Tuesday, 28 February 2017

New Privacy-Oriented advanced Browser with Built-in Torrenting

Welcome Brave – a brand new security-oriented web browser, which also has built-in support for torrent downloading and streaming.

It is not a secret that old-fashioned BitTorrent clients have lost most of their appeal, as they become outdated with the rise of video streaming websites and services. This is why the solution is to enjoy both torrent downloading and streaming without having to install any separate apps.

Brave was first launched in early 2016, intended for privacy conscious people willing to browse the web securely. The web browser also supports torrent downloads out of the box, along with instant torrent streaming. Its developers explain that their new, open source browser was designed for both speed and security, featuring a built-in adblocker, which ensures an ad-free and seamless browsing experience. As such, the browser claims to significantly improve browsing speeds while shielding you from malicious ads and offering lots of other privacy features like HTTPS Everywhere, script blocking, and third-party cookie blocking.

The most interesting part is the recently introduced built-in support for BitTorrent transfers, powered by WebTorrent technology. Brave is able to download torrents via magnet links directly from the browser. This feature is not exclusive (Opera also supports it, for instance), but Brave also supports torrent streaming, which allows you to view videos instantly as you would do on streaming websites.

The browser received support from WebTorrent founder, who continues to lend a hand. Right now Brave is compatible with all traditional torrent clients, and support for web peers is also expected. WebTorrent uses TCP connections and is going to add WebRTC support to allow Brave users to connect to web peers.

However, Brave has its shortcomings – its user interface is quite limited, and basic features such as canceling or pausing a torrent are not available yet, so you need to close the tab to cancel a download.

However, you should understand that even despite Brave’s focus on privacy, torrent transfers are not anonymous – if you don’t use VPN or other anonymizer, tracking outfits will be able to track your downloads or streams

Hosting a Pirate Site Is not a Crime : US Court

The US Federal Court ruled that the Chicago-based hosting provider Steadfast is not liable for copyright infringement, as it merely hosted an alleged pirate website. The judge didn’t see sufficient evidence to support a secondary liability claim.

Back in 2016, porn publisher ALS Scan sued several third-party intermediaries, including CloudFlare, one advertising network and several hosting providers, one of them being Steadfast. The latter asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that it was protected by the DMCA’s safe harbor provisions. Steadfast indicated that it didn’t operate or manage the pirate website and didn’t in any way communicate with or interact with its individual users, but simply provided computer storage.

The District Court agreed that the allegations were not sufficient to hold Steadfast liable. It also noted that the porn studio failed to allege that Steadfast had the goal to promote copyright infringement or directly encouraged the hosted site to publish pirated content.

The vicarious liability allegation was also ruled insufficient, as it required the copyright holder to demonstrate that the hosting company had control over the infringing actions and that it financially benefited from them.

As a result, the Court tentatively granted Steadfast’s motion to dismiss, due to the absence of evidence and allegations to support a secondary liability claim. However, this court decision keeps the door open for the adult entertainment publisher to file an improved complaint. Still, so far, the hosting provider is winning the copyright battle.

Monday, 27 February 2017

How to Stop Government Agencies from Tracking Your Torrenting

The proposed “three strikes” anti-piracy code for Australian internet service providers (ISPs) can be activated soon. Under the Copyright Notice Scheme code (PDF), residential Internet users that are found pirating content will be subject to a series of "escalating" warning notices from rights holders, sent via ISPs. The notices will warn users that they are infringing copyright, and that they will face legal action if they get three strikes recorded against their IP address -- that is, if they receive an Education, Warning and Final notice -- within a 12 month period. If a user gets three warning letters, or "strikes", in a 12-month period, ISPs will help copyright owners identify them for potential legal action after a hearing in a prescribed court. Up to 200,000 notices can be processed and sent each year. An industry code can be actiated in the middle of 2017

Over the past 2 years, thousands of Canadians have received ‘Piracy Notices’ in their mailbox asking for cash settlements. The new law aims to reduce piracy in Canada, but it seems Canadians are not ready to give up on their habits. After paying no attention to hundreds of notices from anti-piracy group named Rightscorp, the users are now sued over sharing the 20+ year-old music albums.

French government agencies sent out over 5 million warnings to alleged pirates. 169 Internet users were referred to the public prosecutor in the first half of 2016, which is 4 times for than in the same period last year

Such regimes are used in many countries and are commonly known as “three-strikes”. However, they are promoted as educational in nature, because suspected pirates just receive notifications of breach, which are meant to discourage further infringing behavior.

To prevent their IP-addresses from being visible to the rest of the Internet, millions of people have signed up to a VPN service. Using a VPN allows users to use the Internet anonymously and prevent your ISP from tracking your online activity. The best VPN services don’t log any traffic nor session data of any kind. Besides, 100% anonymous VPN should accept payments via anonymous payment methods like Bitcoin.

Recently, a part of ExtraTorrent community launched a VPN called by Trust.Zone VPN for safe torrenting. This VPN project cares about safety of ET members and every downloader. Trust.Zone VPN prevents your ISP from sending Copyright Infringement Notices by hiding your real location and your real IP address.

What's a VPN?

It's a tool that hides your IP address and your identity, it encrypts traffic and has no logging, so, your IP address will never be revealed and you will be 100% anonymous while torrenting. Government or your ISP can't track your activity. With a VPN, you are free to download any files you need without any risk.

Trust.Zone has founded by the part of ExtraTorrent community. The tool is free to use first 3 days of usage. If test period ends, unfortunately, the service asks for the money from you but..... our partners tried to make it as CHEAP as possible, you can catch EXCLUSIVE DEAL specially for ExtraTorrent Fans for only $2.99/mo (click here) - it's the cheapest price among all popular VPN providers.

Protect yourself with VPN - Save ExtraTorrent!

All Oscars 2017 Winners Movies Are Available on ExtraTorrent

The cast and crew of "Moonlight" accept the best picture Oscar during the Academy Awards 2017. The winner was initially announced as "La La Land", but moments later it was revealed that there was a mistake and "Moonlight" had actually won. See full list of Oscar 2017 winners.

All 2017 Oscar Winners are available on EXTRATORRENT:
Best picture
La La Land Moonlight

Best actor
Casey Affleck (Manchester by the Sea)

Best actress
Emma Stone (La La Land)

Mahershala Ali (Moonlight)

Best supporting actress
Viola Davis (Fences)

Best cinematography, Best production design, Best score, Best song
La La Land

Best director
Kenneth Lonergan (Manchester by the Sea)

Best original screenplay
Manchester by the Sea

Best adapted screenplay

Best visual effects
The Jungle Book

Best film editing
WINNER: Hacksaw Ridge

Best makeup and hairstyling
Suicide Squad

Best costume design
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

Best documentary
OJ: Made in America

Best sound editing

Best sound mixing
Hacksaw Ridge

Best animated feature

Best foreign language film
The Salesman

Best animated short

What's your choice? What's the best picture?

Company Leaked Oscar Screeners Settled with Movie Studio

Warner Bros. has finally settled its case against an agency that “ran a pirate movie platform”. In fact, Innovative Artists ripped the Oscar nominee screeners and streamed them to associates via Google servers. As a result, movies ended up on torrent sites.

DVD screeners are often given out to awards voters and are supposed to be handled securely while the films are still in theatres. However, these screeners end up on torrent sites every year, causing damages to movie studios. For example, two titles leaked through a talent agency Innovative Artists 2 years ago in the following way: once the agency obtained the copies legally, it used ripping software to copy them to its own digital distribution platform.

As a result, pirate group Hive-CM8 obtained copies of the movies and published them online. Of course, the copies were watermarked and traced back to Innovative Artists, which was then sued by Warner Bros. The movie studio pulled no punches, accusing the agency of using unauthorized software to bypass the protection on the discs before streaming them on an illegal distribution platform.

Innovative Artists publicly apologized but was surprised by the lawsuit, since it had cooperated with Warner Bros. from the very beginning in an effort to fix things. Now the dispute has been resolved: Warner Bros. and Innovative Artists have reportedly come to a settlement agreement. In the meantime, pirate group Hive-CM8 continues releasing copies of leaked screeners, demonstrating that it can find other sources of leaks, even if one route of supply closes.

Only 0.05% of Recent DMCA Notices Were Correct : Google

Google has recently submitted comments to a US Copyright Office consultation, giving the DMCA a vote of support, although stressing widespread abuse. The company had to admit that DMCA allows for innovation and agreements with copyright owners, but 99.95% of links Google was asked to take down in January didn't even exist in its search index.

According to DMCA, American ISPs don’t have to proactively police infringing user content, but have to remove it following the content creator’s complaint. However, now the copyright holders complain that the law is failing them in terms of the so-called “safe harbor” provision that protects ISPs. This is why the US Copyright Office is now running an extended public consultation, with all stakeholders expected to submit their comments.

Google argued with the entertainment industry which believes that the DMCA is “failing”: the company pointed out that rogue sites have been driven out of the US by an effective DMCA and suggested leaving the law intact. At the same time, Google recommended to encourage voluntary mechanisms between content owners and service providers.

Google brought its YouTube-based Content ID as an example of such collaboration. This system allows copyright holders to take down or monetize infringing content. Besides, Google offers takedown tools to rights holders in respect of Google search.

However, the company experiences some problems with takedown provisions, as lots of DMCA notices are duplicate, unnecessary, or bogus – in particular, most of takedown requests submitted to Google are for URLs that have never been in its search index or search results. For instance, the company received 16,457,433 URLs from one of the most prolific submitters last months, 99.97% of which appeared never existing in Google’s search index in the first place. And this is not an outstanding incident – the search giant admits that 99.95% of all submitted URLs in January were not in its index.

In all other respects, Google seems comfortable with the current DMCA law, taking some voluntary measures that go beyond the requirements of Section 512 of the DMCA. In other words, the company sees the DMCA as a law it can work with. Unfortunately, the copyright holders see things differently.

Contact Form


Email *

Message *