When ‘caught’ uploading copyright works for the first time, the owner of the Internet connection used for the alleged infringement will receive an email warning. On allegations of a second offense, a physical letter will drop through the door. On the the third, the account holder will be summoned to appear before a judge who will have the power to fine, or even disconnect them from the Internet.

French senator Michel Thiolliere has told the BBC that the so-called Hadopi legislation will have the desired effect, with nearly everyone warned a second time abandoning illegal file-sharing for good.

“What we think is that after the first message… about two-thirds of the people (will) stop their illegal usages of the internet,” he explained

“After the second message more than 95% will finish with that bad usage.”

It is, however, much more likely that after getting a first warning, or even before, French Internet users will try to find a way round this system. They will discover that it’s surprisingly easy.

6 Ways Savvy Internet Users Will Neutralize Hadopi

Free options

MP3 Search Engines

One of the simplest ways to find music online is to use an MP3 search engine. That won’t be difficult as there are dozens to choose from. Sites like Skreemr, Songza, beeMP3, MP3Realm and AirMP3 are very simple to use and since there is no uploading, they drive a cart and horses through Hadopi. For those who don’t mind getting their hands dirty, Google offers similar functionality with their filetype: search operator.

Direct Downloads

During 2008 and 2009, the continued rise of blogs and forums that link to music, movies, tv shows and games stored on so-called cyberlocker sites was difficult to ignore. Although links can get taken down very quickly by copyright holders, they are often replaced just as swiftly by the communities that frequent such sites. The international music industry is particularly worried about the phenomenon, as tracking those that download from sites such as Rapidshare and MegaUpload is completely impractical.

Of course there are also perfectly legal alternatives, such as the excellent Jamendo.

Streaming Music and Video

While there are dozens of sites to visit directly, for those who really can’t be bothered to look any further and don’t mind closing a couple of slightly annoying popups, OVGuide is a huge portal to thousands of movies, TV shows and general video. With the assistance of the DivX plug-in, most content can be streamed directly in compatible web-browsers.

Music fans who don’t mind to stream tracks in their web browser actually have a few dozen legal alternatives. Grooveshark is one of the most elaborate music services. It holds more content than the average download store, supports playlists and it will roll out an iPhone app.

Premium options

Overseas MP3 Sites

Just over the English Channel from France lies the UK. Research carried out there recently by the BPI indicated that usage of MP3 pay sites had increased by 47%. While users do have to hand over money to use these services, at a tiny fraction of prices they would pay in their homeland they prove attractive to those on a tight budget.

Newsgroups

Using Usenet, or newsgroups as they are commonly known, is one of the most secure ways of downloading movies, TV shows, music and video games.

While the learning curve on Usenet is considered by many to be quite steep, once an individual discovers .NZB files – the .torrent of the newsgroup world – everything is hugely simplified. Within seconds of starting a transfer, the user’s connection will be completely maxed-out.

On a practical basis, and certainly as far as Hadopi is concerned, paying a few euros each month for a decent newsgroup account means that French citizens need never fear being disconnected from the Internet. Indeed, not even the first warning email will arrive.

Anonymous VPN

While the above options require that Internet users modify their behaviors, by spending a few euros a month on an anonymous VPN account they won’t have to change any of their habits at all. They can continue to use BitTorrent, eD2K or any other P2P method of file-sharing.

Once subscribed to a service such as Netherlands-based ItsHidden (who also offer a free, but speed-limited service), Hadopi file-sharing investigators will believe that the user behind that IP address is from another country and simply move on.

As the failed and now largely abandoned campaign against file-sharers in the United States proved, scare tactics simply don’t work. There are millions of file-sharers in France and many will simply carry on their activities in the belief that the odds of being caught are extremely slim.

And they would be absolutely right.

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

“This is our preemptive strike with a narrowly defined petition for Declaratory Relief that we do not infringe, in anticipation they are going to file their own lawsuit that we do infringe (their copyright),” Fung told TorrentFreak at the time.

In March 2009, isoHunt and the CRIA appeared in court. IsoHunt asked the court to decide whether BitTorrent search engines could be held liable for .torrent files that might point to copyrighted data, but the CRIA demanded a full trial against the BitTorrent site.

In the end the judge felt that the issues were too complex and consequences too far reaching not to move to a full trial.

IsoHunt appealed that decision but yesterday were turned down by the appeal court.

“The issues involved in this case are fundamental to the rights of creators to earn a living from their work,” said CRIA president Graham Henderson. “A matter of this importance should be considered by a court with access to all the facts and not, as isoHunt had argued, to only one party’s version of the facts. A lower court agreed with us and now so has the court of appeal,” he added.

Speaking with TorrentFreak, isoHunt’s Gary Fung said that the decision was not that sad and was expected.

“We didn’t lose (the case),” he told us, “only a motion on a form of litigation and we’ll have news soon enough on how we are to proceed suing CRIA in self defense”

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

To solve these issues, some ISPs have started to slow down all BitTorrent traffic, Comcast-style. Others choose to limit BitTorrent speeds at certain times of the day, and there are other examples where customers simply cannot download files with a .torrent extension at all.

Luckily there are options available which can help manage BitTorrent traffic and please customers, all at the same time. The Israeli ISP Bezeq International has taken this more consumer-friendly route. This ISP actually makes BitTorrent downloads faster by caching popular torrent downloads on their own network. By doing so the load on the network decreases and since there are less connections to peers outside the network Bezeq is also saving on costly bandwidth.

It works as follows. When a Bezeq International customer downloads a .torrent file the ISP will intercept it and add (!) a new tracker to it. The additional tracker is only accessible for Bezeq International customers and it connects to a high speed web-seed hosted on Bezeq International’s network. As a result the files will be downloaded much faster. A Bezeq customer told us that almost all ‘popular’ torrents he downloaded connect to local seeds.

Interestingly, the tracker Bezeq International uses is hosted by an ISP in The Netherlands, while the actual seeds (caches) are on the ISPs network. The provider confirmed to TorrentFreak that the ISP is indeed listed as a client, but they were not aware of its torrent caching practices or that they were hosting a BitTorrent tracker.

On the surface this seems to be a win-win situation for both the ISP and its customers. Bezeq saves on resources and expensive bandwidth while the customer enjoys higher download speeds. There are of course privacy concerns, since the .torrent files are intercepted and edited without permission, but the biggest opposition to such a system will most likely come from the entertainment industry.

Various anti-piracy lobby groups, including the MPAA and RIAA are already pushing for more cooperation from ISPs in tracking down copyright infringers. The relationship between the entities is an uneasy one already, and that’s before an ISP decided it would become a BitTorrent seeder. Although Bezeq International does not control which files are cached on their servers, the likes of the MPAA and RIAA will likely see it as aiding in copyright infringement.

Caching BitTorrent traffic and attempts to keep it within the local network as much as possible are not new, but aside from occasional tests these technologies are never implemented by ISPs. Bezeq International did not respond to our inquiries so we can’t confirm that they have implemented it for all their customers. For those who are lucky enough, enjoy the ride.

More discussion in Israeli.

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

Like most things, however, Usenet has its drawbacks. The main problem lies with its complexity – the learning curve can be a little steep – but with amazing little things called .NZB files, downloading is made almost as easy as BitTorrent. NZB files contain meta-data and without splitting too many hairs, they function in a very similar way to .torrent files. Download an NZB, load it into a news client such as Grabit and very quickly the download is complete.

Newzbin is one of the original Usenet indexing sites and the creator of the .NZB format, which opened Usenet downloading to the masses. In May 2008 it received a threatening letter from the Motion Picture Association (MPA). In the letter, the MPA claimed that some of Newzbin’s editors were listing NZBs which linked to movies on Usenet which infringed their member’s copyright.

In October 2008, ‘Caesium’, the owner of Newzbin made an announcement. “Newzbin has recently received two serious complaints regarding the indexing we perform, and raising doubts as to its legality. It is likely that we will in the coming weeks be presented with a court case and have to defend our rights.”

Noting that Newzbin would defend itself vigorously against the complainants, Caesium said he believed that linking to content on Usenet is entirely legal and that the site’s procedures for dealing with unlawful content is appropriate. “We believe that, or we wouldn’t still be here,” he added.

At the start of December 2008, Newzbin confirmed that it had indeed been removing NZB files that link to infringing movies on Usenet. However, this wasn’t enough for the MPA, who filed an injunction against Newzbin.

Now, four months later, the site is still operating as normal but has received more details about its upcoming battle with the movie companies.

“The latest we’ve heard is that there will be an interim hearing (to hash out administrative details) sometime in the next couple of months, and the case itself will be heard in court sometime between November 2009 and January 2010,” said Caesium in an announcement.

It is far from clear how the legal system will view the operations at Newzbin – no other site of its type has ever appeared in court in the UK, or elsewhere in the world. Newzbin has already been considering that in order to be completely sure of staying within the law it may have to automate its operations and remove human intervention in the creation of its NZB files.

While Newzbin has never, ever hosted any copyright infringing material, previously another newsgroup-related company Usenet.com was sued by the RIAA for actually hosting illicit content. Usenet.com was also criticized over its advertising, which is alleged to encourage piracy.

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

Uploading fakes to a BitTorrent network is relatively easy, but keeping the torrents active is a much more difficult task. The moderation teams on private trackers remove fakes as soon as they appear – if people are stupid enough to even try to upload them. Other directories such as The Pirate Bay and Mininova, however, are more difficult to police due to their open nature but these sites continually battle fakes too.

There are several forces driving this phenomenon. Of course, the likes of the MPAA and their partners like to upload fakes in order to waste downloader’s time and to monitor their activities. That said, there are others who are uploading fakes in order to make themselves money, with many of the fakes simply encouraging the use of malware such as Domplayer, or sending the user ostensibly to get passwords to view the video, but in reality directing them to spammy sites.

Unless you’ve been on Mars for a few years, you will be aware that aXXo is one of the strongest BitTorrent-related brands and as such, the aXXo name is ripe to be exploited with fake torrents and the schemes behind them. This morning, Mininova was bombarded with hundreds of fake aXXo torrents linking to various malware and spam schemes. Luckily the moderation staff at Mininova are very much on the ball, and their skills and experience allowed them to remove them very quickly. Indeed, the thousands of users at Mininova also help by informing the site that a torrent is not what it should be, but it’s an on-going battle.

When a fake is removed from the site, the IP address of the uploader is also banned, meaning that unless the uploader gets himself a new IP, he won’t be able to upload any more. However, the problem is a lot deeper than just the odd person here and there uploading a fake. Just recently malware and spam peddlers have been advertising online for people to work for them on a freelance basis, uploading fakes to torrent sites and getting paid for each one. Hundreds, maybe thousands of people have taken them up on their offers, getting paid around 20 cents for each successful upload. The scammers mitigate the effects of their worker’s IPs being banned by torrent sites by advertising for people with dynamically assigned IP addresses, while encouraging them to use proxies.

We spoke with Moe1210 at Mininova who told us that for them, although time consuming, the aXXo fakes are easiest to spot, and they are often removed from the site in a matter of minutes. However, due to these teams of hired individuals doing the uploading, the sheer number of fake torrents is significant. Even though the mod team are checking the site every 5 minutes, sometimes in that period 50 fakes could’ve been uploaded. On a regular day, the amount of fakes uploaded can reach 2,500.

In the ongoing battle the scammers are getting a little smarter, adjusting the way they operate as the challenge is met by Mininova. They became aware that at certain times of the day the fakes stayed on Mininova for longer periods before being removed, which was down to fluctuating staffing levels due to people having to sleep, rest and venture back into real-life every now and again. To counter this, Mininova now have a worldwide team which cover the major time zones.

Speaking of fake aXXo torrents, Moe1210 told TorrentFreak, “It’s a pretty pointless task uploading a torrent with aXXo in the title trying to trick people [on Mininova]. I’d say that 75% – 80% of our members know that if the torrent is not from aXXo’s account, its fake – meaning, if they check the ‘general’ tab and aXXo’s name is not in red letters, it’s fake! They [the scammers] have no way of spoofing this.”

Many fake torrents are using a tracker located at http://bt9.c7q.fast1010.info, which is hosted with Ecatel in The Netherlands. In order to trick users into believing the torrents it tracks are real, the tracker is faking the download statistics, as can be seen with this fake on TorrentPortal, which at the time of writing is reporting 76278 seeders and 82380 leechers.

The torrent contains an unusable video and a password.html file which claims to reveal a password to play the file, but instead leads the user into a quagmire of spammy sites.

Users looking to avoid these fakes should read our previous article entitled Stop Downloading Fakes and Junk From BitTorrent. In the meantime be aware that the same people behind the aXXo fakes are behind file names such as ‘Race to Witch Mountain 2009 DVDRIP XviD BangeR’, and ‘Watchmen 2009 DVDRIP SeedeRz’.

As a final thought, TorrentFreak asked Ecatel if they intend to do anything about the fakes tracker. They told us, “Ecatel does not allow any spam and malware in its network.” And then it became clear. The tracker hosted at Ecatel doesn’t host the content, the users do – like all trackers. Sometimes the law’s such an ass.

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

We’ve gone through the data, and it seems that BitSmash is off on the numbers of seeds and peers. One of the top downloads according to the service is The Incredible Hulk, with 414 peers and 139 seeders. However, Mininova and several other BitTorrent sites report that the torrent has more than 15,000 peers, and a manual scrape of one of the trackers returned close to 18,000 peers.

The service is of course still being developed, so these numbers might be corrected later. Smash, the founder of the project told us: “I’m going to stand by our numbers,” but said he will take a look at the inconsistencies. He encourages everyone to submit feedback while the site is in Beta.

Interestingly, BitSmash has decided to include a link to the .torrent files on their detail pages, which basically makes it a meta-search engine as well. The anti-piracy lobby might not be too happy about that. A few days ago we reported on the Swedish news site Nyheter24, that was criticized for linking to torrents on The Pirate Bay.

The service will officially launch October 15th, and later this year there will also be an API available for other services and websites to access, who can use the data for other purposes. Overall we think that BitSmash could develop into a great research tool. It’s worth checking out.

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

As stated previously, for your money you get a box that you plug into your network as close as possible to the Internet connection. Here it monitors all the traffic it can see, looking for data that matches the fingerprints stored in it. If it detects a transfer matching a fingerprint, it terminates the connection, in the same way Sandvine does , by sending RST packets to both ends of the connection, spoofed to look like the other sent it.

Although it seems like a fairer system than the Sandvine box Comcast used, it still has some significant flaws. Perhaps of greatest interest, is that it can be configured to act just like Sandvine, but more so. Literature for the system claims it “automatically filters copyright infringements, operating in a manner similar to a virus filter, without disrupting legitimate file trades.” But does it live up to the hype?

Audible Magic’s support site contains the answers to the basic questions most of us have about CopySense.

Q: What P2P protocols/programs are recognized?
A: The CopySense Appliance recognizes signatures from over 150 popular P2P applications and their derivatives. As new P2P applications are introduced, additional recognition capabilities are provided as software updates under your maintenance agreement
Q: How does it block traffic?
A: The appliance can be instructed to block all P2P traffic or to block only copyrighted content from P2P applications. The CopySense Appliance uses a patented packet-resetting process, and it sends a packet reset to both the requesting and sending IP addresses each time they attempt a P2P transfer that is to be blocked. The P2P application is thus forced to time out with an unsuccessful transfer.
Q: How does it recognize copyrighted content?
A: The CopySense technology examines the perceptual characteristics of a media file and compares that signature with those contained in a database of protected works. Publishers of media content register their works in Audible Magic’s database. The database is regularly updated in the CopySense Appliance as part of a content update subscription.

As the name of the site is TorrentFreak, and the main protocol in use is BitTorrent, let’s start there. Torrents are non-sequential downloads (illustration), that take ‘random’ (generally rarest first of what’s available) pieces from peers on the torrent, in 16KiB chunks. Also, although chunks might be sequential, pieces rarely are. A data stream may consist of 5 chunks from the start, then 2 from the back, and 1 from the middle. From just that 128KiB of data, Audible Magic claim they can identify a copyrighted work, and then terminate the connection.

If it sounds implausible, that’s because it is. It may work with systems like DC++, or possibly eD2k (as well as SoulSeek and KaZaA), but there is no way it can be accurate or effective with BitTorrent. Such methods would work better with HTTP (like Rapidshare) or FTP transfers, but aside from CopySense saying they don’t interfere with anything non-P2P, there is another problem.

As highlighted in the recent case involving the baby dancing to a Prince soundtrack, fair use is a perfectly adequate defence. This system makes no allocation for fair use at all. In the case, the judge ruled that before copyright enforcement can take place, the copyright owner is required to consider if the usage is fair use. An automated system is incapable of that. There have also been doubts surrounding the effectiveness of the streaming content version, which is based on the same technology.

So, in essence, CopySense does not (and can not) work to inhibit the most popular p2p protocol out there. If it could, then we would simply see a resurgence in passworded RAR files being torrented, with the passwords posted either on the torrent site, or even in the comment field of the torrent. CopySense also fails to check if a copyrighted file that it might identify (if you’re using a protocol that it can actually detect) is being used in a way consistent with fair use, or is licensed for use (although extremely improbable, the possibility exists, especially if copyrighted recording is right at the start).

In part two, we will look at claims that have been made from those who have used CopySense, and how that affects copyright infringement cases already in progress, and just how you get your content protected.

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

In May 2008, isoHunt received a Cease and Desist letter from the CRIA, in which they demanded that isoHunt founder Gary Fung should take the site offline. If Fung didn’t comply, the CRIA said it would pursue legal action, and demand $20,000 for each sound recording the site has infringed.

A similar tactic worked against Demonoid, but the isoHunt founder didn’t back down so easily. “We have since tried to come to an understanding, but just as with the MPAA in the US, they ignored our offers of cooperation by the take down of .torrent links to their content files, so long as they provide sufficient identification,” Gary Fung told TorrentFreak.

Fung has pointed out that, like most other BitTorrent sites, isoHunt has a Copyright Policy, and takes down .torrent files when they receive an appropriate request. The CRIA simply ignored this, even though they have sent correct takedown notices to isoHunt before (and isoHunt complied), and continued to threaten with legal action.

As an act of self-defense, isoHunt has decided to sue the CRIA instead, and today Fung will file a petition (pdf) to ask the Court of British Columbia to confirm that isoHunt –and sister sites Torrentbox and Podtropolis– do not infringe copyright. “This is our preemptive strike with a narrowly defined petition for Declaratory Relief that we do not infringe, in anticipation they are going to file their own lawsuit that we do infringe (their copyright),” Fung told TorrentFreak.

“Our petition summarizes BitTorrent technology, its open nature and a whole ecosystem of websites and operators that has developed around it, that CRIA does not own copyright to all files distributed over BitTorrent or on isoHunt websites, and we seek legal validation that we can continue to innovate within this emerging BitTorrent ecosystem on the Internet.”

“Think of this as a follow up to the QuebecTorrent case,” Fung says. “We intend to take this all the way up to the Canadian Supreme Court unless CRIA settles with us out of court in any reasonable way,” Fung added.

This is the first case worldwide where a court will be asked to decide whether .torrent files, and BitTorrent search engines in particular, are infringing copyright or not. Among other things, isoHunt argues that they are just a search engine, like Google, and that they have no control over the files they find elsewhere on the web. The site is indexing other BitTorrent trackers and indexers, without human intervention, and allows its users to find content that is scattered across the web.

So, should BitTorrent search engines be held liable for the .torrent files that might point to copyrighted data? If so, what does this mean for other search engines, and sites such as YouTube? This landmark case might be the one to define how files can be distributed online, let’s hope the Court of British Columbia will make the right decision.

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

No more slow downloads, viruses, or adware/spyware required to find the files you are looking for. The Rhever application has a built in easy-to-use search engine to find what you are looking for and does not require you to troll websites looking for .torrent files.

Unfortunately for Rhever, there is no Internet ‘buzz’ around their brand, people just aren’t taking about it, which is a bit strange for such a seemingly great product. If you do a search, 95% of the stuff you’ll find are press releases – and they only appear to be designed to worry people onto their new service.

They play an awful lot on the closure of TorrentSpy in their attempts to generate fear, uncertainty, doubt – and new business for them.

The ‘launch‘ press release lays off most of the scare tactics but is still littered with strange and misleading statements. Rhever spam is posted on dozens of forums, like this one and there are also some ‘interesting’ articles and blog posts around (tagged ‘Rhever’) proclaiming the end of BitTorrent sites. Even Digg doesn’t escape Rhever spam submitted by the company itself.

Also, Rhever use the most contentious music industry statistics to ‘prove’ that other P2P networks are dangerous, and refer to the IFPI as “respected industry analysts.”

If the fear doesn’t work, maybe the comedy angle will get them some subscribers? Rhever has produced a series of (admittedly quite funny) promotional animations showing the benefits of using Rhever over existing file sharing networks. Take a look at the ‘Rhever vs LimeWire’ video below which says that Rhever has done the impossible – and completely eradicated viruses from its network. In its own words:

Each of its [Rhever's] 60,000 servers are run by an administrative team that monitors the servers for any rogue files – viruses, fake uploads and other negative features that are removed instantly

LimeWire vs Rhever

BitTorrent vs Rhever . In this video you will find the secret of the Rhever network..

So it seems Rhever is selling access to good old Usenet and advises its subscribers to use NZB files to get their material, recommending its own (currently non-operational) site to get them – NZB.net.

Considering that Rhever’s strategy is to worry people about the legality of their chosen method of sharing files so much that they sign up, they’re quite cavalier about their own legal position. NZB sites in the US don’t have a great lifespan and offering a full package with Usenet seems very brave.

Finally, here is the KaZaA vs Rhever video:

Rhever is keen to play on the adware bundled with KaZaA, and that proves interesting when armed with WHOIS.

Rhever.com and NZB.net are both owned by a company called JMH Media. JMH Media are the current owners of the MySpaceBar.com domain, which was previously connected to the Scam.MySpaceBar malware. Unsurprisingly, McAfee doesn’t like it at all.

I’m not exactly inspired with confidence to try this Rhever but hey, nothing ventured, nothing gained! Time to sign up. Unfortunately, no matter what I put in I get errors, a point not lost on the solitary poster on the Rhever forums:

No mention of prices anywhere. No contract information. No proper terms or conditions. No company information. No privacy statement. No contact information. No postal address.

There is however, a link to the Rhever client, named ’setup.exe’…..

Maybe Rhever’s fear-marketing has got to me? Far from being scared into leaving BitTorrent, all this uncertainty means that i’m too scared to even install ’setup.exe’ due to what might be inside it – an instinct I acquired in my days as a LimeWire/KaZaA user. I think something just backfired.

Well then, another couple of hours wasted looking for The Holy Grail, only to realize that much like the French soldiers in the movie of the same name, I already have one.

What we really need now is a talented animator to make a proper ‘BitTorrent versus Rhever’ video….

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

The increased popularity of services such as Newzbin didn’t go unnoticed with the MPAA. On 22nd May 2008, administrator ‘Caesium’ made an announcement:

Newzbin has today received a letter from the Motion Picture Association (MPA). In the letter, they claim that some editors may be reporting material from Usenet that is infringing the copyright of their members.

While these claims have not been substantiated, it should be noted that Newzbin does not condone the distribution or indexing of such materials. We will immediately act to remove any items that are found to be infringing copyright.

Please take a moment to refer to our Terms and Conditions, in particular sections 4 and 4.2.

Please note that we may revoke privileges, or ban accounts, of users found to be violating these Terms and Conditions.

Since this announcement, worried Newzbin users have contacted TorrentFreak to see if we could find out exactly what had been going on. Understandably, Newzbin didn’t want to tell us much.

However, if one looks closely at the announcement, it doesn’t tell us anything that we didn’t already know. The terms and conditions have been in place since 2007, there doesn’t appear to be anything new in those.

Of course Newzbin doesn’t condone the indexing of copyright works. How can it? It is a proper company that charges users for access, not an underground operation hiding in the shadows. It appears to comply fully with the laws in the UK, where the service is based. Newzbin also say they will remove anything that infringes copyright. NZB files do not, so at that point they probably believed they would have little work to do.

But the MPAA isn’t known for letting the law stand in the way of a good threat, threats which have closed several US-based NZB sites in the past such as NZB-Zone and forced others to adjust the way they operate. Newzbin has not been sued, we can confirm that, but it will have to change the way it operates too, if it is to comply with the movie industry demands.

Caesium is hinting at possible changes to the site in the future. It’s a possibility that all .NZB related reports will have to be removed. An alternative to appease the MPAA would be to remove only the posts related to movies and TV shows, an arrangement favored by BinNews.com when faced with the same legal threats.

At this point it is far from clear what measures Newzbin will be finally forced to take to stop the threat of legal action turning into an actual lawsuit. Newzbin appear to be being as upfront as they can at this point and are suggesting that if users only use the site for .NZB files, then they should consider not renewing their subscription. For those who aren’t scared of making their own .NZBs ‘BinSearch’-style, the site will still be of great use, even if the most draconian measures are taken.

BinSearch provides Usenet indexing with a do-it-yourself .NZB creator. Anyone who knows the full scene release name of the material they seek will adjust to it in a few minutes, but it’s no Newzbin. For the uninformed, the learning curve is steep.

Newzbin has a secret weapon which has made it so attractive. ‘Editors‘ are essentially human beings who make reports which link to specific content on Usenet. Newzbin can then generate a .NZB file, based on the report. Anyone with an NZB capable news reader, like Grabit, can use them. It seems that it’s this human intervention with the creation of reports which poses the legal headache.

Newzbin is considering that it may have to fully automate its operations in order to be totally sure of staying the friendly side of the law – no more human intervention, no more ‘editor’ named reports. No more easily browsable pre-determined categories. A simple Usenet search engine would likely attract little attention and would be entirely legal, as confirmed by Caesium: “…we’re pretty sure nobody is going to tell us that having an automated searchable index of the entire contents of Usenet is going to cause any problems.”

But why would anyone bother using a degraded Newzbin over, say, the very useful (but limited) ‘BinSearch’? After all, there would be presumably little to separate them, feature-wise.

The plan is to introduce a feature where Newzbin users can tag. This way the site can provide an entirely legal automated index – no Newzbin staff involved – with only the users adding the tags. It sounds like a great solution and may even prove just as workable longer term.

They say every cloud has a silver lining and for Newzbin, that might come in the form of a greatly increased userbase. Newzbin is currently a subscription service but the changes may well turn it into a free site, which effectively opens it up to everyone rather than just its current paying userbase. That’s a hell of a lot of tags. Thankfully there will likely be a ratings system, to ensure quality tagging.

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

In April, the appointed judge asked both parties to clarify how BitTorrent works, and what isoHunt’s contribution is to the copying of (copyrighted) material. Little over a month ago the MPAA explained (in private) to judge Wilson why they think BitTorrent sites are infringing copyright, and today isoHunt has filed a response.

“The MPAA has taken a narrow point of view that copyright infringement is stealing, that isoHunt serves no other purpose than promoting and facilitating infringement of Hollywood films,” isoHunt owner Gary Fung writes. He and his lawyers refuse to be compared to “the bogeyman selling pirated DVDs on the street”, and explain why.

One of isoHunt’s arguments is that the site is in fact very similar to search engines like Google. They write: “The essential functions performed at a torrent site are also performed at a comprehensive search site like Google or Yahoo!. To visualize a visit to isoHunt, start off with a visit to Google , only a few things are changed, mostly superficial, and the workings are very similar.”

This is not a new argument, two years ago TorrentSpy used a similar analogy, and last year OiNK administrator Alan Ellis told The Telegraph: “If Google directed someone to a site where they can illegally download music, they are doing the same as what I have been accused of. I am not making any Oink users break the law.”

Indeed, torrent sites do not host or directly link to copyrighted content. In the filing isoHunt goes on to explain how BitTorrent works and what the role of the site is in the downloading process. They explain that all the site does is collect and index metafiles (torrents), and that they are not directly involved in the downloading process.

The MPAA does not agree, and has argued that sites such as isoHunt offer a “centralized index” of copyrighted material. isoHunt, however, does not agree with this view, and tell judge Wilson: “It is a semantic game to argue that Defendants provide a “centralized index.” The words “centralized” and “central” are contrary to the principles that shape and define BitTorrent technology.”

BitTorrent is indeed decentralized rather than centralized, and the claim that BitTorrent sites are an “index of copyrighted material” is not correct either, since .torrent files itself are not copyrighted. Some files may link to copyrighted material (hosted on computers all over the world), but there are thousands of .torrent files that link to material that is uploaded with the permission of the copyright holder.

isoHunt as a service does not infringe or facilitate copyright infringement, all they do is host .torrent files. These files may or may not point to copyrighted material, but this seems to be irrelevant. The site is not alone, hundreds of sites index .torrent files, and even Google has a .torrent search command. BitTorrent or .torrent links have nothing to do with copyright infringement, nor do sites like isoHunt.

“More innocent than Google, Defendants have no part in the design or operational control of the BitTorrent Network and have no more than a membership role,” isoHunt’s lawyers write. Perhaps the MPAA should sue Google next?

To be continued…

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

“My goal is to be in the top 100 most-visited sites on the Internet in two years,” ‘Jon’ told BusinessWeek. “If I can corner the torrent market, everyone would rely on the site for profits, just as people look to Google for search-based advertising revenue.”

Yesterday, Patrick from YouTorrent told us: “The YouTorrent project has grown very quickly and unfortunately is not in line with the owning company’s core business.”

Unfortunately, the chances of becoming the BitTorrent equivalent of Google have evaporated. Having courted the file-sharing masses and gained huge amounts of free publicity as a result, the site is only now of interest to a tiny subset of them and it appears that for many, the site will never be useful again. So having just lost 99% of its original target market, it won’t be as much use to advertisers either. Wait….the site doesn’t have any ads……

This is getting confusing. Back to the matter in hand.

Top 10 YouTorrent (meta-search) Alternatives

1. PizzaTorrent

PizzaTorrent was the first YouTorrent clone, so it deserves to be top of the list.

2. NowTorrents

Another YouTorrent clone.

3. Torrentz

Fast, clean and reliable. Probably the best meta-search engine out there.

4. LookTorrent

A relatively new meta-search engine that presents search results in separate tabs

5. Torrents.to

Torrent.to uses a toolbar at the top of the page to search several BitTorrent sites.

6. Morrent

A meta-search engine with categories and advanced search operators.

7. Torrent-Finder

Searched more that 100 private and public BitTorrent sites, the results open in separate tabs.

8. TorrentScan

TorrentScan allows you to search 13 BitTorrent sites from one page.

9. BitDig

This could be a great site if they decided to got rid of the excessive advertising.

10. TorrentScoop

A meta serach engine powered by the Google coop service.

BitTorrent meta-search engines can be a great and easy way to find torrents. However, they are useless if all the sites they index host the same .torrent files. So, no matter how useful these site may seem, they are pretty much useless if there are no trackers.

Do you know any other new BitTorrent sites that are worth visiting? Leave a comment and share it with us…

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

This is why Tape It Off The Internet seemed like such a good idea until you actually started trying to use it. There are just not enough good shows being made to justify something as complicated and involved as TIOTI. Enter all your favorites and share them with strangers ‘just like you’ and discover… what? That there are only seven good shows in the world at any one time, you were already watching six of them, and they’re all in the Pirate Bay’s Top 100 anyway. When you strip away the hours of dross and advertising, the truth is that the world’s mighty entertainment infrastructure is only capable of producing half a dozen hours of passable content a week. Maybe it’s because they spend the rest of their time on lawsuits.

One of these rare hours is The Wire. If by some small chance you’re not mainlining it already, think yourself lucky. You have four back seasons to enjoy, of what is quite possibly the last great show television will produce before it’s entirely superseded by — well, by whatever is coming around the way.

I’m not sure anyone has ever attempted to make a show of this scope: The Wire’s by-all-accounts-not-very-nice creator David Simon (Homicide, The Corner) has said his theme over the series’ five years has been ‘the decline of the American empire’ — which means decay of its cities through poverty, of traditional jobs, of the education system, of the police force and of the media. For those getting restless at the back, the show’s also got the slickest, nastiest drug slingers you’ll see on screen and is so realistic that the Baltimore Police have apparently complained it reveals too much about how crimes are — or are not — solved; apparently real thugs love it as well.

Find it and download it — though probably David Simon doesn’t want you to and neither does HBO, which has been actively poisoning Torrents of its other shows. Tell everyone you know about it. Maybe those of them still rocking TVs will raise the show’s increasingly dismal viewing figures.

Or maybe that’s no longer the point. While I sympathise with the plight of the David Simons, David Milchs (Deadwood, John from Cincinnati) and Joss Whedons (Firefly) of this world, and would like to help them in future endeavors, I specifically do not sympathise with the plights of the craven, dim-witted, played-out producers that surround them on all sides. And by ‘playing fair’ and buying the DVD or the cable package, besides the fact that most of our money is not going to the creators and their families, aren’t we really saying we accept the meshwork of shit in order to get the two or three gems that occasionally sift through it? Aren’t we signalling the industry that there’s something we still find acceptable about their way of doing business?

Now I suppose this could seem a bit extreme to some. But again and again in blogs and comments about shows like The Wire you hear ‘I’d pay for this if…’ — if it wasn’t DRM’ed all to hell like HBO’s own online offering, if it was freely shareable, good to be watched whenever, wherever, on whatever, without constant interruption by adverts. The kicker is that we’re not only unable legally to liberate and re-distribute shows from the broken, corrupt mechanisms of television and DVD distribution: we also have no way of supporting creators like David Simon and crew outside of it.

This means that right now, people still stupid or unfortunate enough to sit in front of TVs watching months-old shows or paying massive cash-or-attention premiums for the new ones are heavily subsidising us P2Pers. This is genuinely immoral, because we’re really exploiting people less fortunate than ourselves. Instead, we should be helping them out of the wasteland, and thinking of new ways to get the creators we like creating outside the prison of mass distribution. It cannot be that we are able to figure out how to make GNU-Linux – a world-class operating system — together, but not to make a dozen decent shows a year.

The irony is that TV series really feel like they’re coming into their own, just as the media that spawned them is dying. From the ‘high art’ of Deadwood and John From Cincinnati to the epic modern-day myth of Lost to the (dare I call it) Beckettian dark comedy of Trailer Park Boys, the drawn out tales of our series (often consumed a ’season’ at a time: I know at least three people waiting for The Wire to finish before downloading it) are an undeniable core of our emerging P2P culture.

We are the most passionate viewers ever, talking and writing profusely about the media we love, analysing, promoting, hosting free screenings… And they need us as much as we need them — all of these shows, without exception, enjoy their primary life on the networks, through our blogs, comments, reviews, remixes and fan fiction. Lost in particular has learned that incorporating online feedback can make a great (if utterly Shaggy Dog) story.

Can we find a way to get the shows we want made without buying the goddamn DVD? I remember this guy talking really sensibly a couple years ago about how Joss Whedon could get to make another season of Firefly, and we got this project back up his musings. Why didn’t Whedon try it? Because someone else owned his ideas? Perhaps it could have worked otherwise, and maybe it could work for the future. If you’ve got ideas, throw them in the comments box below. And if you have time in between catching up on The Wire, read this by the venerable guru of Wired magazine, Kevin Kelly — I’m going to try to get him into the next installment of STEAL THIS FILM. See you around. I’ll be back in two weeks to pick up the pieces.

TorrentFreak welcomes Jamie King as our new bi-weekly columnist. Jamie is the Director of STEAL THIS FILM I & II and a member of the League of Noble Peers. He is currently working on a cinema release of STEAL THIS FILM and prototyping an experimental, post-P2P remuneration system for creators.

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