Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United Kingdom Piracy The Courts

UK High Court Orders Block On Popcorn Time 96

An anonymous reader writes: Five ISPs have been given orders by the UK High Court to restrict access to sites offering downloads of popular movie streaming service Popcorn Time – a move which follows complaints from the Motion Picture Association referring to the software's use as a platform for viewing pirated content. According to the new regulation, Virgin, BT, Sky, EE and TalkTalk are now required to block access to popcorntime.io, flixtor.me, popcorntime.se and isoplex.isohunt.to – all sites which link to Popcorn Time downloads. In the High Court order, Justice Birss cites under Section 97A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, that the 'Popcorn Time application is used in order to watch pirated content on the internet.' Popcorn Time operates as a BitTorrent client, despite its slick user interface, and is used mainly for illegal content – although, as its supporters argue, it is also a handy tool for streaming public domain films. It is unclear how successful the ban will be – the blocked sites are not the only places to find Popcorn Time online. Additionally, at ISP level, it will be challenging to monitor as there is not a single version or developer to seek out, with the code available as open source.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK High Court Orders Block On Popcorn Time

Comments Filter:
  • by rHBa ( 976986 ) on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:11AM (#49591689)
    ...I think I'll fire up the SOCKS tunnel and check it out.
    • by pslytely psycho ( 1699190 ) on Friday May 01, 2015 @04:32AM (#49591939) Journal
      It's reputation is Netflix for pirates.
      It's great, slick, intuitive interface, great selection of mostly good quality torrents.

      It is so slick I would wager a lot of users have no idea it is basically a bitorrent client that downloads a copy of the movie to your HDD and shares it. It looks very professional. It looks like a Netflix variation, much like my smart TVs and Bluray players all have a different Netflix interface. It has a logo that looks polished and very commercial. Their forums are a disaster for trying to find information when something doesn't work right. Earlier in the year they changed cover providers and the temporary bugfix was posted in a comment (not stickied or prominent in any way) and was a bitch to find as it wasn't repeated in any other thread on the topic.

      It looks legitimate enough that at least two people I know were astounded when they found out they were 'gasp!' pirating movies 'gasp!' I work on most of my friends computers although I don't work in the industry.

      I occasionally find a specific file that just won't work properly or dies in the middle, but it mostly just works.
      Series updates can be spotty, Some shows can be weeks behind but others seem to update within hours of broadcast.

      A quick mention when you open it that it may not comply with laws in your region that nobody seems to notice. It's great for stuff that isn't on Netflix.
  • by popo ( 107611 ) on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:16AM (#49591701) Homepage

    The Internet is a big place. Restricting access to a few sites is effectively useless.

    • by kesuki ( 321456 )

      There is already a P2P network with encrypted access, reputation based access to files, and so called anti-bot measures. DC++
      also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Free_file_sharing_software [wikipedia.org] there are way more than just 'popcorn time'

      remember there is no difference to which side of the law you are on, because the illegal side will still cause overheat failures from too high utilization(1) for the design capacity of the network. and the legal side has no qualms about lying about the numbers and make up u

      • The best hope that the media companies have for squashing piracy is not the legal route. Yes, by suing some people or having governments ban some tools, they'll move one step forward. Unfortunately, for them, those who write the programs used for piracy will move five steps forward during this time. Instead, their best hope are services like Netflix. Imagine if the media companies got over their fear of putting stuff online and opened the doors to everything being on Netflix (and a few competing service

      • I'm interested in how this plays out "reputation based access to files" plays out in practice. How does a new user gain enough reputation to begin to participate?

        • Usually by bringing in some files obtained elsewhere.

          • by tepples ( 727027 )

            If "elsewhere" also requires reputation, how does a user brand new to file sharing in general obtain his first such files? To compete with the ease of use of Popcorn Time, there has to be a way to bootstrap a new user.

            • by kesuki ( 321456 )

              easy, ripping tools are easy to find, and usb optical drives exist, making from store bought is too easy if you Google it. and as the law is currently ripped committing a crime to catch a criminal is illegal so reputation based access is basically modern prohibition the crooks always ahead of the enforcers of the laws.

              • by kesuki ( 321456 )

                /s/ripped/written
                waiting to correct my post Slashdot your secretary is slow... ;)

              • by tepples ( 727027 )

                But won't the store-bought stuff already be on the network, uploaded by someone who got to the store faster than you?

    • Useless to us techies, but not for the general public. When they lose popular websites--or Google stops showing them--it really does slow them down. They don't understand how to search for similar content, or the pirating websites replicating for survival.

      And honestly, the relevant governments (or at least the FBI/CIA/etc organizations they consult) know that you don't need to stop all the techies, just the general populace. Making something one or two steps difficult is enough to dissuade large swathes o
  • by Chrisq ( 894406 ) on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:20AM (#49591707)

    According to the new regulation, Virgin, BT, Sky, EE and TalkTalk are now required to block access to popcorntime.io, flixtor.me, popcorntime.se and isoplex.isohunt.to – all sites which link to Popcorn Time downloads

    Link here. Better still link - Facebook - Twitter - Tumblr... and see if the ISPs dare to block these

    • by Neil_Brown ( 1568845 ) on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:44AM (#49591749) Homepage

      Facebook - Twitter - Tumblr... and see if the ISPs dare to block these

      It would be interesting to see what would happen. Injunctions under s97A [legislation.gov.uk] can be imposed on "service providers", which is defined [legislation.gov.uk] very broadly, as " any person providing an information society service", so not just telcos.

      My feeling is that the copyright industry would attempt to secure injunctions against Facebook, Twitter and so on, if they had entities in the jurisdiction. Both Twitter and Facebook do, as both have offices in London. However, they are not the entities providing the services, so it would be interesting to see how a court might rule — if the European Court's approach of Google Spain [europa.eu] was followed, their proximity to the service provision might be sufficient to bring them within scope...

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        I use a VPN for all internet access now, to block Virgin Media's blocks and their spying. The VPN provider is based in another European country, so presumably this legislation would be unable to force them to block any sites. Their local laws don't allow VPN providers to be forced to do blocking, although ISPs in that country are currently under legal assault by the copyright industry.

        • The VPN provider is based in another European country, so presumably this legislation would be unable to force them to block any sites.

          This can perhaps be unpacked a little:

          • Does the UK legislation permit a court to injunct a VPN provider?
          • If so, could an injunction be obtained in the UK against a provider based overseas?
          • Does the UK legislation permit a court to injuct a UK-based ISP (Virgin Media) to block access to a VPN endpoint?

          My gut feeling would be that, yes, a VPN provider would probably be a "s

          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            However, an injunction against a VPN provider where there is clear non-infringing use would seem disproportionate â" which probably means that a mainstream VPN service, used by corporates, is more likely to survive than a service named "usethisvpntoinfringecopyright" or the like.

            This is the part I'm most interested in. I use this service mostly to protect my privacy from ISP/GCHQ spying, and to ensure I have a clean, unfettered internet connection. That's the primary purpose of this service, since it doesn't give me access to any private networks or anything like that.

            So, the question becomes, does a service that is used to enhance privacy and block spying have enough non-copyright-infringing uses to make a block disproportionate.

            • does a service that is used to enhance privacy and block spying have enough non-copyright-infringing uses to make a block disproportionate.

              Until such a case goes to court, it's anyone's guess, really. Where the service encourages infringement, or "authorises [bailii.org]" it, I suspect that it would be easier to make a case for blocking than if it were entirely neutral, even if it was used for entirely lawful activities too.

      • A little more work and we might not even need the torrent sites. Magnet links can be copied and pasted with ease, including into facebook posts.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Heck, Popcorn Time is even available via the Arch Linux User Repository. What are they going to do? Block the AUR?

  • A public domain movie can be watched technically but how many public domain movies are in the top 100 most watched list?

    Free software is awesome. Too bad the same can't be said for free music/movies.

  • Anybody remember? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:38AM (#49591735)

    Back when the IWF came around, "this is the only thing we'll ever block, honest". Then it was porn in general, for everybody. Then it was torrent sites. Oh, and the anarchist's handbook got targeted too. Now this. What's next?

    The UK is building their own digital Hadrian's wall at the behest of several special interest groups. How long before the "pro-EU" lobby becomes a big enough interest group to suppress "eurosceptic" views? Signs are, closer than you think.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:44AM (#49591745)

      Euroskeptic views SHOULD be suppressed. Anyone opposed to the EU should be arrested and silenced. People don't know how good they have it. I'd take prosperity and safety over "freedom" anytime. And so should you. If you're not smart enough to know what's good for you, let better people decide it and shut up.

      • I'd take prosperity and safety over "freedom" anytime.

        Ronald Reagan: we believe that freedom and security go together [wikipedia.org].
        Or to paraphrase him:

        We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the United Kingdom can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. Prime Minster Cameron, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the United Kingdom and Europe, if you seek liberaliza

        • I'd take prosperity and safety over "freedom" anytime.

          Ronald Reagan: we believe that freedom and security go together [wikipedia.org]. Or to paraphrase him:

          We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the United Kingdom can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. Prime Minster Cameron, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the United Kingdom and Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this portal. Mr. Cameron, open this portal. Mr. Cameron, tear down this firewall of censorship!

          The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson

      • by jez9999 ( 618189 )

        Nah, they shouldn't be suppressed. They should just be reflexively demonized in the media and by the mainstream political class as racist, bigoted, xenophobic, and not worthy of consideration beyond summary dismissal.

  • by Neil_Brown ( 1568845 ) on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:38AM (#49591739) Homepage

    The judgment is Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation & Ors v Sky UK Ltd & Ors [2015] EWHC 1082 (Ch) [bailii.org]

    The legislation is here [legislation.gov.uk]

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:45AM (#49591751)

    I hadn't heard of Popcorn Time until very recently, although I'm living in Thailand and my standard means of obtaining digital media of any sort is piracy.

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to use uTorrent or Deluge plus eztv.ch, yts.to, kickass.to, and/or the Pirate Bay to get just about anything that I want. From very old TV series to brand new movies (sometime BEFORE theatrical release) to PC games to eBooks, I almost never get a desire to search for something and then fail to find it.

    BUT, Popcorn Time puts that (at least the TV and movies aspects) into an interface that my mother or grandmother could easily use. I would recommend it to my family and/or remote desktop install it for them, but they live in the US so threatening letters from ISPs (and worse) seem like more of a risk than they are here in piracy hotspot SE Asia. A VPN or other solution might take care of those concerns, but on the other hand it would also detract from the ease of use, which is the main attraction of Popcorn Time.

    If you're savvy enough to know and manage those risks (or if you live in a place where they aren't a concern), Popcorn Time is well worth checking out. Just a couple caveats:
    * Go for popcorntime.io, not the other fork (popcorn-time.se or "Time4Popcorn"). The .io one is 100% clean in my experience, but I hear the others have adware/malware.
    * Biggest downside of Popcorn Time in my opinion is that it has no option to seed beyond the duration of the time that you are streaming/watching the videos. I'd happily designate a 1-2TB drive or partition to Popcorn Time / torrent cache and allow PT to seed up to a target ratio or beyond if I'm a critical seeder of the file. I set up PT to keep its cache persistent so I can let uTorrent manage the seeding, but it is a by-hand multi step process to import PT stuff into uTorrent because PT puts everything into subfolders created with the filename of the torrents it downloads (which are a long hash of alphanumeric characters). If PT streamlines that process or just implements better seeding, I'll switch to it as my primary means of video torrenting.

    • A VPN or other solution might take care of those concerns, but on the other hand it would also detract from the ease of use, which is the main attraction of Popcorn Time.

      You mean like clicking the little red lock on the top of the popcorn time window and that's it?

      Even with the VPN side of things they have you covered. Popcorn time includes a VPN service which you can access natively from the client. I'm not sure about the quality of the service itself but for ease of use it looks like it can't be beat.

  • by TheManInTheMoon ( 1495657 ) on Friday May 01, 2015 @02:50AM (#49591763)
    I, like many others, had not heard of Popcorn Time before it was so successfully advertised by the British Legal system. I now wonder where the source code is hosted, and under which open source licence.
  • Change DNS to OpenDNS, avoiding resolution by ISP.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    YouTube is a platform for viewing pirated content. Hell, YouTube proactively offers and even recommends pirated content to the user. When will YouTube be banned?

  • Wouldn't it make more sense to send take-down notices (or if necessary, file lawsuits) against the owners or hosting providers of the sites directly?

    Same with any pirate site or other illegal content they want to block, its better to go after the child porn sites directly than to try and block them at the ISP level...

    • Illegal in what country?

      Childporn is a bit different due to it being almost universally illegal and Interpol are happy to organise global raids on providers. But Popcorn Time? It's nothing more than a bittorrent client + IMDB client bolted together with a built in media player. It's open source and no more or less legal than utorrent or any other bittorrent client. My guess is if they get sent a take down notice they'll send back a photo of their extended middle finger.

      • Popcorn Time ... no more or less legal than utorrent or any other bittorrent client

        The court here came up with a slightly different perspective:

        • - even though the claimants did not argue this, the court commented that the developers of Popcorn Time probably authorise copyright infringement (Paragraph 48 [bailii.org])
        • The Popcorn Time application is a means necessarily used for users to infringe the copyright in many senses. It is the means by which they find what content they want, it is the means by which they access

        • They provide the software and provide the information to keep the indexes up to date.

          I'm not sure that's how it works. From what I've gathered Popcorn time strung together different and openly available sources of data using APIs those sources provided.

          But my point stands which was one of jurisdiction. Childporn is pretty much universally illegal in most of the western world. This software by comparison has been (dubiously IMO) ruled illegal by one court in one jurisdiction, and even then it is unlikely that the jurisdiction covers the location of the servers etc.

      • Illegal in what country?

        I'm guessing copyright infringement is illegal in Berne Convention signatories, which means every country in the WTO.

        • You'd be right except you're not infringing copyright by running Popcorn Time, and you're not infringing copyright by creating Popcorn Time.

          You're only infringing once you USE it, unless a court deems otherwise, and so far only one court in one jurisdiction has.

          • you're not infringing copyright by creating Popcorn Time.

            You're only infringing once you USE it, unless a court deems otherwise, and so far only one court in one jurisdiction has.

            I'd be interested to see where you get the idea that "one court in one jurisdiction" recognizes the legal theory of contributory infringement. Napster, Aimster, Grokster...

            • No the idea is that one courts decision only applies in that jurisdiction. Napster was shutdown by a court in the country in which it operated. If the Supreme court of the Cayman Islands ruled that it was an illegal operation, no one would give a shit.

              Likewise just because one judge in the UK made one decision doesn't make the software illegal in any other parts of the world.

              • by tepples ( 727027 )

                Napster was shutdown by a court in the country in which it operated.

                Which also happens to be the country in which Slashdot operates.

                Likewise just because one judge in the UK made one decision doesn't make the software illegal in any other parts of the world.

                Yet.

                Both the USA and Great Britain agree about the illegality of a copying service with no substantial non-infringing use. What makes you think courts in other countries that have signed the same copyright treaty won't reach the same conclusion when the MPA (the MPAA's foreign division) goes into those countries?

                • Which also happens to be the country in which Slashdot operates.

                  What has that got to do with the price of eggs in China?
                  (A quote from a person in a country that is not where Slashdot operates, about a subject as equally relevant to the location of Slashdot as a court decision about an unrelated service).

                  Likewise just because one judge in the UK made one decision doesn't make the software illegal in any other parts of the world.

                  Yet.

                  Both the USA and Great Britain agree about the illegality of a copying service with no substantial non-infringing use. What makes you think courts in other countries that have signed the same copyright treaty won't reach the same conclusion when the MPA (the MPAA's foreign division) goes into those countries?

                  Absolutely nothing. I'm sure it would be considered illegal once it is tested in the jurisdiction covered by the court. In the mean time the decision in the UK has about as much affect on me and the software I use, where I live, outside of their jurisdiction as the above

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Looks like Popcorn Time is available in the Arch User Repository: "https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/popcorntime/".
    Time to block aur.archlinux.org in the UK?

  • http://popcorntime.se/ [popcorntime.se] is dead already.

    • by Zedrick ( 764028 )
      The summary is wrong, popcorntime has never used popcorntime.se (and I really doubt a site like that could by hosted with binero, which is a typical webhotel - they don't even offer VPS-accounts).
  • First they came for the kiddie porn...
  • This is getting stupid beyond belief. If we are blocking things like this why not strike at the heart of the problem and block home computers or operating systems, or the internet altogether.

    Without an operating system people can't infringe music, movies or software. Same without a computer. While we're at it why not just kill all humans and then we'll be able to 100% eliminate piracy in all forms at the same time we'd solve our economic and social problems as well as protect humans from disease and end wo
  • They had better ban Wikipedia as they have a like to where popcorn time is downloaded. They have links all over to popcorn time downloads. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki... [wikipedia.org]
    • I believe specific Wikipedia pages actually have been banned in the UK. That album cover with the naked chick.
  • thetvdb.com, themoviedb.com, kat.ph, and eztv.ch pretty much got you covered.

  • All in favor of increasing funding to Project Whack-A-Mole? AYE!!! Measure approved.
  • Postal services are also capable of delivering pirated content...so when are all those shut down?

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Working...