As a result the BBC is now getting involved in the copyright debates of other countries, notably Australia, where it operates four subscription channels. Following submissions from Hollywood interests and local ISPs, BBC Worldwide has now presented its own to the Federal Government. Its text shows that the corporation wants new anti-piracy measures to go further than ever before.

The BBC begins by indicating a preference for a co-operative scheme, one in which content owners and ISPs share responsibility to “reduce and eliminate” online copyright infringement. Educating consumers on both the impact of piracy and where content can be obtained legally online would be supported by improved availability of official offerings.

After providing general piracy statistics, the BBC turn to the recent leaking of the new series of Doctor Who to file-sharing networks which acted “as a spoiler” to the official global TV premiere.

“Despite the BBC dedicating considerable resources to taking down and blocking access to these Doctor Who materials, there were almost 13,000 download attempts of these materials from Australian IP addresses in the period between their unauthorized access and the expiration of the usual catch-up windows,” the BBC write.

So what can be done?

In common with all rightsholder submissions so far, the BBC wants to put pressure on ISPs to deal with their errant subscribers via a graduated response scheme of educational messages backed up by punitive measures for the most persistent of infringers.

“ISPs should warn any alleged copyright infringers through a graduated notification system that what they are doing is illegal and, at the same time, educate them about the law, the importance of copyright to funding content and services they enjoy and where they can access the material they want legally. However. if the consumers do not abide by the notifications then more serious action may need to be taken,” the BBC note.

Those sanctions could lead to a throttling of a users’ Internet connection but should not normally lead to a complete disconnection. However, the BBC doesn’t rule that out, adding that such measures could be employed “in the most serious and egregious circumstances, as is the case in the United States.”

While little in the foregoing presents much of a surprise, the BBC goes further than any other rightsholder submission thus far in suggesting that ISPs should not only forward notices, but also spy on their customers’ Internet usage habits.

VPNs are pirate tools

“Since the evolution of peer-to-peer software protocols to incorporate decentralized architectures, which has allowed users to download content from numerous host computers, the detection and prosecution of copyright violations has become a complex task. This situation is further amplified by the adoption of virtual private networks (VPNs) and proxy servers by some users, allowing them to circumvent geo-blocking technologies and further evade detection,” the BBC explain.

“It is reasonable for ISPs to be placed under an obligation to identify user behavior that is ‘suspicious’ and indicative of a user engaging in conduct that infringes copyright. Such behavior may include the illegitimate use by Internet users of IP obfuscation tools in combination with high download volumes.”

While the BBC goes on to state that “false positives” would need to be avoided in order to “safeguard the fundamental rights of consumers”, none of this will sit well with Internet service providers or the public. Throwing around accusations of illegal activity based on the existence of an encrypted tunnel and high bandwidth consumption is several steps beyond anything suggested before.

Site blocking

The BBC says it supports the blocking of overseas infringing sites at the ISP level after obtaining a court injunction. Of interest is a proposal to use a system which allows for injunctions to be modified after being issued in order to deal with sites finding ways to circumvent bans.

“It is important to have the ability to get existing injunctions varied by the court when defendants reappear in different guises, a useful tool in the United Kingdom,” the BBC writes.

Who foots the bill?

Who pays for all of the above has been the major sticking point in all Australian negotiations thus far. The ISPs largely believe they shouldn’t have to pay for anything, but most rightsholders – the BBC included – think that the costs need to be shared.

“In light of the fact that a large inducement for internet users to become customers of ISPs is to gain access to content (whether legally or illegally), it is paramount that ISPs are required to take an active role in preventing and fighting online copyright infringement by establishing and contributing meaningfully to the cost of administering some form of graduated response scheme,” the BBC concludes.

Earlier submissions from Hollywood, ISPs and tech companies can be found here (1), (2), (3)

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Doctor Who Media (DWM) was a site created in 2010 and during the ensuing four and a half years it amassed around 25,000 dedicated members.

A source close to the site told TF that since nothing like it existed officially, DWM’s core focus was to provide a central location and community for everything in the “Whoniverse”, from reconstructions of missing episodes to the latest episodes, and whatever lay between.

But yesterday, following a visit by representatives from the BBC and Federation Against Copyright Theft, the site’s operator took the decision to shut down the site for good.

“I had a knock at the door and a couple of guys were there. One from FACT and one from BBCWW [BBC Worldwide]. The FACT guy basically explained what the issue was, said that he was there to give a cease and desist and wanted the domain transferred,” the site’s operator informs TorrentFreak.

With threats of executing an official search warrant and taking the matter to court if terms could not be reached, there was never any question of embarking on a losing battle. With the user database secured, an agreement was quickly reached to close down the site and transfer the domain.

Interestingly, however, the domain name will not be going to FACT as is usually the case. Doctor Who Media’s operator told TF that it will be transferred to the BBC as there are trademark issues involved.

“DWM may have been a major factor of my life for the past few years, but I wasn’t going to let it ruin me, so I agreed, signed, the guy wrote down his mobile number in case there were any issues and then they went. They were about as nice as you could expect given the situation. It’s only a job after all,” he concludes.

The tip about the site’s shutdown came from a DWM user who told TF that he’ll be sad to see its doors close for the final time.

“I can’t speak for others but having that content available really helped raise my interest level in Doctor Who. Often times, having watched stuff there led to me purchasing the exact same content on iTunes as well as all the various other content available for Doctor Who,” he explained.

And now, all eyes turn to the season premiere tonight. As of yesterday, all but the final episode of the brand new season had leaked to file-sharing sites, although it’s worth pointing out that Doctor Who Media refused to carry any of that content.

Will the leaks have a positive or negative impact on viewing figures? There’s only a few hours to find out, but it’s doubtful the BBC will be weeping following tonight’s episode.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

While the BBC closed down the security breach, it didn’t do so quickly enough. The scripts were made available on file-sharing networks first and they were soon followed by the leak of the first episode.

Destined for Marcelo Camargo of Marc Drei Productions, a Brazil-based production company known for its subtitling work, the unfinished ‘workprint’ release wasn’t to be the last. Less than a week ago the first full copies of the second episode “Into The Dalek” started doing the rounds, prompting concerns of whether the leaks would stop there or continue.

That question now seems to have been answered. A 1020Mb file currently being made available via The Pirate Bay is the third episode in the new series. The file follows the naming convention of the previous two leaks suggesting that the video comes from the same source.

Rumored to be titled “Robots of Sherwood”, the episode confirms details revealed in the leaked scripts and sees Doctor Who venturing back in time for a memorable meeting with Robin Hood.

As can be seen from the screenshot, the episode is presented in monochrome and is heavily watermarked. Special effects and other elements of final polish also appear to be absent.

The question now falls to whether the remaining three episodes of six will also leak to mainstream file-sharing networks such as BitTorrent. There are reports of episodes four, five and six appearing on the eD2K network (sometimes known as eDonkey) but thus far there are no confirmed full downloads.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Following a catastrophic error at a BBC office in Miami, not only were the new seasons’ scripts made available to the public, but several episodes too.

It’s unclear how many people downloaded the videos directly from the server, but it soon became clear that episode one had leaked when it appeared on The Pirate Bay and other file-sharing sites. It was an unfinished ‘workprint’ release, destined for Marcelo Camargo of Marc Drei Productions, a Brazil-based production company known for its subtitling work.

The image below shows how the content appeared on the BBC website.

Soon after rumors turned to a potential leak of episode two. A torrent was certainly uploaded to The Pirate Bay, but whoever seeded that file in the first instance quickly backed away, leaving the torrent at just a few percent complete. This led many to presume that the release was a fake, but that wasn’t to be the case. A full copy was definitely waiting somewhere.

On Sunday at least one torrent sprang back to life temporarily, surprising people who had patiently left it in their client to complete. While it reportedly went quiet again, another torrent appeared claiming to be of the same material. As both torrents completed confirmation arrived that the leak, which had lay dormant for several weeks, was indeed real.

Weighing in just short of 987MB, the episode is called ‘Into the Dalek’ and once again it is another unfinished ‘workprint’ copy, as the screenshot below shows.

In addition to being covered in text watermarks, the episode is presented in black and white, with many special effects absent. Its naming convention matches the screenshot above, suggesting that this leak was also obtained from the BBC website.

While the BBC will be disappointed not to have contained this second episode, there are currently no signs that any of the remaining episodes have leaked to file-sharing networks.

The leak is only the latest in a long line of workprint copies of movies and TV shows to be made available online. It certainly won’t be the last.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Back in 2009 the movie Wolverine appeared on the Internet in advance of its official release. The copy was unfinished and provided a version of the film to downloaders that would have otherwise remained hidden forever. Now that same dubious status has fallen to Doctor Who.

After appearing online over the weekend, what claims to be episode one of the new series of the hit show was uploaded to The Pirate Bay today. The 1.49Gb file is marked as a “pre air screeneer” with a claimed running time of one hour and 16 mins.

While leaks of TV shows are much more rare than movie leaks, this copy is particularly unusual. Clearly unfinished, the video is both heavily watermarked and monochrome.

As can be seen from the image above, the copy carries the text “Prepared for Marcelo Camargo at Drei Marc.”

Marcelo Camargo is the owner of Marc Drei Productions, a Brazil-based production company known for its subtitling work. There is no suggestion that Camargo or his company is responsible for the leak.

This is the second serious breach in a matter of days to hit Doctor Who and the BBC. Just last week scripts from the new series leaked online after inadvertently being made available to the public by a BBC Worldwide office in the U.S. It seems likely that this video comes from the same source.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

According to a newly leaked document the “3 strikes” mafia are at it again. Following on the ACTA debacle, they have again been been working secretly on a new global anti-piracy plan. Of course, the democratic process is conveniently undermined by making their agreement behind closed doors.

What immediately jumps out from reading the leaked TPP draft is the proposed copyright extension to 120 years, which would ostensibly be applied to works from the 50′s and 60′s in a move which is not only sneaky, but is arguably a violation of the prohibition on ex post facto laws. In a time when media distribution costs are nearly zero and significant value is added by “consumers” remixing works, this is clearly the wrong direction.

But there is an even more dangerous proposal, one that would bring a “three-strikes” law of copyright infringements to all participating countries.

Communication is considered by most to be a right. In the United States, the Constitution says “Congress shall make no law” which abridges the “freedom of speech”, and although people spend lifetimes arguing about the definition of speech, most people agree that if Alice wants to speak with Bob and Bob wants to speak with Alice it is unlawful for the government to prevent them from communicating.

Putting Bob on a “do not speak with” list is blatantly criminal. Somehow, the copyright mafia seem to have convinced people that if Alice is the owner of an Internet service provider, she should not be allowed to speak with all of the Bobs of the world even if she wants to.

When we look for historical equivalents to the “do not speak with” list, we don’t have to look further than the Middle Ages when the Catholic church had the power of excommunication which prohibited Catholics (everyone at the time) from speaking with a particular person. This was practically a death sentence, but it was still undermined because anyone could speak with the excommunicated, violating the prohibition.

In our time things are much worse. In most places nearly all Internet is provided by a small oligopoly of major ISPs. If these companies are compelled to refuse access to a given person, that person is effectively off of the net. This may not seem important to some as the net was little more than a toy 20 years ago, but as more and more commercial enterprise moves on to the net it is becoming as essential to daily life as electricity, telephone, or automobiles. In this high stakes high competition world, being excommunicated from the net would truly be a virtual death sentence.

If we are to excommunicate people, on what basis should this occur? The copyright lobby says that it should happen to those who are “caught” violating copyrights. How does one go about proving guilt or innocence in a case of copyright violation? All anyone has to go on are logs of data relayed to them by their ISP, and these can easily be doctored or be innocently wrong.

Copyright infringement is truly the heresy of our time, there is no way to prove guilt nor innocence. If I wanted to silence a critic or a whistle blower, I only have to accuse them of copyright infringement, it is my word against theirs. The power of excommunication using trumped up copyright claims is too dangerous to place in the hands of those who would undoubtedly like to see their critics go away.

When we begin disconnecting those who are disruptive, we begin killing the Internet. The Internet is little more than a conglomeration of disruptive technologies and people. Those who have the most
enemies are those who contribute the most to the net. The number of people and the number of websites which are blocked will balloon as everyone grabs for a piece of the anti-competition pie. The Internet will be whittled down to little more than interactive cable TV, and a generation who grew up in the turbulent wild west of the net will simply move on to something else.

If this goes into effect as it probably will, let it be remembered that we knew this was poison. We were not duped, we did not think it was good or that it was written with anything but malicious intent. Let it be remembered that this was forced down our throats by a waning aristocracy which was used to getting its way.

I have said it.

If my connection is turned off you don’t have to wonder why.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

To the absolute dismay of most outside the music and movie industries, some of the most controversial elements of the Bill are unlikely to receive any major scrutiny and will be dealt with quickly under the so-called “wash-up”, a short period between the announcement of an election and parliament being closed down.

“It’s a deeply unsatisfactory and very worrying development,” a senior executive from an ISP told The Guardian. “The fear is that no one will know what is being cooked-up before it becomes law. It’s legislation on the hoof.”

But this situation suits the BPI just fine. This week a leaked memo from the BPI fell into the hands of Cory Doctorow which showed that the “LibDem amendment” – a proposal under the DEB which would allow for websites to be blocked if, essentially, the BPI didn’t like their activities – was in fact written by the BPI. Very cosy.

But the controversies don’t end there. Doctorow also received an internal document prepared by the BPI’s Director of Public Affairs and prospective Labour parliamentary candidate, Richard Mollet. In the document he admitted that the only reason the DEB had a chance of passing is because MP’s are resigned to voting on it without debate.

“Translation: if MPs got to debate the Bill, they would tear it to unrecognizable pieces as they realized what terrible rubbish it really is,” wrote Doctorow. The scandals go on and on, but we have to stop somewhere.

Nevertheless, UK Music head Feargal Sharkey says that he is confident that the DEB will be passed before the general election, although others are not so sure.

“It will still be nip and tuck to get the Digital Economy Bill onto the statute book before the election so the battle is not won yet,” wrote Shadow Culture Minister, Jeremy Hunt, on his blog this week.

According to Jim Killock at the Open Rights Group, UK citizens aren’t leaving anything to chance with 10,000 of them having written to their MPs in the last three days to demand a debate on the Digital Economy Bill.

“It is outrageous for corporate lobbyists including the BPI, FAST and UK Music to demand that MPs curtail democracy and ram this Bill through Parliament without debate,” says Killock, adding: “The British people did not elect UK Music and the BPI to write our laws.”

Killock says that what is making the 10,000 so angry is the pushing through of the DEB without debate, an act he describes as “undemocratic and dangerous”.

If you’d like to add your dissenting voice, please email your MP, write to your local newspaper, and attend the planned demonstrations.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Tomorrow the exact text of the bill is expected to be made public, but according to early reports, the legislation will open all doors for a digital police state where alleged pirates will be crucified by private companies.

Judging from some of the plans that leaked earlier today, the endless lobbying efforts of the entertainment industry by anti-piracy outfits including IFPI and the BPI have definitely paid off.

Cory Doctorow has the scoop on BoingBoing and he told TorrentFreak that the information comes from someone “very close to the Labour government” who he trusts implicitly.

If accurate, the new legislation will be a disaster for the privacy of all Internet users while giving unprecedented powers to the entertainment industry. Under the new bill the Secretary of State would be able to pass secondary legislation without Parliamentary oversight in order to protect rights holders.

Three reasons are given:

1. The Secretary of State would get the power to create new remedies for online infringements. (for example, he could authorize jail terms for file-sharing, or create a “three-strikes” plan that costs entire families their Internet access if any member stands accused of infringement)

3. The Secretary of State would get the power to “impose such duties, powers or functions on any person as may be specified in connection with facilitating online infringement” (for example, ISPs could be forced to spy on their users, or to have copyright lawyers examine every piece of user-generated content before it goes live; also, copyright “militias” can be formed with the power to police copyright on the web)

The leaked information mainly shows that the Secretary of State will have the power to introduce all kinds of draconian measures without Parliamentary oversight. More details on concrete policy dealing with alleged file-sharers and the proposed three-strikes system have yet to be announced.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Whereas some people may download a movie to avoid the cost, TV shows offer something different. People are generally able to watch these shows for free on regular TV, but still, due to superior convenience and greater availability, those same people choose to get their fix from BitTorrent instead.

In Australia right now, online piracy is a hot topic, with anti-piracy outfits going as far as trying to hold ISPs accountable for the infringing actions of their customers, and the ‘firewall’ of Australia threatening to target BitTorrent. But when it comes to deterring piracy it seems the big studios are blind to some of the small things they can do to make the situation better, instead of continually going to war with pirates – a war they simply cannot win.

The TV show Doctor Who, like many shows, has a ‘Christmas Special’. This episode, unsurprisingly, will air Christmas Day on the BBC in the UK. In it the Doctor will have one of his trademark re-incarnations, a very important event for fans of the series. The problem for Australian viewers is simple – ABC who have the rights to the show think that Christmas Day falls on January 25th 2009 down-under, as this is the date it will air there, officially at least.

But of course, Doctor Who fans know about BitTorrent, the show has appeared in our most pirated TV show lists and was even subject to a major ‘leak‘ of its own.

Thanks to ABC’s short-sightedness, thousands of Australians will pirate this episode of their favorite show just minutes after it finishes airing in the UK and a month ahead of its official launch. It’s not just The Doctor who is capable of time-traveling these days.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

The data of the weekly download chart, collected by TorrentFreak, is gathered from a representative sample of BitTorrent sites and is for informational and educational reference only.

At the end of the year we will publish a list of most downloaded TV-shows for the entire year, like we did last December.

TV-shows such as “Lost” and “Heroes” can get up to 10 million downloads per episode, in only a week.

Top Downloads June 15 – June 22

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.