ISPs forced to block Popcorn Time by court orders

Greg S

Posts: 1,607   +442

Following a judgement from Norway's Oslo District Court, 14 different internet service providers have been ordered to block access to Popcorn Time and several of its variants.

Popcorn Time is often known as the "Netflix for pirates", but this is a large success for Hollywood movie studios that have been attempting to fight against piracy. Gaining rapid popularity back in 2014 and going through a roller coaster of ups and downs following media attention, it ultimately faded from the limelight with the introduction of Kodi.

Since no representatives from Popcorn Time showed up to court, it was concluded that the movie studios acting as plaintiffs are able to collect damages to cover legal fees. Each of the three Popcorn Time spinoffs owes $23,359 each, but it is highly unlikely that money will ever be paid.

In addition to three domain names operated by Popcorn Time, third-party sites offering subtitles or other content have also been targeted and blocked. In total, 15 third-party sites related to Popcorn Time were also blocked including all of their sub-domains.

One of the major implications of the order is that the court ruled a block does not infringe on "the Internet service providers' freedom to operate nor anyone else's right to freedom of expression". It may seem pretty clear cut that Popcorn Time was operating in a known gray area, but this sets a stronger precedent for restricting access to more sites in the future.

Permalink to story.

 
Well, if VPN subscriptions weren't' already at a record high, they certainly are now. Heck at this point they are pretty much required whether you are pirating or not. I know for a fact that certain ISPs do monitor P2P traffic and send IP notices whether or not you are actually infringing on anyone's rights. Unless you are using a VPN, they can see all of your data.
 
I pay for Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, CraveTV, Youtube Red, and Google Music, everything else I connect to my VPN and either torrent or stream from apps like ShowBox. Ending piracy is easy, make your media easily accessible worldwide for a reasonable price.
 
I pay for Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, CraveTV, Youtube Red, and Google Music, everything else I connect to my VPN and either torrent or stream from apps like ShowBox. Ending piracy is easy, make your media easily accessible worldwide for a reasonable price.

That and stop trying to milk older titles. There is no reason for older movies to not be available for streaming for a nominal price of £1 or $1 each.
 
I pay for Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, CraveTV, Youtube Red, and Google Music, everything else I connect to my VPN and either torrent or stream from apps like ShowBox. Ending piracy is easy, make your media easily accessible worldwide for a reasonable price.

I live in Mozambique, Africa and I agree more than 120% with you, since Amazon and Netflix became available here I don't hear about exchanging movies, Torrents, people are investing in good connection to take advantage of those services because in the end none likes to pirate staff but sometimes we have to because there is no other way around... no movie/music/game store with the kind of content people are looking for, etc...
 
What a waste of time they can only block streaming services if they can see them. Here is states people have started to move to VPN services.
 
Well, if VPN subscriptions weren't' already at a record high, they certainly are now. Heck at this point they are pretty much required whether you are pirating or not. I know for a fact that certain ISPs do monitor P2P traffic and send IP notices whether or not you are actually infringing on anyone's rights. Unless you are using a VPN, they can see all of your data.

Yea but don't you need ISP to connect to VPN? So in reality the ISP can see traffic from your house to the VPN and back from VPN to your house.

Well traffic from the VPN server to the target the ISP cannot see and control.
 
Yea but don't you need ISP to connect to VPN? So in reality the ISP can see traffic from your house to the VPN and back from VPN to your house.

Well traffic from the VPN server to the target the ISP cannot see and control.

Um, that's not how VPNs work. The traffic from your house to the server is encrypted. The only thing they will be able to see is your IP address and your VPN's server IP address, nothing else. The only way they could get around that is through a DNS leak or similar but any VPN worth there salt has protection against this specifically. What many ISPs will do is monitor known P2P ports and send out letters, whether or not you are actually doing anything illegal but one could easily employ a socks5 to anonymize the port as well.
 
Um, that's not how VPNs work. The traffic from your house to the server is encrypted. The only thing they will be able to see is your IP address and your VPN's server IP address, nothing else. The only way they could get around that is through a DNS leak or similar but any VPN worth there salt has protection against this specifically. What many ISPs will do is monitor known P2P ports and send out letters, whether or not you are actually doing anything illegal but one could easily employ a socks5 to anonymize the port as well.


So if it is encrypted that see any thing even the port.
 
So if it is encrypted that see any thing even the port.

I think you misunderstood. Monitoring the known P2P ports still does not give them access to the contents of the packets. Regardless even without knowing the content of those package certain ISPs will send out letters simply based on you just using common P2P ports. They assume that you are doing bad things.

Things like port, sender IP, and receiver IP are included in the packet's header and is visible to anyone regardless of encryption. Of course they are though, as they are need to route your packet to it's destination. The data of the packet is the part being encrypted. In addition, like I mentioned earlier, it's possible to obfuscate port and IP addresses. A VPN helps on the IP front while a Socket5 helps on the port front.
 
I think you misunderstood. Monitoring the known P2P ports still does not give them access to the contents of the packets. Regardless even without knowing the content of those package certain ISPs will send out letters simply based on you just using common P2P ports. They assume that you are doing bad things.

Things like port, sender IP, and receiver IP are included in the packet's header and is visible to anyone regardless of encryption. Of course they are though, as they are need to route your packet to it's destination. The data of the packet is the part being encrypted. In addition, like I mentioned earlier, it's possible to obfuscate port and IP addresses. A VPN helps on the IP front while a Socket5 helps on the port front.

What are the pros and cons of free VPN vs paid VPN.

Some VPN better than others.
 
What are the pros and cons of free VPN vs paid VPN.

Some VPN better than others.

Indeed some VPN services are better than others. Here is the general rule of thumb when comparing VPN services

Disadvantages of Free VPN
- Slower than paid VPN services
- Typically some restrictions like a bandwidth cap or ads to support the service
- No guarantee that your data is being handled correctly by the free VPN
- They may keep logs unless stated otherwise. (even the most popular free VPN Hotspot shield does)
- Not many servers to pick from

There really is no advantages of Free VPNs other than getting to keep your money. These free VPNs need to pay the bills somehow, whether that be through selling ads or selling your data.
 
"Since no representatives from Popcorn Time showed up to court, it was concluded that the movie studios acting as plaintiffs are able to collect damages to cover legal fees. Each of the three Popcorn Time spinoffs owes $23,359 each, but it is highly unlikely that money will ever be paid."

Ya know, I never really understood the mentality of this, where you are automatically guilty if you don't show up for court. It essentially favors large corporations, because they can have any number of people represent them while there is only one of you. That's about as fair as not being able to sue any individual in a company either, which is sadly also true.
 
Back