Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'iptv'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Site Related
    • News & Updates
    • Site / Forum Feedback
    • Member Introduction
  • News
    • General News
    • FileSharing News
    • Mobile News
    • Software News
    • Security & Privacy News
    • Technology News
  • Downloads
    • nsane.down
  • General Discussions & Support
    • Filesharing Chat
    • Security & Privacy Center
    • Software Chat
    • Mobile Mania
    • Technology Talk
    • Entertainment Exchange
    • Guides & Tutorials
  • Off-Topic Chat
    • The Chat Bar
    • Jokes & Funny Stuff
    • Polling Station

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 14 results

  1. This week police in the UK targeted another IPTV provider, arresting a 24-year-old man. However, there are other cases too involving at least three arrests and the seizure of luxury vehicles. All targets were detained under suspicion of fraud and money laundering offenses. As reported early June, Spain’s National Police shut down a pirate IPTV operation that allegedly serviced two million customers. The operation was a multi-national affair, with participation from law enforcement authorities across Europe, Canada and the United States. Almost €5 million in funds plus €1.1 in bank assets were frozen. This was a big operation by most standards but it’s clear that this didn’t mark the end of anti-IPTV activity in Europe. Police Hit Another Supplier and ‘Hijacked’ its Streams This week, news of a particularly interesting enforcement action appeared in the UK. After arresting a 24-year-old man in the Hollesley area of East Suffolk under suspicion of involvement in a pirate IPTV operation, police hijacked the service’s streams to deliver an anti-piracy message to subscribers of the service. The image below, supplied to TF by Suffolk Police, shows what customers saw. This is the first time that police in the UK have used an IPTV service itself to deliver an anti-piracy warning and to our knowledge, this method has never been carried out in other countries either. If it had, perhaps the events we’ll mention now would’ve attracted more attention in the media. Another Raid, Another Arrest, High-Value Assets Seized On Thursday, June 25, Lancashire Police executed a search warrant at a house on Buckley Grove in the seaside resort of Lytham St Annes. Carried out under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, a 28-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of being involved in the supply of pirate IPTV services and illegal TV streaming devices. While these cases are increasingly common, particularly in mainland Europe, it is rare for police in the UK to immediately seize high-value assets in connection with local cases. As the images below show, police walked away with a couple of pretty nice vehicles. In addition to the Range Rover Sport SVR V8 and Audi A5 convertible shown above, police also seized designer clothing, bags and watches. “I hope this case shows people that we will work to find those responsible for what ultimately amounts to fraud, seeing people make thousands of pounds illegally. We will also look to seize what they spend their fraudulent profits on,” said DS Mark Riley from Lancashire’s Economic Crime Unit. The name of the service hasn’t yet been published by the police and with insufficient evidence to back up the rumors, we won’t name it here. Two People Arrested and Charged in Northern Ireland To the west of Lytham and across the Irish Sea, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) has also been busy cracking down on the provision of pirate IPTV services. Details are scarce but it transpires that following an investigation in the Mid Ulster area, Criminal Investigation Department (CID) detectives and local officers in Bellaghy, County Londonderry, uncovered what is being described as the “sale of illegal subscriptions for TV channels”. “A 34-year-old man and a 30-year-old woman have been charged with a range of offenses including making or supplying articles for use in fraud, possessing articles infringing copyright, unauthorized use of a trademark and concealing criminal property,” a police spokesperson confirmed. Again, police haven’t named the service but online chatter points firmly towards an IPTV supplier that disappeared offline last month. Without direct confirmation we won’t publish its name here but there are some signs that should the case go all the way to a conviction and sentencing, it could be a less than straightforward matter. Fraud and Money Laundering Are the Common Factors For many years people considered the operation of torrent sites and streaming platforms only from the angle of copyright law but what we are seeing with most IPTV cases are continual references to offenses under the Fraud Act (defrauding rightsholders) and Proceeds of Crime Act (money laundering). These offenses not only attract significant custodial sentences in their own right but can also lead to those convicted being stripped of their property, if the authorities believe those assets were obtained from criminal activity. Source
  2. This week Reddit banned the popular /r/iptvresellers sub-Reddit for violating the site's rules. When a new sub-Reddit was created covering the same topic, Reddit quickly banned that too. So what exactly is an IPTV reseller, how do they operate, and why is Reddit so keen to get rid of them? While torrent-based piracy remains popular today, there is massive demand for unlicensed IPTV providers that offer thousands of live TV channels and VOD packages. These IPTV products are available for just a few dollars, euros or pounds per month from what appears to be thousands of suppliers. The truth, however, is that while there is a bewildering range of people willing to sell customers a subscription, most of these don’t run services of their own. Instead, they act as sellers or resellers of other entities’ products. These individuals or groups sell IPTV subscriptions all over the Internet. They are often seen on Facebook pages, Twitter, or their very own websites. Until this week, hundreds were advertising subscriptions on Reddit via the appropriately named /r/iptvresellers sub-Reddit. However, that all came crashing down when Reddit’s admins banned the group for violating the site’s rules. Reddit wasn’t clear about the specific reasons that led it to ban the IPTV resellers’ hangout and merely pointed to the site’s rules indicating there had been a breach. However, Reddit’s ‘Content Policy’ mentions “unwelcome” content as being unsuitable for the platform and specifically mentions that “fraudulent services” are outlawed. Some may dispute that definition in respect of pirate IPTV but as Reddit makes clear, its guidelines are there for a reason and users should “please keep in mind the spirit in which these were written, and know that looking for loopholes is a waste of time.” One of the loopholes tested after the banning of /r/iptvresellers this week was to immediately open up a new sub-Reddit – /r/iptvresellers2. That too was quickly banned by Reddit but under a different rule, as the image below shows. Clearly, IPTV resellers are no longer welcome on Reddit (at least openly) but how do they fit into the bigger picture and how do they operate? There are many variations and exceptions but here’s a basic analogy and overview for those still puzzled by how things work. Manufacturer vs Retail If someone wanted to buy a new Samsung S20, they could call up Samsung in South Korea and say “Hey, sell me a phone!” and hope for the best. A more likely scenario is that they would head off to a local electronics store advertising the product and buy one from there. Samsung may be good at manufacturing and supplying phones in bulk to distributors but local suppliers can offer the personal service most customers require. They’re also accessible when things don’t go to plan. In return for advertising availability of the phone from their store, stocking units, dealing with sales and advice, and the inevitable customer service issues thereafter, these retailers are rewarded with a cut of the profits. In this case, Samsung is happy for the retailer to deal with the public because they’re too busy making phones. It’s a good partnership that works for everyone. IPTV often works on a similar basis. IPTV Resellers Are Similar to Retailers Most IPTV resellers do not operate an IPTV service of their own so their role is similar to that of the phone retailer. While the IPTV provider worries about obtaining TV channel sources and maintaining servers to deliver the service, the reseller (retailer) can go to work finding and looking after customers. In common with regular retailers, IPTV resellers need payments from their customers in order to pay their suppliers. Most generally they are able to charge customers whatever they like per month, three-month, six-month, or yearly period of access. The idea, of course, is to charge more than the supplier charges them in order to make a profit. First, the Prospective Reseller Needs an IPTV Supplier Once a prospective reseller has found an IPTV supplier prepared to offer a reseller account (some prefer to sell direct or via preferred partners), the reseller is granted access to a ‘panel’. This web interface allows the reseller to manage his or her account, including adding new subscribers and offering trials. The panel also allows the reseller to manage their existing customers, including subscribing them to various packages or adding a new device that needs to be identified by a MAC address, for example. Perhaps most importantly, it allows the reseller to buy ‘credits’ from their supplier. IPTV Resellers Buy ‘Credits’ and Convert These Into Subscriptions Becoming an IPTV reseller requires some kind of investment and no one is going anywhere without buying some ‘credits’ first. These virtual tokens are sold by IPTV services to resellers in bulk, let’s say 50 at a time at $5 each for the sake of argument and round numbers. Each credit usually buys one month’s worth of access so, for an investment of $250, the reseller now has 50 months of subscriptions to sell. As an example, when new customer ‘A’ appears and agrees to buy a three-month subscription for $30, three of the reseller’s available 50 credits are spent on that transaction, costing him $15 and leaving $15 in gross profit. This process can be repeated for additional new customers or when existing customers want to extend their subscriptions. When the reseller’s available credits reduce to a low level, the reseller simply buys some more from his or her supplier. Reselling Sounds Simple But It’s a Still a Business With Risks The above provides only the most basic overview of how resellers can operate and massively oversimplifies the business itself. In common with a retailer selling consumer goods to the public, there are big decisions to make. Should the reseller pile subscriptions high and sell them cheaply via Reddit Discord? Or would it be better to have a glossy website that aims to portray the service as the best in the world and therefore worth double or triple the money? There are arguments for both but each has its pitfalls. Having thousands of subscribers and making a smaller amount on each is fine in theory but when a large proportion of those customers demand high-levels of service, that has time implications for the reseller who could end up a busy fool. Equally, running a slick website supported by a marketing operation to build faith in a cool brand means additional costs, which obviously eats into profits. And, of course, there’s always the chance that the IPTV supplier gets taken out by the authorities. That could mean lost credits, hundreds of angry customers, and a reselling business in tatters. Source
  3. Spain's National Police has shut down a popular pirate IPTV operation that allegedly serviced two million customers. With help from Europol and law enforcement in Canada, the US and several European countries, 11 suspects were arrested. The authorities also confiscated property worth nearly €5 million while another €1.1 in bank assets were frozen. In recent years, unlicensed TV subscriptions have been flourishing, with hundreds of vendors offering virtually any channel imaginable for a small monthly fee. This is seen as a major threat by copyright holders and law enforcement authorities are also taking the matter seriously. That became apparent again today, as law enforcement authorities announced one of the largest IPTV busts in history. In an operation led by Spain’s National Police, law enforcement agencies across Europe claim to have “switched off” a massive pirate IPTV operation. The investigation, which started last year, resulted in 15 house searches and 11 people – including the suspected leader – were arrested. Millions Seized in International Operation Spanish police received widespread international support, including from law enforcement agencies in Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Italy, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Sweden, United Kingdom, and the United States. The authorities report that the enforcement actions took place last Wednesday, June 3. In addition to the raids and arrests, another 16 people were interrogated for their possible involvement in any illegal activity. The IPTV operation reportedly offered streaming services to roughly two million subscribers and was good for €15 million in estimated profits, Europol says. “More than 2 million subscribers were receiving these illegal services totaling the profits for the criminal network at an estimated €15 million. The investigation focused on shutting down the servers and disconnecting the IP addresses, and obtaining relevant information to effectively dismantle the criminal group.” Spanish police released footage of some of their enforcement actions. This shows how officers in riot gear entered the premises of a suspect where four cars, luxury watches, cash, and cryptocurrencies were confiscated. It also shows a wide variety of servers allegedly used in the operation. In total, nearly €5 million in assets were seized while €1.1 million in funds across 11 different bank accounts were frozen. As is often the case, authorities haven’t named the prime suspects or connected services. However, we were able to gather some further details. Rapid IPTV Targeted Anti-piracy group Rights Alliance, which reported the issue to the authorities in Denmark, informs TorrentFreak that Rapid IPTV was a prime target in Spain. In Denmark, three people connected to Danskip.tv were arrested. With many IPTV services using similar names things can get confusing but Rapid IPTV is certainly a large player. Also, several of Rapid IPTV’s services were indeed shut off about a week ago when the raids were carried out. This is confirmed by the official status page, shown below. However, the same status page shows that services are starting to resume again. At the time of writing, most are up and running again, apart from the popular IPTV.community forums. So, if this RapidIPTV was the target, it’s certainly not down and out. Last week’s actions were supported by Eurojust, the European Union’s Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation, which held two coordination meetings ahead of the operation. The operation itself was led by the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Alicante in cooperation with Spain’s National Police. This is not the first time Europe’s law enforcement agencies have cooperated to bust a pirate IPTV service. While these raids and arrests will certainly have a short term effect, they can also present opportunities for others to get involved. And with millions and millions in potential profits, that’s an attractive prospect for some. Update: IPTV.community just came back online. Source
  4. SAN DIEGO: No longer tucked away in the dark reaches of the Internet, the streaming of pirated television shows and films has gone mainstream. Just look at Heroes IPTV. Not satisfied with online sales alone, business partners Hisham Alshaikhli and Laith Alqaraghuli opened a storefront in El Cajon to sell the latest craze in pirated media: set-top boxes similar to a Roku, but preloaded with illicit streaming apps. For a one-time price – US$150 (RM623) to US$350 (RM1453) – viewers could gain access to thousands of pirated films and shows, no subscription necessary. The brick-and-mortar shop gave customers a rare in-person shopping experience and lent the business the luster of legitimacy. But despite the openness with which the company operated, it was illegal. The black-market entrepreneurs are the first in the US to be successfully criminally prosecuted for selling such illicit streaming devices, according to Homeland Security Investigations. Many more cases are in the pipeline. Criminal investigations into streaming piracy devices at the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Centre – a clearinghouse partnering US law enforcement agencies with foreign allies – have more than doubled over the past two years, according to an estimate by the FBI. Pirated movies and shows in the digital age have long been available on massive online servers, called cyberlockers, as well as shared on peer-to-peer networks. But the online portals haven't always been that simple for novices to access or navigate. It wasn't until the advent of illicit streaming devices, paired with user-friendly interfaces, that the trend truly opened up to the mass market. The set-top boxes, which can be plugged into a TV, come preloaded with legitimate-looking streaming apps that open the door to massive unauthorised media collections. The growing popularity has content creators terrified. "We have been devalued because piracy has become rampant," said Ruth Vitale, a veteran Hollywood producer and CEO of CreativeFuture, a nonprofit coalition of more than 550 companies and organisations working to protect creative rights. "Audiences don't understand that over 85% of the businesses in film and television are small businesses employing under 10 people," she added, noting the 2.2 million people who work in the US film and TV industry. "Red carpets telegraph that we are all wealthy; we are working people." The Global Innovation Policy Center, an affiliate of the US Chamber of Commerce, estimates that global online piracy costs the US economy at least US$29.2bil (RM121.25bil) in lost revenue each year, according to a study released in June. But the law protecting copyrighted works hasn't evolved as fast as the technology. Downloading and distributing unauthorised content is a felony, a crime that carries a prison sentence of up to five years. Streaming that same content without permission, on the other hand, is considered infringing on a public performance and treated as a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in prison. In other words, the law is more Napster era than Netflix. The criminal copyright code hasn't been revised since 2008 – when streaming wasn't considered a viable option. "Now 80% of all piracy happens through streaming," Vitale said. "Things are going to have to change." The so-called "streaming loophole" has been briefed in front of the Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property earlier this year, and the US Copyright Office has put its support behind felony-level penalties in illicit streaming cases, noting in a letter to the subcommittee "the failure of the current law to effectively address unauthorised streaming". Much of the battle against digital piracy, especially when it comes to streaming, has been waged in civil litigation, with major studios going after illicit services after cease-and-desist letters go ignored. Criminal prosecutions involving streaming devices have been particularly rare. The Motion Pictures Association, a trade group that represents major studios from Disney to Sony to Netflix, has been one of the loudest voices calling on the US federal government to go after violators criminally. In recent testimony to Congress, the association has also urged US Customs and Border Enforcement to aggressively interdict illicit streaming devices coming into the US from other countries. "The industry has a role to play to fight for their rights, but we need the support of law enforcement badly to get the message out that this is illegal and this should not happen," said Jan van Voorn, chief of global content protection for the Motion Pictures Association. But investigating such cases can be challenging, according to the FBI and Homeland Security Investigations. The identities of streaming service operators or illicit device sellers are often cloaked in sham business and fake addresses, with many based overseas. The US works closely with law enforcement on intellectual property issues in Europe, Canada and Mexico, but many other countries that shelter violators don't have similar copyright laws, making diplomatic cooperation difficult at times, said Anthony Frazier, an FBI special agent at the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center. Often, an illicit streaming device is just one part of a global ecosystem, said Nathan Loehr, an intelligence analyst at the coordination center. "Hypothetically, you could have a California reseller obtaining a device built and shipped from China using software from India that's allowing the streaming of content from South-East Asia that's being hosted on servers from the Netherlands," said Loehr. And similar to other forms of organised crime, the players structure the operation in a way that limits interaction with each other. "That becomes really, really difficult to work our way up to develop that chain, but not impossible," Loehr said. The El Cajon case was different, though. The operators of Heroes IPTV – a California corporation launched in 2015 – actually sold face-to-face out of its store, located in an office complex on Main Street at Jamacha Road. Undercover agents visited multiple times in 2017 and heard the sales pitch that blatantly described the product's illegal purpose, according to Homeland Security Investigations, which handled the case. The set-top boxes were sourced from China and, once in the US, loaded with the illicit apps, including Show Box, according to HSI. Alshaikhli and Alqaraghuli pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting in the infringement of a public performance of a copyrighted work. While they faced up to a year in custody, a San Diego federal judge last month sentenced both to a year of unsupervised probation and US$1,000 (RM4,152) restitution each. The two are the first in the nation to plead guilty to selling such devices, according to HSI. While the El Cajon case has been quietly wrapping up in the courts, the streaming industry has been closely watching a new major prosecution unfold. In August, the US Attorney's Office in the Eastern District of Virginia charged eight people linked to Jetflicks, a Las Vegas-based subscription streaming service designed to work on many different types of devices, from computers to set-top boxes to smartphones, according to the FBI. Jetflicks allegedly used sophisticated computer code to scour pirate websites around the world to pull in new content, according to the indictment. At one point, Jetflicks claimed to have more than 183,200 different television episodes, and the company distributed them to tens of thousands of paid subscribers around the US, the FBI said. One of the defendants left Jetflicks to launch his own service, iStreamItAll, the indictment alleges. The two lead defendants are facing US felony charges, including reproduction and distribution of copyrighted material and money laundering. Law enforcement efforts to stamp out streaming piracy have focused on the supply chain, not individual viewers. Still, authorities and industry officials continue to search for ways to grab the attention of consumers. If the ethical argument isn't enough to dissuade consumers, there's something else they should consider: the possibility that these illicit streaming device are also preloaded with malware. By plugging a set-top device into a home's Internet network to stream, users have willingly bypassed router firewall protection and have invited potential intruders inside, making any other device on the network also vulnerable, experts say. Research by Digital Citizens Alliance and cybersecurity company Dark Wolfe Consulting found malware on piracy apps that stole user names and passwords, uploaded data without consent and probed user networks for weak spots, according to the findings released in April. "You're supporting illegal activity by stealing creative content," Voorn of the Motion Pictures Association said. "You don't know who you're doing business with." And with the recent crackdowns against such streaming services and devices, there is also the real possibility of suddenly losing access. "You see a blank screen and nothing works anymore," Voorn said. "Obviously that's not a great consumer experience." Source: Illicit streaming devices bring piracy to the mass market – and it's terrifying Hollywood (via The Star Online)
  5. Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN has successfully targeted dozens of vendors of copyright-infringing IPTV services. However, the problem remains. According to BREIN, hosting providers play an important role and it wants those that willingly host illegal IPTV services to be prosecuted. Increasingly, people are canceling their expensive cable subscriptions, opting to use cheaper or niche-based Internet TV instead. While there are plenty of legal options available, there’s also a broad offer of easy-to-use set-top boxes which are specifically configured to receive pirated content. These pirate IPTV boxes are often sold bundled with a monthly or yearly subscription. This created an industry that’s worth billions of dollars worldwide and may grow even bigger. It is safe to conclude that IPTV piracy makes up a large part of the pirate ecosystem. This hasn’t gone unnoticed to copyright holders of course. Over the past year, we have seen enforcement actions against hundreds of sellers and more are likely to follow. Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN is one of the outfits that have IPTV-pirates high on their agenda. This was highlighted in an interview with local radio station BNR in which director Tim Kuik referred to the criminal nature of this problem. While IPTV sellers come in all shapes and sizes, the true masterminds behind the pirated signals often remain unseen. According to BREIN, many resellers are actually afraid to identify their sources. “The signals are stolen by criminal organizations. These set up the infrastructure and provide vendors with the codes. Sellers are afraid to name their suppliers out of fear of retaliation. ‘That would put my life at risk,’ we regularly hear.” The Hollywood-backed anti-piracy group mostly takes action against public sellers. It tracks down these companies and successfully demands hefty settlements. However, in order to tackle the problem properly, more resources are needed. “We target sellers and take their money. A settlement costs them tens of thousands of euros, but to tackle the infrastructure you need better resources and a criminal investigation,” BREIN notes. Potential investigations should target the criminal masterminds behind the scenes but BREIN says that Dutch hosting providers should remain alert as well. Also, providers who willingly host illegal IPTV services should face charges themselves. “Providers who shelter such illegal services and willingly turn a blind eye should be prosecuted,” the anti-piracy group argues. Because of its good Internet infrastructure, the Netherlands is typically a popular location for IPTV vendors to host their services. These ISPs generally claim that they are not aware of the criminal nature of their clients. However, many rightsholders have their doubts about that. According to BREIN, there is a small number of Dutch hosting providers that frequently does business with these IPTV services. These companies don’t get actively involved when complaints come in but forward them to their customers instead. “Reports of rightsholders are only forwarded to the criminals who obviously do nothing with it. If the provider has to take action, it gives the illegal customer plenty of time to keep his service online,” BREIN adds. Whether the hosting companies are required to do more under Dutch law remains the question. However, BREIN would clearly like these companies to take more responsibility. Or, alternatively, have a proper criminal investigation where the role of a hosting provider is seriously considered. In the past, we have already reported on large Europol raids where servers in the Netherlands were targeted. However, as far as we know, Dutch hosting providers were never accused or criminally charged as part of these operations. VIEW: Original Article.
  6. Live Stream TV from M3U Local playlist or from your Internet service provider or free Playlist from any web source. Livestream TV – M3U Stream Player is a stylish IPTV / Live Media Player Set Top Box that is perfect for Stream TV from TV, tablets and smartphones with the Automatic Channel Connectivity feature of M3U Playlist. This application allows you to view IPTV technology based TV. This application does not contain a built-in playlist, making it easy for you to watch TV online comfortably. Please use the playlist in m3u format. Features: Automatically Check Channel Connectivity M3U Playlist. No need for activation code No need to login Local M3U Playlist support. Stream Playlists from any web source Example: github, pastebin etc. Playlist navigation is simple and easy. Automatically scans local M3U playlists Automatically opens the last playlist when opening the application Automatically plays the last channel when opening the application. Great OSD menu makes it easy and fun to watch videos Easy parental control to hide some channels or playlists for kids. “One-Click Favorites” to Add Your Favorite Channels with just one click. Support auto-update Playlists, and use cached versions if not available; EPGs support in XMLTV and JTV formats Chrome cast support (Coming soon) What’s new: Fixed Auto Play Last Played Channel Feature, Minor fixing auto play feature, Bug fixing for Android Jelly Bean below ★★★ MOD Pro ★★★ Pro features unlocked Ads disabled Site: https://www.mirrored.to Sharecode: /files/G1NODCQ8/Livestream_TV_M3U_Stream_IPTV_Pro_v3.2.0.1.2.apk_links
  7. Sky TV Sends Google Thousands of Complaints to Delist Pirate IPTV Services Sky TV is sending notices containing thousands of complaints to Google to have pirate IPTV providers removed from search results. While there's little doubt that the underlying services upon which they rely are unlicensed and therefore illegal, in many cases the sites being wiped from Google are not directly infringing in themselves. Like the majority of commercial broadcasters around the world, Sky has genuine competitors, eager to capture the company’s market share. However, with the rise of unlicensed IPTV providers, which are offered either directly or through a staggering number of re-sellers and affiliates, Sky also faces huge competition from pirates. It is not difficult to see why. While Sky subscriptions start at somewhat affordable prices, enhanced packages that involve premium movies and sports can escalate to sums that many households simply cannot muster. Pirate IPTV services, on the other hand, are cheap and offer channel packages that eclipse all legal offers. To that end, companies like Sky are keen to wipe such platforms from the map but there’s currently a huge deficiency in what can actually be done to take them down. Nevertheless, that doesn’t stop Sky from trying to make a dent in the volume of eyes landing on their websites. During the past few weeks, Sky has been sending takedown notices to Google targeting many thousands of URLs that make up the websites of pirate IPTV providers servicing customers everywhere. A single notice here, for example, attempts wipe 500 URLs belonging to EpicIPTV, Enjoy-IPTV, TalentIPTV, BestIPTV, and many, many more. Another, sent just this week, targets the websites of a dozen more, systematically attempting to delist every URL. A third, sent at the beginning of February, attempts to remove 500 pages belonging to just a single provider. The list of notices (mainly sent by Sky in Italy, followed by Sky UK) goes on and on (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) but most have something in common. Despite the fact that a regular DMCA takedown notice should list URLs containing infringing content, the vast majority of those sent by Sky do not. Instead, they target the sales portals, information databases, FAQs, and other ancillary pages that support infringing activity carried out elsewhere. None of the services targeted appear to offer pirate streams from the websites listed in the takedown notices, meaning that from a strictly technical perspective, none should be removed by Google. While Google does indeed reject some of the notices for reasons unknown, many have been removed as requested. All that being said, it’s somewhat difficult to criticize Sky for not playing strictly by the rules when so many illicit services aren’t playing by them in any capacity. So, as things stand, it looks like the strategy of targeting providers’ web presences will continue, since it often removes them from view and, as this forum post shows, can cause significant irritation and loss of profits for some people (re)selling IPTV services. That being said, this removal of web presences does little to stop the underlying IPTV services from continuing, business as usual. That makes this a game of whac-a-mole that will never end, unless the underlying services are dealt with. Source
  8. UpGrade

    IPTV Service Advice

    Hi all, I am thinking of paying for an IPTV service i can use on my android box. I have never paid for this kind of service before and i need some recommendations. I want to be able to watch sky sports and UFC, all that kind of stuff in HD. I am in the UK. I want all the film channels and entertainment channels. I would also like it to include multi regional channels from different countries What do you do once paid ? Simply set up an app for example stbemu and thats it ? Can anybody advise of any services that are not too pricey and preferably a yearly payment?
  9. PythonCrew Streaming Pack: Android One pack for all your android streaming needs. We have tested over 400+ different apk's for movies, tv series, iptv, music, vpn's, etc. As we find more that work good, they will be added and post updated. Most apk's are ad free and unlocked. All apks are focused on android tv boxes with landscape view. I hope everyone enjoys the Pack and have fun streaming. Special thanks goes out to PriSim, Delboy, UpGrade and Atasas for their contributions. Folder link: Site: https://drive.google.com Sharecode: /drive/folders/16381vE16N_0JFZrOaPRduLPrBPCYsUrx?usp=sharing Note: You are not obligated to download or install any of the included apk's within this pack. If you wish to use the free versions (containing ads and some limitations), go ahead. Disclaimer: I test and share with members here to reduce the need for searching and testing themselves. The modded apk's are included so users can see what the full featured versions consist of in order to make a purchase decision. If you like any of the apps you should purchase them. Support the developers so they can continue to improve their apps and services.
  10. Rusty

    Sling TV

    Anyone else here subscribe to SligTV? I like it but hangs on commercials way too much for me. Anyone else? Maybe you have found a fix? Their support offers no viable solutions for me. Maybe I try Hulu next?
  11. Village Roadshow and several major Hollywood studios have won a blocking injunction against a pirate IPTV service. HD Subs Plus delivers around 600 live premium channels plus hundreds of movies on demand, but the service will now be blocked by ISPs across Australia. More blocking requests were also filed today against torrent and streaming sites. After successful applying for ISP blocks against dozens of traditional torrent and streaming portals, Village Roadshow and a coalition of movie studios switched tack last year. With the threat of pirate subscription IPTV services looming large, Roadshow, Disney, Universal, Warner Bros, Twentieth Century Fox, and Paramount targeted HDSubs+ (also known as PressPlayPlus), a fairly well-known service that provides hundreds of otherwise premium live channels, movies, and sports for a relatively small monthly fee. The injunction, which was filed last October, targets Australia’s largest ISPs including Telstra, Optus, TPG, and Vocus, plus subsidiaries. Unlike blocking injunctions targeting regular sites, the studios sought to have several elements of HD Subs+ infrastructure rendered inaccessible, so that its sales platform, EPG (electronic program guide), software (such as an Android and set-top box app), updates, and sundry other services would fail to operate in Australia. After a six month wait, the Federal Court granted the application earlier today, compelling Australia’s ISPs to block “16 online locations” associated with the HD Subs+ service, rendering its TV services inaccessible Down Under. “Each respondent must, within 15 business days of service of these orders, take reasonable steps to disable access to the target online locations,” said Justice Nicholas, as quoted by ZDNet. The ISPs were given flexibility in how to implement the ban, with the Judge noting that DNS blocking, IP address blocking or rerouting, URL blocking, or “any alternative technical means for disabling access”, would be acceptable. The rightsholders are required to pay a fee of AU$50 fee for each domain they want to block but Village Roadshow says it doesn’t mind doing so, since blocking is in “public interest”. Continuing a pattern established last year, none of the ISPs showed up to the judgment. A similar IPTV blocking application was filed by Hong Kong-based broadcaster Television Broadcasts Limited (TVB) last year. TVB wants ISPs including Telstra, Optus, Vocus, and TPG plus their subsidiaries to block access to seven Android-based services named as A1, BlueTV, EVPAD, FunTV, MoonBox, Unblock, and hTV5. The application was previously heard alongside the HD Subs+ case but will now be handled separately following complications. In April it was revealed that TVB not only wants to block Internet locations related to the technical operation of the service, but also hosting sites that fulfill a role similar to that of Google Play or Apple’s App Store. TVB wants to have these app marketplaces blocked by Australian ISPs, which would not only render the illicit apps inaccessible to the public but all of the non-infringing ones too. Justice Nicholas will now have to decide whether the “primary purpose” of these marketplaces is to infringe or facilitate the infringement of TVB’s copyrights. However, there is also a question of whether China-focused live programming has copyright status in Australia. An additional hearing is scheduled for May 2 for these matters to be addressed. Also on Friday, Foxtel filed yet another blocking application targeting “15 online locations” involving 27 domain names connected to traditional BitTorrent and streaming services. According to ComputerWorld the injunction targets the same set of ISPs but this time around, Foxtel is trying to save on costs. The company doesn’t want to have expert witnesses present in court, doesn’t want to stage live demos of websites, and would like to rely on videos and screenshots instead. Foxtel also says that if the ISPs agree, it won’t serve its evidence on them as it has done previously. The company asked Justice Nicholas to deal with the injunction application “on paper” but he declined, setting a hearing for June 18 but accepting screenshots and videos as evidence. torrentfreak
  12. Several major Hollywood studios, Amazon, and Netflix have filed a lawsuit against Set Broadcast, LLC, which sells the popular IPTV service SET TV. The companies accuse the service and its operators of facilitating mass copyright infringement. In addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages, the movie studios request an injunction to stop the infringing activity. In recent years, piracy streaming tools and services have become a prime target for copyright enforcers. This is particularly true for the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE), an anti-piracy partnership forged between Hollywood studios, Netflix, Amazon, and more than two dozen other companies. After taking action against Kodi-powered devices Tickbox and Dragonbox, key ACE members have now filed a similar lawsuit against the Florida-based company Set Broadcast, LLC, which sells the popular IPTV service SET TV. The complaint, filed at a California federal court on Friday, further lists company owner Jason Labbosiere and employee Nelson Johnson among the defendants. According to the movie companies, the Set TV software is little more than a pirate tool, allowing buyers to stream copyright infringing content. “Defendants market and sell subscriptions to ‘Setvnow,’ a software application that Defendants urge their customers to use as a tool for the mass infringement of Plaintiffs’ copyrighted motion pictures and television shows,” the complaint reads. In addition to the software, the company also offers a preloaded box. Both allow users to connect to live streams of TV channels and ‘on demand’ content. The latter includes movies that are still in theaters, which SET TV allegedly streams through third-party sources. “For its on-demand options, Setvnow relies on third-party sources that illicitly reproduce copyrighted works and then provide streams of popular content such as movies still exclusively in theaters and television shows.” The intended use of SET TV is clear, according to the movie companies. They frame it as a pirate service and believe that this is the main draw for consumers. “Defendants promote the use of Setvnow for overwhelmingly, if not exclusively, infringing purposes, and that is how their customers use Setvnow,” the complaint reads. Interestingly, the complaint also states that SET TV pays for sponsored reviews to reach a broader audience. The videos, posted by popular YouTubers such as Solo Man, who is quoted in the complaint, advertise the IPTV service. “[The] sponsored reviewer promotes Setvnow as a quick and easy way to access on demand movies: ‘You have new releases right there and you simply click on the movie … you click it and click on play again and here you have the movie just like that in 1 2 3 in beautiful HD quality’.” The lawsuit aims to bring an end to this. The movie companies ask the California District for an injunction to shut down the infringing service and impound all pre-loaded devices. In addition, they’re requesting statutory damages which could go up to several million dollars. At the time of writing the SET TV website is still in the air, selling subscriptions. The company itself has yet to comment on the allegations. — A copy of the complaint is available here (pdf), courtesy of GeekWire. torrentfreak
  13. Last week police forces across Europe raided and shut down one of the largest 'pirate' IPTV operations in the world. With information continuing to drip out, the true scale is now becoming clear. In Bulgaria alone, where the illicit service had its alleged base,140 servers were seized. Only adding to the intrigue are fresh claims that the owner of a local ISP was the brains behind the entire operation. Last Tuesday a year-long investigation came to a climax when the Intellectual Property Crime Unit of the Cypriot Police teamed up with the Cybercrime Division of the Greek Police, the Dutch Fiscal Investigative and Intelligence Service (FIOD), the Cybercrime Unit of the Bulgarian Police, Europol’s Intellectual Property Crime Coordinated Coalition (IPC³), and the Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance (AAPA), to raid a ‘pirate’ TV operation. Official information didn’t become freely available until later in the week but across Cyprus, Bulgaria and Greece there were at least 17 house searches and individuals aged 43, 44, and 53 were arrested in Cyprus and remanded in custody for seven days. According to Europol, the IPTV operation was considerable, offering 1,200 channels to as many as 500,000 subscribers around the world. Although early financial estimates in cases like these are best taken with a grain of salt, latest claims suggest revenues of five million euros a month, 60 million euros per year. Part of the IPTV operation (credit:Europol) As previously reported, so-called ‘front servers’ (servers designed to hide the main servers’ true location) were discovered in the Netherlands. Additionally, it’s now being reported by Cypriot media that nine suspects from an unnamed Internet service provider housing the servers were arrested and taken in for questioning. But the intrigue doesn’t stop there. Well in advance of Europol’s statement late last week, TorrentFreak was informed by a source that police in Bulgaria had targeted a specific ISP called MegaByte Internet, located in the small town of Petrich. After returning online after a couple of days’ downtime, the ISP responded to some of our questions, detailed in our earlier interview. “We were informed by the police that some of our clients in Petrich and Sofia were using our service for illegal streaming and actions,” a company spokesperson said. “Of course, we were not able to know this because our services are unmanaged and root access [to servers] is given to our clients. For this reason any client and anyone that uses our services are responsible for their own actions.” Other questions went unanswered but yesterday fresh information coming out of Cyprus certainly helped to fill in the gaps – and then some. Philenews reports that a total of 140 servers were seized in Bulgaria – 60 from the headquarters of MegaByte Internet and four other custom locations, and 80 from two other locations in the Bulgarian capital, Sofia. At least as far as locations go, this ties in with a statement provided by MegaByte to TF last week which claimed that some of its equipment was seized from Telepoint, Bulgaria’s biggest datacenter. Viewing cards facilitating feeds… We now know that ten employees of MegaByte were interrogated by the police but perhaps the biggest revelation is that the owner of the Internet service provider is now being openly named as the brains behind the entire operation. Philenews reports that 47-year-old businessman Christos Apostolos Samaras from Greece, who has owned and run MegaByte since 2009, is the individual Europol reported as being arrested in Bulgaria last week. In addition to linking him to MegaByte Internet’s domain, various searches indicate that Samaras is also connected to 1Stream, a hosting company dedicated to providing bandwidth for streaming purposes. The investigation continues. source
  14. Watch IPTV from your Internet service provider or free live TV channels from any other source in the web. If you are using VLC to watch TV on your PC then this app is for you. This is the paid version of IPTV app. More Info: https://play.google.com/store/apps/d...iptv.pro&hl=en Download: http://www.tusfiles.net/z50b4mgnhg0mhttp://www.indishare.com/8l2iow7vu8ouhttp://up.bannedhost.com/s77fdyvarfb8http://www11.zippyshare.com/v/14677096/file.htmlhttp://usersfiles.com/gyzs8s2yk1om
×
×
  • Create New...