Last September, we reported that a filmmaker named Matthew Schneider obtained a DMCA subpoena through a California federal court, seeking information from Cloudflare on several prominent private trackers.

These trackers, including PassThePopcorn, BroadcasTheNet, KaraGarga, HDBits, and Beyond-HD, allegedly shared several of his works without permission.

At the time, multiple sources informed TorrentFreak that several of the “infringing URLs” submitted as evidence did not point to working torrent pages and used URL structures that didn’t match the targeted sites. The films could not be found on several of the trackers either.

After that, the docket went quiet, until last December, when the person identifying himself as Schneider escalated the matter through a federal copyright lawsuit.

Filmmaker Files Federal Lawsuit

In a complaint filed in the Northern District of Illinois, the filmmaker sued ten unnamed ‘John Doe’ defendants, alleging that all six trackers are part of a single coordinated “piracy Enterprise” run by the same people.

The complaint named PassThePopcorn.me, BroadcasTheNet, KaraGarga.in, HDBits.org, Beyond-HD.me, and Bibliotik.me, calling them “coordinated access points to the same underlying BitTorrent-based distribution service.”

The plaintiff filed pro se, which means that he’s not represented by an attorney. He listed a mailing address in Sanborn, New York, while the complaint described him as a UK-based filmmaker.

Fabricated Evidence?

In February 2026, the court allowed Schneider to subpoena seven companies, Reddit, GoDaddy, Cloudflare, PayPal, Stripe, Namecheap, and X Corp, requesting identity information on the Doe defendants.

This triggered an objection from several of the Doe defendants, who filed motions to quash through their attorneys. As a result, all seven subpoenas were placed in abeyance in May, until these outstanding motions would be decided.

One of the defendants, identified as Doe 7 and linked to a Reddit account, accused the plaintiff of building the case on fabricated evidence.

Doe 7 wrote that the sworn declaration supporting the discovery motion came from “Saumya Shah, Partner and Senior Investigator” at a UK firm called “Northbridge Digital Investigations.” Doe 7 searched the UK Companies House registry and found no such company. No trace of Shah appeared anywhere online. TorrentFreak independently confirmed these claims.

The same Doe defendant also challenged the roughly 130 URLs submitted as evidence. Intriguingly, the exhibit also includes URLs from other pirate sites and WHOIS lookups on at least ten additional private tracker domains not named in the complaint.

Schneider, meanwhile, doubled down that the copyright infringement claims against Doe 7 are valid, but he did not address whether an investigator named Shah exists or Northbridge is a real company.

The Real Matthew Schneider

Yesterday, TorrentFreak listened in as all parties were present at a telephonic hearing before Judge Andrea R. Wood, to address the motions to quash and a motion to proceed anonymously. However, that hearing took an unexpected turn, which changes the stakes.

Before the hearing began, defense counsel Erin Russell , representing Doe 1, had contacted the judge’s chambers directly to address an important matter. Russell acknowledged that this was an extraordinary step that wasn’t taken lightly. However, she felt it needed to be addressed before any rulings would be made.

Russell, working alongside counsel for the other Does, Haley Finch , told the court they had developed serious suspicions that the person litigating as Matthew Schneider is not the real Matthew Schneider.

Both counsel conducted detailed research and traced the listed films and Schneider to a Canadian production company, Dirtbag Films , which we had separately identified in our earlier coverage.

However, the finding that Schneider is Canadian does not match the information shared by the person who presented himself as Schneider in court.

Finch, who is a Canadian attorney, had a personal contact connected to Dirtbag Films and through that connection, she eventually reached the actual filmmaker. Russell, meanwhile, reached out to a Dirtbag contact separately and was also connected to the Canadian Matthew Schneider.

The attorneys informed the court that the real Matthew Schneider signed a declaration confirming his identity and that he resides in Ontario, Canada.

After being confronted with this information, Judge Wood asked the plaintiff on the call to respond. He said he did not see why this information would delay any rulings. At the end of the hearing, he stated, “I’m Matthew Schneider,” while stressing that the case should not be delayed.

The Stakes Shift

Judge Wood did not rule on any of the pending motions to quash or proceed anonymously. She also denied the plaintiff’s motion to strike Doe 7’s filings.

Instead, she signaled that, if the allegations are true, the plaintiff could face sanctions, directing the defense to file a motion supported by the declaration from the Canadian Matthew Schneider. In addition, she scheduled an in-person hearing next month to resolve the identity questions.

In the meantime, Judge Wood stressed that the plaintiff may not seek to obtain personal information about the Does and that nothing identifying the defendants should be filed on the docket.

Doe 7, who also appeared on the call with his prospective counsel, indicated that he anticipates filing a motion to join the defense filings submitted by the other Does.

Before yesterday’s hearing, this lawsuit was already quite novel, as it is the first one that targets multiple prominent private torrent trackers. Now, the stakes have completely changed, with an unprecedented impersonation claim, which, if it turns out to be true, will likely lead to a dismissal and sanctions for the plaintiff.

—

A copy of Doe 7’s motion to quash is available here (pdf) . The plaintiff’s motion to strike Doe 7’s filings can be found here (pdf) . The original complaint can be found here (pdf) .

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

Since 2021, major German Internet providers have agreed to block the country’s most egregious pirate sites through the Clearing Body for Copyright on the Internet, better known as CUII .

The system started as an administrative scheme without judicial oversight. CUII’s own committee issued blocking recommendations, and the Federal Network Agency signed off before providers acted.

This setup changed in mid-2025 , when the stakeholders rewrote their code of conduct so that every block now starts with a rightsholder suing one ISP. Once a court confirms the block, the other providers follow.

CUII no longer issues the orders, but it will still communicate the recommendations to all participants. In recent weeks, the clearing body published several new ones based on orders from the Cologne Regional Court, targeting KinoGo and Streamed.

The structural infringement check

The court orders are not available to us, but according to CUII’s paperwork, these targets are classified as structurally copyright infringing websites, making the blocking orders “reasonable and proportionate.”

As is typical in Germany, the requesting rightsholders and the targeted domains are not mentioned. However, based on the brands and data from the independent transparency portal CUIIListe , streamed.pk, streamed.st, and kinogo.ec were all blocked in Germany this month.

CUII’s paperwork does reveal one hard statistic. For each site, a private investigator pulls a random sample of the site’s content, to see how much of it infringes at a 95.5 percent confidence level. This number is used to determine whether the target site is indeed ‘structurally’ infringing.

For example, for Streamed, the investigator put the infringing share somewhere between 96.16 and 100 percent. For KinoGo, meanwhile, between 82.4 and 94.6 percent of the content is pirated.

The 82.4 percent floor is the lowest we have seen so far, below all previous German blocking orders we have seen, including the ones below.

Site	Ruling	Share infringing
KinoGO	Jul 2026	82.4% to 94.6%
LIVETV.SX	Apr 2026	85.28% to 96.72%
SPORTPLUS	Feb 2026	88.8% to 100%
MegaKino	Feb 2024	89.8% to 100%
Kinoger	Nov 2025	91.4% to 99.0%
Anna’s Archive	Sep 2025	91.6% to 94.8%
NSWPedia	Jan 2026	94.4% to 99.8%
s.to	Feb 2021	94.84% to 100%
LibGen	May 2024	96.07% to 98.23%
Streamed	Jul 2026	96.16% to 100%
cine.to	Jun 2022	96.28% to 100%

The 81.5% ‘Line’

In a March 2025 order targeting HDFILME, STREAMCLOUD and FILMPALAST, CUII specifically stated when illegal content clearly outweighs the legal content on a site.

“The illegal content on the websites far outweighs the legal content. This is the case in any event when at least 81.5% of the website’s content is illegal,” the order reads , translated from German.

It is the only CUII order we found that puts a number on it. The figure traces back to the Cologne Regional Court, which set it in a January 2025 default judgment against the download portal NOX, a case the operator never contested. That same judgment triggered NOX’s own block.

In KinoGo’s example, the 82.4 percent floor is getting quite close to the 81.5 percent.

This percentage is not a hard benchmark for the court or for CUII to determine whether a site is blockable. However, one can imagine that it’s not a good look when it drops lower than that, especially when legal content would outweigh their pirated counterparts.

This doesn’t mean that KinoGo is a questionable target. The site has been a thorn in the side of rightsholders for many years. It has more than 50 million monthly visits, mostly from Belarus and Ukraine, which it has historically targeted.

Hiding in Plain Content?

The open question is how much of a site’s library has to be pirated before a block can be issued in Germany, and whether 81.5 percent is considered to be a general benchmark or just a figure tied to that one case.

If there is a fixed percentage, there are some obvious exploits that come to mind. In theory, an operator could pad an archive with public domain films or AI generated filler, pushing the investigator’s interval below the line while the pirated library stays intact.

We asked CUII whether the 81.5 percent can be treated as a fixed benchmark, but it has not responded by the time of publication. We will update this article if they do.

Update: Romsns.com is also blocked. CUII just published the associated recommendation. The Virustotal scan below shows that there are multiple malware warnings for this comain.

—

A copy of the Streamed order can be found here (pdf) and the KinoGo order can be found here (pdf) . An archive of all CUII determinations is also available on the clearinghouse’s official website .

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

With more than 160 million visits last month, Cineby is one of the most popular pirate streaming sites on the Internet.

The streaming portal has been a thorn in the side of Hollywood, with the Motion Picture Association ( MPA ) listing it as a notorious pirate site in its submission to the USTR last fall .

“Cineby is a fast-growing one-stop-shop piracy site in the ‘hydra site’ category. These are a rapidly expanding category of one-stop piracy sites offering content somewhat comparable to IPTV services, but without the need for subscriptions or dedicated devices,” MPA wrote at the time, linking the operation to Russia.

Enforcement Pressure Builds

In addition to the diplomatic pressure, the movie industry was also the driving force behind several high-profile blocking orders against the site this year.

In May, Cineby was listed as a target in the new UK “omnibus” site blocking order , for example, which also covers the site’s successors preemptively. The same applies to the recent “expanded scope” order from Canada’s federal court, which also covers Cineby and any potential successors.

In July, a Delhi High Court order obtained by HBO and other movie studios went further . This injunction covered four Cineby domains and directed Indian ISPs to block the sites, while domain registrars were ordered to suspend them.

Despite the Indian order, Cineby’s main .at domain name remains online, suggesting that Registrar.eu has not complied with the Indian order. However, according to a recent announcement by the site’s operators, there soon might be no need to take action anymore.

A Voluntary Shutdown?

Visitors to Cineby’s website are currently greeted with a new announcement, suggesting that the site will shut down permanently in a few days.

“Cineby and all related services will cease operations on August 26th. It’s been a good run, but the time has come to stop,” the site announces, adding that “all servers will be shut down, and every user account will be deleted.”

The operators provide no rationale for this surprising decision. However, it is a reasonable assumption to suggest that the mounting enforcement pressure played a role.

What will happen to the domain name when the site shuts down has yet to be seen. With millions of daily visits, the site has a massive audience, which will be looking for an alternative.

The Hydra…

Whether the operators will indeed shut down the site and get out of the business has yet to be seen. In the past, other sites have simply rebranded in an attempt to shake off the legal pressure. This includes the now-defunct HiAnime operation , which started as Zoro and also used the Aniwatch brand.

According to the MPA, Cineby relied heavily on piracy-as-a-service (PaaS) infrastructure, embedding videos from third party sites. These remain online, which means that the underlying piracy problem remains.

In the typical ‘hydra’ fashion, Cineby’s planned shutdown will result in plenty of new sites popping up; whether these are linked to the original site or not.

This problem is one of the key reasons why the UK and Canadian site blocking orders were expanded to cover future Cineby copycats and successors, even if they don’t use the same brand. If everything happens according to plan, this new blocking power can be put to the test later this month.

For now, however, cineby.at remains online, streaming pirated movies and TV shows as usual.

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

Like many other public communication services, Telegram can be abused to facilitate illegal activities.

While much of this occurs beyond the company’s purview, pirates appear to be drawn to the platform, sharing links to pirated movies, TV-shows and other content in dedicated channels.

Despite this reputation, the platform’s piracy ecosystem has rarely been mapped in any detail. A new academic paper sets out to fill that gap, while also trying to offer a potential AI-powered solution to the problem.

Researchers from Louisiana State University and the University of Texas at Arlington examined 1,057 channels that shared roughly 209,000 posts between December 2023 and January 2026. They describe it as the first large-scale study of video piracy on the platform.

The results are detailed in the paper titled “Binge, Bot, Repeat: Unpacking the Ecosystem of Video Piracy on Telegram,” which provides some interesting new insights.

The findings reveal that piracy is certainly not a fringe activity on Telegram. On the contrary, it is massively popular.

4.85 billion post views for 19,033 titles

To map the ecosystem, the researchers relied on a locally run large language model to label posts. This helped them to identify 19,033 unique pirated titles across various Telegram channels, including 14,632 movies and 4,401 TV shows produced by 3,941 companies.

As on regular pirate sites, anime is rather popular. The most pirated rightsholder is Japan’s Toei Company, home to One Piece and Dragon Ball, which accounted for 17% of the titles. As shown below, Netflix is in second place with 15%, followed by Warner Bros. at 12.4%.

These numbers get more context when looking at the total views. According to the researchers, the ‘pirate’ posts were found on 983 channels where they amassed 4.85 billion views.

The views are not per title, as a single post can include more titles. Nonetheless, the researchers estimate a total loss of $17.49 billion, with United States content accounting for $8.17 billion and Japanese content $3.72 billion.

This is a loose estimate, assuming that 1% of the views translate into lost sales, based on the cheapest legal option available. Also, the researchers capped lost sales at a single subscription cost when multiple titles from one service were linked.

Built to Survive Takedowns

One of the most noteworthy findings is that piracy channels use a wide variety of distribution techniques, with content scattered across interconnected channels, bots, and backup accounts.

Roughly 94% of the AI-mapped channels were connected to at least one other and many of these were unfindable using traditional searches.

“We also find that this ecosystem is deliberately engineered to be resilient against takedown efforts, frequently redirecting users through chains of intermediary channels and automated bots that collectively handle hosting, access control, monetization, and channel discovery.”

Most pirate links pointed to external hosting platforms such as TeraBox, Terashare, and GoFile. Torrents and magnet links, meanwhile, were a rarity, and the researchers only spotted nine of these links in their research.

In addition to posting links to pirated content, some channels also shared compromised Netflix, Hulu, Disney+, and Crunchyroll logins, and VPN tutorials to help people bypass blocking measures.

Anti-RIP: AI Powered Channel Hunting

The researchers went beyond simply mapping the ecosystem. Their findings also motivated the development of “Anti-RIP,” a real-time AI-powered tool that can detect video piracy on Telegram.

To catch channels before they grow, the researchers generated candidate Telegram handles and probed them to see which ones were linked to piracy communities. Between February 3 and April 10, 2026, the tool scanned 249,133 newly discovered channels.

From that sweep, Anti-RIP flagged 802 piracy channels with a median age of less than 5 days, along with 299 connected channels and 108 bots.

Rather than sending bare links, the team compiled the findings into evidence reports that paired each flagged channel with contextual labels describing what it was doing, from hosting and redirecting to monetizing content. These reports were sent to Telegram’s abuse department as well as 17 major U.S. rightsholders.

The research notes that 14 of the 17 US studios acknowledged the reports, and 4 explicitly stated that the contextual labels helped them assess and prioritize the notices.

“Over a 61-day period, the framework facilitated the takedown of 524 previously unknown piracy channels and 71 bots,” the paper reads. Additionally, Telegram removed many flagged posts.

AI Tool Isn’t Flawless

Anti-RIP’s reports produced measurable results. Within two weeks, 524 of the 1,101 reported channels had become inaccessible, and Telegram removed many individual flagged posts on top of that.

The AI tool is far from perfect, and the researchers acknowledge that it produces false positives. When two coders reviewed a random sample of 1,000 posts used to validate the system, they found that the model had wrongly flagged 4 legitimate posts as piracy.

The detection model built for the live tool is reported to be 98% accurate in testing. That figure comes from a controlled test set, however, and the paper does not publish a verified error rate for the channels that were flagged during its real-world run.

The researchers have open-sourced Anti-RIP and released the dataset publicly through GitHub . This means that Telegram and rightsholders can put it to use, if they like. Similarly, pirates will likely use AI tools to evade detection, triggering an AI-driven game of cat-and-mouse.

—

A copy of the paper, “Binge, Bot, Repeat: Unpacking the Ecosystem of Video Piracy on Telegram,” is available here . It is a preprint that hasn’t been peer-reviewed yet.

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

When the Motion Picture Association (MPA) described its new UK blocking order to WIPO in May, it was presented as a key step in the fight against online piracy.

The “omnibus” order would make it easier and quicker to block new domain names and pirate site brands that pop up in response to blocking efforts.

According to the MPA, it allows Hollywood studios to seek blocking of any “structurally infringing audiovisual piracy services that meet defined criteria, without having to bring a fresh court application for each new domain or site name available in the future.”

Cited but Inaccessible

As we reported at the time, the order itself was nowhere to be found. The judgment was not on BAILII or in the National Archives, and none of the targeted ISPs had mentioned it. The MPA’s summary was the only public account.

The significance of the order was clear though. The MPA prominently featured it at WIPO and the UK ruling was also referenced and used as an example in a Canadian site blocking order that was handed down last month.

Canada’s Federal Court noted that the purpose of the order is to “address increased fragmentation in the Internet piracy landscape” that is the result of people switching from blocked to non-blocked sites and domains.

This “expanded scope” order, as Canada’s Federal Court called it, allows Hollywood studios and broadcasters to add unrelated sites to the blocklist, without having to go back to court. However, the UK order that it was based on remained unpublished, until recently.

This week, we spotted a new transparency filing from Cloudflare, which was added to the Lumen database . This filing references the UK omnibus order and also attaches a copy of it.

Omnibus Order Details Surface

That attachment is, as far as we know, the first public copy of the omnibus order. It is headed a “Public Version,” a copy with a confidential schedule removed, which confirms the broad powers the MPA described as well as other details.

The order, handed down by Mr Justice Mellor on 7 May 2026, was requested by Columbia, Disney, Netflix, Paramount, Universal and Warner Bros. The respondents are the UK’s six largest ISPs: BT, EE, Plusnet, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin Media.

Like previous UK blocking orders, the ISPs are required to block access to a series of websites. In this case, the first part of schedule 1 specifically lists 345movie.nl and 456movie.nl, cineby.app, movies2watch.watch and streamm4u.com.co. These are the ‘seeds,’ followed by an open-ended category in part 2 of the same schedule.

Since 2022, UK court orders also support subsequent blockades of similarly branded websites. The latest order expands this power to a much broader list of pirate sites, regardless of the brand used, as long as these are similar in functionality.

“[E]ach Part 2 Target Website has essentially the same mode of operation as one or more of the Part 1 Target Websites in so far as it enables users to stream film/audiovisual content by indexing and aggregating links to unauthorised copies of such content,” the order reads.

There is a clear set of boxes newly added sites have to tick, so future expansions are not unlimited. In this case, all pirate movie streaming sites that are available in the UK and unresponsive to complaints, should be fair game.

The order does not come with a transparency clause that requires the list of blocked domains to be made public, which makes it impossible for the public and journalists to review the blocking efforts.

Voluntary Expansion

Importantly, adding new sites to the blocklist does not involve a judge. When the studios flag a new Part 2 site, they notify the ISPs that the conditions are met, and it is added. There is no court hearing or independent review.

The order states that the ISPs are “wholly reliant on the Applicants accurately identifying” the URLs to block, and that they “have no obligation to verify whether the Applicants’ or their agents’ determination is correct.” The studios are in charge of expanding the blockades.

These expansions are not limited to the ISPs either. As mentioned earlier, Cloudflare published the order without being a party. This is because the American company voluntarily blocks targeted sites if these use its CDN services. These blocks are limited to the UK, as we documented before .

As shown above, Cloudflare shows an Error HTTP 451 to UK visitors that try to access movies2watch.watch, explaining that the site is unavailable for legal reasons.

Guardrails and Limitations

The order is not without safeguards. In addition to the earlier mentioned expansion requirements, site operators or other people caught up in these blocking efforts have the right to object.

Importantly, rightsholders are also strictly prohibited from asking ISPs to block an IP address if the underlying server also hosts legitimate, non-infringing websites. This should prevent overblocking incidents.

Finally, there is also a relatively short time limit on the order, which expires after six months.

“This Order shall cease to have effect at 23:59pm on the date 6 months from the date of this Order, unless the Court orders otherwise,” it reads.

This doesn’t mean that the blocking order will cease to exist after that. In practice, it means that the Hollywood studios will return to court to request an extension. While there is no formal blocklist review, if there are any concerns they can be brought up then as well.

As far as we know, the judgment linked to the order has yet to be added to BAILII or the National Archives. Ironically, we only know of it because of the transparency efforts of Cloudflare, which isn’t even a formal party in the case.

—

A copy of the public “omnibus” blocking order is available here (pdf) . The Cloudflare blocking notice, published at the Lumen Database, can be found here .

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

While site blocking efforts were a novelty in France a few years ago, they have since transformed into a streamlined annual ritual.

Ahead of each new football season, broadcaster Canal+ goes to the Paris Judicial Court, requesting site blocking orders to stop pirate streaming sites and services.

Over several years, these blocking requests have grown from simple ISP blocks to cover DNS resolvers, CDN providers, VPN services, and search engines. Initially these orders were scattered, but a batch signed last month reveals a clear pattern.

On July 17, Vice-President Irène Benac signed the latest batch. The fourteen orders are split evenly between the 2026/2027 Champions League and Premier League seasons. These two batches cover every type of intermediary Canal+ has pursued since 2022, all in one coordinated action.

ISPs, DNS, CDN, VPNs, and Search Engines

The Premier League orders target 47 domain names and the Champions League orders cover 26 domain names. This includes ones using popular brands such as Totalsportek, LiveTV, Kevinsport, as well as various IPTV gateways. An overview of all domain names is available below .

The ISP orders will have the most direct impact. They cover France’s largest providers, including Orange, SFR, Free, and Bouygues Telecom, who all have to block access to the listed domain names. The other orders aim to cover potential bypasses.

If subscribers try to get around these ISP blocks by switching to an alternative DNS resolver, the orders against Google DNS, Cloudflare DNS, Quad9 and DNS4EU prevent this. The latter two did not present a defense in court.

The Cloudflare orders are not limited to the 1.1.1.1 DNS resolver either. The Internet infrastructure company must also block the domains across its CDN, and its reverse proxy service under the same rulings, by whatever technical means it chooses.

The orders add search engines in the same sweep. Google and Microsoft Bing are ordered to de-index the domains, so they no longer surface in results for users in France.

Finally, VPN services are covered as well. Canal+ secured orders against Proton, CyberGhost, and ExpressVPN, to shut down another bypass. That part of the blocking batch was also the most heavily contested, as covered below.

All the blocks are dynamic. This means that domains can be added throughout the season once ARCOM, France’s audiovisual regulator, approves them. The Premier League measures run from August 22, 2026 to May 30, 2027, while the Champions League blocks expire on June 5, 2027.

VPN Defense Fails

Canal+ previously named five VPN providers in previous seasons. This round it pursued only three, dropping NordVPN and Surfshark without explanation.

The most detailed defense came from CyberGhost and ExpressVPN. They first asked the court to pause the case pending a referral to the EU Court of Justice. This is the Anne Frank Stichting case, which was decided shortly before the Paris ruling and shielded VPNs from liability in a copyright dispute.

The Paris court already refused to pause the case, explaining that the Anne Frank case concerns a different directive and a publication that was itself lawful, which is different from the pirate streaming sites that are at stake here.

The VPN providers further argued that Article L. 333-10 of the Sports Code conflicts with the EU E-Commerce Directive and should be set aside. The court disagreed, stressing that this is a dispute between private companies. Since an EU directive has no “horizontal direct effect,” a national law can’t be disapplied on that basis.

The court also spelled out why a neutral intermediary can be required to take action, as it enables the transmission of infringing content. The “mere act of serving as a bridge enabling access to the infringing sites fulfills the transmission function,” the ruling states (translated).

The court stressed that, even though an intermediary may act passively and neutrally, it can still be an essential link in transferring infringing data.

Google also pushed back in response to the DNS and search orders. It questioned whether Canal+ had enforceable exclusive rights in France, and argued that the Canal+ companies had not proven repeated infringements per channel for every disputed domain. The court rejected both these points.

Up Next: Automated Real-Time Blocking

The orders were issued on July 17 but haven’t been picked up in the press, as far as we know. With hindsight, the timing is notable, as they were handed down just four days before the French Parliament adopted a new sports law that rewrites the blocking process.

As we reported previously , the law replaces the current manual system, where ARCOM agents verify each domain before a block, with an automated process that can add new targets in real time during a live broadcast. ARCOM’s agents keep a review role, but after the fact rather than before.

The law has not yet been implemented; that’s expected later this year. For now, these orders still run under the old framework. However, if the new law is implemented, Canal+ and other rightsholders will likely switch as soon as they can.

—

The Premier League order targets these domain names.

1. abcsport.tel
2. akhtv.online
3. antenasport.org
4. empire-sports.store
5. kevinsport.org
6. livetv880.me
7. livetv882.me
8. sports24.cc
9. streamonsport.art
10. totalsporteki.com
11. witv.team
12. xuperlive.com
13. abcsport.top
14. liveon5.zip
15. zac01bp.mpipzni2naturally32kistomach.ru
16. zac22bp.mpipzni2naturally32kistomach.ru
17. lovetier.bz
18. kevinsport.lat
19. kevinsport.mom
20. strongst.link
21. kevinsport.best
22. fisherman.click
23. cdn.livetv880.me
24. emb.apl407.me
25. cdn.livetv882.me
26. livetv883.me
27. cdn.livetv883.me
28. kiratop.site
29. livetv884.me
30. cdn.livetv884.me
31. livetv885.me
32. cdn.livetv885.me
33. wilderness.click
34. woundsilk.net
35. totalsportek.wales
36. streamlycdn.com
37. sports-rope.top
38. l2l2.link
39. totalsportek.company
40. live.totalsportek.fyi
41. yallalive.cfd
42. iptv-abonnement.tv
43. ott-premium.tv
44. iptvpremium-europe.com
45. cf.orion-2026.xyz
46. smartippon.com
47. line.snssmarters.store

The Champions League orders cover the following domain names.

1. empire-sport.live
2. empire-sports.store
3. kevinsport.org
4. kzontop.site
5. sports24.cc
6. sportsonline.vc
7. streamonsport.art
8. witv.team
9. kevinsport.lat
10. kevinsport.quest
11. lovetier.bz
12. kevinsport.homes
13. [Address 27]
14. wilderness.click
15. v3.sportssonline.click
16. 7y306yg5flk3x4.dynmaspect.net
17. j7x31108tgeg77x.dynmaspect.net
18. woundsilk.net
19. swopglow.net
20. iptv-abonnement.tv
21. tv.business-cloud-8k.ru
22. cf.orion-2026.xyz
23. ott-premium.tv
24. smartippon.com
25. iptvpremium-europe.com
26. line.snssmarters.store

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

For years, rightsholders have demanded urgent and decisive action from the European Commission, to tackle live-streaming piracy of live sports and events.

The EU heard these calls and in 2023 it published a targeted recommendation , “encouraging” member states to introduce measures to facilitate prompt takedowns of live streams.

This advice was largely seen as a disappointment by rightsholders, since it was not binding. While some EU member states have increased their enforcement efforts since, with Italy’s “Piracy Shield” as the prime example, others took no notable action.

EU Study Proposes 30-minute Takedown Timer

A new study commissioned by the European Parliament’s Committee on Legal Affairs ( JURI ) argues that the EU-wide response, as it stands, is not strong enough.

The report, titled “Countering online piracy of sports and broadcast in the EU”, is written by Professor Giovanni Maria Riccio of the University of Salerno. It recommends that the EU to move from voluntary guidance to a binding Regulation that’s aimed specifically at combating live-streaming piracy.

“The current EU response to live-content piracy remains fragmented and not fully adapted to the speed and technical complexity of live broadcasts. Existing rules provide useful tools, but they do not yet ensure consistent and timely enforcement across Member States,” the study concludes.

The study recommends a swift takedown obligation for streaming intermediaries, requiring these to take action within a certain time limit. As an example, it mentions 30 minutes, following the example of Italy’s Piracy Shield .

This takedown requirement should not only apply to Internet providers. Other intermediaries including third-party DNS resolvers such as Google and OpenDNS, VPN providers, and CDNs such as Cloudflare, should also take action.

“It would likewise be desirable for the personal scope of application to extend to the entire chain of intermediaries technically involved in the distribution of unauthorised content – including providers of content delivery networks, VPN services, dedicated servers and DNS resolution systems,” the study recommends.

The report notes that courts in Europe have already started to issue broader injunctions. This includes the Paris Judicial Court, which required DNS resolvers and VPN providers to block pirate sites.

An AGCOM in Every EU Member State

The report models a lot of its suggestions after the Italian “Piracy Shield” legislation, which has been widely criticized by opponents. This applies to the 30-minute clock and the broad range of intermediaries it covers, as well as the oversight body.

In Italy, the administrative AGCOM agency handles pirate site blocking procedures and the report suggests that all EU member states should have their own version of AGCOM.

“[I]t is advisable for each EU Member State to establish an independent administrative authority – or, where appropriate, to confer the necessary powers upon an existing one (again on the example of AGCOM) – to ensure consistent oversight, effective enforcement, and regulatory coordination,” it suggests.

Blunt Tools

While the study leans heavily on the Italian model, it doesn’t pretend that blocking is a perfect fix. It openly admits that these often-used anti-piracy tools have their shortcomings.

“IP and DNS blocking remain inherently blunt instruments,” the report warns, noting that they can’t reliably separate unlawful streams from legitimate services that share the same infrastructure.

That’s the overblocking problem that has plagued Piracy Shield from the start, where blocks aimed at pirate streams have taken down access to unrelated sites and services.

Curiously, the study makes part of its case using research that points the other way. For example, it cites an empirical study published by the Open Observatory of Network Interference (OONI) which found that following a LaLiga blocking order in Spain, more than 554,000 domains were blocked at least once during football match broadcasts. This included websites from Amnesty International and the ACLU, UNICEF, UNHCR, the Australian Senate, and Amazon S3 endpoints.

It also cites a report from the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), which TorrentFreak covered earlier this year, that called for banning IP-based blocking , while also making rightsholders liable for collateral damage.

The report references those warnings, but recommends rolling out the Piracy Shield approach across the entire Union anyway. To keep it in check, it proposes safeguards such as limiting blocks to the duration of the live event, keeping judicial or administrative oversight in place, and sticking to the proportionality standards set by the EU Court of Justice.

Fragmented and Expensive Options

Finally, the report recognizes that no amount of blocking will kill piracy if watching sports legally is an expensive hassle.

It notes that fragmented and expensive legal offerings are a key piracy driver. This often means that fans are forced to sign up for multiple subscriptions, run into geo-blocking barriers, or face other artificial hurdles just to enjoy their favorite sports.

To improve the demand side, the study calls for more attractive and accessible legal options.

For now, this all remains a wishlist. The study is third-party advice, not law, and it arrives while the Commission’s review of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive is still ongoing. That includes input from both pro- and anti-blocking advocates.

—

A copy of the study, “Countering online piracy of sports and broadcast in the EU”, is available here (pdf) .

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

For many years, NYAA has been heralded as one of the top sources for anime content, serving an audience of millions of users.

The site was launched more than two decades ago and the brand is still going strong today, as it’s traditionally one of the most visited torrent sites.

NYAA’s popularity hasn’t gone unnoticed by rightsholders. The MPA previously targeted the site’s GitHub repo , although that was later restored . Additionally, Japan’s Content Overseas Distribution Association ( CODA ) has been trying to disrupt its activities for many years.

Among other enforcement efforts, CODA teamed up with Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry ( METI ) in a Cross-Border Enforcement Project to identify NYAA uploaders. This effort recently resulted in a high-profile arrest.

Police Arrest NYAA Seeder

Last week, the Cyber Investigation Division of the Kyoto Prefectural Police, working with Fushimi Police Station, arrested a 56-year-old unemployed man from Sagamihara, Kanagawa Prefecture. Kyodo News named the suspect as Masakazu Ono.

CODA announced that the man allegedly was the “first uploader” or initial seeder for the NHK drama ‘ Midnight Taxi .’ The series is copyrighted by NHK and WOWOW, both connected to CODA member companies.

According to the police, the man allegedly uploaded roughly a thousand NHK recordings over some five years. He reportedly admitted the offense, noting that he wanted people around the world to see NHK’s work.

As the initial NYAA seeder, the suspect allegedly had a full copy of the file, suggesting that he might be the original source for the leak. CODA notes that the arrest is part of a landmark case.

“CODA regards the arrest of this first uploader as a landmark case in addressing copyright infringement involving torrent sites,” the group announced, noting that more actions may follow.

“While closely monitoring the details of the case as they are revealed through future investigations and criminal proceedings, CODA will continue to work toward the proper protection of copyright and implement effective measures against similar acts of infringement.”

Sankei previously reported that Kyoto police opened the investigation around April 2024, which also suggests that this case isn’t just about tracking an IP-address.

Hacker Tool Didn’t Touch the Swarm

CODA partially credits the successful enforcement action to an analysis tool developed by the Japan Hacker Association, a cooperating organization in its Cross-Border Enforcement Project.

The mention of this tool triggered immediate speculation in the anime community that it simply logged IP addresses inside a BitTorrent swarm, the same technique copyright holders have used against file-sharers for close to two decades, and that the suspect had failed to use a VPN.

However, CODA says that isn’t what happened.

“The tool does not analyse activity within the BitTorrent swarm itself. Instead, it analyses how data moves through torrent sites, such as index sites and tracker sites,” CODA informed TorrentFreak.

While this answer rules out a simple torrent-logging tool, it raises many new questions. What is this tool tracking exactly, how did it identify the suspect? After all, analysis at the index and tracker layer does not ordinarily produce the address of a broadband subscriber.

CODA notes it is unable to disclose the specific analytical or investigative techniques, as that could negatively impact future investigations and enforcement activities. It stressed that the suspect was ultimately identified through an investigation conducted by the Kyoto Prefectural Police.

Three Leechers Were Caught

While the arrest of the seeder is the lead angle, CODA informs us that it wasn’t the only enforcement action.

“While the primary objective of this case was to identify and apprehend the first uploader, three secondary uploaders (i.e., leechers) were also apprehended as part of the investigation,” CODA said.

The group later clarified that these three were handled by a different police force, in a subsequent action connected to the same site.

Local reports say that three men, in their forties and sixties, were referred to prosecutors on the same charge, rather than arrested. They allegedly downloaded the files, which BitTorrent shares back to other users by default.

That last detail is important, as this suggests that anyone who shared the torrent could have been caught. After all, BitTorrent clients share back by default, including the qBittorrent software the main suspect reportedly used.

CODA made the same point in its public announcement, warning that many torrent clients upload automatically, so simply using them can result in criminal liability under Japanese law. This type of messaging also helps increase the deterrent effect of the enforcement action.

Not Over Yet

CODA declined to say whether it’s also pursuing NYAA’s operators, whether more uploaders have been reported to police, and whether further arrests are expected this year, citing the ongoing investigation.

In April, CODA signed memorandums of understanding with French media regulator ARCOM and the Alliance for Manga and Webtoon, and it also renewed its agreement with the MPA two weeks later. We asked whether these deals cover the sharing of data that identifies individual uploaders, but that question remained unanswered.

CODA pointed to “the confidentiality clause contained in the MOUs” and said it couldn’t disclose the level of intelligence that it shares with other organizations.

For now, NYAA remains online. Based on SimilarWeb data, the site was good for more than 22 million visits last month, with more than a third of these originating from Japan. This means that plenty of potential targets are still out there.

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

YggTorrent was France’s largest torrent community, home to more than 10 million registered members before it shut down in March following a devastating hack.

The operators threw in the towel, and in July the French Gendarmerie arrested twelve people it accused of running the operation.

However, someone apparently still sees value in the brand.

Until recently, visitors to yggtorrent.org landed on a domain sale pitch. The domain name, bundled with 59 others into what the listing called a “comprehensive portfolio” and an “established brand with millions of users,” had a substantial $700,000 asking price. That’s just for the domains.

The twelve arrests came after the domain went up for sale, which might suggest the deal would fall through. We can’t confirm this either way, but new messaging on the official domain shows ‘someone’ is attempting to make a comeback.

‘Grand Return’

The yggtorrent.org domain currently redirects to yggtorrent.to, where a countdown clock ticks toward a relaunch on September 1 at midnight Paris time. An accompanying message explains that a ‘new team’ has taken over.

“YggTorrent rises from the ashes,” the (translated) page reads. “The largest French-language sharing platform is making its grand return. The catalogue, the community, the Ygg spirit: nothing has changed, everything is ready.”

The comeback announcement notes that the YggTorrent community still comprises 6 million members, who have access to over a million torrents. How many of the former users plan to return after the hack and the police arrests has yet to be seen, but the tracker suggests that YggTorrent’s remnants are still going.

‘Nothing Has Changed’

The comeback teaser notes that ‘nothing has changed’ and it points to a tracker status page which shows that many YggTorrent torrents are still being actively shared.

At the time of writing, it reported 455,300 torrents and more than 1.5 million connected peers, roughly 94% of them seeders. This suggests that the ‘new team’ that controls the domain also has a working tracker, or access to the old one.

Who’s in charge of the new team remains a mystery. The domain name WHOIS data shows no recent changes. This doesn’t mean that it didn’t change owners, as the registrar accounts might have been sold in full, but there are no public traces of that.

Whether the teased comeback is a true revival, a potential scam, or anything in between remains unclear. For now, the clock is ticking, and with the French police not ruling out further arrests, they might be keeping an eye on the comeback too.

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