TorrentFreak Email Update

Pirate Bay Uploader Hit With $32m Lawsuit

Posted: 01 May 2014 02:49 AM PDT

For quite some time a releaser known as Secludedly was one of the most reliable sources of UFC events on file-sharing sites around the world. But after a strong run, a release in January would prove to be his last.

After interviewing Secludedly in April 2013 and subsequently hearing he was in considerable trouble, earlier this year TorrentFreak tried to reach the ripper/uploader through previously-established channels. All attempts failed and now it’s clear why.

UFC parent company Zuffa have caught up with Secludedly in a very big way indeed. In a lawsuit filed at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Secludedly is revealed as Steven A. Messina, a 27-year-old from Staten Island, New York.

The lawsuit, which includes two other doe defendants and an unknown company Zuffa refers to as XYZ Corp (“a business entity, the exact nature of which is unknown”), centers around the unlawful recording (“capping”), uploading and distribution of more than 120 UFC events via two of the world’s biggest torrent sites.

“Defendants have, on over 124 occasions, used the torrent websites known as http://kickass.to and http://thepiratebay.se to upload, distribute and publicly display the Broadcasts to the users of said websites,” the lawsuit reads.

Also receiving a prominent mention from Zuffa is the fact that Secludedly allowed people to donate via a PayPal in order to help with the financing of future ripping and uploading activities.

Secludedly, who TF understood to be just one person, is repeatedly referred to as a group in the lawsuit, such as when it’s claimed that “their” aim was to become “the most well-known pirates and infringers on the internet” who were “content to profit handsomely from user payments and donations to fund their rampant piracy and copyright infringement.”

Secludedly’s profile at Kickass.to

While it’s no surprise that Zuffa is claiming statutory damages of $150,000 for each of the alleged 124 infringements (a cool $18.6m), the MMA organization is definitely not stopping there. In a second count, Zuffa goes on to claim that Secludedly violated the Federal Communications Act.

“Defendants, wishing to use Plaintiff's Broadcasts for their own commercial gain, surreptitiously gained access to Plaintiff's Broadcasts by purchasing the programming through their satellite TV provider, without proper authorization, at residential rates, and subsequently copying the Broadcasts and uploading them to the users of the websites known as http://kickass.to and http://thepiratebay.se,” the lawsuit reads.

For these “willful violations”, Zuffa is claiming up to the maximum of $110,000 for each of the alleged 124 offenses, potentially another $13.64m in damages. In a third count, Zuffa seeks up to $60,000 after Secludedly “willfully and unlawfully accessed, received and subsequently re-transmitted the Broadcasts over a cableTV or internet system.”

Not content with the millions already on offer, Zuffa throw in an additional claim for breach of contact after Secludedly legally purchased PPV events but went on to step over the terms and conditions.

“Upon information and belief, Defendants purchased the Broadcasts through Plaintiff's
authorized websites or via Pay-Per-View purchase for private, residential viewing…[but then]…willfully and unlawfully copied, uploaded and distributed the Broadcasts..”

Zuffa further alleges a “civil conspiracy” in which “members” of Secludedly supposedly worked together to infringe the company’s rights and went on to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

“[Defendants], without authorization or by exceeding such authorization as was granted, accessed a protected computer containing Plaintiff's live internet streams of the Broadcasts knowingly and with intent to defraud, and unlawfully copied, distributed and publicly displayed said Broadcasts,” the lawsuit reads.

It seems that Zuffa has left no stone unturned in its attempts to make life as difficult as possible for Secludedly. The company is seeking statutory damages of $18.6m for copyright infringement, up to $13.64m plus $60,000 for breaches of the Federal Communications Act, plus sundry damages on the remaining counts.

That all adds up to at least $32.2m and it could get much worse, but there’s not a chance in the world that Zuffa will see that kind of money from a 27-year-old reportedly living with parents. The company will settle for big anti-piracy headlines instead, in the hope of deterring others.

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

Accused of Movie Piracy, Senior Citizen Kicked Out of Theater

Posted: 30 Apr 2014 09:27 AM PDT

While recording a movie strictly for personal use is entirely legal in UK cinemas, the same definitely cannot be said about the United States. Recording or ‘camming’ a movie in the U.S. can result in jail-time, particularly if the activity is connected to subsequent bootlegging or illegal online distribution.

This strict approach is the result of intense Hollywood lobbying during the last decade, and there can be few cinema-goers today who haven’t been touched by the results. Bag searches and night-vision goggles are now used to deter ‘cammers’, coupled with industry-funded rewards programs aimed at vigilant theater workers.

This climate of fear hasn’t stopped cammed copies of movies turning up online, but it has sucked in a few innocent victims over the years. If a new report from Utah is to be believed, another one can now be added to the list.

According to Provo resident Enos Ledezma, his elderly parents go to the movies several times a week. They find it both entertaining and practical, since it allows them to brush up on their English.

However, this past weekend things weren’t so enjoyable when Ledezma’s mother stood accused of illegally camming a movie in a Cinemark theater.

Ledezma says that part-way through the movie his father had to leave, but before doing so handed his wife a “brick, slider-type” cellphone. She apparently put the device in her pocket, but shortly after was confronted by not only a Cinemark employee, but also two police officers.

The trio reportedly informed the woman she had been seen recording the movie and would therefore have to leave, but due to her poor grasp of English the woman didn’t fully understand what was going on. Attempting to hand over her phone for inspection didn’t ease the situation either.

The woman was eventually ejected from the theater and not allowed to watch the remainder of the film, even after the false allegations were withdrawn.

Ledezma told KSL that it’s possible that another cinema-goer saw the theater-provided closed-captioning device next to his mother and presumed it was a bootlegging tool, but that was still no excuse for mistreating a regular customer.

While it seems unlikely that the woman broke the law (the police officers would have seen any footage by accessing her cellphone), it occurred to us that she may have broken Cinemark’s policy on using cellphones in the theater.

However, this somewhat amusing footage, filmed in a Cinemark theater by someone using a Nintendo DS, seems to clear up that cellphones are allowed, as long as they’re silent.

And here’s the thing. If anything, the footage from the DS in the clip above is likely to be better than that obtained from what appears to be an old cellphone. This kind of end result is definitely not a threat to the movie industry, even if the woman had been recording, which it appears she was not.

Interestingly and this case aside, Cinemark actually approaches the cellphone-in-theater problem in an innovative way. If visitors have a smartphone with the Cinemark app installed, switching over to CineMode darkens the screen for the duration of the movie. If that state is maintained right to the end, users can pick up rewards, such as a free drink.

But even in the event Ledezma’s mother upgrades to an iPhone, it’s unlikely she’ll be taking advantage of the offer.

"At the moment, I have no intention of going back to that Cinemark. I'd rather drive 45 minutes to the Megaplex,” Ledezma concludes.

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