All Activity

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Today
  2. I have U2.dmhy.Org Invites for sale, PM me for price. URL: https://u2.dmhy.org/index.php
  3. Warner Bros. has reportedly settled its lawsuit against a talent agency it accused of running a pirate movie platform. Innovative Artists allegedly ripped DVD screeners and streamed them to associates via Google servers, something which led to movies ending up on torrent sites. Perfect copies of movies still in theaters are relatively hard to come by, unless you know someone with access to DVD screeners, that is. These discs are often given out to awards voters “for their consideration” and are supposed to be handled extremely securely so that they don’t fall into the wrong hands. Nevertheless, every year screeners end up on torrent sites, much to the disappointment of movie companies. Two titles that leaked back in 2015 were Creed and In the Heart of the Sea but their route to the Internet was a particularly unusual one. After obtaining the discs legally on behalf of its clients, talent agency Innovative Artists used ripping software to copy the movies to its own digital distribution platform. Quite clearly its security was lacking, as notorious pirate group Hive-CM8 obtained copies of the movies and dumped them online. Both were watermarked, however, which allowed content security company Deluxe Entertainment Services to trace the copies back to Innovative Artists. In response, Warner Bros. filed a lawsuit against the company last October. Warner pulled no punches, accusing Innovative Artists of using illegal software to circumvent the protection on the discs before placing them on an illegal distribution platform. The agency publicly apologized for its actions but added that it was surprised by the lawsuit. It had cooperated with Warner right from the beginning in an effort to put things right, so the legal action came out of the blue. Now, however, the dispute appears to be have been sorted out. According to information received by THR, Warner Bros. and Innovative Artists have come to some kind of settlement agreement. No court documents have yet been filed to indicate that a settlement has been reached. That being said, it’s rare for such agreements to be made fully public so any terms could remain confidential, even when the notice of dismissal appears. THR says it contacted both parties for comment but neither side provided any information. Meanwhile, Hive-CM8 have continued releasing copies of leaked DVD screeners over the past several weeks, showing that when one route of supply closes, another one opens. https://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-settles-with-company-that-leaked-oscar-screeners-170223/
  4. Nice GA. I apply for Like + Rep added. Apollo.rip
  5. Unlike the United States where 'fair use' exemptions are entrenched in law, Australia has only a limited "fair dealing" arrangement. As a result, Google's head of copyright William Patry says that Australia wouldn't be a safe place for his company to store certain data, a clear hindrance to innovation and productivity. With Fair Use Week now in full swing, people around the world are celebrating the freedom to use copyrighted content in certain contexts without fear of prosecution, thereby enabling creativity and inspiring innovation. The legal freedom offered by fair use is a cornerstone of criticism, research, teaching and news reporting, one that enables the activities of thousands of good causes and enriches the minds of millions. However, not all countries fully embrace the concept. Perhaps surprisingly, Australia is currently behind the times on this front, a point not lost on Google’s Senior Copyright Counsel, William Patry. Speaking with The Australian (paywall), Patry describes local copyright law as both arcane and not fit for purpose, while acting as a hindrance to innovation and productivity. “We think Australians are just as innovative as Americans, but the laws are different. And those laws dictate that commercially we act in a different way,” Patry told the publication. “Our search function, which is the basis of the entire company, is authorized in the US by fair use. You don’t have anything like that here.” Australia currently employs a more restrictive “fair dealing” approach, but it’s certainly possible that fair use could be introduced in the near future. Last year, Australia’s Productivity Commission released a draft report covering various aspects of the country’s intellectual property system. One of its key recommendations was to adopt fair use legislation. “The Australian Government should amend the Copyright Act 1968 to replace the current fair dealing exceptions with a broad exception for fair use,” the Commission wrote in its report. “The new exception should contain a clause outlining that the objective of the exception is to ensure Australia’s copyright system targets only those circumstances where infringement would undermine the ordinary exploitation of a work at the time of the infringement.” Unfortunately, the concept of fair use is not universally welcomed. Local anti-piracy and royalty organizations are opposing its introduction, claiming that it will undermine their ability to make money. Interestingly, broadcaster Foxtel says that the deployment of fair use would introduce “significant and unnecessary uncertainty into Australian law.” This is the exact opposite of Google’s position. The search giant says that Australia’s current exceptions fail to offer legal certainty and that a US-style fair use system would be much more predictable. “If you are a company like Google who wants to store information in the cloud, or internet searches or text and data mining, we can do that safely in the US. We can’t do it here,” Patry concludes. In its final inquiry paper, Australia’s Productivity Commission renewed its calls for the introduction of fair use, noting that in the US, where fair use is long established, “creative industries thrive.” Whether fair use will ever hit Aussie shores remains to be seen, but yet again there is a division between how technology companies and entertainment groups would like copyright law to develop. It’s a battle that’s set to continue well into the future. https://torrentfreak.com/google-with-no-fair-use-its-more-difficult-to-innovate-170223/
  6. Yesterday
  7. Tracker Name: Unlimitz Tracker URL: https://www.unlimitz.biz Tracker Genre: General Tracker Type: Ratio Based Tracker Access: Open Tracker Birthday: N/A Tracker Bonus: N/A Tracker IRC: Tracker Description: Unlimitz is a THAI Private Torrent Tracker for GENERAL. Home / News Categories Browse Torrents Requests Forums Rules Casino Top 10 Torrents Donate My Ratings: 8/10 Content 8/10 Speed 8/10 Community 8/10 Overall experience
  8. 20 Feb 2017 - Words of Wisdom Share your words of wisdom for fun and win prizes! More info can be found in our CONTEST thread.*UPDATED*
  9. In comments submitted to a U.S. Copyright Office consultation, Google has given the DMCA a vote of support, despite widespread abuse. Noting that the law allows for innovation and agreements with content creators, Google says that 99.95% of URLs it was asked to take down last month didn't even exist in its search indexes. Under current legislation, US-based Internet service providers are not expected to proactively police infringing user content. They are, however, expected to remove it, if a copyright holder complains. The so-called ‘safe harbor’ that providers enjoy as a result of such cooperation is currently under the microscope, following rightsholder complaints that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act is failing them. To address these concerns, the U.S. Copyright Office has been running an extended public consultation. As noted earlier, the RIAA and other music groups just submitted their comments and Google have now added theirs. In contrast to the music groups who believe that the DMCA is “failing”, Google believes otherwise. Noting that rogue sites have been driven out of the United States by an effective DMCA, the search giant suggests leaving the law intact while encouraging voluntary mechanisms between content owners and providers. “In short, the DMCA has proven successful at fostering ongoing collaboration between rightsholders and online service providers, a collaboration that continues to pay dividends both in the U.S. and in international contexts,” Google writes. The company highlights its YouTube-based Content ID as one such collaboration, with the system helping creators take down or monetize infringing content, as they see fit. Google also cites the benefits afforded by the takedown tools it provides to rightsholders in respect of Google search. “First, in recent years, Google has streamlined its submission process, enabling rightsholders to send more notices more easily (while still continuing to reduce the average time to resolution to under six hours),” the company notes. “Second, Google has provided new incentives to make heavy use of the DMCA takedown system. We now use the number of valid DMCA requests a domain has received as one of the inputs in making ranking determinations in search results, so rightsholders seeking to take advantage of this signal have further incentive to file notices.” But while Google supports the current takedown provisions, there are problems. The company says that a significant portion of the recent increases in DMCA submission volumes stem from notices that are either duplicate, unnecessary, or bogus. “A substantial number of takedown requests submitted to Google are for URLs that have never been in our search index, and therefore could never have appeared in our search results,” Google states. “For example, in January 2017, the most prolific submitter submitted notices that Google honored for 16,457,433 URLs. But on further inspection, 16,450,129 (99.97%) of those URLs were not in our search index in the first place.” This kind of rampant abuse was highlighted in our recent report which revealed that one small site had millions of bogus notices filed against it. But, according to Google, that’s just the tip of the iceberg. “In total, 99.95% of all URLs processed from our Trusted Copyright Removal Program in January 2017 were not in our index,” the company reveals. But despite the abuse, Google is apparently giving these ‘trusted’ submitters some wiggle room to be creative. In a rather unexpected move, the search giant says that it now accepts takedown notices for URLs that don’t exist, to ensure that they never appear in future search results. While copyright holders will presumably enjoy that feature, it is a fairly curious move. A proactive takedown of a non-existent URL necessarily happens in advance of any determination of whether that URL is infringing, which goes way beyond any legislation currently being demanded. That being said, some of these non-existent (and essentially fabricated) URLs do eventually turn up in Google search, albeit at a tiny rate. “Of the 35,000,000 URLs we processed in the latter half of September 2016 that were not in our index, fewer than 2% of those would have made it into our index in the intervening four months; notices for the other 98% therefore were at best unnecessary,” Google says. “Many of these submissions appear to be generated by merely scrambling the words in a search query and appending that to a URL, so that each query makes a different URL that nonetheless leads to the same page of results,” it adds, referencing an earlier TF report. Overall, however, Google seems comfortable with the current notice-and-takedown framework, noting that a “robust ecosystem” of companies with expertise in sending takedown requests is being bolstered by voluntary service provider measures that already go beyond the requirements of Section 512 of the DMCA. “While stakeholders can be expected to disagree about the details of these voluntary efforts, it cannot be said that the DMCA safe harbors are failing in the face of this overwhelming evidence that these voluntary measures continue to grow both in number and diversity,” Google concludes. It’s crystal clear from Google’s submission that it sees the DMCA as a law it can work with, since it enables service providers to innovate without fear while simultaneously addressing the concerns of copyright holders. The latter see things quite differently though, so expect the battles to continue. Google’s submission can be found here, via Michael Geist. https://torrentfreak.com/google-99-95-of-recent-trusted-dmca-notices-were-bogus-170222/
  10. 关于辅种作弊 本站严禁任何种子在未完成下载情况下跳过校验做种,无论有意或无意都视为作弊行为,一经发现直接BAN号,请大家注意,周知,谢谢! Translate: About cheating This site is strictly prohibited in the case of unsuccessful download skip check to do the species, whether intentionally or unintentionally regarded as cheating, once found directly BAN, please note, well known, thank you!
  11. A group of prominent music groups including the RIAA has asked the Copyright Office to help solve the "broken" and "ineffective" DMCA law. The current takedown provision results in a never-ending game of whack-a-mole, they say, arguing that automated piracy filters are the way forward. Signed into law nearly twenty years ago, the DMCA is one of the best known pieces of Internet related legislation. The law provides a safe harbor for Internet services, shielding them from copyright infringement liability as long as they process takedown notices and deal with repeat infringers. In recent years, however, various parties have complained about shortcomings and abuse of the system. On the one hand, rightsholders believe that the law doesn’t do enough to protect creators, while the opposing side warns of increased censorship and abuse. To address these concerns, the U.S. Copyright Office is currently running an extended public consultation. This week a new round of comments was submitted, including a detailed response from a coalition of music industry groups such as the RIAA, National Music Publishers’ Association, and SoundExchange. When it comes to their views of the DMCA the music groups are very clear: It’s failing. The music groups note that they are currently required to police the entire Internet in search of infringing links and files, which they then have to take down one at a time. This doesn’t work, they argue. They say that the present situation forces rightsholders to participate in a never-ending whack-a-mole game which doesn’t fix the underlying problem. Instead, it results in a “frustrating, burdensome and ultimately ineffective takedown process.” “…as numerous copyright owners point out in their comments, the notice and takedown system as currently configured results in an endless game of whack-a-mole, with infringing content that is removed from a site one moment reposted to the same site and other sites moments later, to be repeated ad infinitem.” Instead of leaving all the work up to copyright holders, the music groups want Internet services to filter out and block infringing content proactively. With the use of automated hash filtering tools, for example. “One possible solution to this problem would be to require that, once a service provider receives a takedown notice with respect to a given work, the service provider use automated content identification technology to prevent the same work from being uploaded in the future,” the groups write. “Automated content identification technologies are one important type of standard technical measure that should be adopted across the industry, and at a minimum by service providers who give the public access to large amounts of works uploaded by users.” These anti-piracy filters are already in use by some companies and are relatively cheap to implement, even for relatively smaller services, the music groups note. The whack-a-mole problem doesn’t only apply to hosting providers but also to search engines, the music groups complain. While companies such as Google remove links to infringing material upon request, these links often reappear under a different URL. At the same time, pirate sites often appear before legitimate services in search results. A fix for this problem would be to stop indexing known pirate sites completely. “One possible solution would be to require search engines to de-index structurally infringing sites that are the subject of a large number of takedown notices,” the groups recommend. Ideally, they want copyright holders and Internet services to reach a voluntary agreement on how to filter pirated content. This could be similar to YouTube’s Content-ID system, or the hash filtering mechanisms Dropbox and Google Drive employ, for example. If service providers are not interested in helping out, however, the music industry says new legislation might be needed to give them a push. “The Music Community stands ready to work with service providers and other copyright owners on the development and implementation of standard technical measures and voluntary measures. However, to the extent such measures are not forthcoming, legislative solutions will be necessary to restore the balance Congress intended,” the recommendation reads. Interestingly, this collaborative stance doesn’t appear to apply to all parties. File-hosting service 4Shared previously informed TorrentFreak that several prominent music groups have shown little interest in their voluntary piracy fingerprint tool. The notion of piracy filters isn’t new. A few months ago the European Commission released its proposal to modernize the EU’s copyright law, under which online services will also be required to install mandatory piracy filters. Whether the U.S. Government will follow suit has yet to be seen. In any case, rightsholders are likely to keep lobbying for change until they see significant improvements. — The full submission of the music groups is available here (pdf). https://torrentfreak.com/music-industry-wants-piracy-filters-no-takedown-whack-a-mole-170222/
  12. Authorities in Italy are continuing a huge crackdown on sites involved in the unlawful distribution of copyrighted content. This week the domains of another 41 platforms offering first-run movies, TV shows, and live sports were targeted, bringing the total for the last four months to 290 sites. For so many years, Italy developed a reputation for doing little to stop the spread of infringing content online. As a result, pirate sites flourished and millions of citizens decided that paying for content was a thing of the past. In recent times, things have changed. Italy now has one of the toughest anti-piracy regimes in Europe and regularly launches new actions, often targeting multiple sites in coordinated operations. This week marks the start of another, with the Special Command Units of the Guardia di Finanza (GdF), a militarized police force under the authority of the Minister of Economy and Finance, acting on the orders of the Public Prosecutor of Rome. Following the signing of a special decree issued by the Court of Rome, the GdF targeted the domains of 41 websites alleged to be involved in the distribution of first-run movies such as The Magnificent 7, Suicide Squad, and Legend of Tarzan. Within the batch were many sites streaming live sporting events, such as soccer matches broadcasted by The Premier League, La Ligue 1, Bundesliga, La Liga and Champions League. Those who transmitted motor racing events were also in the frame, after drawing fire from Formula 1 and Moto GP broadcasters. All domain names will be blocked by local ISPs or potentially seized, if within reach of local authorities. Authorities report that in common with an operation carried out earlier this month, two anti-piracy strategies were employed, the so-called “follow-the-money” approach (whereby site owners are identified via payments made by advertisers and similar business partners) and the reportedly newer “follow-the-hosting” angle. Investigating site hosts has been a core anti-piracy strategy for many years so precisely what’s new about this recent effort isn’t clear. However, much is being made of the ability to discover the true location of sites that attempt to hide behind various anonymization techniques available via the cloud. Whether a true breakthrough has been made is hard to decipher since local authorities have a tendency to be a little dramatic. Nevertheless, there can be no doubts over their commitment. According to Fulvia Sarzana, a lawyer with the Sarzana and Partners law firm which specializes in Internet and copyright disputes, a total of 290 sites have been targeted by court injunctions in the past four months alone. Back in November, a landmark action to block more than 150 sites involved in the unauthorized streaming of movies and sports took place following the signing of a mass injunction by a judge in Rome. It was the biggest single blocking action in Italy since measures began in 2008. Then, in early February, authorities widened their net further still, with a somewhat unusual campaign targeting sites that offered unauthorized digital versions of dozens of national newspapers and magazines including Cosmopolitan and Vanity Fair. With the latest blockades, Italy is now a true front-runner among European site-blocking nations. With many hundreds of domains now the subject of an injunction, the country is now firmly among the top three blocking countries, alongside the UK and Portugal. https://torrentfreak.com/italy-blocks-290-pirate-movie-tv-show-domains-in-4-months-170222-170222/
  13. Last week
  14. Tracker's Name: AvistaZ (AsiaTorrents) Genre: ASIAN MOVIES / TV / GENERAL Sign-up: https://avistaz.to/auth/register Additional information: AvistaZ (AsiaTorrents) is a Private Torrent Tracker for ASIAN MOVIES / TV / GENERAL
  15. Tracker's Name: CinemaZ (EuTorrents) Genre: FOREIGN NON-ASIAN MOVIES Sign-up: https://cinemaz.to/auth/register Additional information: CinemaZ (EuTorrents) is a Private Torrent Tracker for FOREIGN NON-ASIAN MOVIES
  16. A Federal Court in California ruled that Steadfast is not automatically liable for hosting an alleged pirate website. In a tentative order favoring the Chicago-based hosting provider, Judge Wu fails to see sufficient evidence to support a secondary liability claim. Last year, adult entertainment publisher ALS Scan took things up a notch by dragging several third-party intermediaries to court. The company targeted CDN provider CloudFlare, advertising network JuicyAds, and several hosting providers, including Chicago-based Steadfast. Steadfast was not happy with the allegations and has recently asked the court to dismiss the case. Among other things, the company argued that it’s protected by the DMCA’s safe harbor provisions. “Steadfast does not operate or manage the Imagebam website. Steadfast does not in any way communicate with or interact with Imagebam’s individual users. Steadfast only provides computer storage,” the company wrote in its motion to dismiss. In a tentative ruling issued this week, the California District Court agrees that the allegations in the second amended complaint (SAC) are not sufficient to hold the hosting company liable. Merely hosting a pirate website is not enough to argue that the host contributes to the alleged copyright infringement on the image sharing site, Judge George Wu argues (pdf). “In short, the Court is unaware of any authority holding that merely alleging that a defendant provides some form of ‘hosting’ service to an infringing website is sufficient to establish contributory copyright infringement. “The Court would therefore find that the SAC fails to allege facts establishing that Steadfast materially contributed to the infringement,” Wu adds. Among other things, the Court notes that ALS Scan fails to allege that Steadfast provides its hosting services with the goal to promote copyright infringement, or that it directly encouraged Imagebam to show pirated content on its website. In addition, the vicarious liability allegation is insufficient too. This requires the copyright holder to show that the host has control over the infringing actions and that it financially benefits from them, which is not the case here. “Here, the SAC contains no allegations that Steadfast has a direct financial interest in the infringing activity or has the right and ability to stop the infringing conduct,” Judge Wu writes. As a result of the lacking evidence and allegations to support a secondary liability claim, the Court tentatively granted Steadfast’s motion to dismiss. The ruling does keep the door open for ALS Scan to file an improved complaint, but for now, the victory goes to the hosting provider. https://torrentfreak.com/court-hosting-a-pirate-site-doesnt-equal-copyright-infringement-170221/
  17. Thank you guys! I'm glad to be a part of the community! [Have] My Anonamouse x3 [Want] Cinemageddon, PassTheHeadphones, PassThePopcorn. Cheers!
  18. ThePlace (yes, our sister site) is going to have Summit in less than 1H. Some topics are related to the TheGeeks especially those linked to work/life balance. Every member from TheGeeks is welcomed. All you have to do is join #theplace.bz channel on IRC network. Quote: All times are listed in UTC 18.02.2017 #1. 15:00 - 16:30 - Pampgun777 & Rogerphilip - success, wealth and women #2. 16:30 - 18:00 - Ghalbert & Klaatu & HackerOne - Productivity #3. 18:00 - 19:00 - Percussion - Sexual Energy Work & Tantra #4. 19:00 - 20:30 - Helio & nick011894 - Fitness #5. 20:30 - 21:30 - illman - How to prepare ground for manifestation #6. 21:30 - 22:30 - treetee - Assume Attraction & Send Love Need time conversions? Click here! Don't wait and check ThePlace Announcement CLICK HERE For those who are not ThePlace members: TheGeeks Internal Link
  19. we are aware of the issues with SSL and we are working to fix them.
  20. Last week's landmark ruling compelling a Swedish ISP to block The Pirate Bay won't spread quickly, despite copyright holders' wishes. Telecoms giant Telia says that the ruling does not apply to them, so connectivity to the site will continue unless a court orders otherwise. Copyright holders are assessing their options. Last week after almost three years of legal wrangling, Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, Nordisk Film and the Swedish Film Industry finally achieved their dream of blocking a ‘pirate’ site After losing an October 2015 trial at the Stockholm District Court, the rightsholders went to appeal last September, a hearing that ran for several days at the brand new Patent and Market Court. Last Monday the court ruled that Bredbandsbolaget, the ISP at the center of the action, must block The Pirate Bay. For the rest of Europe, where blocking is becoming more and more commonplace, it was just another day at the office. Back in Sweden, however, the reaction was more animated. It appears that Internet service providers don’t like the idea of becoming copyright policemen and as a result, none voiced support for the decision. In other EU countries where blocking injunctions have been achieved, ISPs have often resigned themselves to the same fate and smoothed the process moving forward. The rightsholders are still holding on to the idea that might be a possibility in Sweden, as spokesman Per Strömbäck told IDG this morning. “We believe that the legal situation is now clear and that ISPs should act in loyalty with Bredbandsbolaget and apply the same rules,” Strömbäck said. “We believe and hope that we will get to a solution as we have in Norway, Denmark and the UK, where telecom operators cooperate and all block the pirate sites.” But the signs are not good. Last week ISP Bahnhof absolutely slammed the decision to block The Pirate Bay, describing the effort as signaling the “death throes” of the copyright industry. It even hinted that it may offer some kind of technical solution to customers who are prevented from accessing the site. For those familiar with Bahnhof’s stance over the years, this response didn’t come as a surprise. The ISP is traditionally pro-freedom and has gone out of its way to make life difficult for copyright enforcers of all kinds. However, as one of the leading telecoms companies in Sweden and neighboring Norway, ISP Telia is more moderate. Nevertheless, it too says it has no intention of blocking The Pirate Bay, unless it is forced to do so by law. “No, we will not block if we are not forced to do so by a court,” a company press officer said this morning. Telia says that the decision last week from the Patent and Market Court affects only Bredbandsbolaget, indicating that a fresh legal process will be required to get it to respond. That eventuality appears to be understood by the rightsholders but they’re keeping their options open. “It depends on how [the ISPs] choose to act,” Strömbäck told IDG. “One can have lot of hypothetical scenarios in which some follow, but others do not. Or where some protest loudly and generate debate.” Thus far, no ISPs have publicly indicated they’re a “follower”. Telia will not be “following”, while one can safely put Bahnhof into the “protest loudly” category. There are plenty of others, however, so it will take more time to see how this plays out. Interestingly, way back in 2008 after the IFPI forced Danish ISP ‘Tele2’ to block access to The Pirate Bay, Telia received a letter warning that legal measures would follow if it didn’t follow suit. The ISP refused, noting that blocking would be illegal in Sweden. While subsequent decisions from the EU and indeed Sweden’s courts have now indicated otherwise, it’s been nine long years since that initial threat to the ISP. But in all that time Telia hasn’t changed its position. Almost a decade ago it advised copyright holders to move away from the idea of blocking and concentrate on providing better legal alternatives instead. Entertainment companies have indeed made significant progress on that front, but today Telia is standing by its long-standing advice, that blocking will not provide the solution. https://torrentfreak.com/wont-block-pirate-bay-swedish-telecoms-giant-says-170221/
  21. I'd Like to apply for scenetime Thanks
  22. A new academic study shows that piracy can have a positive effect on comic book sales under some conditions. The empirical research, which zooms in on Japanese Manga comics, suggests that sales of ongoing comics dip when pirated versions are more readily available, while those for completed series go up. Research into online piracy comes in all shapes and sizes, with equally mixed results. Often the main question is whether piracy hurts legitimate revenue streams. In recent years we have seen a plethora of studies and most are focused on the effects on movies, TV-shows and music revenues. But what about comic books? Manga in particular has traditionally been very popular on file-sharing networks and sites. These are dozens of large sites dedicated to the comics, which are downloaded in their millions. According to the anti-piracy group CODA, which represents Japanese comic publishers, piracy losses overseas are estimated to be double the size of overseas legal revenue. With this in mind, Professor Tatsuo Tanaka of the Faculty of Economics at Keio University decided to look more closely at how piracy interacts with legal sales. In a natural experiment, he examined how the availability of pirated comic books affected revenue. The research uses a massive takedown campaign conducted by CODA in 2015, which directly impacted the availability of many pirated comics on various download sites, to see how this affected sales of 3,360 comic book volumes. Interestingly, the results show that decreased availability of pirated comics doesn’t always help sales. In fact, for comics that no longer release new volumes, the effect is reversed. “Piracy decreases sales of ongoing comics, but it increases sales of completed comics,” Professor Tanaka writes. “To put this another way, displacement effect is dominant for ongoing comics, and advertisement effect is dominant for completed comics,” he adds. For these finished comic seasons, the promotional element weighs heavier. According to the Professor, this suggests that piracy can effectively be seen as a form of advertising. “Since completed comics series have already ended, and publishers no longer do any promotion for them, consumers almost forget completed comics. We can interpret that piracy reminds consumers of past comics and stimulates sales.” The question that remains is whether the overall effect on the industry is positive or negative. The current study provided no answer to this effect, as it’s unknown how big the sales share is for ongoing versus completed comics, but future research could look into this. Professor Tanaka stresses that there is an important policy implication of his findings. Since piracy doesn’t affect all sales the same (it’s heterogeneous), anti-piracy strategies may have to be adapted. “If the effect of piracy is heterogeneous, it is not the best solution to shut down the piracy sites but to delete harmful piracy files selectively if possible,” Professor Tanaka adds “In this case, deleting piracy files of ongoing comics only is the first best strategy for publishers regardless of whether the total effect is positive or negative, because the availability of piracy files of completed comics is beneficial to both publishers and consumers,” he adds. The research shows once again that piracy is a complex phenomenon that can have a positive or negative impact depending on the context. This isn’t limited to comics of course, as previous studies have shown similar effects in the movie and music industries. — The full paper titled The Effects of Internet Book Piracy: The Case of Japanese Comics is available here (pdf). https://torrentfreak.com/online-piracy-can-boost-comic-book-sales-research-finds/
  23. i apply for Apollo.rip.........thx sir
  24. Dear users! There are two types of fake UHD Blu-ray releases that exist and ‘kill’ the faith and confidence in 4k: 1) Upscaled Blu-ray coded by x265 with questionable config and overall quality. Converted in BT2020 and plays off as HDR - presented as a true capture of UHD Blu-ray made by low-end adapters. 2) Upscaled Blu-ray with laid over intensive sharpness and `sand` - sells off as various HDCP Rips. Sometimes cropped frames of UHD Blu-ray may differentiate from mastering of normal Blu-ray disk. In this case that provides a 100% genuineness proof of third-party captures. Conclusion. We’re not going to prove anyone anything, though kindly reminding to avoid dozens of similar questions. Here are our plans: 1) We plan to start making the releases of UHD Blu-ray using the most advanced hardware with native support of HDR. The format of releases is going to be: HEVC-10bit-HDR. 2) We’re planning to start capturing movies that have not being announced to be released in hard copy with our HDD Samsung Video Pack. The format of releases is going to be: AVC-8bit-noHDR. The very same format is going to be used in many other releases with HDR as a source. 3) The releases will be supplied with a minimum of English, Ukrainian/Russian audio tracks as they will be considered temporary ones and will be replaced in a future. Note, that in a following 1-2 years we all are going to be challenged with a choice of playback device for UHD, as there are literally no good external 4k players and internal ones do not support multiple audio tracks in .mkv. For user’s convenience the 4k video streams are going to be synchronized and align with standard Blu-ray/Remux/Encode videos that will give a possibility for everyone to download any collector’s edition release from a HDCLUB tracker and use one of its audio tracks. Administration ultrahdclub.org
  1. Load more activity