Invite Scene - #1 to Buy, Sell, Trade or Find Free Torrent Invites

#1 TorrentInvites Community. Buy, Sell, Trade or Find Free Torrent Invites for Every Private Torrent Trackers. HDB, BTN, AOM, DB9, PTP, RED, MTV, EXIGO, FL, IPT, TVBZ, AB, BIB, TIK, EMP, FSC, GGN, KG, MTTP, TL, TTG, 32P, AHD, CHD, CG, OPS, TT, WIHD, BHD, U2 etc.


Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'sharing'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Invite Scene Official Information
    • Announcements
    • Suggestions and Ideas
    • Member Introductions
    • Competitions
  • Invite Scene Premium Membership
    • Make a Donation: Grab Your Premium Membership Now
  • Invite Scene VIP Giveaways & Requests
    • VIP Giveaways
    • VIP Requests
  • Invite Scene Official Store
    • Invite Scene Store: The Official Store for Private Torrent Invites
  • Invite Scene Marketplace
    • Premium Sellers Section
    • Buyer's Section
    • Trader's Section
    • Webmaster Marketplace
    • Service Offerings
    • Other Stuffs
  • Invite Scene Giveaways & Requests Section
    • Giveaways
    • Requests
  • Invite Scene Bittorrent World
    • Private Tracker News
    • BitTorrent World Discussion
    • Private Tracker Help
    • Tracker Reviews
    • Open Trackers
  • Invite Scene SeedBox Forum
    • Exclusive SeedBox Sellers Section
    • SeedBox Sellers Section
    • SeedBox Reviews
    • SeedBox Discussions
  • Making Money
    • Monetizing Techniques
    • Crypto Currency
    • Free Money Making Ebooks
  • Webmasters
    • Website Construction
  • Invite Scene General Topics
    • The Lounge
    • Movies, TV, and Videos
    • Melody, Harmony, Rhythm, and MP3
    • General PC Chat and Help
    • Security Hive
    • Guides and Tutorials
    • Gamers Hangout
    • The Graphic Design
  • Invite Scene Deal Disputes & Limitations
    • Deal Disputes
    • Archives


  • Bug Tracker
  • Suggestions Tracker

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL

Google+ Hangouts

Yahoo Messenger






Found 21 results

  1. Tracker Name: RainbowNation Sharing | RNS Genre: e-Learning Sign-up Link: Closing Date: N/A Additional Information: Private Torrent Tracker for EBOOKS / GENERAL
  2. The purpose of public libraries is exactly the same as the effect of file-sharing. You cannot defend one while opposing the other. Public libraries started appearing in the mid-1800s. At the time, publishers went absolutely berserk: they had been lobbying for the lending of books to become illegal, as reading a book without paying anything first was “stealingâ€, they argued. As a consequence, they considered private libraries at the time to be hotbeds of crime and robbery. (Those libraries were so-called “subscription librariesâ€, so they were argued to be for-profit, too.) British Parliament at the time, unlike today’s politicians, wisely disagreed with the publishing industry lobby – the copyright industry of the time. Instead, they saw the economic value in an educated and cultural populace, and passed a law allowing free public libraries in 1850, so that local libraries were built throughout Britain, where the public could take part of knowledge and culture for free. In other words, they made explicit exceptions to the copyright monopoly for the benefit of public access to culture and knowledge. In most copyright monopoly legislation today, it says explicitly that monopoly holders to not have any kind of right to object to their works being displayed, read, and lent from public libraries. This can be traced back to the insights of 1850. So how is this different from file-sharing? From manufacturing your own copies of knowledge and culture from others’ sources? Is it different at all? Yes, it is different. It differs in efficiency. Where public libraries can educate one citizen at a time from one original book, file-sharing has the potential to educate millions at a time with the same effort spent. Libraries and file-sharing do not differ in payment to copyright monopoly holders. You would frequently hear that authors are paid royalties when their books are borrowed from a library. This claim is not true. Authors do indeed get some slush money in most European countries, and this is based on library statistics, but it is no form of compensation for that library activity. The difference is crucial. Rather, that money “from libraries†is a unilateral cultural grant that happens to use library statistics for data. It is not true that authors get money when their books are borrowed from libraries. In some cases, they do, but that’s mostly a coincidence. When Harry Potter in Swedish is borrowed from a Swedish library, for example, J.K. Rowling does not get a single penny for that. (The translator does, though. It’s a grant to promote culture availability in the local language, not to reward the author.) So the equivalence – the connection between lending and compensation – can be trivially disproven through examples. Libraries and file-sharing do not differ in principle. The purpose of libraries was – is – to make culture and knowledge available to as many as possible, as efficiently as possible, for free – simply because of the greater socioeconomic benefit of an educated and cultural populace. How is this not file-sharing? So we can observe that public libraries and file-sharing differ in scale and efficiency – and only in scale and efficiency. Quite a bit, even. But that’s a quantitative difference, not a qualitative difference. I sometimes hear people trying to defend the copyright monopoly by saying that file-sharing makes public libraries too efficient, and therefore cannot be allowed. I can’t do anything but shake my head at that. That has to be a first in the public debate: Are those people actually standing up and demanding that public services, such as public libraries, be made less efficient, to have less output for the tax money spent on it? No. That does not make sense. And they deserve to hear it, to hear the absolute silliness of their own argument. You just cannot defend public libraries and oppose file-sharing at the same time. They are one and the same phenomenon. One is just vastly more efficient. In a quote from the 1850s that went past my information flow in February 2009, I noted that a publisher of the time had argued, paraphrased, that “you cannot possibly allow people to read books for free! If you pass this law, no author will ever make a penny from books again! Not a single more book will be written if you pass this law!†(Sadly, I have lost the source of that quote. If somebody recognizes it, I would love to re-source it.) Indeed, no book has been written since 1850. And no movie or piece of music has been created since large-scale file sharing with the Internet arrived around 1999. Either that, or these arguments are completely bogus, and there are only gains to be had from enabling the largest library ever created. History does repeat itself. As do the people trying to defend obsolete guild-like privileges, even across centuries. We have built the most amazing public library ever created. All of humanity is able to access the collective culture and knowledge of all of humanity, twenty-four by seven, as well as contribute to that collective pool. All the tools are already in place, all the infrastructure already rolled out, all the training already completed. Not a single tax penny needs to be spent to accomplish this. The only thing we need to do is to remove the ban on using it. Why are we letting a cartoon industry stand in the way of this? ABOUT THE AUTHOR Rick Falkvinge is a regular columnist on TorrentFreak, sharing his thoughts every other week. He is the founder of the Swedish and first Pirate Party, a whisky aficionado, and a low-altitude motorcycle pilot. His blog at focuses on information policy.
  3. In the beginning of The Pirate Bay's history the site was in Swedish. It was made by Swedes for their community. Other countries had their own file sharing sites but they got shut down. I remember when one of the biggest Spanish file-sharing sites was shut down. These file sharers had nowhere to go but The Pirate Bay (TPB). All of a sudden the top list of TPB was flooded with Spanish content except for one peculiar audiobook. It was a Swedish language course. We decided to translate the site. Not just into English but into as many languages as possible. We found people from lots of countries to chime in and help. I remember the Portuguese translation especially interesting as it was carried out by a man from Brazil. We decided that we’d make two different buttons for the translation – one for Portuguese and one for Brazilian-Portuguese. These languages differ a little. The actual gettext translation file was the same though. There were words that had never been translated to Portuguese before (like “seederâ€, “leecher†and “torrent†as technical terms) and for us it was funny to see that Brazil, a former colony of Portugal, had a say in how their former mother state developed their native language. The Swedish translation gave me a similar experience. A Finnish person did most of the translation. Finland, which was part of, and ruled by, Sweden for a very long time, still has Swedish as an official language. A few words in the Swedish translation of TPB were so new that they had to be invented. Some ended up in dictionaries. And the same thing happened for the Norwegian translation. There are two of them, since Norway has two main languages. But the main Norwegian translation was done by a person who speaks the minority language (whom just happens to also be really good at the main language). It has an effect on how the language develops. A few years later another thing made me think quite a lot. During the height of TPB’s struggles I noticed that for the first time ever, more than 50% of the top 100 listing were things from India. Previously when TPB was localized for Sweden it felt natural that it had mostly Scandinavian or English things. But when it had become an international success, and the things being shared were not from where one thought they might be, it said something about the way the world is moving. I just watched the movie India’s Daughter. The movie is about a gang rape (and murder) in India in 2012. The first thing that struck me was that I wanted to put it up on The Pirate Bay’s frontpage to make sure that people all over the world could see it – especially in India. Why? It’s being censored there. It’s a film that everyone needs to see. But not only is there a copyright issue, but there’s also a country-wide ban on the movie. People have tried putting it up on YouTube multiple times, but YouTube always takes the movie down due to their need to follow court orders in India. This all puts things into perspective for me. De-centralized file sharing by virtue of peer-to-peer technology is obviously a way to get important information in and out of countries in a time of need. It’s a way to make sure that global data is not being blocked due to local corruption. It transcends the ideas of national borders. And it is highly political. It has multiple angles. I understand now that one of the key reasons for the US to fight file-sharing might be that they don’t want India to take over their place as the number one culture. If Bollywood passes Hollywood in interest, it will be a huge loss for the US. I am also upset that no one in TPB is doing their part. No one cares about politics anymore. It’s a technical site that is not helping a movement. I’m not talking about the file-sharing movement. But for me it’s strange that TPB is not promoting India’s Daughter to everyone globally. Especially on the international women’s day. Sharing is political. Words are political. Communication is political. And if we don’t use the powers and voices we have, we’re on the wrong side of the struggle. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Peter Sunde is the former spokesperson of The Pirate Bay. He’s currently working for the micro-payment service Flattr, the encrypted chat client and several other technology startups.
  4. Internet provider AT&T has obtained a patent to speed up BitTorrent and other file-sharing traffic, while reducing the impact of these transfers on its network. Whether the invention will ever be implemented is doubtful though, as net neutrality proponents generally don't like "fast lanes." Despite the growing availability of legal services, unauthorized file-sharing continues to generate thousands of petabytes of traffic each month. This massive network use has caused concern among many Internet providers over the years, some of which decided to throttle BitTorrent transfers. Interestingly, AT&T believes the problem can also be dealt with in a more positive way. A new patent awarded to the Intellectual Property division of the Texas-based ISP describes a ‘fast lane’ for BitTorrent and other P2P traffic. Titled “System and Method to Guide Active Participation in Peer-to-Peer Systems with Passive Monitoring Environment,†one of the patent’s main goals is to speed up P2P transfers while reducing network costs. While acknowledging the benefits of file-sharing networks, the ISP notes that they can take up a lot of resources. “P2P networks can be useful for sharing content files containing audio, video, or other data in digital format. It is estimated that P2P file sharing, such as BitTorrent, represents greater than 20% of all broadband traffic on the Internet,†AT&T writes. To limit the impact on its network resources, AT&T proposes several technologies to serve content locally. This can be done by prioritizing local traffic and caching files from its own servers. “The local peer server may provide the content to peers within the same subnet more efficiently than can a peer in another subnet,†the patent reads. “As such, providing the content on the local peer server can reduce network usage and decrease the time required for the peer to download the content.†Patent drawing The ISP realizes that there may be legal concerns when it starts to serve downloads from its own servers, and notes that some “unlicensed†content may be excluded. In addition to caching files, the patent also describes a system in which BitTorrent traffic is analyzed in order to connect subscribers to peers that cause less congestion. “In an embodiment, pieces of the data file may be preferentially retrieved from peers closer in the network or peers having a lower network cost,†the patent reads. In other words, AT&T’s proposal reduces network costs while speeding up the transfers of its subscribers. It seems like a win-win for everyone involved, except strict net neutrality proponents who expect every bit to be treated equally. Given the big push for net neutrality it is unlikely that the ISP has intentions to test or implement the file-sharing “fast lane†in the real world. It’s hard to miss the irony here. The present net neutrality debate first started in 2007 when TF uncovered that Comcast was throttling BitTorrent traffic. Those same principles might now prevent a system that can speed up torrents.
  5. RapidShare, once the most popular file-hosting service in the Internet, has announced that it will shut down next month. The company doesn't cite a reason for the surprising shutdown, but losing the majority of its users in recent years after the implementation of tough anti-piracy measures is likely to be connected. Founded in 2002, Swiss-based RapidShare was one of the first and most popular one-click file-hosting services on the Internet. Like most sites of this nature, RapidShare was frequently used by people to share copyright-infringing material. It was a relationship that got the company into trouble on various occasions. RapidShare fought many legal battles with entertainment companies seeking to hold the company liable for the actions of its users, and to top it off the site was called out by the U.S. Government as a “notorious market.†Hoping to clear up its image the company made tremendous efforts to cooperate with copyright holders and limit copyright infringements. Among other things, the company adopted one of the most restrictive sharing policies while (re)branding itself as a personal cloud storage service. The anti-piracy measures seemed to work, but as a result RapidShare’s visitor numbers plunged. The dwindling revenues eventually cost most of RapidShare’s employees their jobs. Today marks the beginning of the final chapter in RapidShare’s controversial history. The company just announced that it will shut down at the end of March and is recommending that users store their files elsewhere. “Kindly note that RapidShare will stop the active service on March 31st, 2015. Extensions of STANDARD PLUS and PREMIUM will be possible until February 28th, 2015,†RapidShare writes on its homepage. “We strongly recommend all customers to secure their data. After March 31st, 2015 all accounts will no longer be accessible and will be deleted automatically,†the company adds. TF asked the company for further details on the planned shutdown but we have yet to hear back. The most likely explanation is that RapidShare can’t sustain its business with the smaller number of users it has today. The demise of RapidShare marks the end of an era. Half a decade ago RapidShare was listed among the 50 most-visited sites on the Internet, with hundreds of millions of page-views per month, but in a just a few weeks it will be gone.
  6. Good news everyone !! Before of anything, we want to say thanks to this community and the user Inviter to authorise us to post our "products" here. We want to offer our seedboxes, in fact, we are here to revolutionize the world of seedboxes… We are offering seedboxes with a ridiculous price without lose the service and attention, and we want to be transparent and serious without lose the sympathy Our principal objective is to offer the best value on the market. These are our plans: And now, exclusively for users of this forum to try our products, we want to present 3 Free Trial Seedboxes with 300Gb each for a week, the firsts to post their solicitude will win the Free Trials, and after "the test", would be fine to post their impressions here, but it's absolutely optional... Good Luck !! and... Sharing is live... If you have some question or anything, just contact us on our webpage: or send an e-mail to Box4Seed Staff.
  7. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) appear to be continuing with Operation in Our Sites. In recent days two large music sharing sites, and, were taken offline. Their domain names are now pointing to a prominent seizure banner. During the spring of 2010 U.S. authorities started a campaign to take copyright-infringing websites offline. Since then Operation in Our Sites has resulted in thousands of domain name seizures and several arrests. While most of the sites are linked to counterfeit goods, dozens of “pirate†sites have also been targeted. After a period of relative calm the authorities appear to have restarted their efforts with the takedown of two large music sites. and, which are connected, now display familiar banners in which ICE takes credit for their demise. “This domain has been seized by ICE- Homeland Security Investigations, pursuant to a seizure warrant issued by a United States District Court under the authority of 18 U.S.C. §§ 981 and 2323,†the banner reads. TorrentFreak contacted ICE yesterday for a comment on the recent activity but we have yet to receive a response. The domain names are now pointing to the same IP-address where many of the previously seized websites, such as and, are directed. Both domain names previously used Cloudflare and had their NS entries updated earlier this week. Despite the apparent trouble, and’s Twitter and Facebook pages have remained silent for days. RockDizMusic presented itself as an index of popular new music. Artists were encouraged to use the site to promote their work, but the site also featured music being shared without permission, including pre-release tracks. RockDizFile used a more classic file-hosting look, but with a 50MB limit it was mostly used for music. The site offered premium accounts to add storage space and remove filesize and bandwidth limitations. Both websites appear to have a strong focus on rap and hip-hop music. This is in line with previous ICE seizures which targeted,, and The latter was seized by mistake. The record labels failed to deliver proof of alleged infringements to the authorities and after a long appeal the domain was eventually returned to its owners. This incident and the general lack of due process of ICE’s domain seizures has led to critique from lawmakers and legal scholars. The authorities are nevertheless determined to keep Operation in Our Sites going. “Operation In Our Sites’ enforcement actions involve federal law enforcement investigating and developing evidence to obtain seizure warrants from federal judges,†ICE states on its website. Once a credible lead comes in ICE says it “will work with the U.S. Department of Justice to prosecute, convict, and punish individuals as well as seize website domain names, profits, and other property from IP thieves.†At this point it’s unclear whether ICE has targeted any of the individuals connected to and or whether the unit has taken down any other sites in a similar fashion. Add Rep and Leave a feedback Reputation is the green button in the down right corner on my post
  8. RainbowNation Sharing - RNS - E-Books Tracker - 2012 Tracker URL: User Sign up : OPEN SIGNUP Tracker Type: Mostly Books... there is quite a bit of other stuff like Games and Apps, but this is mostly uploaded by request, Ratio-based. Tracker Birthday : September 2012 Tracker Description: RNS is an excellent source especially for the latest and newest books, and they actually care about suggestions for new content. Speeds and pre-times are very good ( new books are up very fast ) and very good use is made of seedboxes, site has a dedicated 1gb/s box. A good and responsive chat (shoutbox) makes a nice addition, users are actively encouraged to use it for community building. Logo Chat / Shout Details / Home / News Tracker Stats Torrent Categories / Browse Page Freeleech Torrents over 2 GB are ALWAYS Freeleech, and open events are held regularly on certain categories too. Forums Rules Userclasses/Promotion Bonus System Invite System Invites are purchased with Bonus points and can be used at any time, any quantity. Ratings & Personal Commentary The staff on site is very experienced and capable, friendly and always willing to listen to suggestions for improvement or new content. Most of the content is seeded from seedboxes, so speeds are generally quite good, ALL e-books are seeded from the site seedbox. Movie and Music is very decent, and site is expanding into more languages as well, Afrikaans is the first of a planned expansion, German will be next, followed by Portuguese, Spanish, French and Italian. They also really listen to suggestions for series inclusion and make a real effort at obtaining good content. The bonus system is not at all hard, and users with a slow home connection will comfortably survive. This site could definitely benefit from an influx of new users, especially ones willing to upload, and people who like an active chatroom will find that they will be right at home. The site was originally started because friends and family had problems getting their TV and Movie fixes... and since things have gone extremely well, the owners have decided to open it up, but for a limited time/user amount only... Users will most probably be limited at around 5000 for the open signups, and after that it WILL be strictly by invite only... Open day(s) will be held, as unused accounts get deleted, to keep a constant flow of active users on site. They are very seriously looking for German / Portuguese members right now, as Torrent Editors in those languages have to be appointed BEFORE they can expand into those language categories.
  9. BitTorrent Inc. has just released version 1.4 of its Sync application. The new release has a completely redesigned interface and allows users to share files and folders via https links instead of encryption keys. There are dozens of sync and backup services available on the Internet, but most have a major drawback. They require people to store data on external cloud-based servers that are not under their control. BitTorrent Sync is a lightweight backup tool that eliminates this drawback, and it’s much faster too. The functionality of the Sync application is comparable to most cloud-based sync tools, except for the fact that there’s no cloud involved. Users simply share their files across their own devices, or the devices of people they share files with. Since its launch the application has built a steady user base of millions of users who already transferred a mind-boggling amount of data. “Since the initial Alpha launch of Sync a little over a year ago, we’ve now hit over 10 million total user installs and have transferred over 80 Petabytes of data,†BitTorrent Inc’s Erik Pounds notes. Today marks another big step in the development of Sync. With the release of version 1.4 users are now able to share files and folders more easily, by simply sending someone a URL. Previously, people had to exchange encryption keys which seemed more complicated. Sharing a Sync file or folder People who receive a Sync URL will be directed to a download page where they are prompted to install Sync, if it isn’t already, and start downloading files right away. Sync offers a wide variety of sharing options. Users have complete control over where their data is going and how it is used. This includes setting read/write permissions and the option to give access to approved devices only. “Sync gives you full ownership over your data. With no third parties involved in storing or arbitrating your data, you know exactly where your files go,†Pounds explains. In addition to the easier sharing options and various other improvements, the latest release also has a completely redesigned interface. For those who are interested, the latest version of BitTorrent Sync is now availablefor download here, completely free of charge.
  10. Movie studio Lionsgate is continuing its crackdown on sites and services connected to the leak of The Expendables 3. The additional sites now being targeted have not been approached directly - Lionsgate has chosen to go after their Internet service providers and domain name registrars instead. Today sees the official premiere of The Expendables 3, but what was supposed to be a celebration for the makers has turned into a fiasco. Three weeks ago a high quality leak of the film appeared online. This resulted in millions of downloads long before it reached the big screen. Fearing a massive loss in revenue, Lionsgate issued thousands of takedown requests to limit the leak’s availability and sued six file-sharing sites that allegedly failed to respond to these notices. It now appears that Lionsgate has more tricks up its sleeve. The owner of cloud hosting service informs TorrentFreak that he never heard from Lionsgate, yet the movie studio is now going after his DDoS protection provider Cloudflare and domain registrar Easyname. TorrentFreak obtained a copy of the notice, which is also believed to have been sent to the service providers of several other file-sharing sites. In the notice Lionsgate’s law firm Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton requests that these companies render the sites in question unavailable. The law firm lists several allegedly infringing URLs and points out that the hosting providers and domain name registrars have to take responsibility. The following text comes from a notice Cloudflare and others received, accusing the company of potentially assisting a criminal operation and ignoring a previous notice. “In accordance with the DMCA, we have already notified you of the infringement, but you have continued to cause, enable, induce, facilitate and materially contribute to the infringement by continuing to provide your users with the means to unlawfully distribute, reproduce and otherwise exploit The Expendables 3,†the email reads. The same takedown notice was also sent to the domain name registrar Easyname, who were encouraged to “take action†against the allegedly infringing site under ICANN rules. In their notice Lionsgate appears to hint at a domain name suspension. “If you are the domain name registrar for the domain name referenced above, under ICANN rule 3.18.1, you are required to take reasonable and prompt steps to investigate and respond appropriately to any reports of abuse,†the notice reads. “You are hereby put on notice that despite Rule 3.18, and the website owner’s representation to you that it is not using the domain name ‘in violation of any applicable laws’, the owner is either directly infringing the rights of Lionsgate or contributing to such infringement through the distribution of the stolen work referenced above,†it adds. Lionsgate’s methods are unusual as the operator of was never contacted by the movie studio’s law firm. There were abuse mails sent by other outfits though, and the URLs listed in the takedown notice were already taken offline. This means that the infringing pages listed by Lionsgate were directed to a 404 page. The owner of informs TF that he’s not happy with the pressure Lionsgate has put on the companies he works with, especially since they failed to first contact the site itself. “It might be nice if these complaining entities actually checked that their emails have a valid claim before firing them off to everyone under the moon,†’s owner notes. “The majority of notices I get daily are dud but at least none of them go out of their way forwarding their gripe to everyone who has anything remotely to do with the site,†he adds. In this case the notices haven’t yet caused any trouble for, but it’s not hard to imagine a scenario in which smaller companies are easily threatened to pull the plug on an accused site.
  11. A California federal court has granted Lionsgate's request for a preliminary injunction against six file-sharing sites that distributed the Expendables 3 leak. As a result, all bank accounts and other financial assets will be frozen. In addition, the sites' domain names are also at risk. Two weeks ago a high quality leak of the upcoming Expendables 3 film appeared online. Fearing a massive loss in revenue, movie studio Lionsgate issued thousands of takedown requests to limit the film’s availability. While most sites swiftly removed links to the pre-release leak, according to the studio some did not respond at all. Late last week Lionsgate sued the operators of six file-sharing sites that allegedly failed to remove the infringing files –,,,, and Lionsgate accused the sites of several copyright infringement offenses and asked for a permanent injunction to stop further distribution of the film, as well as seizure of the sites’ bank accounts and other assets. Yesterday the case appeared before Judge Margaret Morrow at the California federal court. None of the file-sharing sites had responded to the allegations and the judge granted Lionsgate’s request for a broad preliminary injunction. The preliminary injunction prevents the sites from hosting and linking to copies of the movie. The same applies to all companies that provide services to or in connection with the sites, which means that the sites are at risk of losing their domain names. In addition, the court also ordered that all bank accounts and other financial assets of the sites can be frozen. “All banks, savings and loan associations, payment processors or other financial institutions, payment providers, third-party processors and advertising service providers of Defendants or any of them must, upon receiving notice of this Order, immediately locate all accounts connected to Defendants,†the injunction states. The seized funds may be needed to compensate Lionsgate for the losses it suffered as a result of the leak, the judge argues. “Such an asset freeze is appropriate in this case to preserve Lions Gate’s right to such recovery against Defendants, who are trafficking in the Stolen Film and may secret assets to insulate them from judgment,â€Judge Morrow notes. This is not the first ruling in favor of the movie studio. Earlier this week Lionsgate also obtained permission to subpoena various third-party web services including Google, Cloudflare and GoDaddy to obtain personal details on several of the defendants. With the preliminary injunction, Lionsgate now has the potential to severely cripple the accused file-sharing sites. Whether it will be enough to stop the distribution of the leaked film has yet to be seen. Thus far all six sites remain operational and links to the Expendables 3 leak are still widely available.
  12. Lionsgate has filed a lawsuit against six file-sharing sites that allegedly distributed leaked copies of The Expendables 3 film. The movie studio claims that the sites in question failed to respond to takedown requests. Lionsgate demands a permanent injunction to stop further distribution of the film, as well as seizure of the sites' domain names and bank accounts. expendablesLast week saw the leak online of the brand new Expendables movie. Scheduled for an August 15 U.S. release, Expendables 3 leaked in near DVD quality a full two weeks ahead. The timing and quality combined to make the leak one of the most prominent in recent years. The movie studios behind the film have been rather quiet, but behind the scenes they have been trying hard to limit the damage. Lionsgate in particular sent takedown requests to numerous file-sharing sites. While most sites complied by taking down infringing links or copies, some failed to respond. In response to this apparent lack of cooperation, Lionsgate has now sued the operators of six file-sharing sites –,,,, and The complaint (copy below) filed at a federal court in California accuses the sites’ owners of direct, contributory and vicarious copyright infringement. Limetorrents is the only torrent site in the lawsuit, and Lionsgate notes that the Expendables leak was still prominently available on the site when the complaint was drafted. “To date, the operator(s) of the site have not responded to Lions Gate’s demands. Rather, as of the date of this filing links to the torrents allow users to access ‘swarms’ where the Stolen Film is being shared remain on the site, including in the fifth-ranked position for ‘Movie torrents’ on the site’s home page,†the lawyers write. In the complaint, first reported by THR, the movie studio demands a wide range of measures. Lionsgate asks the court for a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction and a permanent injunction to stop the sites from further distributing the film. This includes a request to suspend the sites’ domain names, or transfer them to Lionsgate. In addition, the movie studio also wants all financial institutions who do business with the sites to freeze their assets. If granted, Lionsgate could severely damage the sites in question even if the operators remain silent. Finally, the movie company demands actual or statutory damages for the financial loss it has suffered. Since there is only one film at stake, the statutory damages are limited to $150,000 per site. At this point it is unknown whether Lionsgate is also investigating the source of the leak, which isn’t related to any of the sites listed in the complaint. A third option would be to go after individual filesharers, which Nu Image did when they sued 23,322 alleged pirates who shared the first Expendables movies. Thus far well over two million copies of The Expendables 3 have been shared via BitTorrent, so there are plenty of targets for sure.
  13. All it took yesterday was a single article to trigger off a tidal wave of copycat reports across dozens of sites including the mainstream Just to be absolutely clear - Britain HAS NOT decriminalized file-sharing and to suggest otherwise only puts people at unnecessary risk. File-sharing remains ILLEGAL in the UK, guaranteed. From next year people in the UK can download and share whatever they like. Movies, music and video games. You name it – it’s a free-for-all download bonanza with zero consequences other than four friendly letters asking people to try Netflix and Spotify. In fact, the UK government has even gone as far as decriminalizing online copyright infringement entirely, despite risking the wrath of every intellectual property owner in the land. That was the message doing the rounds yesterday in the media, starting on VG247and going on to overload Reddit and dozens of other sites. Even Russia’s got in on the fun. Except it’s not fun at all. It’s completely untrue on countless levels and to suggest otherwise puts people at risk. Let’s be absolutely clear here. Copyright infringement, whether that’s on file-sharing networks or elsewhere, is ILLEGAL in the UK. Nothing, repeat NOTHING, has changed. As detailed in our previous article, VCAP is a voluntary (that’s the ‘V’ part) agreement between some rightsholders and a few ISPs to send some informational letters to people observed infringing copyright. This means that the mainstream music labels and the major Hollywood studios will soon have an extra option to reach out to UK Internet users. However, whenever they want to – today, tomorrow or next year – any of the copyright holders involved in VCAP can still file a lawsuit or seek police action against ANYONE engaged in illegal file-sharing – FACT. What makes the original VG247 report even more inaccurate is its headline: “Britain just decriminalised online game piracy.†If we’re still laboring under the illusion that VCAP is somehow the reason behind the government’s “decriminalization†of piracy, understand this – video game companies are not even part of the VCAP program. Worst still, the biggest financial punishment ever ordered by a UK court was a default judgment in 2008 issued to – wait for it – a person who illegally file-shared a single video game. The case was a farce, but the judgment stands and the law on which is was based has not changed. There is nothing stopping any video game company from doing this again once VCAP starts, properly this time. But why stop at video games? Porn companies/trolls aren’t involved in the VCAP scheme either and any of those could head off to court to obtain the identities of people they want to sue. It’s happening in the UK. There’s a VCAP-style scheme in the United States too, often referred to as “six strikesâ€, and that has done nothing to stop companies like Malibu Media filing lawsuits almost every day. Voluntary agreements avoid the complication of changing the law, that’s their entire point. They provide helpful mechanisms that the law does not already mandate. For example, UK ISPs are not expressly required to forward infringement notices to users under current law, yet VCAP means that some rightsholders, not all, will get that ‘right’. So which other sectors are not involved in VCAP so therefore cannot rely on the assistance it provides? Well, thousands of smaller record labels and film companies for a start. They tend to be outside the walls of the BPI and MPA so do not enjoy the fruits of their lobbying. While these smaller outfits tend to stay away from litigation, they could soon have fresh options. Piracy monetization firm Rightscorp works with many smaller companies and has recently indicated an interest in the UK. “We are getting a great reception from everyone we have spoken to [in the UK],†the company’s Robert Steele said in May. Whether Rightscorp will be able to pull this off is an entirely different matter, but since file-sharing of copyrighted material remains illegal in the UK, the company has a chance. The other issue is how the VCAP warnings will be presented to alleged infringers. While they have a focus on education, it would be incredible if they contained the text “The UK has just decriminalized file-sharing, that’s why we have sent you this letter.†It would be even more amazing if the ISPs agreed to pass them on if file-sharing was no longer an offense. While no laws have been changed, in some instances it’s probably fair to say that VCAP will make it less likely that people will be pursued by the major record labels and movie studios in the UK. It doesn’t eliminate the threat, however. Try this. Head off to your local Odeon, Showcase or UCI this coming weekend, set up a camcorder, and see if you can get a really sweet copy of Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Begin uploading this to The Pirate Bay and while it’s seeding send an email to the Federation Against Copyright Theft containing your personal details. VCAP friendly letter incoming or a police raid? Yeah, thought so.
  14. New research by economist Koleman Strumpf shows that there is no significant effect of movie piracy on box office revenues. This conclusion is based on data from 150 blockbuster movies that were released over a period of six years, using the popular Hollywood exchange as an indication for the revenue impact. Research into online piracy comes in all shapes and sizes, often with equally mixed results. Often the main question is whether piracy is hurting sales. A new study conducted by economist Koleman Strumpf is one of the most comprehensive on the subject so far. Drawing on data from a popular BitTorrent tracker and revenue projections from the Hollywood Stock Exchange he researches how the release of a pirated movie affects expected box office income. The research covers 150 of the most popular films that were released over a period of seven years, and the findings reveal that the release of pirated films on file-sharing sites doesn’t directly hurt box office revenue. “There is no evidence in my empirical results of file-sharing having a significant impact on theatrical revenue,†Strumpf tells TorrentFreak in a comment. “My best guess estimate is that file sharing reduced the first month box office by $200 million over 2003-2009, which is only three tenths of a percent of what movies actually earned. I am unable to reject the hypothesis that there is no impact at all of file-sharing on revenues.†So while there is a small negative effect, this is limited to one tenth of a percent and not statistically significant. Interestingly, the data also reveals that movie leaks shortly before the premiere have a small positive impact on expected revenues. This suggests that file-sharing may serve as a form of promotion. “One consistent result is that file-sharing arrivals shortly before the theatrical opening have a modest positive effect on box office revenue. One explanation is that such releases create greater awareness of the film. This is also the period of heaviest advertising,†Strumpf notes. One of the advantages of this study compared to previous research is that it measures the direct effect of a movie leak on projected box office revenues. Previous studies mostly compared early versus late leaks, which is less accurate and may be influenced by other factors. “For example, suppose studios added extra security to big budget movies which then have a delayed arrival to file-sharing networks. Then even if file-sharing has no impact at all, one would find that delayed arrival on file-sharing leads to higher revenues,†Strumpf tells us. Another upside of the research lies in the statistical precision. The data includes thousands of daily observations and relatively precise estimates, something lacking in most previous studies. The downside, on the other hand, is that the expected box office impact is estimated from the Hollywood Stock Exchange. While this has shown to be a good predictor for actual revenues, it’s not a direct measurement. In any case, the paper suggests that file-sharing might not be the biggest threat the movie industry is facing. Even if the negative effects were twice as big as the data suggests, it would still be less than the $500 million Hollywood spent on the MPAA’s anti-piracy efforts during the same period.
  15. Here are the top 15 Most Popular File Sharing Sites as derived from our eBizMBA Rank which is a continually updated average of each website's Alexa Global Traffic Rank, and U.S. Traffic Rank from both Compete and Quantcast."*#*" Denotes an estimate for sites with limited data. 1 | DropBox 179 - eBizMBA Rank | 35,000,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 114 - Compete Rank | 314 - Quantcast Rank | 110 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 2 | MediaFire 351 - eBizMBA Rank | 22,500,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 531 - Compete Rank | NA - Quantcast Rank | 171 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 3 | 4Shared 448 - eBizMBA Rank | 21,000,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 936 - Compete Rank | 239 - Quantcast Rank | 169 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 4 | Google Drive 550 - eBizMBA Rank | 18,500,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | *100* - Compete Rank | *1,000* - Quantcast Rank | *NA* - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 5 | SkyDrive 600 - eBizMBA Rank | 16,000,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | *650* - Compete Rank | *550* - Quantcast Rank | *NA* - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 6 | iCloud 984- eBizMBA Rank | 9,500,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 429 - Compete Rank | *1,536* - Quantcast Rank | 987 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 7 | Box 1,060 - eBizMBA Rank | 6,750,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 1,274 - Compete Rank | 1,028 - Quantcast Rank | 877 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 8 | Mega 1,303 - eBizMBA Rank | 6,500,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 1,936 - Compete Rank | *NA* - Quantcast Rank | 670 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 9 | ZippyShare 1,354 - eBizMBA Rank | 6,250,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 2,337 - Compete Rank | *NA* - Quantcast Rank | 370 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 10 | Uploaded 1,618 - eBizMBA Rank | 6,000,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 2,943 - Compete Rank | *NA* - Quantcast Rank | 292 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 11 | DepositFiles 3,183 - eBizMBA Rank | 4,750,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 4,709 - Compete Rank | *2,913* - Quantcast Rank | 1,927 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 12 | HighTail 3,231 - eBizMBA Rank | 4,500,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 2,459 - Compete Rank | *4,297* - Quantcast Rank | 2,938 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 13 | SendSpace 3,272 - eBizMBA Rank | 4,000,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 5,790 - Compete Rank | 2,551 - Quantcast Rank | 1,474 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 14 | RapidShare 4,651 - eBizMBA Rank | 3,250,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 7,217 - Compete Rank | NA - Quantcast Rank | 2,084 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA 15 | 10,031 - eBizMBA Rank | 3,000,000 - Estimated Unique Monthly Visitors | 14,239- Compete Rank | *NA* - Quantcast Rank | 5,823 - Alexa Rank | July 14, 2014. The Most Popular File Sharing Websites | eBizMBA
  16. The past year, the copyright industry appears to have calmed down a bit, thinking it won the file-sharing wars. At the same time, people sharing culture and knowledge have done the same thing. This conflict is far from over. The two sides in the conflict over sharing culture and knowledge have rarely been further from each other in their view of the world. On one hand, you have the copyright industry, now content thinking it won the war against the net generation – or net generations by now (plural). File-sharing has stopped growing, the copyright industry observes, and controlled streaming is growing exponentially. New technology has produced a better offering that outcompeted the inferior pirate alternatives, and in the end, people wanted to do the legal thing, the copyright industry argues. But this is very far from the truth. The only true part of it is that the number of people sharing culture and knowledge is no longer growing exponentially, but that’s because the habit is saturated. One-third of young people in the US and Europe today share culture – in violation of the copyright monopoly – daily or almost-daily. A phenomenon can’t keep growing exponentially forever in a finite population: eventually, everybody’s doing it, and that’s the point we have arrived at now. Apart from that, it is true that the copyright industry has produced better offerings: Pandora, Netflix, and HBO streaming. But so have the people who manufacture their copies without a license. The Pirate Bay is ten years old; almost as old as Microsoft’s Windows XP, to put it in context. (Anybody remember Microsoft?) Yet, despite HBO’s successful and profitable subscription model, record numbers of us get our latest fix of Game of Thrones delivered automatically directly to our desktop the instant it is available, courtesy of RSS torrenting and EZTV, or your own favorite supplier. And if we don’t like torrenting, but actually like streaming? Turns out that the pirate equivalents of the commercial offerings far surpass the simplicity, accessibility, and ease of use of the copyright industry’s technology – and that’s not even going into selection and absence of laughingly stupid “not available in your country†messages. From Popcorn Time to Zona, the happy amateur sharers are miles and leagues ahead of the copyright industry. The technology that the copyright industry claims “already has won the war†for that obsolete industry? Well, it turns out that the net generation could use the same technology to build a lot better services still. Teens today make absolutely no distinction whether services are “legal†or not; they just grab stuff from where it’s easiest. In this environment, people on the other side – the people manufacturing unlicensed copies of knowledge and culture, and sharing those copies in turn – have also taken a victory for granted. We’re getting our Game of Thrones, we’re getting our movies and porn as we always have, what’s the big deal? The Pirate Bay team was sentenced in a mock trial five years ago to largely no effect whatsoever (except for those poor individuals), the site itself is still up, and new great services for manufacturing our own copies of knowledge and culture are appearing by the month. Why bother fighting? This is long over, right? Not so fast. SOPA and ACTA was just two years ago, in 2012. They were struck back, but their obfuscated spawn are already appearing. We’ve seen and heard the acronyms TPP, TTIP, CISP, CETA, and others. The copyright industry keeps working, it just does so out of the sunlight. In the end, this is about the power of narratives, the greatest power anybody has ever had. And the copyright industry isn’t giving it up without a fight. The file-sharing wars are far from over. There may be a bit of silence on the fronts at the moment. Enjoy it, and prepare for what’s coming.
  17. New data collected by piracy monitoring firm MarkMonitor shows that the latest Hollywood blockbusters are most frequently shared from Russia, with America and Italy trailing behind. Per capita the results are completely different. Here the United Arab Emirates is in the lead, followed by Israel and Estonia. It’s no secret that P2P file-sharing services are widely used to distribute pirated movies. However, less is known about the volume of these unauthorized transfers in various countries. New data published in a Dutch report detailing the impact of unauthorized P2P file-sharing on the movie industry reveals that in the Netherlands alone an estimated 78 million euros are lost due to movie piracy. The same report also provides some interesting statistics that shed some light o geographical file-sharing differences. During the first half of the year MarkMonitor, which is also the technology partner for the U.S. six strikes program, tracked 16 popular English language blockbuster movies. The list includes titles such as Frozen, The Hobbit: the Desolation of Smaug, and The Hunger Games: Catching Fire. The movies were monitored via both eDonkey and BitTorrent, with the latter having the largest audience. In total MarkMonitor found that these movies were shared 150,186,156 times without permission. Despite the focus on English language films, most pirated copies – more than 20 million – were shared from Russia. The bar chart below shows the full top 10 based on the absolute number of infringements that were detected, with the United States, Italy, Brazil and Spain completing the top five. It is of course no surprise to see these large countries on top. It gets more interesting when we look at the number of file-sharers per capita. In the United States for example, 12.5 million pirated copies were shared in a population of more than 310 million, which is roughly 4%. In Russia this percentage is much higher at 15% and in Australia it’s more than 16%. Not surprisingly, the list of countries that share the most pirated movies per capita is quite different. According to the report, the movies in the sample were relatively most shared in the United Arab Emirates, followed by Israel, Estonia, Greece and Italy. Australia, Qatar, Sweden, Singapore and the Netherlands complete the top 10. It has to be noted that the findings above are based on a sample that is biased towards Western content. This explains the absence of Chinese downloaders, who tend to share files through other channels. Similarly, the data doesn’t cover direct downloads and streaming sites which may be relatively more popular in other regions. That said, the numbers do give some more insight into the popularity of P2P movie piracy, or lack thereof, across various countries.
  18. The City of London police took down another search engine for downloads on file-sharing websites for linking to infringing material. The website was already blocked in the United Kingdom by some local ISPs after getting blacklisted alongside 20 other file-sharing services. Now, the website’s domain name was removed entirely, but it was back up the next day following legal complaints from the owners. Torrentz’s domain name registrar was approached by the City of London police, who asked the company to suspend the website for linking to illegal content as part of Operation Creative. However, the service is still live at other domain names. Despite the fact that the force’s demand had no legal force, many registrars still followed such requests anyway. The City of London police explained once again that after a website is confirmed as providing copyright infringing content, its owners or operators are approached by the police officers and offered the chance to engage with the police, change the online behavior and start to operate legitimately. In case a website fails to comply, the police can turn to other tactical options – for example, contacting the domain registrar to seek suspension of the website, or disrupting advertising revenue via an Infringing Website List (IWL) provided to companies involved in the sale and trading of digital advertising. is known worldwide as one of the largest search engines for BitTorrent files. The portal lets users search for material to download via BitTorrent protocol. In most cases, people search for unlicensed copies of TV shows and films like Game of Thrones and the upcoming X Men: Days of Future Past. However, the service also contains legitimate material, including installers for free open source software, as well as books released under the so-called “copyleft†licenses. The next day after the initial suspension, the website’s Polish host, registrar, was reported to change its mind about complying with the police request. Apparently, this happened after Torrentz’s lawyer contacted the company to complain. Another illustrative example of site resurrection is the court in the Netherlands that lifted a ban on notorious file-sharing service The Pirate Bay. The court had to admit that the practice proved “ineffectiveâ€. According to the European legislation, the ISPs should not have to take measures like blocking if they are disproportionate or ineffective.
  19. In 2012 a device called PirateBox excited users with the prospect of anonymous wireless file-sharing anywhere, no Internet required, and at a cost of just a few dollars. Now the project has released PirateBox 1.0 and a brand new website. TorrentFreak caught up with PirateBox founder David Darts for the lowdown. Inspired by the local communications power of traditional pirate radio, in 2011 NYU art professor David Darts created the PirateBox. Part WiFi hotspot, part file server, PirateBox provides quick, easy and above all anonymous access to the files onboard. In 2012 and following a breakthrough update, the cost of creating a PirateBox dropped from a very reasonable $100 to an extremely attractive $50. Anonymous offline file-sharing was now within everyone’s reach. Since then PirateBox has gathered an extremely enthusiastic following, something which has spurred its developers on. Yesterday PirateBox delivered its v1.0 update and a brand new website so to celebrate the occasion TorrentFreak caught up with creator David Darts. TF: PirateBox was warmly welcomed by the community in 2012. How has community feedback shaped the PirateBox project since? DD: The community has had a big impact on the development of PirateBox. When I originally released the project, it was essentially just an offline browser-based file sharing system. My first prototype was basically a proof-of-concept – a light-weight python web server running on a hacked Seagate Dockstar network adapter connected to a pocket wireless router. Almost immediately after publishing the project online, I started receiving feedback from developers and hackers around the world who were interested in using and contributing to the project. My inbox also started filling up with support requests, which is why I set up the PirateBox Discussion Forum. While I believe in the Free Open Source ethos of providing tech support for my peers (I’ve been the beneficiary of this support many times), I simply couldn’t handle the volume of requests. Fortunately, the community stepped up and helped out with support (and testing, and development) through the discussion forum. Many of the key features of the PirateBox, like the chat room and UI, have been co-developed by the community. Matthias Strubel, who is now the project’s lead developer, was one of the community members who reached out and joined the PirateBox team. He has really helped push the project forward. pbox-4 TF: Has PirateBox been used in any unexpected or innovative ways? DD: As designers know all too well, their creations are often used in ways they didn’t necessarily intend. The PirateBox is no exception. It has been used by musicians and bands to distribute their music at festivals and gigs, by teachers to distribute and collect digital materials from students, and by emergency response workers and volunteers to distribute local first aid information and community updates. Conference organizers have used it to distribute conference materials and to provide local wireless commenting during presentations, and it’s been utilized by CryptoParty workshop volunteers to securely share cryptographic keys. pbox-1 TF: How many users of PirateBox are there today? DD: Well, we don’t track our users but the project has grown “rhizomatically†across several websites and languages so it’s a little tricky to estimate how many PirateBoxes are out in the wild today. It is possible, and sometimes preferable, to distribute the PirateBox software locally (and anonymously) using a PirateBox and, because the boxes never go online, it’s impossible to really keep track of them. Generally speaking, this is a good thing. TF: Technology is always on the move – which developments have most affected today’s PirateBox compared to the one that launched two years ago? DD: Two big tech trends have helped push PirateBox 1.0 development forward: The proliferation of small screens, which is how we increasingly interact with the network and each other, and the increased availability of tiny, inexpensive computers (including wireless routers, single board systems like the Raspberry Pi and other embedded “Internet of things†devices) which are rapidly filling up our world. pbox-3 Version 1.0 is thus designed with mobility and low cost hardware in mind. We’ve reworked the UI and based it on Twitter’s Bootstap so that the software plays nicely with small screens. And we’ve built PirateBox 1.0 to run natively on inexpensive hardware. Another “technology†development that helped increase interest in the PirateBox project was the confirmation through the Snowden leaks last year that the US government was operating near universal mass-surveillance programs around the world, often in partnership or, at least, with the complicit support of several large technology and Internet companies. While this has obviously raised very serious questions and concerns around the world, these revelations have at least helped push important conversations about privacy, surveillance, censorship, freedom, etc. to the forefront. These are all issues that the PirateBox project engages with and thus it has helped inspire new users to join the project. pbox-2 TF: What is so special about the release of PirateBox 1.0, why should existing users upgrade, and what do new users have to look forward to? DD: Along with the increased stability of PirateBox 1.0, the key new feature is Matthias Strubel’s “box-installer†which radically simplifies the process of building or upgrading a PirateBox. It is now possible to build a new PirateBox in just a few easy steps. One of my favorite new features of PirateBox 1.0 is the UPnP media server which starts streaming video and audio files over the network as soon as they’ve been uploaded to the box. I’ve actually been using this feature for awhile. It works perfectly as a backend to XBMC for instance and is also a great way of streaming movies to your mobile devices when traveling. PirateBox 1.0 also offers a image/message bullet board called Kareha by default which is similar to the software used on 4chan. This means that PirateBox 1.0 offers 4chan in a box functionality, which I think is pretty cool. And of course, it also comes with a chat room and browser-based file sharing system. TF: What role do you see PirateBox fulfilling in the future and what plans do you have for the next 12 months? DD: The holy grail of offline networking is wireless mesh and we’ve been experimenting with it in the PirateBox. Matthias has been playing with Forban over the last year and we’ve successfully deployed and connected small sets of PirateBoxes using the B.A.T.M.A.N. protocol. This is really just an experimental feature at this point but it is something we’re planning to keep developing. I’ve also been experimenting with connecting the PirateBox to the Internet, which, in some ways, is counter to the philosophy of the project as an offline file sharing and communications system. However, I also think there’s real value in providing people with ways to connect online that help preserve their privacy. This is especially important for those who are less tech-savy and thus may not know how to protect themselves from tracking, etc. While the PirateBox will continue to be an offline file sharing and communications system, we may consider providing an optional feature in the future that allows it to be used online. Or this may become a new fork of the project….. Interested in making your own PirateBox? source
  20. Tracker name: Sharing-Island Genre: movies, tv, general sign-up link: