV-show release.

Although the number of downloads for Obama’s speech were way above that of an average TV-show, it didn’t come close to the numbers of the Olympic opening ceremonies earlier this year. Despite the massive file size of 5GB, the opening ceremonies were downloaded over a million times, mostly by Chinese. The IOC, who owns the right to the broadcast wasn’t too happy about this, and went as far as contacting the Swedish Minister of Justice, to try and get the .torrent file off The Pirate Bay.

Unlike with the Olympics, we haven’t heard about any takedown requests for Obama’s presidential acceptance speech. In fact, if we could ask Obama if we can download a copy for personal use, he will more than likely answer with popular campaign slogan, “Yes we can.”

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

According to a report from Xinhuanet, China’s State Administration of Radio Film and Television has taken action against 17 sites it claims violated various regulations, including the publishing of horrific, violent or pornographic content, and operating a video site without proper approval. None of the sites appeared to have been warned or shuttered due to piracy issues.

One of the sites that has been warned, VeryCD, is China’s largest eDonkey indexing site. In operation for around 5 years, it claims to link to more than 30 terabytes of data. VeryCD also operates a service known as MP3! which aims to be the world’s largest index of MP3 files, which would understandably attract some copyright action.

However, a visit to VeryCD appears to show the site pretty much intact and packed with links to the latest movies, music, games and software. So, it appears the site was warned, rather than banned. Details are scarce, what might it have been warned about if it is not related to copyright infringement?

Of course, pornographic content is available on eDonkey, that is one option. Another possibility lies in the list of complaints about the various sites – there is one which reads “spreading video programs that violate national regulations”. VeryCD actually created their own version of eMule, which has been downloaded more than 30 million times. Could that be the cause of the warning?

Whatever the problem, unusually for a file-sharing site, it wasn’t piracy.

Via SHD

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

So, customs officials in Hong Kong have arrested a 14 year old boy. The boy is suspected to have uploaded 2,000 Chinese-language pop songs onto the Internet. I’d love to be able to tell you this kid’s name, but (un)fortunately the law says he’s too young to be named. I’m sure kids today are much smarter and advanced than I was, so hopefully he’s not too young to understand what’s happening to him. The ‘not knowing’ would add considerably to his ordeal.

According to customs spokesman Michael Kwan, the teenager had been sharing Cantonese pop songs, known locally as Cantopop. When I was 14, I had cassette tapes filled with pop music too, all of it copied from anyone who had a copy. I doubt I had 2000 tracks, but I certainly had an impressive arsenal of jam-packed C90’s, and I happily copied them for anyone with a blank tape. In fact, faced with no money but a thirst for pop music, all my friends copied off each other, and the recipients of those copies all shared those with everyone else. It never crossed our minds that we would be arrested for it. Not once, since arrests seemed to be reserved for the glue-sniffing vandals who my parents warned me to stay away from, which I did, happily.

Copyright infringements in Hong Kong apparently carry a maximum penalty of four years in jail and a fine of HK$50,000 (US$6,400) for every item violated. A worrying amount for an adult, even ones who have the means to raise the cash. I once ran up a $30 telephone bill for my parents through my generous use of a 1200/75 modem. Through my kid’s vision it seemed like the end of the world, even though the phone company was the boogeyman, not the police or entertainment companies.

Mr Kwan, a head at Hong Kong’s Copyright Investigation Division, told at a press conference that the boy made a post on a forum indicating he had the songs for download. A press conference? For a 14 year old kid sharing music? Could I have imagined being arrested at 14 for taping music, taken away and then be the subject of discussion at a government press conference? Hardly. But maybe I should’ve been – they say standards are slipping in society, maybe the police and media companies coming down hard on children is the solution?

The Kid With No Name has been set free on a bail of 2,000 Hong Kong dollars, roughly US$260, and has not been charged while the police make further inquiries. Hopefully the investigation won’t interfere too much with his school work and revision at this crucial point in his education. Or maybe any diversion away from school work is cool in the eyes of a hormonal teenager? I think I’d have been happy to have a few disrupted maths lessons, but there again, in hindsight I didn’t understand how important they were. After all, I was just a kid.

But of course, eventually all kids grow up. We leave school and start earning our own money and start making those important decisions about where to spend it, which are probably shaped by previous life experiences and dreams for the future. We also decide who to vote for. I didn’t grow up in a ‘lock up pirates and throw away the key’ environment yet i’m still disturbed and concerned at how copyright enforcement is heading. Going to war against today’s potential customers seems foolish. Punishing and polarizing children – tomorrow’s customers – at the behest of big-business, is in a completely different league.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Currently, Irish pay-TV broadcaster Setanta has the rights to broadcast live matches to its 4 million subscribers, of which a maximum of 1.5 million watch the matches, such as England’s World Cup qualifier with Croatia last week. Terrestrial channels, available to most in the UK, have to strike a deal with Setanta to get the match highlights to show to their viewers after the live match has finished. Last week, they failed to reach a deal which meant that football-mad England fans who wanted to view on terrestrial TV were unable to watch their own national team.

In the end, a deal was struck with the ITV network to show match highlights the next day, but by which time everyone knew that England had won 4-1 and although most fans were pleased, all the surprises were ruined. However, those prepared to pirate their favorite sport managed to cut through the satellite/terrestrial split and all the boardroom and financial politics at the click of a mouse.

The majority of the pirates got their England vs Croatia fix from streaming services. Most of them are easy to view with a software client but other streams can be viewed directly in a regular web browser, and there appears to be no shortage to choose from. Ok, the picture quality might not be all that and the commentary might be in Chinese on some streams but since the matches can be heard live on national radio, understandable commentary is accessible, if out of sync.

A much smaller number, around 15,000, downloaded the full match via BitTorrent, which ordinarily would only be available via a subscription to Setanta. Even if a deal had been struck with terrestrial channels, only the highlights would have been available to the masses. But of course, pirates don’t care about subscriptions or the reasons why companies fail to make a deal to enable fans to watch their national team participate in their national sport. They want media and they want it now – and they get it too, either for free via Internet piracy, or at a discount via other less obvious gray-area sources.

The message to media companies is simple – provide wide access to media at a reasonable price and no fuss, and the majority (who can afford it) will be happy to pay. Start aggressively restricting things that people love – like watching football – and then fail to reach agreements to let the fans have even a diluted version in a timely organized fashion, and you’re asking for trouble. Once people start pirating and realize just how much easier, convenient and cheaper it is, it will be hard to get them back, especially once BitTorrent and streaming media devices start to be found in the average living room.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Compared to 2004, the availability of Olympic events on BitTorrent has grown significantly, both in quantity and quality. Interestingly, the demand for Olympic torrents is the greatest in China, as 65% of the people who downloaded the Openings Ceremony come from the host country.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) is not pleased seeing their shows on BitTorrent sites though. Yesterday they even sent a letter (read it here) to the Swedish Minister of Justice, urging her to take on The Pirate Bay. From the letter, it looks like they have been reading last week’s article. “Our technical advisor Informs us that as many as 1 million copies of the Opening Ceremony have been illegally downloaded worldwide, with the most significant activity taking place through Pirate Bay,” they write.

The IOC claims to have contacted The Pirate Bay with a takedown request, but turned to the Minister when they got no response. The Pirate Bay denies this, and Pirate Bay co-founder Peter Sunde writes: “The phone hasn’t rung. And I guess their e-mail probably got caught in the Chinese firewall, since TPB is blocked there.”

From the letter, it seems that the IOC is predicting that the Closing Ceremony will hit BitTorrent immediately after the fireworks. “We are also gravely concerned about the upcoming Closing Ceremony on August 24, as it is entirely predictable that illegal copies of that event will be immediately made available through the Pirate Bay.” They are right of course, and we’re afraid that the Swedish government can’t do much about it either.

Today, the Minister said in a radio interview that The Pirate Bay is not really good promotion for Sweden (although some would disagree), but that there is indeed little they can do to stop the tracker from hosting torrent files.

It is not clear why the IOC is going after the Pirate Bay, and not any of the other BitTorrent sites. Of course, they are the most outspoken, but the majority of all the Olympic torrents are downloaded from other sites. Most BitTorrent sites do take down torrents when they are asked to, so it might be a good idea to start there….

Below is this week’s chart of the most pirated TV-shows on BitTorrent, the Olympics Opening Ceremony tops the chart again. The data for the TV-torrent chart is collected by TorrentFreak from a representative sample of BitTorrent sites and is for informational and educational reference only.

Top Downloads August 10 – August 17

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

First a little introduction to Andrew. From his site, NewMusicStrategies.

My name’s Andrew Dubber. I’m the Degree Leader for Music Industries at UCE Birmingham, UK. I’m a senior lecturer and researcher with a particular interest in online music, radio and new media technology.

My background is in both radio and the music industry, and I’ve written numerous articles, book chapters, and conference presentations about these sorts of new strategies and technologies in both of those sectors.

In the context of a blog about the online music world, I thought you might be interested in an email exchange I’ve had this evening with a board member of both the IFPI and the BPI.

I’ve had an email conversation with Paul Birch of Revolver Records this evening. Rather than comment on it, I’ll just post it here for your information, in full and unedited, with his permission.

_______________________

Andrew

Looking at your site I do think allowing indiscriminate criticism of the RIAA is inappropriate for a Government funded institution.

Paul

_______________________

Hi Paul,

You might be right, but I’m not a government funded institution, and nor do I consider my criticism of the RIAA indiscriminate.

However, if you find something that’s factually incorrect, I’d be more than happy to amend it.

Thanks for checking out the site.

Cheers,

Andrew

_______________________

Let’s talk about it when we next meet-up, as I don’t intend to write a thesis on the subject.

However, I stand by my assertion.

Regards

Paul

_______________________

Fair enough. But if you do happen to stumble across something that you have a particular problem with, if you could point it out to me, that would be most helpful.

Look forward to catching up.

_______________________

Andrew, Well I am in regular contact with the RIAA and both they and the IFPI are subject to hate mail as a consequence of hubcap, our litigation against consumers for illegally downloading our copyrights.

This manifests itself into individual members of our RIAA management being singled-out for malicious statements and blogs on the internet. As an example you probably saw the case earlier in the week of a Chinese Laundry in the United States being sued for $54M for loosing a pair of trousers, belonging to a lawyer. If you take a look at the criticism on your blog of the RIAA by one of the contributors, they are engaging in a similar malicious prosecution in the US courts but go further and make a number of assertions through your blog that gives credibility to illegal downloading.

I am not concerned that people decide to take out law-suits against our organisations; we have the resources to deal with that. What does concern me however is the repeating of malicious falsehoods that occur in a number of internet blog, and are re-reported as having validity contribute widely to the assertion that right is on the side of wrong-doing.

You might argue that your professional blog is your opinion alone, however you are interwoven into the views and policy of the University of Central England and I think that puts you in an exposed positon Andrew.

It might not be nice to be sued by the RIAA and potentially put in a position of being made bankrupt; neither is issuing redundancy notices to hard working staff. People don’t have to download; they do however have to work. Consumers that enjoy music have a lot of options and enjoying it free on the radio is at least one of them, with last FM and You Tube there is near on demand service free at the point of use. But stealing isn’t clever, but presumably most people don’t really wish to steal, and only share because it is so easy and seems harmless/victimless. If people need to affirmatively hide their activities, then there is an understanding of wrongdoing. I feel that your blog underpins the misuse of our copyright and attacks our trade associations.

There are very serious allegations made in this anti-RIAA link on your blog, and I don’t think its appropriate that you link to them.

Paul
_______________________

2 questions, then please Paul:

1) Which link?
2) Would you be willing for me to post this email to the blog to present a counterbalance to the anti-RIAA position?
_______________________

http://www.downloadsquad.com/2007/06/06/

riaa-extortion-and-conspiracy-in-the-same-sentence

Above is the link, I am not sure how I navigated to it from your blog.

I am willing for you to publicise anything I say here, but I think that what is more desirable is to take down links from your site that promote this hatred of the recording Industry, because the assumption is that by linking to them that you support the extreme view heralded. That might be unfair to you by the way as you may or may not hold those views. I can only seek to reason with those views but my argument about biting the hand that feeds it is I feel valid. I respect everyone’s right to dissent but I am anxious that Individual managers within our trade association have the right not to be publicly hounded.

Best wishes

Paul
_______________________

I remember that article. I can see how it would be seen as undesirable PR for the RIAA, but I’m not at all convinced it either represents an extreme view or promotes the hounding of individual managers represented by the recording industry association.

In fact, from my time online reading articles about the music industry, I would say it’s about par for the course. Most independent commentators take the position that the suing of individuals by the RIAA has been a public relations disaster, and that rather than deter illegal activity, they have simply turned the record-buying public against them. If someone is taking a countersuit against the organisation, I’m afraid that’s comment-worthy. As it happens, I think I remember hearing that the case was thrown out, but I’d have to check the facts.

The way I see it is this: what I’m linking to is opinion about a news story. It’s genuine news and it’s legitimate opinion. You may not agree, but I don’t see anything there that warrants a take-down notice.

I would never endorse hate speech or the encouragement of the victimisation of any individual no matter what their job. That link doesn’t even come close to either of those things.

More importantly, as someone who comments about the industry, only linking to items that echo the official position of the major label organisations would pretty much make my site valueless to its readers.

Download Squad, the source of that article, is pretty much uniformly interesting, relevant and linkworthy. I don’t think this was an exception.

But I think it’s important that both sides are put, so I’ll post this email exchange up on the site. If there’s anything else you’d like to say on this, then pop it in a reply to this email, and I’ll leave it at that.

I think it’s great that you’re willing to have this discussion in public. Much appreciated.

_______________________

Andrew

It expresses opinion, it’s not factual. If you persist then I shall make a formal complaint to the University.

Your choice.

Paul

_______________________

The End. Always good to end on a threat, RIAA-style….

The full post and comments can be found here.

Andrew has also kindly given every TorrentFreak reader the chance to download his eBook, The 20 Things You Must Know About Music Online.

UPDATE:Seems like Andrew Dubber’s webhost (UKHost4U) has suspended his site. It’s unclear at this stage exactly why.
UPDATE2:Andrew’s site is now operational but clarification on the reason for the take-down is still being sought.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

The growth is a result of BitTorrent’s deals with companies like Warner, Chinese TV and Movie companies, and other movie companies. BitTorrent is also planning to open their very own video store later this year.

The serverpark is located at the Main 365 datacenter in San Francisco, BitTorrent’s hometown. Ashwin Navin, president and co-founder of BitTorrent states:

“BitTorrent is not a company that limits itself by convention. With our aggressive growth plans we need a data center that can grow with us and deliver reliable power, cooling and connectivity. 365 Main provides these features within a stone’s throw away from our engineering team in San Francisco,”.

And I always thought BitTorrent was supposed to save you bandwidth…

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Download a P2P streaming player from the forum Football Streaming Info, which is stuffed full of links to downloads and tips if you get into technical trouble. TvAnts is a front-runner due to its ease of use — a big plus is that the channel menu is mostly in English, unlike many of the other players which seem to be in Chinese.

Once you have a player installed, a clear and detailed schedule of the day’s games and where to view them can be found at BoxtoBox.

Wired also points their readers to BitTorrent. The World Cup matches are posted on several trackers within a few minutes. No real-time streaming, but very useful if you miss a game.

Over at tvRSS you can find some matches in hr.hdtv, and subscribe to the world cup rss feed.

Update:

In a previous article I pointed to the article in Wired, with some tips and tricks to watch the world cup online. But it seems that quite a lot of people still have problems watching world cup streams online. Don’t worry, there’s another p2p world cup stream player, and it’s easier to use.

People from the UK can use the BBC streams. The rest of the world should try the TVUplayer.

Tune in to the ESPN2 channel for English commentary, and you’re ready to go.

And yes, some people say it’s illegal…

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Navin said:

“They’ve (Chinese movie and TV-companies) been very receptive. Everyone knows what BitTorrent is. If there’s a way for them to protect their films and distribute their films legally, making the money they are not making now, I think there’s mutual interest for BitTorrent and the Hong Kong film industry.We hope the service can be up this year.”

DRM alert!

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Today p2pnet’s Alex H did an exclusive Q&A with with uTorrent’s Ludvig Strigeus:

Alex H: Last time we spoke you guys had just released uTorrent 1.1.4. Now you’ve just released uTorrent 1.5. How far has uTorrent come with the 1.5 release? What’s new?

Ludde: uTorrent 1.5 is a significant release that’s a big milesone for us. The new major changes in 1.5 are support for Protocol Encryption (i.e. Message stream encryption) and Peer Exchange (a feature that lets peers interchange peers with each other, and reduces the need for a working tracker, it makes BitTorrent more distributed). A lot of work has also been spent on optimizing the downloading speeds, uTorrent should now download much more efficiently than before.

In combination with this, a new algorithm for optimized disk accesses has been implemented. Previous versions would hit the disk much more often, while the new automatic disk cache tries to minimize this.

The time between releases, a whopping 2 months, is the longest time ever in uTorrent’s history. This shows that 1.5 is really a big change compared to 1.4 (The number of changes is well over a hundred), and we’ve worked to perfecting it down to the smallest detail.

Other notable things that have been added since 1.1.4 (when you last interviewed us) include:

* RSS Reader: Allows uTorrent to automatically fetch releases (such as TV-shows) as soon as they are released. This helps uTorrent to become a better content-on-demand platform, since it will automatically help users download the content they need. A nice RSS tutorial can be found on the webpage for the users that are unsure about how RSS works.

* Unicode support: The same executable can be used both in Unicode mode (windows 2000 or later) or in ANSI compability mode (windows ME or earlier). This is a quite unique feature for native Win32 programs. Unicode is a relatively new universal way of representing characters inside the computer, which means that uTorrent is compatible with foreign torrents (such as those with chinese filenames), while still being able to run properly on old platforms. Support for old platforms like Windows 95 is an important goal for us, not because the user base is there, but it shows that we care about how the application performs for all users.

* Mainline-DHT: This was added in uTorrent 1.2. It means Distributed Hash Table, and is a nice technology that really minimizes the dependency on the tracker. DHT allows uTorrent to receive peers through a distributed network of peers, so the tracker is not needed.

We’ve come a long way since 1.1.4, now uTorrent is really one of the serious contenders in the BitTorrent scene. We concentrate on adding mainstream features that are easy to use, and benefit the majority of the user base, and thus uTorrent is geared towards both normal users and “expert” users that know the inns and outs of their computer.

Alex H: Who makes up the uTorrent team now?

Ludde: The uTorrent team consists of:

* Ludvig Strigeus (ludde) – Sole uTorrent Developer
* And some of the most notable members of the uTorrent community:
* Giancarlo Martínez (Firon) – Support technician and my right hand.
* Timothy Su (Ignorantcow) – Website designer
* Maciej Trebacz (mav) – In charge of translations
* Carsten Niebuhr (Directrix) – Working on the upcoming webinterface
* Ludovic Arnaud (Ashe) – Working with website efficiency/admin frontend

Then there are a bunch of other people hanging around in the IRC channels/Forums helping people and helping me.

Alex H: uTorrent worked with Azureus to develop the Message Stream Encryption specs. What does it do and how does it do it?

Ludde: It is basically an encrypted wrapper around the BitTorrent traffic. This makes it a lot harder for Internet Service Providers to block or throttle the BitTorrent traffic, as they can’t determine as easily if the traffic really is BitTorrent. Blocking is obviously of interest to them, since it has been estimated that at least 30% of all Internet traffic is BitTorrent.

All data packets are encrypted with a key generated at run time, so there is no way for a 3rd party to observe what kind of files that are being transmitted by just analysing the packet stream. However, characteristics of the BitTorrent protocol, such as packet sizes, or the fact that a client connects to a large number of peers, can still be used to infer that BitTorrent activity is going on, so the encryption is not a universal solution.

Alex H: Can the PHE specifications work with other protocols, or is it a BitTorrent-only thing?

Ludde: It was designed to be as general as possible, and to not be dependent on BitTorrent, so it can (in theory) be used to encrypt other protocols. Just like SSL can be used to encrypt other things than HTTP.

Alex H: What was it like collaborating with rival developers? Was it just “Team uTorrent” and “Team Azureus”, or were there other individuals involved too?

Ludde: We are not really “rival developers” even though we work on “competing” clients. I have a healthy relationship with the Azureus team and we’re cooperating openly. My goal is not to destroy Azureus. I want to provide a lightweight alternative to Azureus for the people that believe that Azureus’s requirements in terms of CPU/Memory are too high.

Alex H: Last week Slyck.com published a story that revealed a deal between a company called PeerFactor and Ludvig Strigeus, uTorrent’s developer. How does uTorrent fit into this? Is Ludde working for the “dark side”? Have you sold out as some people are claiming?

Ludde: I can’t believe how much this deal has been blown up. The whole hysteria started with the Slyck.com article saying that uTorrent is cooperating with RetSpan and working with Anti-P2P organizations. Later the article was updated because that statement was factually incorrect. Yet I believe a large number of users still have doubts about uTorrent’s legitimacy.

The deal as such is not even about uTorrent. I will provide the company (PeerFactor, a startup company started in late 2005), with a small DLL-file that can be used for one thing only – Downloading files from BitTorrent network. The deal is not between uTorrent and PeerFactor, and it does not affect uTorrent. I’m just using some of my expertise to help them develop an application that webmasters can use to publish big content on their websites. I don’t even give out any source code.

I can’t show you our agreement, but uTorrent is not even mentioned in our deal. There are no mentions of any Anti-P2P ideas, and PeerFactor owns NO rights to the BitTorrent code. The deal is just between me (Ludvig Strigeus) as a developer and PeerFactor. It’s not related to uTorrent at all. The license has no malicious intent towards P2P users, and it does not affect uTorrent in any way. The contract explicitly states that they can only use it for the designated purpose, and not for anything else such as monitoring P2P users.

Alex H: Who was at the meeting with PeerFactor?

Ludde: I have not even met anyone in person, I havn’t even talked to them on the phone! All our communication has been on e-mails and IRC. This is not a big contract. It’s just a small side project to try to get some payment for the effort involved in writing a BitTorrent protocol stack.

Alex H: What does this .dll file do exactly?

Ludde: The DLL file component that I have exports a few basic functionalities such as

* Start downloading a torrent
* Stop it
* Pause
* Remove it
* Determine how many % was downloaded.

It contains no functionality whatsoever for retreiving IP-addresses of peers.

The DLL file wasn’t written specifically for PeerFactor. It’s a generic download DLL with a small size/footprint that I have developed as a separate project. I just made some minor adjustments so it would meet PeerFactor’s requirements.

Alex H: Do you know, or can you speculate on what PeerFactor plans to do with the .dll?

Ludde: The goal is to use unused bandwidth of Internet users to distribute big files, like trial games, free trial music and trailers. It is not related to fake files.

Alex H: How is the deal structured? Is it a straight sale or a lease? Is there some kind of royalty payment to Ludde?

Ludde: It’s a 6-month lease. PeerFactor will evaluate if the DLL fits with their requirements. No source is involved, and all ownership to the code belongs to me. I have not been paid anything, but if the service turns out to work, I will get some form of payment. I don’t have an employment contract with PeerFactor. I do not work for them, and they do not have control over any decisions I make related to uTorrent.

Alex H: PeerFactor has ties to French anti-P2P company RetSpan. Is there still a relationship there?

Ludde: No, the person I’ve been in contact with has assured me that there is no relationship at all between PeerFactor and RetSpan. I trust him, and if it turns out that there is a connection, I will not work with them.

Alex H: The uTorrent website was put on a block list a few days ago. How did it happen? Is there anything on the uTorrent website that is a security risk for users?

Ludde: These blocklists are created by a bunch of over-paranoid people (Bluetack). The software PeerGuardian has temporarily handed over list creation to Bluetack, and Bluetack prefers to be better safe than sorry. Their decision was based on incorrect facts, and it will take some time before the block gets removed.

Alex H: There is a certain level of mistrust directed at closed source applications like uTorrent. Why is the uTorrent source code not available? Will uTorrent ever be open source?

Ludde: There are no plans to make uTorrent open source. If uTorrent becomes open source, it will result in hacked clients, or companies modifying the code and creating malware clients. If uTorrent is closed source, I can make sure that the quality of uTorrent stays high and that it doesn’t become a bloated client. Further, it makes sure that the source code is not used by dubious companies or for dubious purposes.

Alex H: Is there anything in the uTorrent source code that would be considered a security risk to users, such as a “phone home” component or something that builds up a profile of the user?

Ludde: Not at all, uTorrent has an optional feature (enabled by default) that sends a unique random ID number when checking for new updates. This is used solely for the purpose of computing how many users that are actively using uTorrent. Azureus does the same thing, so it’s nothing special really. A lot of internet-enabled programs do this without even telling the user. With uTorrent you have the option to turn it off if it’s of concern to you.

Alex H: uTorrent is free, but donations are accepted. What other kinds of work have you done to make ends meet? Is there anyone you would refuse to work for?

Ludde: Working with an Anti-P2P company is certainly not a good idea, considering my interests in making the best BitTorrent client. I would not do that. Apart from that, I don’t know. I will have to evaluate any possible offers and see if they match with what I think is fair and makes sense.

Alex H: I asked a similar question to this in our previous interview: How do you see BitTorrent developing over say, the next three years?

Ludde: This is a very hard question to answer. I definitely believe P2P is here to stay. I think ISPs will get a bigger role and start developing solutions to help P2P instead of working against it, for example cache mechanisms. I like the new law in France that legalizes P2P, and I hope that more countries will follow.

I think we’ll start seeing BitTorrent more in embedded devices, such as set-top boxes. More services will be developed around BitTorrent to distribute legal content, and subscription based services such as high quality movies-on-demand instead of renting DVDs in the rental store.

Alex H: Thanks for your time, and good luck for the future.

Ludde: Thanks.

P2Pnet

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.