Argentina Blocks Pirate Streaming Services Magis TV and Xuper TV, VPN Usage Skyrockets [magis xuper]In September 2024, we reported on an unprecedented anti-piracy measure handed down in Argentina. Judge Esteban Rossignoli required local ISPs to block 69 domains linked to the pirate IPTV service Magis TV. More controversially, the judge also ordered Google to remotely uninstall sideloaded Magis TV apps from all Android devices with Argentine IP addresses. “What was achieved is an unprecedented court order, which is in the process of being analyzed by Google – we understand that they cannot deny it – which is to uninstall, through the Android operating system update, the application on all devices that have an IP address in Argentina,” prosecutor Alejandro Musso said at the time. While the Magis TV crackdown has some effect, the brand wasn’t gone. New IPTV services continued to pop up, including an apparent rebrand: XuperTV. This week, these two services are both targeted in a new high-profile court order. ## 70+ Domains Blocked, Apps Go Dark On February 10 and 11, thousands of Argentine users [discovered][1] that Magis TV and its successor Xuper TV had stopped working entirely. Channel lists wouldn’t load, connections timed out, and in some cases, the apps completely vanished from smart TVs and mobile devices. This is the result of Judge Rossignoli’s new court order, which covers more than 70 domains. The order requires ISPs to block domains and IP-addresses and, similar to the earlier version, orders Google to disable the applications on Android devices connecting from Argentina. Users attempting to open the apps are greeted with a blunt message: > “Due to policy limitations, the account cannot be used in your area. Contact your retailer.” The court order is part of a broader enforcement action, led by Argentina’s Specialized Unit on Cybercrime (UFEIC) under prosecutor Musso. According to [La Nación][2] and [Cadena 3][3], the investigation included raids and the seizure of hundreds of TV Boxes. Those identified as responsible face up to six years in prison. Before the full block hit, the platforms reportedly tried to limit their exposure by [deleting all Argentine channels][4]. However, that clearly didn’t work. ## Operación 404 The Argentinian enforcement is part of [Operación 404][5], an international anti-piracy operation led by Brazil’s Ministry of Justice that has previously coordinated raids and domain seizures across Latin America. [TVs] Coinciding with the Argentinian actions, Chile’s Department of Telecommunications [ordered][6] ISPs to block all sites using the brands Magis Tv, Flujo TV, Xuper TV or their variants. That includes “any domain, subdomain, IP address, link, redirect or mirror” that reproduces the content. The dynamic blocking order gives ISPs five days to comply. The Chilean action was triggered by a complaint from Warner Bros. Discovery. ISPs must display a notice stating the sites were blocked for intellectual property infringement. ## The Milei/Trump IP Agreement The timing of the anti-piracy actions might not be coincidental. On February 5, Argentina and the United States [signed][7] a trade and investment agreement that includes [explicit commitments][8] on intellectual property enforcement. Argentina committed to “establish a robust standard of protection for intellectual property” and to create “effective systems for enforcement in civil, criminal, and border areas” that “combat and deter the infringement or misappropriation of intellectual property, including in the digital environment.” The United States reportedly [lodged more than 100 copyright-related demands][9] in the negotiations. Article 1.10 specifically commits Argentina to “investigate and bring criminal proceedings against operators of Argentina-based websites that engage in commercial-scale copyright piracy.” That language goes well beyond Magis TV. It also targets sites like Fútbol Libre and Pelota Libre, which stream Argentine football without authorization. ## VPN Interest Spikes In addition to blocking pirate sites, the actions had an immediate side effect: a surge in VPN usage. On February 10, [Proton VPN’s account on X][10] posted a graph showing a sharp spike in Argentine connections, asking: [“Is everything okay in Argentina?”][11] Apparently, pirates quickly began [sharing workarounds][12] on social media. A common one involves installing ProtonVPN, connecting to a Mexican server, then reopening Magis TV or Xuper TV. In some cases, the apps work again via the VPN. Others are [changing DNS settings][13] on their smart TVs manually, though this is reportedly becoming less effective. According to FayerWayer, rights protection systems are now using AI to identify pirate IPTV traffic in real time, leaving users who reconnect with constant interruptions and degraded quality. ## What’s Next The search for workarounds in response to blocking efforts is not new. We have seen this countless times already, dating back more than a decade ago. These blocking workarounds don’t only apply to users, the operators of pirate services and apps also have to get creative. Whether Google actually complied with the removal order and, if so, what actions it took precisely remains an open question. Magis TV apps were distributed mostly as sideloaded APK files from third-party websites. For Google to remotely disable such an app, it would need to intervene on the users’ devices directly. App developers could likely find ways to work around it by rebranding again, simply continuing the game of whack-a-mole. But that’s nothing new, of course. From: [TF][14], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://www.infobae.com/tecno/2026/02/11/xuper-tv-y-magis-tv-dejan-de-funcionar-tras-un-bloqueo-judicial-masivo-en-argentina/ [2]: https://www.lanacion.com.ar/tecnologia/adios-a-magis-tv-y-xuper-tv-por-que-bloquearon-todos-los-canales-de-argentina-nid10022026/ [3]: https://www.cadena3.com/noticia/sociedad/fin-de-la-pirateria-el-motivo-detras-del-bloqueo-de-magis-tv-y-xuper-tv_518185 [4]: https://www.eldestapeweb.com/cultura/television/despues-del-bloqueo-magis-tv-y-xuper-tv-boraron-los-canales-argentinos-202628222045 [5]: https://www.bragadoinforma.com.ar/nota/29768/adios-a-magis-tv-y-xuper-tv-el-quot-apagon-quot-masivo-que-deja-a-miles-de-usuarios-sin-senales-piratas.html [6]: https://www.latercera.com/pulso/noticia/subtel-ordena-a-proveedores-de-internet-bloquear-a-magis-tv-y-todas-sus-versiones/ [7]: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/argentina-and-us-sign-major-trade-deal-targeting-tariffs-and-boosting-political-alliance [8]: https://piracymonitor.org/us-argentina-trade-agreement-specifies-intellectual-property-anti-piracy-protections/ [9]: https://www.minutouno.com/tecno/magis-tv-xuper-tv-futbol-libre-y-pelota-libre-seran-bloqueados-argentina-el-acuerdo-eeuu-n6243847 [10]: https://www.cronica.com.ar/sociedad/tras-el-bloqueo-de-magis-tv-y-otras-plataformas-ilegales-se-disparo-el-uso-de-vpn/ [11]: https://x.com/ProtonVPN/status/2021027758919516668 [12]: https://noticiasargentinas.com/interes-general/el-truco-para-seguir-usando-magis-tv-y-xuper-tv-en-argentina_a698b9be4c331fb2518e9f310 [13]: https://www.fayerwayer.com/entretenimiento/2026/02/11/el-truco-para-seguir-usando-magis-tv-y-xuper-tv-en-argentina-una-solucion-temporal-cargada-de-riesgos/ [14]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/argentina-blocks-pirate-streaming-services-magis-tv-and-xuper-tv-vpn-usage-skyrockets/

Anna’s Archive Quietly ‘Releases’ Millions of Spotify Tracks, Despite Legal Pushback [spotify dice][Anna’s Archive][1] is generally known as a meta-search engine for shadow libraries, helping users find pirated books and other related resources. However, last December, the site announced that it had also [backed up Spotify][2], which came as a shock to the music industry. Anna’s Archive initially released only Spotify metadata, and no actual music, but that put the music industry on high alert. Together with the likes of Universal, Warner, and Sony, Spotify filed a lawsuit days later, hoping to shut the site down. Through a preliminary injunction targeting domain registrars and registries, the shadow library lost several domain names. However, not all were taken down, and with the addition of a new [Greenland-based backup][3], the site apparently pushed through with the feared Spotify data release. ## Millions of Music Files While there hasn’t been an official announcement or a formal listing on the torrent page, several people have spotted dozens of new Spotify download links in the torrents.json file hosted on the site. These files were added on February 8, presumably with a single seeder. At the time of writing, we count 47 new music torrents, plus a new metadata torrent. These releases all contain 60,000 files, except for a smaller batch, bringing the total to roughly 2.8 million files. That’s roughly 6 terabytes of music. In addition, there’s a massive 29 GB ‘seekable’ metadata file, which likely acts as the index for the 2.8 million tracks that use abstract Spotify track IDs as names. *Some of the torrent data* [torrent json] On Reddit, the mysterious releases are [actively discussed][4] in various threads. They do indeed contain music files, ranging from a few hundred kilobytes to several megabytes. The filenames reference what appear to be Spotify track IDs but contain no artist names or song titles. Instead, they likely match Spotify’s internal cache format. The music files themselves come with media information and metadata, including song, album, artist, and publisher, among others. If applicable, the cover art is also included. *Media information* [media information] The torrents are labeled “pop_0,” which, based on Anna’s Archive’s earlier blog post, refers to the popularity rank. The site previously said it planned a staggered release, based on how popular releases are, but additional batches could follow. ## Defying the Injunction The release comes despite a [preliminary injunction][5] signed by Judge Jed Rakoff on January 16. That order explicitly prohibited Anna’s Archive from hosting, linking to, or distributing the copyrighted works, and also targeted third-party intermediaries, including domain registries, hosting companies, and Cloudflare. Anna’s Archive previously appeared to comply, at least in part. The site’s dedicated Spotify download section was removed and marked as “unavailable until further notice.” However, the new torrents suggest that this was a temporary measure rather than a lasting retreat. Until now, only metadata had been released publicly, compressed into roughly 200GB. The actual music files, which the lawsuit specifically sought to prevent from being distributed, are of much bigger concern. ## What’s Next Given the gravity of the situation, Spotify and the labels are not expected to sit idly by. Anna’s Archive previously said it archived roughly 86 million music files, and almost 300 terabytes in total, so there could be more to come. Whether the music companies will also monitor people who share these files for potential legal follow-ups is unknown, but they will do their best to keep the pressure on intermediaries. The music companies already have a court-ordered injunction that compels domain name registrars and registries to make the site inaccessible. However, we have observed that companies and organizations that fall outside the U.S. jurisdiction [don’t automatically comply][6] with these. At the time of writing, Anna’s Archive has not publicly commented on the new release yet. Spotify informed us that the company has no further comments at this time and referred us to the [preliminary injunction][7] it obtained in U.S. court last month. From: [TF][8], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna%27s_Archive [2]: https://torrentfreak.com/annas-archive-backed-up-spotify-plans-to-release-300tb-music-archive/ [3]: https://torrentfreak.com/annas-archive-loses-pm-domain-adds-greenland-gl-backup/ [4]: https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/1qzwnze/annas_archive_releasing_spotify_torrents/ [5]: https://torrentfreak.com/spotifys-crackdown-on-annas-archive-domains-hits-a-jurisdiction-snag/ [6]: https://torrentfreak.com/annas-archive-loses-pm-domain-adds-greenland-gl-backup/ [7]: https://torrentfreak.com/spotifys-crackdown-on-annas-archive-domains-hits-a-jurisdiction-snag/ [8]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/annas-archive-quietly-releases-millions-of-spotify-tracks-despite-legal-pushback/

Nintendo Piracy: NXBrew and NSWPedia Targeted in European Blocking Efforts [nintendocracked]Pirate site blocking is a common practice in dozens of countries around the world, and the Netherlands and Germany are no exceptions. The neighboring countries rely on court-ordered blocking decisions, with a twist; ISPs in both countries voluntarily agreed to honor orders against other providers. At the start of this year, this applied to two Nintendo-related pirate sites. ## Dutch Dynamic ‘NXBrew’ Blocking Order In the Netherlands, the Rotterdam District Court granted a blocking order requested by Dutch [anti-piracy group BREIN][1]. Last week, the court ordered local ISP Delta Fiber to block access to NXBrew.net, a popular platform that reportedly links to more than 12,000 pirated Nintendo Switch games. This is the first site blocking order against a gaming-related site in the Netherlands. The order includes a dynamic blocking provision, requiring Delta Fiber to also block future domains, subdomains, proxies, and mirrors. This means if NXBrew shifts to new domains to evade the blockades, BREIN can add them without returning to court. For now, however, only the .net domain is targeted. *NXBrew* [nxbrew] Delta Fiber made an appearance in the Dutch court, but it offered no substantive defense. The court subsequently granted BREIN’s requests in full, adding NXBrew to the national blocklist. Nintendo was not directly involved in the legal proceeding; instead, its rights were represented by BREIN, which is the primary driver behind Dutch blocking requests. ## ISPs and Google Cooperate While Delta Fiber was the only targeted ISP, other major Dutch Internet providers have agreed to follow suit under the [site-blocking covenant][2] that was signed in October 2021. In addition to broadening the ISP blockades, the covenant also requires BREIN to complete a step-by-step plan before taking legal action. This includes trying to contact the site operators or urging the respective hosting companies to take action. A blocking order should be used as the last resort. In addition to notifying all ISPs, BREIN says that it also sent Google a copy of the ruling requesting removal of NXBrew links from its search results. While not part of the covenant, the search engine is known to [voluntarily comply][3] with ISP blocking orders, even when the company itself is not named. That further increases the scope of the injunction. ## German Court Blocks NSWPedia The Dutch order is not the only Nintendo-linked blocking action this year. On January 27, Cologne Regional Court in Germany ruled that NSWPedia, another piracy site, must be blocked by German ISPs. German ISPs also agreed to cooperate through the [CUII ][4](Clearing Body for Copyright on the Internet) framework, which coordinates blocking efforts between rightsholders and ISPs. Under this system, one court order triggers voluntary blocks across participating providers, similar to the Dutch scheme. NSWPedia was classified as a “structurally copyright-infringing website.” Through a representative random sample, the court determined that between 94.4% and 99.8% of the content was infringing. *NSWPedia* [nswpedia] CUII’s implementation order doesn’t mention the rightsholder and the underlying court order was not immediately available. However, we expect that Nintendo (or their affiliate) is the complainant. ## Transparency Concerns While both systems rely on judicial oversight, transparency remains a concern, especially when ISPs don’t substantially push back in court proceedings. Transparency is particularly limited in Germany, where there is no official public blocklist. This lack of openness led a German developer named Lina to create [CUIILliste.de][5], an [unofficial monitoring site][6] that has exposed several blocking errors. In the Netherlands, some ISPs offer more transparency. This includes Delta Fiber, which provides a list of all blocked domain names. The list, which includes piracy and [Russian propaganda blocks][7], is currently a few hundred entries long and [publicly accessible][8] on the company’s website. *—* * * *A copy of the CUII blocking implementation statement on NSWPedia, referencing the Cologne court order, is available [here (pdf)][9].* TorrentFreak has seen a copy of the NXBrew ruling issued by the Rotterdam Court, but it has not been published publicly yet. From: [TF][10], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://stichtingbrein.nl/ [2]: https://torrentfreak.com/brein-signs-landmark-pirate-site-blocking-agreement-with-dutch-isps-211105/ [3]: https://torrentfreak.com/dutch-court-orders-isp-to-block-music-piracy-sites-newalbumreleases-and-israbox/ [4]: https://cuii.info/en/about-us/ [5]: https://cuiiliste.de/ [6]: https://torrentfreak.com/homebrew-transparency-portal-reveals-needlessly-blocked-pirate-sites-240928/ [7]: https://torrentfreak.com/eu-ban-on-russian-war-propaganda-misfires-blocks-social-media-giants-pirate-iptv/ [8]: https://www.delta.nl/geblokkeerd/ [9]: https://torrentfreak.com/images/Stellungnahme_NWSMEDIA_14_O_323_25.pdf [10]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/nintendo-piracy-nxbrew-and-nswpedia-targeted-in-european-blocking-efforts/

Top 10 Most Pirated Movies of The Week – 02/09/2026 [the housemaid]The data for our weekly download chart is estimated by TorrentFreak, and is for informational and educational reference only. Downloading content without permission is copyright infringement. These torrent download statistics are only meant to provide further insight into piracy trends. All data are gathered from public resources. This week we have one newcomer on the list. “The Housemaid” is the most shared title. ## The most torrented movies for the week ending on February 9 are: ──────────┬──────────────┬────────────────────────┬────────────────────── **Movie │**Rank last │**Movie name** │**IMDb Rating / Rank** │week** │ │Trailer** ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **1** │(…) │The Housemaid │[6.9][1] / │ │ │[trailer][2] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **2** │(1) │Anaconda │[5.7][3] / │ │ │[trailer][4] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **3** │(6) │The Wrecking Crew │[6.5][5] / │ │ │[trailer][6] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **4** │(3) │Zootopia 2 │[7.6][7] / │ │ │[trailer][8] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **5** │(2) │Greenland Migration │[5.3][9] / │ │ │[trailer][10] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **6** │(5) │Predator: Badlands │[7.5][11] / │ │ │[trailer][12] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **7** │(…) │Hamnet │[8.0][13] / │ │ │[trailer][14] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **8** │(4) │The Rip │[6.9][15] / │ │ │[trailer][16] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **9** │(10) │Bugonia │[7.4][17] / │ │ │[trailer][18] ──────────┼──────────────┼────────────────────────┼────────────────────── **10** │(7) │One Battle After Another│[8.1][19] / │ │ │[trailer][20] ──────────┴──────────────┴────────────────────────┴────────────────────── Note: We also publish an updating archive of all the list of [weekly most torrented movies lists][21]. From: [TF][22], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt27543632/ [2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdDdlY2VPxw [3]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt33244668/ [4]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az8M5Mai0X4 [5]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt33046197/ [6]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8R0xDczERo [7]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt26443597/ [8]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-7RMaQaygI [9]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14850054/? [10]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiD3zk0ZRFg [11]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt31227572/ [12]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43R9l7EkJwE [13]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14905854/ [14]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYcgQMxQwmk [15]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt32642706/ [16]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARU2WHyOPxE [17]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12300742/ [18]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd_5HcTujfc [19]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt30144839/ [20]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feOQFKv2Lw4 [21]: https://torrentfreak.com/most-pirated-movies-of-2026-weekly-archive/ [22]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/top-10-most-torrented-pirated-movies/

DMCA Subpoenas Can’t Be Used for Foreign Piracy Lawsuits, Court Rules [one piece logo]With an impressive [185 million visitors][1] per month early last year, Mangajikan was one of the largest piracy sites on the Internet. The site’s popularity did not go unnoticed by manga publisher Shueisha, which took legal action at a California federal court last summer to uncover the operator’s identity. Shueisha filed a request for a DMCA subpoena, directed at Cloudflare, hoping to expose the operator. This appeared to yield results right away, as mangajikan.com and the related domain alammanga.com were voluntarily taken down soon after. The DMCA subpoena was granted [last October][2], despite fierce objections from Mangajikan’s former operator. However, Cloudflare could not hand anything over yet, as both sides [disagreed on the scope][3] of the associated protective order. This disagreement was finally resolved this week. ## U.S. Enforcement Only At the heart of the dispute was whether Shueisha could use the pirate site operator’s identity for copyright lawsuits in Japan or other foreign jurisdictions. The manga publisher argued it should have that flexibility, as it couldn’t know the operator’s location when requesting the subpoena. Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson disagreed. In a discovery order issued this week, the court stated that the DMCA subpoena’s purpose and scope is clearly defined by the [sworn declaration][4] Shueisha made to obtain it. This legally required statement says that the subpoena “will only be used for the purpose of protecting rights under this title.” “‘[T]his title’ means title 17 of the United States Code, so only U.S.-based copyright claims are within the purpose of the subpoena,” Judge Hixson wrote, adding that “foreign litigation is outside of that scope.” *Out of Scope* [out of scope] The ruling effectively means Shueisha can identify the operator to its team in Japan, as long as this is to aid U.S. copyright enforcement. However, it cannot use the data obtained through the Cloudflare subpoena to file copyright infringement actions in foreign courts. ## U.S. Lawsuit Can’t Be Used as Bypass The court also rejected Shueisha’s argument that filing a U.S. copyright lawsuit would effectively end the protective order’s restrictions, allowing the publisher to then use the publicly filed information however it wished, including in foreign proceedings. Judge Hixson characterized this as an impermissible bait-and-switch. “Filing a U.S.-based copyright claim does not cause the protections of the protective order to evaporate. They remain in place; otherwise, Shueisha’s attestation was false. It is not acceptable for Shueisha to make an attestation that it will use the requested information ‘only’ for one purpose and then later change its mind,” the order states. Mangajikan’s attorneys previously warned the court that Shueisha’s position would create a “roadmap” for rightsholders to circumvent DMCA limitations. They could simply obtain identity information through a DMCA subpoena, file a token U.S. lawsuit to make the info public, and then use it for foreign lawsuits. ## No Privacy Fortress for Pirate Site Operator While the pirate site operator won on the foreign litigation issue, the court rejected most of the operator’s proposed privacy protections as excessive. Judge Hixson called the operator’s 19-page protective order proposal “excessive,” noting it would have micromanaged Shueisha’s internal operations. *Excessive* [excessive] The final protective order clarifies that, while Shueisha can publicly identify the operator by name in U.S. court filings, other personal information, such as email addresses, phone numbers, and financial data, remains protected. The order allows Shueisha to share the operator’s identity with its employees in Japan, coordinate with U.S. law enforcement, and use the information for settlement negotiations or U.S.-based copyright claims. ## What’s Next With the protective order now in place, Cloudflare must hand over the identity information to Shueisha’s lawyers. The publisher must then decide if it wants to use that information to file a U.S. copyright lawsuit, or pursue alternative enforcement options. *Permitted Uses* [permitted] If Shueisha fails to file a U.S. action before the statute of limitations expires, the company must destroy all identity information. Needless to say, the case continues to be closely watched by other rightsholders and pirate site operators. DMCA subpoenas are a widely used intelligence gathering tool, and the present order confirms they are not without boundaries. *—* * * *A copy of Magistrate Judge Hixson’s Discovery Order is available [here (pdf)][5]. The final protective order as modified by the court is available [here (pdf)][6].* From: [TF][7], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://torrentfreak.com/piracy-giant-mangajikans-website-closed-after-185m-visits-in-may-alone-250613/ [2]: https://torrentfreak.com/manga-pirate-site-operator-fails-to-dodge-dmca-subpoena-over-cloudflare-cache/ [3]: https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-site-op-wants-shueisha-to-file-a-u-s-lawsuit-in-180-days-or-restore-their-privacy/ [4]: https://www.google.com/search?q=dmca+subpoena+requirements+%22sworn%22 [5]: https://torrentfreak.com/images/hixorder.pdf [6]: https://torrentfreak.com/images/issuedorder.pdf [7]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/dmca-subpoenas-cant-be-used-for-foreign-piracy-lawsuits-court-rules/

Research: Major Pirate Site Shutdown Boosted Visits to other Pirate Sites (and Netflix) [cueflix]In November 2015, Federal Police in Brazil launched Operation Blackbeard, a coordinated action to take down Latin America’s [most popular pirate site: MegaFilmesHD.net][1]. Launched in 2010 and mainly catering to the Portuguese-speaking market, the movie portal had been pulling in a reported 60 million monthly visits. At the time, the site offered a type of convenience that most legal services couldn’t match. In addition to the free and unrestricted access to content, this also included localized features such as Portuguese subtitles or dubbing. This reign ended when police made several arrests, including the site’s presumed operators, and seized several cars, cash, and bank accounts. These actions were welcomed by Hollywood’s Motion Picture Association (MPA), which had [reported the site][2] to the U.S. Trade Representative a month earlier. *MegafilmesHD in 2015* Today, more than a decade has passed since MegafilmesHD’s demise, and online piracy is arguably a much bigger problem. Popular piracy brands such as Cuevana, Redecanais, and FlujoTV are a magnet for many millions of people This doesn’t mean that the original shutdown has no effect whatsoever. At the time, large local pirate sites were a novelty in the region, and, being the largest site by far, MegafilmesHD clearly stood out above the rest. When this went offline, many people had to scramble for alternatives, legal or illegal. ## Going Pirate or Going Legal? Ideally, rightsholders would like to see pirates flocking to legal services when these types of shutdowns occur. That is similar to the desired response to piracy site blocking. And indeed, in some instances, this appears to be true. For example, the “[*Gone in 60 Seconds*][3]” study found that the shutdown of Megaupload in 2012 resulted in a 6 to 10% increase in digital movie revenues for two major Hollywood studios. However, a similar study on the demise of the German streaming portal Kino.to revealed something quite different. The “[Catch Me If You Can][4]” paper found that this shutdown had no measurable increase in legal consumption. Instead, people simply switched to new pirate sites and continued their habit. These seemingly conflicting findings come together in a new study on the MegafilmesHD shutdown. While the associated paper doesn’t have a title inspired by a Hollywood blockbuster, it might as well have been titled “[The Equalizer][5]“. ## “The Equalizer”: MegafilmesHD Shutdown Effect The paper in question, [published][6] by researchers of Chapman University and Carnegie Mellon University, takes a detailed look at how the online activities of Brazilian users were affected by MegafilmesHD. To do so, they examined six months worth of clickstream data of thousands of Internet users, provided by [Netquest][7]. *From Bootleg to Binge* [bootleg to binge] The data included browsing patterns before and after the shutdown, and it included a wide variety of respondents, ranging from hardcore pirates to people who never visited MegafilmesHD at all. After analyzing all data, the researchers found that pirates who previously used MegafilmesHD increased their visits to other pirate sites by 20% on average. Even more striking was the increase in engagement, as time spent on these alternative pirate sites surged by 61%. This effectively confirms that high-profile shutdowns divert traffic to other pirate sites and services. This makes sense, as a single shutdown can’t realistically make all piracy go away. However, the findings don’t end there. Additionally, the researchers also find a boost in legal use. Specifically, the data showed a 6% increase in visits to Netflix and an 11% increase in time spent on the platform among MegafilmesHD users. *Key results* [results] Crucially, this uptick wasn’t simply caused by existing Netflix subscribers watching more content. The researchers found a causal link between high MegafilmesHD usage and the probability of someone becoming a new Netflix subscriber in the months following the raid. ## The Wealth and Gender Gap While these findings may all seem logical, the most compelling part of the research covers which people switched to legal options and who remained pirates. It appears that “The Equalizer” effect was not felt equally across all demographics. Since costs play an important role, it makes sense that there’s a wealth factor involved. And indeed, the research found that students and unemployed individuals were less likely to sign up for Netflix, likely because price remains a primary barrier to entry. Interestingly, gender also plays a key role. The researchers found that women were more likely to stop piracy altogether following the shutdown. Men, on the other hand, were more likely to persist, often “doubling down” by searching for new illegal sources. It is these types of nuances that reveal the complexity of online piracy and the effectiveness of enforcement actions. Ultimately, the researchers conclude that while a single-site shutdown can generate measurable legal gains, those gains are in part limited to users who can afford the alternative. For rightsholders and policymakers, the “take-home” message is that enforcement is only half the battle. Without appealing and affordable legal alternatives, even the most successful police operation may be nothing more than another round of whack-a-mole, driving traffic from one pirate site to the next one. *—* * * *Danaher, B, Hersh, J, and Smith, MD. 2025. “From Bootleg to Binge: User Migration and Legal Demand Following Brazil’s MegafilmesHD Shutdown”. [Review of Economics Research on Copyright Issues][8], Vol 22, pp 1-32.* *Note: This research was conducted as part of Carnegie Mellon University’s Initiative for Digital Entertainment Analytics (IDEA), which receives unrestricted funding from the Motion Picture Association (MPA). The authors note that all findings and any errors remain entirely their own.* From: [TF][9], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://torrentfreak.com/arrests-as-police-target-latin-americas-largest-pirate-site-151119/ [2]: https://torrentfreak.com/riaa-and-mpaa-report-notorious-piracy-sites-to-u-s-government-151007/ [3]: https://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-shutdown-boosted-movie-revenues-130307/ [4]: https://research-api.cbs.dk/ws/files/57343396/j_rg_claussen_et_al_catch_me_if_you_can_acceptedversion.pdf [5]: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455944/ [6]: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5800542 [7]: https://www.netquest.com/ [8]: https://www.serci.org/rerci.php [9]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/research-major-pirate-site-shutdown-boosted-visits-to-other-pirate-sites-and-netflix/

Anna’s Archive Loses .PM Domain, Adds Greenland (.GL) Backup [greenland]Anna’s Archive has faced a barrage of domain takedowns in recent weeks, after Spotify and several major record labels [filed a high-profile lawsuit][1]. The music industry giants filed the case after the shadow library [planned to release][2] hundreds of terabytes of scraped Spotify data, including full tracks. While [Anna’s Archive][3] has since taken its initial Spotify metadata release offline, the legal pressure hasn’t been lifted. On the contrary, the preliminary injunction issued by the New York court, targeting domain registries, registrars, and other intermediaries, has proven to be quite effective. The [.org domain was the first to fall][4], followed by the .se and .in variants. However, not all intermediaries were eager to comply with the U.S. injunction. As we [reported last week][5], AFNIC, the French registry responsible for the .pm domain, made clear that U.S. court orders carry no direct legal weight in France. Enforcing the injunction would require the music companies to petition a French court; as far as we know, that hasn’t happened yet. Instead, the jurisdictional barrier appears to have been sidestepped entirely through a different route. ## .PM Domain Goes Next Earlier this week, Anna’s Archive’s .pm domain became unreachable. WHOIS records confirm that the domain now has a “blocked” status, with a hold flag preventing it from resolving. AFNIC, the French registry responsible for the .pm extension, previously told TorrentFreak that U.S. court orders carry no direct legal weight in France. This makes it unlikely that the registry itself took action. *.PM domain* [pmwhois] Instead, the suspension may have been issued on the registrar level by the Dutch company Hosting Concepts B.V., also known as [Openprovider][6]. Thus far, neither Openprovider nor AFNIC has responded to our requests for comment. ## International Pressure & U.S. Injunctions It is clear that there is no shortage of U.S. court orders targeting Anna’s Archive. In addition to the preliminary injunction in the Spotify case, library catalog company OCLC won a default judgment and [permanent injunction][7] against the shadow library last month in the [WorldCat scraping lawsuit][8]. That order also includes provisions that could be used to target intermediaries. As highlighted earlier, however, not all domain registries and registrars fall under the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. Because of this, rightsholders and anti-piracy groups in other countries have added their own pressure. In the Netherlands, anti-piracy group [BREIN][9] repeatedly urged the local domain registrar Openprovider to take down the .se and .pm domains in January. Openprovider informed BREIN that it had forwarded the request for closure to its customer. BREIN doesn’t know for certain whether its pressure led directly to the .pm domain going offline, nor is it certain that Openprovider is the party that pulled the plug. However, the result is the same. “In any case, the result counts. It’s good that the sites are offline. These shadow libraries are very harmful to authors,” BREIN director Bastiaan van Ramshorst informed TorrentFreak. Regardless of who took action, the .pm domain is now out of rotation. That left Anna’s Archive down to a single working domain earlier this week, but that didn’t last very long. ## Greenland Backup According to domain records, Anna’s Archive registered [annas-archive.gl earlier this week][10]. This new domain uses Njalla’s nameservers and is registered through Immaterialism Limited, a familiar setup from the site’s working .LI domain. *.GL domain* [GL new] The choice of a Greenland-based domain is notable. With ongoing tensions between Greenland and the United States, the .gl registry may not be eager to subject itself to U.S. court jurisdiction. Whether that assumption holds remains to be seen. Previously, The Pirate Bay also moved to a .GL domain briefly. However, the Greenlandic telecoms company that [manages the registry][11] decided to [suspend it soon after][12], over alleged illegal use. For now, Anna’s Archive continues its game of domain whack-a-mole, staying one step ahead of the takedowns for the moment. At the same time, it is expected that rightsholders will do everything in their power to maintain pressure. From: [TF][13], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://torrentfreak.com/unsealed-spotify-lawsuit-triggered-annas-archive-domain-name-suspensions/ [2]: https://torrentfreak.com/annas-archive-backed-up-spotify-plans-to-release-300tb-music-archive/ [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna%27s_Archive [4]: https://torrentfreak.com/annas-archive-loses-org-domain-after-surprise-suspension/ [5]: https://torrentfreak.com/spotifys-crackdown-on-annas-archive-domains-hits-a-jurisdiction-snag/ [6]: https://www.openprovider.com/ [7]: https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-court-order-against-annas-archive-spells-more-trouble-for-the-site/ [8]: https://torrentfreak.com/lawsuit-accuses-annas-archive-of-hacking-worldcat-stealing-2-2-tb-data-240207/ [9]: https://stichtingbrein.nl/ [10]: https://www.whoxy.com/annas-archive.gl [11]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tusass [12]: https://torrentfreak.com/new-pirate-bay-greenland-domains-about-to-be-seized-130410/ [13]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/annas-archive-loses-pm-domain-adds-greenland-gl-backup/

‘Ripping’ Clips for YouTube Reaction Videos can Violate the DMCA, Court Rules [dma]Downloading audio and video from YouTube is generally not allowed, which the video streaming service clearly states in its terms of service. Despite this explicit restriction, there are numerous ‘stream-ripping’ and “YouTube downloader” tools available on the web that do just that. These ripping tools can be used to convert YouTube music videos into MP3s for example. This is seen as a major problem by the music industry, which has and is taking legal steps in response. Specifically, music companies argue that using these stream-ripping tools violates the DMCA, as it circumvents YouTube’s copyright protection technology. This ‘rolling cipher’ can be bypassed [relatively easily][1], but it prevents regular users from downloading videos from YouTube directly. ## Creator vs. Creator The ‘rolling cipher’ accusations are not limited to the music industry. They can also be used in other contexts, including a creator vs. creator battle. This is the case in Cordova v. Huneault, which revolved around the legality of “reaction” and “commentary” channels. The implications could be significant. Reaction and commentary videos have become a massive part of YouTube’s ecosystem, with countless creators building entire channels around responding to, critiquing, or mocking other people’s content. Many of these creators rely on downloading clips from other channels, often using third-party tools that bypass YouTube’s protections, to incorporate into their videos. While fair use is often cited as a defense, this case suggests that DMCA circumvention liability comes into play, regardless of whether their final use qualifies as fair. Without going into the nature of the videos, the lawsuit pits Christopher Cordova (*[Denver Metro Audits][2]*) against Jonathan Huneault (*[Frauditor Troll Channel][3]*). Cordova alleged that Huneault didn’t just use his copyrighted footage without permission, but that he also used “ripping” tools to bypass YouTube’s technical protection to get it. The defense disagreed with this argument and requested dismissal. They argued that, because the videos are publicly viewable on YouTube, there is no “access control” to speak of. Additionally, the defense pointed out that there is no evidence that ripping tools were used, pointing out that the defendant and many others have used screen recording to copy content. [rippinf] After hearing both sides, U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi denied the motion to dismiss the DMCA circumvention claims, allowing the case to move forward on that claim. “Mr. Cordova has adequately pled that YouTube applies technological measures, including ‘rolling-cipher technology’ designed to prevent unauthorized downloading, to videos published on its platform that effectively control access to his videos for purposes of § 1201(a).” “Whether the videos may be viewed by the public is immaterial; the [complaint] refers to technological measures intended to prevent unauthorized downloading,” Judge DeMarchi adds. *From the order* [order] ## Caution: Reaction Channels While the survival of the §1201 claim may seem like a mere technicality in a case that has yet to be fully litigated, it is rather significant. By accepting that the “rolling cipher” effectively controls access to the downloadable file, the court gives creators who want to sue rivals an option to sue for more than just simple copyright infringement. For years, reaction creators have operated under the assumption that, if their commentary is fair use, the way they acquired the footage doesn’t matter. However, Judge DeMarchi’s decision suggests otherwise. Essentially, it means that commentary and reaction channels, which are widespread, face potential liability for DMCA violations if they use ripping tools that bypass YouTube’s protections. ## “No Harm, No Foul”? The legal teams are now sharply divided on what the circumvention claims mean for the case going forward. In a statement to TorrentFreak, defense lawyer [Steven C. Vondran][4] dismisses the circumvention claims as a tactical maneuver that may eventually fall apart, as his client didn’t use a ripping tool. The attorney further argued that, if the “reaction” video of his client is fair use, there is no “injury” or harm. “If fair use rights apply, and if there is no cognizable injury, then what would be their grounds to have proper standing?” Vondran asked. “Plaintiff is arguing that Defendant used ripping tools to circumvent YouTube’s content protection technology to obtain video clips,” Vondran told us. “In fact, this was not the case, but it seems anyone can allege this in a lawsuit and be able to go through discovery to see if they can find the use of these tools.” The defense shifts the focus and counters that the plaintiff has no right to sue in the first place, because there is no harm. Vondran argues that if the final “reaction” video is fair use, then the original creator hasn’t been “injured” just because someone downloaded a clip. Plaintiff’s attorney Randall S. Newman hit back, telling TorrentFreak that circumventing copy protections under §1201 of the DMCA, is a separate violation that is unaffected by a fair use finding. “The injury flows from the act of bypassing technological protection measures themselves, not from the outcome of a fair-use defense asserted after the fact,” Newman says, adding that the question of whether a ripping tool was used will be answered during discovery. While the order of the motion to dismiss is significant, for this case it means little more than that the case can now move ahead to the discovery phase, after which it will be argued on its merits. The allegations that the defendant used ripping tools to download videos will have to be backed up by evidence then. *—* * * *A copy of the order handed down by U.S. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi of the Northern District of California last month is available [here (pdf)][5].* From: [TF][6], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://torrentfreak.com/deciphering-youtubes-rolling-cypher-in-your-browser-is-a-piece-of-cake-201030/ [2]: https://www.youtube.com/c/DenverMetroAudits [3]: https://www.youtube.com/@frauditortroll [4]: https://www.vondranlegal.com/ [5]: https://torrentfreak.com/images/Cordova-v.-Huneault-25-cv-04685-VKD-Order-on-Motion-to-Dismiss.pdf [6]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/ripping-clips-for-youtube-reaction-videos-can-violate-the-dmca-court-rules/

NVIDIA: Contact With Anna’s Archive Doesn’t Prove Copyright Infringement [nvidia logo]Last month, we reported on an expanded class-action lawsuit in which several authors accused NVIDIA of using millions of pirated books to train its AI models. The complaint cited internal emails showing that NVIDIA [contacted Anna’s Archive][1] seeking “high-speed access” to the shadow library’s massive collection. After being warned about the illegal nature of the materials, NVIDIA executives allegedly gave the “green light” to proceed. Now, NVIDIA has fired back with a comprehensive motion to dismiss, calling the authors’ allegations speculative, vague, and legally insufficient. ## Contact With ‘Anna’ Isn’t Enough At the California federal court, NVIDIA argues that the authors’ complaint is built on speculation rather than facts. While the complaint shows evidence suggesting that NVIDIA contacted Anna’s Archive about potentially accessing “millions of pirated materials,” NVIDIA points out a crucial gap: the authors never actually allege that NVIDIA downloaded their specific books from the shadow library. “The only plausible facts alleged about Anna’s Archive are that NVIDIA ‘contacted Anna’s Archive’ about unspecified data, Anna’s Archive asked NVIDIA to confirm, and NVIDIA gave the “green light” to ‘proceed’.” “The mere fact that NVIDIA was in contact with representatives from Anna’s Archive does not mean that NVIDIA obtained Plaintiffs’ works from Anna’s Archive. It’s equally plausible NVIDIA did not,” the motion states. *Not Enough* [annagreen] The chip giant notes that the authors rely heavily on allegations made “upon information and belief”. This is a legal phrase that essentially means that it is an educated guess, rather than a statement that can be backed up with evidence. ## Anna’s Archive ‘Backs’ NVIDIA It’s worth noting that after our original coverage, AnnaArchivist [weighed in on Reddit][2], stating they have not been in direct contact, suggesting the company may have used an intermediary. “We’ve never dealt with Nvidia directly, so they likely used an intermediate party to avoid legal issues. But if Nvidia were to contact us directly, we’d happily provide them with high speed access in exchange for a donation,” the site’s representative wrote. *AnnaArchivist’s comment* [anna] Whether this clarification helps or hurts the authors’ case remains to be seen. In any case, NVIDIA does not mention it in its motion to dismiss. ## Catch-All Fishing Expedition Aside from the Anna’s Archive rebuttal, NVIDIA describes the amended complaint as a fishing expedition that includes “improper catch-all allegations” that target virtually every AI model and dataset the company has ever worked with. The original complaint focused narrowly on the NeMo Megatron model family and the Books3 dataset. But the amended version now references unidentified “NVIDIA LLMs,” unnamed “internal models,” undefined “NextLargeLLM” models, and unspecified “other shadow libraries.” Shortly after filing their updated complaint, the authors sent new discovery requests targeting these new models and datasets. “Plaintiffs’ bid for limitless discovery is confirmed by the blizzard of discovery requests they served after filing,” NVIDIA writes, as further evidence for the alleged fishing expedition. ## No Proof Books Were Actually Used In addition to Anna’s Archive, the amended complaint also adds various other shadow libraries, including Bibliotik, LibGen, Sci-Hub, Z-Library, and Pirate Library Mirror. However, according to NVIDIA, the complaint lacks proof that the company downloaded the authors’ books. Similarly, it argued that there is no evidence that specific books or datasets were used to train LLMs. For example, for the Nemotron-4 models, the authors simply speculated that because the training dataset was large and contained books, it must have included their works. NVIDIA dismissed this line of reasoning, noting that speculation is not enough. “[T]he absence of factual allegations that the data used to train Nemotron-4 15B and Nemotron-4 340B included Plaintiffs’ works requires dismissal as to those models,” the motion to dismiss reads. ## NVIDIA Requests Dismissal All in all, NVIDIA wants the court to dismiss all the expanded claims, including the addition of the new models, the new shadow libraries, and the alleged communication with Anna’s Archive. The company further argues that the contributory and vicarious copyright infringement claims should be dismissed completely, as there is no evidence that specific books were pirated. *Dismiss* [dismiss] Notably, the direct copyright infringement claim, which alleges that NVIDIA used the Books3 database to train its NeMo model, is not covered by the motion. NVIDIA plans to defeat that during trial or on summary judgment, likely through a defense that relies heavily on fair use. *—* * * *A copy of NVIDIA’s motion to dismiss is available [here (pdf)][3]. It is scheduled for a hearing on April 2, 2026, before Judge Jon S. Tigar in Oakland, California.* From: [TF][4], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://torrentfreak.com/nvidia-contacted-annas-archive-to-secure-access-to-millions-of-pirated-books/ [2]: https://www.reddit.com/r/Annas_Archive/comments/1qhwfrs/comment/o0pyc0a/ [3]: https://torrentfreak.com/images/nviddiss-1.pdf [4]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/nvidia-contact-with-annas-archive-doesnt-prove-copyright-infringement/

U.S. Rightsholders Applaud India’s “Lock and Suspend” Piracy Blockades [iipa26]Pirate sites and services can be a real challenge for rightsholders to deal with. In India, however, recent court orders have proven to be quite effective. Indian courts have issued pirate site blocking orders for over a decade. Initially, these orders were relatively basic, requiring local Internet providers to block specific domain names. However, these early orders have evolved quite a bit since then. In 2023, several Hollywood studios obtained a seminal court order that significantly expanded the scope. In addition to requesting Indian Internet providers to block pirate sites, it also required domain registrars to “lock and suspend” the domain names while sharing registrant data with the rightsholders. This broad Delhi court order became a new standard going forward. American rightsholders used it against a wide variety of pirate sites and, through this Indian route, they targeted American domain registrars such as Namecheap and Porkbun. Effectively, the Delhi High Court now has the power to take domains offline worldwide. ## U.S. Rightsholders Praise Indian Model Thus far, U.S. rightsholders have not commented in great detail on these Indian efforts. However, the International Intellectual Property Alliance ([IIPA][1]), which represents the interests of prominent rightsholder groups, including the MPA and RIAA, recently highlighted it. IIPA makes its remarks in its annual “[Special 301][2]” recommendation to the U.S. Trade Representative ([USTR][3]). This inquiry allows rightsholders to flag shortcomings and concerns in foreign countries. [recomm] The IIPA traditionally sees India as a problematic country, and this year it also recommends the USTR put it on the Priority Watch List. However, there is praise too, especially for the site-blocking efforts. The “lock and suspend” orders, in particular, have helped to (temporarily) take out hundreds of pirate sites. This includes targets such as [Animeflix, Vegamovies][4] [Fmovies][5], SFlix, [VidSrc][6], and [many others][7]. “To date, more than 400 piracy domains have been completely wiped from the Internet, representing billions of global piracy visits,” IIPA writes. “Rights holders are encouraged by the Delhi High Court’s progressive understanding of the technologies involved in modern digital piracy and its resolve to grant creative relief to truly tackle piracy on a global scale.” ## Effective Disruption IIPA notes that these court orders are “unusually disruptive for pirate operators”. This is in part because they target domain names through U.S. domain registrars. This means that the impact of these court orders is felt globally. Also, since the domain registrars are required to share the personal details of the domain registrants, these orders can help with follow-up enforcement actions. These Delhi High Court orders have helped to tackle movie and TV-show piracy, and IIPA suggests that this is also showing in the numbers. Anime and manga are now the dominant piracy categories, with less than 30% of the top pirate sites (ex. music) focused on U.S. movies and TV content. “This can be said to be at least in part attributable to the consistent orders being made by the Delhi High Court to disable access to all the top pirate film, TV, and streaming sites,” IIPA writes. Additionally, IIPA highlights enforcement achievements by the local authorities. For example, the [high-profile action][8] against the alleged operator of the streaming platform iBomma, who was arrested soon after he landed at Hyderabad Airport. ## More Can Be Done Of course, IIPA’s report isn’t just a summary of positive notes. After all, the group lists India as a high-priority threat, so there is plenty of room for improvement. “While these promising developments raise hopes that concerted actions can have a positive impact to disrupt the piracy ecosystem, more needs to be done to ensure deterrence becomes the norm to drive would-be pirates from these damaging activities,” IIPA writes. For example, IIPA complains that some Indian Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are slow to implement the blocking orders passed by the Delhi High Court and calls for tighter timelines. In addition, not all foreign domain name registrars are complying with the Indian court orders. This means that the global reach of these orders remains limited. Finally, since broad blocking orders are limited to the Delhi Court, rightsholders recommend replicating these state-level blocking successes nationally across all Indian states. The site-blocking recommendations are just the tip of the iceberg, however. The IIPA recommends India to undertake a long list of actions, ranging from taking action against illegal camcording in movie theaters to improving the proposed Digital India Act by adding anti-piracy measures. *IIPA’s suggested priority actions for India* [prio] IIPA’s conclusion is that India deserves to be called out on the USTR’s “Priority Watch List” in the upcoming Special 301 Review. Whether the U.S. government agrees has yet to be seen, but it wouldn’t be a surprise, as India has consistently been marked as a priority threat in recent years. *—* * * *IIPA’s 2026 Special 301 Report on Copyright Protection and Enforcement, which includes all India references, is [available here (pdf)][9].* From: [TF][10], for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. [1]: https://www.iipa.org/ [2]: https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/intellectual-property/special-301 [3]: https://ustr.gov/ [4]: https://torrentfreak.com/hollywood-takes-down-animeflix-vegamovies-and-others-with-broad-anti-piracy-order-240523/ [5]: https://torrentfreak.com/fmovies-and-other-piracy-streaming-giants-switch-to-new-domains-240503/ [6]: https://torrentfreak.com/global-piracy-injunction-targets-vidsrc-domains-hydra-regenerates-in-russia-251029/ [7]: https://torrentfreak.com/disney-netflix-crunchyroll-try-to-take-pirate-sites-down-globally-through-indian-court/ [8]: https://torrentfreak.com/ace-anti-piracy-coalition-takes-credit-for-sudden-mkvcinemas-shutdown-251212/ [9]: https://torrentfreak.com/images/IIPA-2026-Special-301-Comments-for-Publication-2-1.pdf [10]: https://torrentfreak.com/ https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-rightsholders-applaud-indias-lock-and-suspend-piracy-blockades/