TorrentFreak's Journal

Hollyood & Netflix Sue Repeat Pirate IPTV Operator For Massive Copyright Infringement

Last summer, customers of pirate IPTV service Area 51 began receiving emails indicating the service would be shutting down.

“We have been forced to make this very difficult decision, and close Area 51. We had quite a run, and we wouldn’t have been able to do it without customers like you,” the email began.

While this initially sounded like bad news for subscribers, customers of the shuttered service soon began receiving emails from a service called Singularity Media informing them that their account had been taken over and all logins would work as before. Soon after, however, Singularity shut down too.

Last August, TorrentFreak revealed that Area 51 had been shut down by the Alliance For Creativity and Entertainment. That event was accompanied by a settlement agreement, which included a clause that the operator of Area 51 couldn’t launch any new infringing services.

That agreement appears not to have been honored, with potentially devastating consequences.

Hollywood Giants File Massive Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

In a California court yesterday, Warner Bros., several Universal companies, Amazon, Columbia, Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Sony and other content creators filed a lawsuit against Jason Tusa, the alleged operator of Area 51 and three other pirate IPTV services.

According to the complaint, the plaintiffs first discovered that Tusa was infringing their rights through Area 51, a service that reportedly received three million visits between June 2019 to June 2020, making it the “then-largest stand-alone” pirate IPTV service by traffic in the United States.

After identifying Tusa, his sister, and now-deceased wife as Area 51 operators, the plaintiffs issued a cease-and-desist that demanded a halt to their infringing activities. While the settlement was being negotiated via an attorney, it’s alleged that Jason Tusa was already working on a replacement.

On July 1, 2020, Tusa reportedly registered the Singularitymedia.net domain and created a close mirror of the Area 51 websites. As we reported earlier, Area 51 customers received emails stating that Singularity would be taking over. On July 8, the plaintiffs contacted Tusa again, demanding a halt to Singularity, which later went down.

Months later on October 12, a confidential settlement agreement was reached in respect of the Area 51 and Singularity services which contained promises from Tusa to never run or assist in the running of another infringing service. According to the plaintiffs, that wasn’t honored.

Tusa Allegedly Launched Two More Services

Before the agreement was signed, Tusa allegedly launched his third infringing service. Digital UniCorn Media (DUM) offered similar pricing and programming to its predecessors but despite trying to hide his connections to the service, the studios were able to link Tusa to the platform by spotting several of his mistakes.

A domain for the new service carried an unredacted email linked to Tusa and it was noted that he uploaded a video containing an inflatable unicorn to YouTube and commented to that using his personal and UniCorn Media accounts. The plaintiffs contacted Tusa’s counsel to report a breach of the settlement agreement and while Tusa denied the connection, he also deleted the video. DUM subsequently went offline, with Tusa posting to Instagram that the service was gone forever.

According to the lawsuit, Tusa then launched a new service called Altered Carbon but despite taking a number of steps to distance himself from the platform, the studios say they were able to link him to it in a number of ways.

Tusa’s Alleged Links to Altered Carbon

While one piece of circumstantial evidence wouldn’t be enough to determine that Tusa controls Altered Carbon, the studios reveal a laundry list of points that together appear to do just that.

Altered Carbon uses the same logo as DUM and the plaintiffs have seen him discussing the service on Telegram. The IP addresses used by the service are close to those used by DUM since they use the same host but the complaint goes further still, particularly when it comes to activity and signaling on social media. Some other pieces of evidence are even more problematic.

Tusa Uses Legitimate Cable Operations to Source Streams

“Tusa’s public internet postings show him obtaining the streams that power Altered Carbon through a process of redirecting licensed transmissions from legitimate cable services,” the complaint reads.

“A video posted to Tusa’s social media account shows him stringing together a series of cable boxes, indicating that Tusa is using the signals routed through those cable boxes as the source for his infringing streams.”

“Altered Carbon is almost identical to DUM, except for its name and superficial design changes. Like DUM, many of Altered Carbon’s American channels contain advertisements localized to Tusa’s home town of Naples, Florida,” the complaint adds, suggesting that the services use the same capture setup.

Altered Carbon Has an Affiliate Program

According to the complaint, Tusa runs a program that enables Altered Carbon to reach a wider audience. By selling “bulk credits” to affiliates at a lower-than-retail price, they are then able to sell the service to their own customers at a profit. For example, 70 credits (each worth a month of service) are sold at $6.42 each while 150 credits are sold at $4.66. These are sold on at whatever rate the reseller chooses.

“Tusa’s Affiliate network increases his customer base and his profits. More Affiliates means more customers buying illegal access to the Copyrighted Works, more money flowing into Tusa’s pockets, and an ever greater number of infringements of the Copyrighted Works,” the studios write.

“Tusa infringes and profits from exploiting Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works, and he refuses to stop. When Plaintiffs have confronted Tusa with proof that he is operating an infringing service, Tusa just shuts it down and starts another one, leading to repetitive games of cat-and-mouse. Plaintiffs are irreparably harmed by Tusa’s brazen infringement in ways that cannot easily be calculated or remedied by monetary damages.”

Claims For Copyright Infringement and Breach of Contract

While the studios are clearly unhappy with the Altered Carbon service, they are also concerned by Tusa’s breaches of his settlement agreement. The plaintiffs say that he has made a “mockery of their rights” and by continuing to start new services, it sends a message to other pirate services that they do not need to take the plaintiffs’ rights seriously. As a result, the lawsuit is already shaping up to be a lesson in compliance.

The plaintiffs say that Tusa breached their rights by distributing at least 110 copyrighted works including the movies Dunkirk, Harry Potter, Joker, Tenet, The Hulk, plus many other mainstream titles. They also allege breaches related to TV shows including The Office, Law & Order, Friends, and The Big Bang Theory.

Claiming direct and willful copyright infringement, the complaint demands the maximum $150,000 in damages for each title. Claiming contributory copyright infringement in respect of the 24/7 channels offered by the service, the studios demand $150,000 in damages per title. For intentionally inducing infringement of the copyrighted works by customers (and by encouraging affiliates to promote the service for infringement), the complaint also demands $150,000 per work.

According to the studios, the settlement agreement previously signed by Tusa required him to cease-and-desist and since he has failed to do so, he is in breach of contract. The finer details of the agreement aren’t public but it appears it may have come with a clause for Tusa to pay a settlement sum in the event of a breach.

Demands For Injunctions, Domain Seizures

In advance of any trial, the complaint demands preliminary and permanent injunctions to prevent Tusa from continuing his operations. The studios also want his hardware to be impounded along with any and all documents relating to the infringement of their rights.

There are also demands for the Altered Carbon services domains to be handed over to the studios, a common request in such cases.

The complaint and list of copyright works can be found here and here (pdf)

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Movie Companies Want U.S. Internet Provider ‘Frontier’ to Block Pirate Sites

Over the past two decades, online piracy has proven a massive challenge for the entertainment industries.

It’s a global issue that’s hard to contain, but Hollywood and the major U.S. record labels are at the forefront of this battle.

One of the key strategies they’ve employed in recent years is website blocking. US companies have traveled to courts all over the world to have ISP blockades put in place, with quite a bit of success.

Interestingly, however, site blocking is noticeably absent in the United States, which harbors the most pirates of any country in the world. This can, in part, be explained by legislative backlashes and legal uncertainty. But it’s noteworthy nonetheless.

In recent years, the tide slowly started to turn, with major copyright groups strengthening their calls for blockades. However, the first move in court now comes from a group of smaller movie companies, including Millenium Media and Voltage Pictures, which have built up an impressive anti-piracy track record in recent years.

Movie Companies Go After Frontier

While most piracy cases are handled by district courts, this case started at a New York bankruptcy court. More than a dozen movie outfits filed claims against Internet provider Frontier Communications, which was in financial trouble at the time.

The movie companies argue that the ISP is liable for the copyright infringements of its subscribers and claimed millions in damages. These claims were similar to the ones made by several record labels, which filed a separate federal lawsuit a few weeks ago.

Some of the damages claims claims

Thus far the piracy angle of this bankruptcy case has remained under the radar but a recent filing caught our attention.

In a motion submitted last week, the movie companies ask the bankruptcy court to move the matter to the district court, noting that it’s better suited to deal with the “novel copyright issues” at the center of this matter.

These claims are in part similar to the several ‘repeat infringer’ lawsuits against ISPs that are currently handled by district courts around the country. However, the movie companies add a twist, one that could make it much more than a liability issue.

Copyright Holders Want Pirate Sites Blocked

In addition to taking action against pirating subscribers, the movie companies also want Frontier to block pirate sites.

This is technically possible under the DMCA, which provides injunctive relief for copyright holders. Thus far the law has never been used that way, and the rightsholders believe that a bankruptcy court is not the best venue to handle the matter.

“Here, to adjudicate the copyright claims, the Bankruptcy Court would be required to [consider claims and issues including] the availability of injunctive relief provided in 17 U.S.C. §§502(a), 512(j) and 1203(b)(1) to order Frontier to block its subscribers from accessing notorious movie piracy websites originating outside of the United States..,” they write.

The YTS Link

The same movie companies, represented by Hawaiian lawyer Kerry Culpepper, previously obtained user data from torrent site YTS. As such, they have evidence that some Frontier subscribers were registered users of the site.

“[S]ome of Frontier’s subscribers have registered for accounts with notorious piracy websites such as YTS and RARBG that the United States Trade Representative (‘USTR’) has listed as examples of Notorious Markets engaged in and facilitating substantial piracy.”

The motion suggests that the rightsholders want Frontier to block the pirate sites that are listed in the US Trade Representative’s annual list of notorious markets. This would include The Pirate Bay, YTS, RARBG and many others. However, exact details about the scope of the blocking request are not mentioned.

This is the first time that a group of copyright holders has requested a site-blocking order against an ISP. This means that it’s uncharted and precedent-setting territory. With that in mind, it makes sense if the issue is handled by a district court.

Legal Uncertainties?

Whether the DMCA is indeed suited to issue blocking injunctions against ISPs is still an open question. Previously, other copyright holders, including the Motion Picture Association, have pointed out that there are several legal uncertainties.

The MPA said that it’s unclear whether ISPs can be required to block sites without a finding of liability. This typically happens in many other countries with so-called ‘no-fault’ injunctions. In this case, however, the movie companies are claiming that Frontier is liable for copyright infringing subscribers, so that box could be ticked by the court.

The case is still in its first innings but, if it moves ahead, it is bound to attract attention from other copyright holders, Internet providers, and the public at large.

Subscribers Are At Risk Too

Finally, the lawsuit may have more direct consequences for pirating Frontier subscribers too. The movie companies plan to obtain information on a percentage of the 89,000 subscribers who pirated their movies.

“The movie claimants will likely assert claims against the more prolific ones of these subscribers that pirated the motion pictures,” Culpepper writes, noting that both Frontier and its subscribers will have a right to trial by jury.

All in all, the movie companies stress that this case concerns important copyright questions that have nothing to do with bankruptcy. As such, they would like the matter to move to a district court.

—

A copy of the motion to withdraw reference, filed at the New York Bankruptcy Court, is available here (pdf).

The full list of movie claimants includes Voltage Holdings, LLC; Backmask, LLC; Union Patriot Capital Management, LLC; Venice PI, LLC; Bedeviled, LLC; MON, LLC; Colossal Movie Productions, LLC; TBV Productions, LLC; Definition Delaware LLC; I Am Wrath Productions, Inc.; Hannibal Classics Inc.; Justice Everywhere Productions LLC; Badhouse Studios, LLC; After Productions, LLC; Rise Up, LLC; Status Update LLC; Morgan Creek Productions, Inc.; Shock and Awe, LLC; Fun Mom Dinner, LLC; Dead Trigger Movie, LLC; YAR Productions, Inc.; Gunfighter Productions, LLC; Ace in the Hole Productions, LP; SF Film, LLC; The Rest of Us, Inc.; Killing Link Distribution, LLC; Cell Film Holdings, LLC; Dallas Buyers Club, LLC; Screen Media Ventures, LLC; Rambo V Productions, Inc.; Millennium Funding, Inc.; Millennium IP, Inc.; LHF Productions, Inc.; UN4 Productions, Inc.; Millennium Media, Inc.; Bodyguard Productions, Inc.; Hunter Killer Productions, Inc.; Fallen Productions, Inc.; HB Productions, Inc.; Laundry Productions, Inc.; Black Butterfly Film, LLC; AMBI Distribution Corp.; Dubious Productions, Inc.; Rupture CAL, Inc.; Future World One, LLC; Groove Tails Productions, LLC; Family of the Year Productions, LLC; Eve Nevada, LLC; After II Movie, LLC; Wonder One, LLC; and American Cinema International, Inc.

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.