Chloe Scott

Blizzard VIP
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


Chloe Scott last won the day on April 24

Chloe Scott had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

227 Accomplished

About Chloe Scott

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

2,948 profile views


  • Happy
  • Currently Feeling Happy
  1. Adult entertainment company Malibu Media has informed the court that it wants to drop one of its piracy cases because the defendants are sophisticated IT professionals who can hide infringing activity. The defendants disagree. They want the case to continue so they can clear their names and take a good look at Malibu's technical evidence. In recent years, file-sharers around the world have been pressured to pay significant settlement fees or face legal repercussions. These so-called “copyright trolling” efforts have been a common occurrence in the United States for roughly a decade, and they still are. Malibu Media, the Los Angeles-based company behind the ‘X-Art’ adult movies, is behind many of these cases. The company has filed thousands of lawsuits in recent years, targeting Internet subscribers whose accounts were allegedly used to share Malibu’s films via BitTorrent. These cases generally don’t make it to trial and there are several examples where the rightsholder opted to voluntarily dismiss a case when a defendant pushed back. This is also what happened in a lawsuit that was filed against Tim McManus. The adult entertainment company named McManus in a complaint last year and later added his company Greenwood Digital as well. However, these defendants were not intent on settling and fought back. They filed a counterclaim for “abuse of process” against Malibu Media and requested discovery. The defendants were ready to fight the case on its merits as that would help them to clear their names. However, Malibu Media then decided that it would no longer pursue the case. While we have seen such voluntary dismissals in the past, in this case, the adult entertainment company gave a rather unique explanation. It informed the court that it chose not to continue because the defendants are “IT professionals” who know how to hide infringing activity. “Plaintiff has elected not to pursue its claim against Defendants as present evidence does not support the time and expense that would be incurred in an attempt to bear out Defendants’ infringer status as a direct or contributory infringer as it appears the Defendants are sophisticated IT professionals with the knowledge to hide infringing activity. “For this reason, and to conserve judicial resources and prevent unnecessary expense for the parties, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court dismiss with prejudice Plaintiff’s claim against Defendants,” Malibu Media added. In essence, Malibu argues that it’s not financially feasible to pursue the matter because the IT company can, presumably, hide any infringing activity despite the evidence it has collected. McManus and his IT company deny these accusations and believe that the rightsholder didn’t have any proper evidence to begin with. They are not happy with this request for a dismissal, as it will make it harder for them to clear their name and get compensated for the costs they have incurred thus far in their defense. They made this clear in a filing submitted to the District Court of New Jersey yesterday. According to the defendants, the allegations made by Malibu Media have led to both financial and reputational damage. They request the court to deny the motion to dismiss, allowing the case to be fought on its merits. “Defendants have been severely prejudiced by being forced to expend substantial sums of money and time to defend against plaintiff’s claims and pursue their Counterclaims. In addition, by the mere existence of plaintiff’s lawsuit against defendant Tim McManus, Mr. McManus’s reputation and ability to secure business have been negatively affected,” the defendants argue. In an additional certification, defendant Tim McManus writes that the case has harmed his reputation. Among other things, he says that the false accusations were brought up by one of his students at Fordham University. “It is a challenge explaining to the students that I did not download the titles outlined in the plaintiff’s Complaint. These accusations have harmed my reputation since I cannot say (yet) that I won a favorable judgment in the case,” McManus writes. McManus stresses that his company is also harmed by the case and wants to fight the allegations in court so he can properly refute the claims. If the case was simply dismissed, as Malibu wants, that wouldn’t be an option. It is now up to the court to decide whether this case will be dismissed or whether McManus and his company will have the chance to clear their names and request compensation.
  2. Developer ZeroPaige has spent the last seven years creating a port of Super Mario Bros. for the Commodore 64, a record-breaking home computer released in 1982. He released the game just before the weekend to critical acclaim. It didn't take long for Nintendo to start filing takedown notices. When it was released in 1982, the Commodore 64 (or C64) was a revelation. Resplendent in all its 8-bit glory, the machine packed 20 kilobytes of ROM, 64 kilobytes of RAM, the ability to display multicolor sprites and a sound chip (the now legendary SID) to die for. How many machines were eventually sold is up for debate, but with lower estimates of more than 12 million units and some as high as 30 million, it was clearly a massive success story that still has developers excited today. In parallel with the companies who wrote code for Commodore’s machine, a thriving hobbyist scene thrived in the 80s. So-called ‘demos’, distributed via BBSs, pushed the computer to its limits, delighting users with super-smooth scrolling and sampled speech – in fact anything it wasn’t originally expected to do. The fascination with the C64 has persisted for decades. It wasn’t officially discontinued until 1994 but since then has lived on, both in hardware and emulated forms. Those pushing the limits of what the machine can do have also remained hard at work. One of those individuals is a programmer known online as ZeroPaige, who for the past seven years has been attempting to cram a port of Nintendo’s 1985 NES game Super Mario Bros. into Commodore’s now ancient hardware. On April 18, 2019, ZeroPaige revealed that his goal had been reached, with the release of Super Mario Bros 64. “This is a Commodore 64 port of the 1985 game SUPER MARIO BROS. for the Famicom and Nintendo Entertainment System,” ZeroPaige wrote. “It contains the original version that was released in Japan and United States, as well as the European version. It also detects and supports a handful of turbo functionalities, and has 2 SID support.” The developer released the somewhat incredible port as a C64 disk image file, playable on hardware or emulators. The reception it received was amazing, with many fans heaping praise on ZeroPaige for completing a task many believed couldn’t be done. But of course, the mighty Nintendo was watching too. Links to the image squirreled away on hosting platforms started to go down, with the suspicion that the Japanese gaming giant was behind the deletions. Seven years of hard work taken down with a few lines of text. Early this morning, the Commodore Computer Club revealed that it too had been hit with a copyright notice, effectively confirming that Nintendo was behind the action against Super Mario Bros. 64. Good times. Due to a DMCA takedown notice we had to remove the Super Mario Bros 64 download from our website blog post from 4 days ago. Hopefully everyone enjoys the #Commodore 64 #C64 game who was able to snag it. — PDX Commodore Club (@c64club) April 22, 2019 It doesn’t really come as a surprise that Nintendo has targeted the project. The company has been extremely busy in recent months taking down sites that offer ROMs that infringe on its copyrights. Furthermore, Super Mario Bros. is also available on its Game Boy, Wii U, and Switch platforms, so the ….erm….Commodore 64…is also a market threat. But while this takedown will have C64 fans shaking their heads, it will prove impossible to delete Super Mario Bros. 64 from history. As things stand, the disk image is available for download in a number of places and for those who want to play it, a few minutes searching will yield results. The other factor is that the people most interested in this project will already have plenty of connections in the emulator scene, so much of the sharing will go on behind closed doors. This is perhaps a fitting tribute to the distribution that took place in the 1980s, when hobbyists began pushing the C64 to perform tricks its creators never envisioned. While Nintendo’s lawyers clearly see Super Mario Bros. 64 as just another threat to be countered, the company’s programmers are probably sitting quietly at their desks, smiling quietly at the impressive work of ZeroPaige. After all, they’re all striving for the impossible.
  3. Server is down for maintenance.
  4. Tracker is Offline.[Server is down for maintenance .]
  5. Tracker is Offline.[Server is down for maintenance .]
  6. Tracker is Offline.[Server is down for maintenance .]
  7. S******* has triggered the Freeleech Pool! The following films have been randomly selected and are now freeleech for the next 48 hours. Freddy vs. Jason The Last House on the Left Seat 25 Incredibles 2 Finding Dory Kikujiro Thanks to users k****, a*****, D*****, k*****, t******, and S******* who donated to the pool. Now go drop some of your own orbs into the next pool!
  8. Results for Lottery 2019-16 483 people entered, with a total sweetening of 1325GB. Winners were: FIRST PLACE 100GB Boxer... SECOND PLACE 50GB Susa... THIRD PLACE 30GB ant... asifk... ASq... bla... blue... Can... cra... da.... eric... Fla... glo... gum... jalu... Ka... lord... Lor... Love... ma... mas... Mav... mis... mr... oma... or... pu... rav... res... rev... rogu... row... snid... sno... trist... twin... Went... wh... yoy... Zinc...
  9. With website blocking becoming more prevalent around the world, more and more users are turning to VPNs to regain access. However, according to the operator of one of the world's largest pirate sites, some advertising agencies consider the traffic as worthless. For more than a decade, copyright holders around the world have pushed Internet service providers to block ‘pirate’ sites. While users in the United States are yet to experience any blocking on copyright grounds, elsewhere – particularly in Europe – the site blocking phenomenon is in full swing. Indeed, according to a recent overview by the Motion Picture Association, almost 4,000 websites are blocked by ISPs across 31 countries. The number of domains blocked is more than double that amount, in excess of 8,000 worldwide. While the action is seen as effective at preventing direct access to sites, plenty of workarounds exist. Alternative ‘pirate’ domains regularly appear, along with mirrors, clones and the rising use of Tor and, of course, VPNs. Interestingly, however, we received correspondence from the operator of a major ‘pirate’ site this week that indicated that VPN-based traffic is undesirable because it is considered almost worthless by advertising networks. “Pirate sites need money to operate,” he explained. “Having more VPN users accessing the site doesn’t equal more money.” According to the operator, ad agencies frown upon such traffic. Instead, they prefer traffic that is easily categorized into geographic regions, with some countries’ traffic being considered more valuable than others. Users visiting sites from places such as the US, UK, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia, are considered more valuable than those visiting from India and China, for example. The site operator says that advertisers pay for his traffic on a geographic basis. An example list of geocodes published by Maxmind shows a sample, with the United States listed as ‘US’, United Kingdom as ‘GB’, and Canada as ‘CA’. However, at the top of the list is A1, which stands for Anonymous Proxy. So while visitors may be able to unblock ‘pirate’ sites with VPNs, TOR, and similar tools, it’s clear that many advertisers aren’t partial to this kind of traffic. There are other more creative ways to monetize these visitors through various schemes but for the large site in question, they’re more of a burden. “More visits, more server load for 0$,” he concluded. “Advertisers pay per [geocode] and do campaigns per [geocode]. VPNs are marked with GEO A1 which is outside the scope of those tiers thus no one gets paid for those,” he explained. Another site operator working in a similar niche told us that in his experience, payment for VPN traffic is patchy. However, he agreed with the overall sentiment. “It all depends on the network to be honest. I have worked with a few networks before that don’t even show a popup if you’re using a VPN,” he explained. Of course, the A1 code isn’t just limited to VPNs. TOR also comes under that category and that traffic is frowned up too. “No ad agency pays for TOR traffic,” we were told. “There are special flags for TOR , anonymous proxies, VPN, dedicated servers, VPS servers. It’s really easy to monitor those networks and changes to them. Everything is public anyway.” IP2Location sells access to a database for $799 which claims to be able to detect VPNs, proxies, and bots. It also offers a demo, which allows the user to enter an IP address and discover whether it falls into the above categories. We tested it with a diverse range of VPN servers and the tool identified the VPN every single time. Source:TorrentFreak
  10. Results for Lottery 2019-16 483 people entered, with a total sweetening of 1325GB. Winners were: FIRST PLACE 100GB t**** SECOND PLACE 50GB P*** THIRD PLACE 30GB A***
  11. Dear all, Temporary Freeleech (TFL) is among us! A TFL torrent works similarly to a featured torrent, but only temporarily (namely: upload is counted and download is not counted). After the time limit expires, a TFL torrent reverts to being a normal, active torrent. It's easy to tell if a torrent is currently TFL: it's advertised in big, purple letters at the head of the Description. TFL comes in two flavors: 48 hours and 7 days. The former will be applied by staff to approved and reviewed upgrades (which are in English or have English subtitles). Please note: only upgrades uploaded since the introduction of the 48h FL option will be set to FL. The 7 day FL will be applied to films which get custom subtitles. On the right of the main site, you will see that there is a new section showing all the latest TFLs. You may post your questions and comments here: Best wishes, Staff
  12. Streaming TV provider Omniverse believes that any comparisons to 'pirate' streaming box vendor Dragon Box are scandalous. The company is asking the court to strike these from the copyright infringement complaint anti-piracy outfit ACE filed earlier this year. In addition, it wants ACE to clarify what the problem is exactly. In February, several major Hollywood studios, Amazon, and Netflix filedalawsuitagainstOmniverse One World Television. Under the flag of anti-piracy groupACE, the companies accused Omniverse and its owner Jason DeMeo of supplying pirate streaming channels to various IPTV services. Omniversedoesn’t offer any streaming boxes but sells live-streaming services to third-party distributors, such as HDHomerun, Flixon TV, and SkyStream TV, which in turn offer live TV streaming packages to customers. According to ACE, these channels are offered without permission from its members. As such, the company was branded a pirate streaming TV supplier. However, Omniverse disagrees with this assessment. In a new court filing, the company requests the California federal court to strike any comparisons to services such as “Dragon Box,” stating that these are “scandalous” and “immaterial.” Omniverse explains that it’s a technical provider for the licensed cable company Hovsat, which has a long-standing agreement with DirecTV to distribute a broad range of TV-channels with few restrictions. “The contract between Hovsat and DirecTV has no limitations with regard to geographic markets, nor innovating with regard to delivery method,” Omniverse informs the court. The streaming service provider believes that the license allows it to offer these channels to third-party companies. ACE clearly disagrees and has branded the company a pirate service, similar to the streaming box vendor Dragon Box. This comparison is rejected outright by Omniverse, which stresses that it operates entirely differently from Dragon Box. “Comparisons between Omniverse and Dragon Box are immaterial because Dragon Box is a hardware device utilizing software to search and link pirated content and Omniverse is a marketing partner of a cable company,” the company writes. Also, Dragon Box recently admitted that it offered copyright infringing software andsettled its lawsuit with ACE for $14.5 millionin the same court. Any comparisons may, therefore, be damaging for Omniverse. “Comparisons between Omniverse and Dragon Box are also scandalous because comparing the two unlike entities damages Omniverse through guilt by (misplaced) association,” Omniverse writes. The streaming service provider requests the court to strike all comparisons to Dragon Box. In addition, it would like ACE to update its complaint to clarify what the problem is. If ACE accuses Omniverse of outright piracy, similar to Dragon Box, it should say so in the complaint. However, if it argues that Omniverse went beyond the authority of the Hovsat license, all Dragon Box mentions should be dropped. This clarification will also help Omniverse to prepare a proper defense, the company argues. A classic piracy lawsuit is different from a lawsuit about a licensing dispute, it says. “If Plaintiffs’ Complaint is alleging Omniverse is a pirate, Omniverse needs to prepare for an action that covers multiple properties held bymultiple plaintiffs. If Plaintiffs’ Complaint is alleging Omniverse does not operate under proper authorization, Omniverse needs to prepare for an action primarily involving the meaning of the Hovsat-DirecTV agreement. Or both.” The court has yet to respond to the request from Omniverse. It is clear, however, that the Hovsat license will play an important role in this case. A few days ago the court signed two subpoenas that are directed at Hovsat and DirecTV. The subpoenas were requested by ACE, which is looking for information about agreements between Omniverse, Hovsat, and DirecTV. — A copy of Omniverse’s motion to strike the scandalous claims, as well as other requests, is availablehere (pdf).
  13. When a new Game of Thrones season is about to land, major news publications everywhere tend to come up with something exciting. But what if there's no obvious angle? Easy! Come up with a sensational headline claiming that Game of Thrones downloaders are going to jail but don't offer a single shred of evidence to back it up. Then sit back, and wait for the clicks. In case anyone hadn’t noticed, a new series of Game of Thrones started last week. That meant hundreds of articles about the show, especially since this is probably its last hurrah. We too did our bit, writing earlier this week how the first episode in the series had resulted in a flood of downloads via torrent sites. We’ve been writing about the show in this context for years, so the latest installment probably didn’t come as a surprise. What will have come as a surprise, to the people who had the misfortune to read it, was an article published on the Daily Mail’s site. As is customary, the piece was placed to the left of a sidebar of clickable articles focusing on the physical attributes of mainly female celebrities in various states of undress. The piece about Game of Thrones admittedly featured less flesh but sought to be just as outrageous.
  14. Tracker's Name: Share Friends Projekt (SFP) Genre: MOVIES / GENERAL Sign-up: Additional information: Share Friends Projekt (SFP) is a GERMAN Private Torrent Tracker for MOVIES / GENERAL
  15. Ten years ago this week, four men were found guilty and sentenced to prison for running The Pirate Bay. At the time, Peter Sunde said that the site would continue, no matter what. A decade on he has been proven absolutely right and that in itself is utterly remarkable. On the morning of March 3, 2009, Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm, Peter Sunde and Carl Lundström, were all waiting for the final day in the now-infamous trial featuring The Pirate Bay. The night before the original ‘notorious site’ had gone offline, worrying the masses. But as it had done countless times before, the site reappeared once again after Fredrik (TiAMO) worked his magic – from inside the halls of justice. “I fixed the Pirate Bay from inside the courtroom just minutes ago. The site is back online,” he said. This type of defiance, before and after the quartet were eventually sentenced to jail and huge fines a decade ago this week, became a hallmark of the three key defendants. While early financier Lundström quickly fell by the wayside, the trio of Sunde, Neij and Svartholm only appeared to gather energy from the momentous event. All three expressed surprise at receiving jail sentences but all pledged never to pay a penny to the authorities. “We can’t pay and we wouldn’t pay if we could,” Sunde said. “If I would have money I would rather burn everything I owned.” While millions expected The Pirate Bay itself to immediately disappear, Sunde vowed that would never happen. Quite remarkably and against all the odds, his words carry weight today. Anyone can visit and see the same homepage they’ve always seen, as if the trial of the site’s operators never happened. For them, however, life would prove less than straightforward in the years to come. On November 26, 2010, following an inevitable appeal, the court decreased the prison sentences for three of the defendants (Sunde, Neij and Lundström) but increased the damages to be paid to the entertainment industry plaintiffs. Svartholm, who was absent from the appeal hearing on medical grounds, would be dealt with later. In the end, all four men served their sentences but Sunde, Neij and Svartholm did so defiantly. No one expected anything less from the Nordic upstarts, who took on the might of Hollywood and the music industries expecting to win, only to lose in the end. Or did they? While no one can claim time in prison as a victory, Sunde, Neij and Svartholm (or brokep, TiAMO, and Anakata, to use their aliases) remained steadfast in their opposition. None went quietly, none caved into enormous pressure, none went back on their word. These are qualities despised by copyright holders when viewed through the prism of the ‘theft’ of their intellectual property. But for millions of followers in the pirate world, there was a chance to vicariously sail the high seas through the experiences of their heroes, at least for a few years. All three men have now slipped into the background of Pirate Bay history but it is nothing short of remarkable that the site still exists today. Despite endless enforcement efforts, not to mention widespread blocking around the world, it’s still one of the most visited torrent sites on the planet. Admittedly, the graphics, search feature, and just about everything else are still stuck in the past. But unlike flashier alternatives such as KickassTorrents and ExtraTorrent, the platform still exists today while serving millions of users with the latest content. The Pirate Bay has also become the digital embodiment of the fabled hydra. Today the main domain still exists, but so do dozens of other tentacles that replicate the site if not entirely, closely enough. While the body may one day be found and slain, there are no signs that day is near. The Galaxy’s Most Resilient BitTorrent Site? It’s hard to argue otherwise.