by Ellen Seidler | Copyright, Film, Law, Music, Piracy, Tech
Mega-pirate Kim Dotcom gets his digital content back, when do the stuff he’s stolen from us back?
A court in New Zealand has ordered authorities to return Kim Dotcom’s hard drives and digital material taken “illegally” during a raid in January of 2012. According to a story on stuff.co.nz:
A judge has ordered the police to sift through all digital material taken illegally from Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom and to return anything irrelevant to their investigation at their own cost.
Fine, he gets his stuff back. My question is–when do all the filmmakers, musicians, and authors get the stuff he stole from us and (and monetized) back?…or at least the $$$$ he made off it.
by Ellen Seidler | Film, Piracy
Notorious pirate site Movie2k.to is gone…at least for now
Much to the chagrin of many on Twitter, the popular pirate movie portal http://www.movie2k.to is offline thanks, it seems, to a court order issued in the UK. According to a story in Torrent Freak earlier this month, a number of UK ISPs were served with a court order that requires them to block the sites or be legally liable for the infringement that occurs. It’s not clear at this point how that effort has affected the site’s availability in places like the United States.
No matter the reason, this is good news for filmmakers. Not only did Movie2k.to list illegal download links for thousands of films, but the site also ignored DMCA takedown requests.
Since the site itself didn’t respond, sending notices to Google was the only way content creators could take action to prevent their work from being stolen. In February when I checked the Google transparency report for Movie2k.to I found the search giant had received 37,764 takedown requests to have related search results removed.
At the time I demonstrated how the popular film “Silver Linings Playbook” download links were easy to find via Google search on Movie2k.to.
Dozens of download links to pirated copies of Silver Linings Playbook on Movie2k
It’s important to note that studio films were not the only ones victimized by Movie 2k. The site offered links to illegal streams and downloads of hundreds of indie films too.
Whether its disappearance is permanent remains unknown. For now, however, there’s cause to celebrate as another pirate site bites the dust….
Update: On Saturday, June 1st Torrent Freak is reporting that another popular pirate site, letmewatchthis.ch has gone missing too. Again, it’s unclear as to why this is happening, but suffice it to say that it’s good news for filmmakers.
by Ellen Seidler | Copyright, Film, Piracy, Tech
Piracy promoted by Facebook and featuring ads served by U.S. based “Ad Council” for a U.S. government agency that’s supposed to protect American consumers
The 6th chapter of the popular movie franchise “The Fast and Furious“ premiered nationwide yesterday, and has already set new Memorial Day weekend box office records. This morning–less than 24 hours later– thanks to a Facebook, a link for a pirated version appeared on my computer screen.
I came across this particular link while having my wake-up coffee and checking my Facebook news feed. I’ll admit to having “liked” this Facebook movie page in the past so I could, in fact, monitor and research ongoing pirate activity.
The film’s speedy arrival onto pirate websites (and shared via a social media site like Facebook) is neither unexpected, nor surprising. I’m sure there are already thousands of pirated copies posted online throughout the globe, and dozens more shared via Facebook pages like this one. I’ve already written about this particular Facebook movie page, and others like it that promote illegal downloads. The reason I’m choosing to revisit it is because today’s scenario, with link appearing in my news feed, demonstrates once again how piracy theft is routinely enabled–and made increasingly efficient–by companies like Facebook.
Today, when I saw this post, I followed the link to the website to check it out. I found 2 working streams of the movie, one via the Russian site VK.com, a social media portal styled after Facebook. The online offering is riddled with advertising (including a pop-up from the United Way) but nonetheless, after clicking through the ads, there’s the film, in its entirety, streaming online. Granted, the copy was likely shot surreptitiously in a theater, but the quality is decent enough. The others “embeds” are actually decoys, carefully designed to mimic working streams in order to trick visitors into clicking, thus triggering a pop-up ad and generating more income for the site.
Ironically, one of the ads that popped up was for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency of the United States government, and another for the Shelter Pet Project. Both ads are apparently placed with the ad servicer by the Ad Council. On its website the organization describes its mission this way:
The Ad Council is a private, non-profit organization that marshals volunteer talent from the advertising and communications industries, the facilities of the media, and the resources of the business and non-profit communities to deliver critical messages to the American public.
Irony aside, the Ad Council’s involvement–and its servicing an ad for an official bureau of United States government (that’s supposed to protect American consumers)–demonstrates just how broken our system is. Were this criminal activity happening in the brick and mortar world I doubt it would be tolerated, at least not by U.S. law enforcement.
I am sure no one at the Consumer Protection Bureau is even aware that their ads blanket pirate websites, but therein lies the problem. Why not? Why are federal dollars being spent for advertisements on sites that offer up stolen goods? When did it become OK for advertisers, whether the U.S. government or not, to underwrite online theft? Just because the crime happens online, is it really OK that our tax dollars end up in the pockets of pirates? How is that the online economy is somehow exempt from legal scrutiny? Is this really the kind of “innovation” we want to encourage and protect?
Advertisements aside, another question should be asked of Facebook. Why should the Silicon Valley behemoth be allowed earn money off the promotion of stolen goods? The company is vigilant when it comes to removing photos of breast feeding mothers, but when it comes to removing pages dedicated to disseminating stolen goods, not so much?
Ads sponsored by the U.S. based Ad Council blanket this pirate website
As Congress moves forward to discuss copyright reform members may want to finally peek under this rock and take a look at what can be done to hold accountable those who–directly or indirectly–aid and abet online theft. Facebook….Ad Council….Uncle Sam….are you listening??? Looking the other way in response to ad sponsored piracy is not OK. Creative content, whether it be a Hollywood blockbuster like “The Fast and Furious” or an indie band’s latest release, should not be there for the taking by piracy profiteers.
The time for action and accountability is long overdue. The government, ad servers, and the entities that advertise on these pirate websites need to step up, admit we have a big problem, and deal with it.
by Ellen Seidler | Copyright, Film, Law, Music, Piracy, Politics, Tech
Derek Khanna first came to public notice in 2012 after writing a lopsided anti-copyright “policy brief” for Republican Study Committee called “Three Myths About Copyright Law and Where to Start to Fix It.” A day after the document was released it was withdrawn and Khanna lost his job at the end of the 112th Congress. He blamed wealthy donors in the “entertainment industry” for his dismissal and quickly became a martyr for the anti-copyright cause. He ended up at as Yale Law Fellow with the Information Society Project.
Unfortunately, like many of those in the legal field who are working to undermine creator’s rights, Mr. Khanna speaks from a decidedly one-sided perspective in penning a piece for today’s Washington Post that ominously warns that “Hollywood should not decide our copyright laws.” Aside from selecting a splashy but lazy (and inaccurate) headline for his piece, he conveniently ignored the (Tech) elephant in the room when he wrote, ” Last year’s defeat of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) caused industry groups to intensify their lobbying efforts. And they haven’t been subtle about it.” Sure, television and motion picture interests have increased their presence in Washington, but then so has “Big Tech.”
May I remind you that the reality of the anti-SOPA uprising was in large part a result of a deliberate (and well-funded) astro-turf campaign managed by the big guns of tech (Google, et al) to gin up the public. How hard is it to get the internet in a spin when you’re in control of its major gateways? Certainly there was room for open discussion about the Stop Online Piracy Act and possible revisions to improve it, but the option for an open debate was quickly overwhelmed by an online avalanche of protest. Never mind that the majority of those who Tweeted or posted condemnations on Facebook hadn’t actually read the bill. For them all that was required was a mendacious meme that SOPA would “break the internet” and do away with “free speech” online.
It’s also worth noting that Mr. Khanna’s current employer (the Yale Law Information Society Project) receives some of its funding from Google–a company not exactly known for its love of present copyright law.
I do agree with one thing Khanna wrote in his post piece:
So in its deliberations, Goodlatte’s committee should ensure that Hollywood isn’t the only voice at the table. Both content creators and innovators desperately want to see copyright reform.
However, after that non-controversial statement it all goes downhill, quickly as Mr. Khanna gives readers a list of examples that, to him, demonstrate why copyright law is bad for creators and industry innovators alike. Why’s that a problem? Well, it’s a problem because, as is often the case with the copy-left, he doesn’t see fit to talk to tell the full story as to how crucial copyright protection is for those whose livelihoods depend on content creation. Khanna lists Hank Shocklee of Public Enemy, as an example of an artist constrained by current copyright law, but fails to mention that while Shocklee is a musician, he’s known for work often derived from sampling the work of others. His situation is not exactly representative of all artists, musical or otherwise, who have a stake in this debate.
Why not talk to some 45% of professional musicians who are no longer working in large part because our current copyright law is flouted by today’s digital pirate profiteers? Why not make mention of the independent filmmakers whose innovations are routinely stolen and monetized by bootleggers and online thieves?
Mr. Khanna also drones on in typical fashion about the DMCA. Yes, it’s an outdated law, but not for the reason he states. It’s outdated because it’s unworkable for creators, small and large, because its “safe harbor” provisions make protecting one’s content from pirate profiteers nearly impossible. He closes his piece by saying:
We can craft a system of copyright that compensates rights holders and incentivizes innovation for start-ups and new artists. It is not an either or proposition. But we’ll only get a balanced copyright system if Congress hears from a broad range of voices. It can’t just be special interests controlling the debate, writing the amendments in backrooms, and writing big checks to members of Congress.
True enough, BUT please remember that artists ARE innovators and that the tech industry represents a big “special interest.” Next time hearings are held in Washington let’s hope that a diversity of creator’s voices is heard rather than a panel of legal theorists–and if he writes about copyright reform again, perhaps Mr. Khanna would be wise take the same “balanced” approach he’s suggesting for members of Congress.
by Ellen Seidler | Copyright, Film, Piracy, TV
There’s a new one-stop shop in town that provides audiences with an easy (and comprehensive) way to find television shows and movies online. It’s called WheretoWatch.org . Some might view this a redundant, after all why not just use a search engine?– but I would disagree. Unfortunately when one searches for a movie or show online it often means ending up on a website slathered with pop-up ads and malware (and pirated content).
This site, developed by the MPAA, serves to give consumers a way to find the various legit online streaming services via a simple interface. It beats Google search any day. I give it a two thumbs up.
