Faced with the growing popularity of ‘pirate’ libraries such as Z-Library and Anna’s Archive , book publishers have ramped up their anti-piracy efforts.

This year alone, Google has processed hundreds of millions of takedown requests on behalf of publishers, at a frequency we have never seen before. The same publishers also target the pirate sites and their hosting providers directly, hoping to achieve results.

Thus far, little is known about the effectiveness of these measures. In theory, takedowns are supposed to lead to limited availability of pirate sources and a subsequent increase in legitimate sales. But does it really work that way?

To find out more, researchers from the University of Warsaw, Poland, set up a field experiment. They reached out to several major publishers and partnered with an anti-piracy outfit, to test whether takedown efforts have a measurable effect on legitimate book sales.

The study only takes printed books into account, since the Polish e-book market is rather small, and statistically reliable sales data is difficult to obtain.

One-Year Takedown Experiment

The research methodology for this study is quite straightforward. In total, 12 prominent publishers took part, of which three dropped out. The publishers shared between 5 and 53 book titles, which were assigned to a takedown group or a control, for which no takedown notices were sent.

The group assignment wasn’t completely random. Instead, books were matched in pairs based on characteristics such as price, format, and previous sales figures, to remove as much noise as possible.

After the books were assigned, those listed in the takedown group were shared with the Polish anti-piracy outfit Plagiat.pl , which started protecting these works. For the remaining books, no action was taken. In total, Plagiat.pl found pirated copies on 53 sites and continually issued takedown notices for a full year.

Takedowns Were Effective, Sales Trend Up

After the research was completed, three assistants were asked to conduct online searches to confirm whether it was harder to find pirated copies ‘protected’ books online. That was clearly the case, as fewer copies were spotted, and it also took longer to find them

The effect of these successful takedowns didn’t clearly translate to sales of print books, however. While the researchers found a small positive effect in the takedown category, it wasn’t pronounced enough to be statistically significant.

Only after the researchers tried a Bayesian analysis, adding data from previous research, did they find an uptick in book sales.

“We were able to substantially curb the unauthorized distribution, which resulted in a small, positive effect on sales,” the researchers write.

“While using classical analysis we found it not to be significantly different from zero, a Bayesian approach using previous ‘piracy’ studies to generate a prior led to the conclusion that protecting from piracy resulted in a significant sales boost of about 9 per cent.”

Open Ending

The paper attributes the lack of a stronger initial result to the relatively low sample size. With more books, it would have been easier to get a more definite answer. However, the positive direction doesn’t contradict earlier research.

For example, a previous study found that takedown notices can lead to an increase in sales of e-books , which are digital, and therefore a more direct substitute for pirated copies.

Strong results or not, the researchers believe that their work is an important contribution to the existing literature. Piracy research typically relies on before-after comparisons, while this study allowed results to be compared during the same time period, with a full control group.

In the end, however, many questions remain unanswered, so follow-up research is warranted. It would be interesting to see the same approach in countries where e-books are more prevalent too.

Since the major publishers are now heavily involved in takedown efforts, they might be interested to see if they get a decent return on their investment? After all, sending takedown notices typically isn’t free.

—

A copy of the paper, published in a recent edition of the Journal of the Economic Science Association is available online here .

Hardy, W., Krawczyk, M. & Tyrowicz, J. Internet “piracy” and book sales: a field experiment. J Econ Sci Assoc (2024)

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

Faced with the growing popularity of ‘pirate’ libraries such as Z-Library and Anna’s Archive , book publishers have ramped up their anti-piracy efforts.

This year alone, Google has processed hundreds of millions of takedown requests on behalf of publishers, at a frequency we have never seen before. The same publishers also target the pirate sites and their hosting providers directly, hoping to achieve results.

Thus far, little is known about the effectiveness of these measures. In theory, takedowns are supposed to lead to limited availability of pirate sources and a subsequent increase in legitimate sales. But does it really work that way?

To find out more, researchers from the University of Warsaw, Poland, set up a field experiment. They reached out to several major publishers and partnered with an anti-piracy outfit, to test whether takedown efforts have a measurable effect on legitimate book sales.

The study only takes printed books into account, since the Polish e-book market is rather small, and statistically reliable sales data is difficult to obtain.

One-Year Takedown Experiment

The research methodology for this study is quite straightforward. In total, 12 prominent publishers took part, of which three dropped out. The publishers shared between 5 and 53 book titles, which were assigned to a takedown group or a control, for which no takedown notices were sent.

The group assignment wasn’t completely random. Instead, books were matched in pairs based on characteristics such as price, format, and previous sales figures, to remove as much noise as possible.

After the books were assigned, those listed in the takedown group were shared with the Polish anti-piracy outfit Plagiat.pl , which started protecting these works. For the remaining books, no action was taken. In total, Plagiat.pl found pirated copies on 53 sites and continually issued takedown notices for a full year.

Takedowns Were Effective, Sales Trend Up

After the research was completed, three assistants were asked to conduct online searches to confirm whether it was harder to find pirated copies ‘protected’ books online. That was clearly the case, as fewer copies were spotted, and it also took longer to find them

The effect of these successful takedowns didn’t clearly translate to sales of print books, however. While the researchers found a small positive effect in the takedown category, it wasn’t pronounced enough to be statistically significant.

Only after the researchers tried a Bayesian analysis, adding data from previous research, did they find an uptick in book sales.

“We were able to substantially curb the unauthorized distribution, which resulted in a small, positive effect on sales,” the researchers write.

“While using classical analysis we found it not to be significantly different from zero, a Bayesian approach using previous ‘piracy’ studies to generate a prior led to the conclusion that protecting from piracy resulted in a significant sales boost of about 9 per cent.”

Open Ending

The paper attributes the lack of a stronger initial result to the relatively low sample size. With more books, it would have been easier to get a more definite answer. However, the positive direction doesn’t contradict earlier research.

For example, a previous study found that takedown notices can lead to an increase in sales of e-books , which are digital, and therefore a more direct substitute for pirated copies.

Strong results or not, the researchers believe that their work is an important contribution to the existing literature. Piracy research typically relies on before-after comparisons, while this study allowed results to be compared during the same time period, with a full control group.

In the end, however, many questions remain unanswered, so follow-up research is warranted. It would be interesting to see the same approach in countries where e-books are more prevalent too.

Since the major publishers are now heavily involved in takedown efforts, they might be interested to see if they get a decent return on their investment? After all, sending takedown notices typically isn’t free.

—

A copy of the paper, published in a recent edition of the Journal of the Economic Science Association is available online here .

Hardy, W., Krawczyk, M. & Tyrowicz, J. Internet “piracy” and book sales: a field experiment. J Econ Sci Assoc (2024)

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

Faced with the growing popularity of ‘pirate’ libraries such as Z-Library and Anna’s Archive , book publishers have ramped up their anti-piracy efforts.

This year alone, Google has processed hundreds of millions of takedown requests on behalf of publishers, at a frequency we have never seen before. The same publishers also target the pirate sites and their hosting providers directly, hoping to achieve results.

Thus far, little is known about the effectiveness of these measures. In theory, takedowns are supposed to lead to limited availability of pirate sources and a subsequent increase in legitimate sales. But does it really work that way?

To find out more, researchers from the University of Warsaw, Poland, set up a field experiment. They reached out to several major publishers and partnered with an anti-piracy outfit, to test whether takedown efforts have a measurable effect on legitimate book sales.

The study only takes printed books into account, since the Polish e-book market is rather small, and statistically reliable sales data is difficult to obtain.

One-Year Takedown Experiment

The research methodology for this study is quite straightforward. In total, 12 prominent publishers took part, of which three dropped out. The publishers shared between 5 and 53 book titles, which were assigned to a takedown group or a control, for which no takedown notices were sent.

The group assignment wasn’t completely random. Instead, books were matched in pairs based on characteristics such as price, format, and previous sales figures, to remove as much noise as possible.

After the books were assigned, those listed in the takedown group were shared with the Polish anti-piracy outfit Plagiat.pl , which started protecting these works. For the remaining books, no action was taken. In total, Plagiat.pl found pirated copies on 53 sites and continually issued takedown notices for a full year.

Takedowns Were Effective, Sales Trend Up

After the research was completed, three assistants were asked to conduct online searches to confirm whether it was harder to find pirated copies ‘protected’ books online. That was clearly the case, as fewer copies were spotted, and it also took longer to find them

The effect of these successful takedowns didn’t clearly translate to sales of print books, however. While the researchers found a small positive effect in the takedown category, it wasn’t pronounced enough to be statistically significant.

Only after the researchers tried a Bayesian analysis, adding data from previous research, did they find an uptick in book sales.

“We were able to substantially curb the unauthorized distribution, which resulted in a small, positive effect on sales,” the researchers write.

“While using classical analysis we found it not to be significantly different from zero, a Bayesian approach using previous ‘piracy’ studies to generate a prior led to the conclusion that protecting from piracy resulted in a significant sales boost of about 9 per cent.”

Open Ending

The paper attributes the lack of a stronger initial result to the relatively low sample size. With more books, it would have been easier to get a more definite answer. However, the positive direction doesn’t contradict earlier research.

For example, a previous study found that takedown notices can lead to an increase in sales of e-books , which are digital, and therefore a more direct substitute for pirated copies.

Strong results or not, the researchers believe that their work is an important contribution to the existing literature. Piracy research typically relies on before-after comparisons, while this study allowed results to be compared during the same time period, with a full control group.

In the end, however, many questions remain unanswered, so follow-up research is warranted. It would be interesting to see the same approach in countries where e-books are more prevalent too.

Since the major publishers are now heavily involved in takedown efforts, they might be interested to see if they get a decent return on their investment? After all, sending takedown notices typically isn’t free.

—

A copy of the paper, published in a recent edition of the Journal of the Economic Science Association is available online here .

Hardy, W., Krawczyk, M. & Tyrowicz, J. Internet “piracy” and book sales: a field experiment. J Econ Sci Assoc (2024)

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

Major rightsholders are constantly seeking tougher legislation, more effective anti-piracy tools, and enhanced cooperation with governments and other stakeholders.

Even in countries where authorities view protection of intellectual property rights as a priority, achieving any of the above usually involves significant periods of negotiation. In Asia, where attitudes to IP crime vary considerably from one country to the next, tackling piracy may not be out of the question but may be considered less of a priority than other crime.

Thailand’s Perfect Storm

In Thailand, where anti-piracy operations are already more common than in most of its neighbors, legal Premier League streams are readily available at affordable prices.

Nevertheless, the piracy problem persists year after year, in part due to Thailand’s prohibition of most forms of gambling. In the absence of legitimate businesses to separate gamblers from their money, organized crime offers the forbidden fruit via illegal websites, with pirated Premier League live streams laid out like a red carpet.

The use of pirated content, to promote and support crimes typically considered to be more serious, provides rightsholders with a golden opportunity to place copyright infringement in the same conversation as illegal gambling and money laundering. An operation carried out by the government’s Department of Special Investigation (DSI) this week shows how effective that can be.

DSI Raids 21 Locations Across Thailand

According to the DSI, an investigation uncovered a network of sites broadcasting live Premier League matches for free. These streams were used to attract potential gamblers who were greeted with banner ads and links to sites, including those operated from other countries, ready to take their bets.

The DSI says that Thai nationals and foreigners, mostly poor with no fixed jobs, operated more than 100 ‘mule’ accounts through which revenue from illegal gambling was processed.

To tackle all of the above, a joint operation on July 31 under the Ministry of Home Affairs, saw the DSI and the Minburi Metropolitan Police carry out raids at 21 locations in several regions of Thailand.

The suspects reportedly operated around 10 websites from an office in the Minburi district of Bangkok.

A document obtained by TorrentFreak reveals several domain names including TVsod.com, Bee789.com, Ballza.com, 7mscorethai.com, 7mscorethai.net, Dooballdottink.com, Suckballhd.com, Amloin789.com and 7upth.com. At the time of writing, none are operational.

“Two suspects were arrested: Mr. Athiwat (surname withheld) and Mr. Yutthaphong (surname withheld) ,” a DSI statement reads.

“They were arrested in front of the Songkhla Provincial Court, Bo Yang Subdistrict, Mueang Songkhla District, Songkhla Province, for the offense of jointly violating the copyright of others for commercial purposes by publishing creative works such as movies and artworks without permission.”

The authorities say that the arrested men are programmers, responsible for running the servers used to provide the pirated match streams and operating ‘mule’ accounts for transferring money. The second suspect is also accused of receiving money from gambling websites.

No Longer Working at the Car Wash

A video released by the authorities on social media shows a press conference and various clips from one of the raided locations.

That appears to be a car wash and according to information made available separately, may have been involved in the supply/distribution of pirated Premier League streams.

The scale of the law enforcement response suggests that washing cars probably wasn’t the extent of the business, butt that appears to be true of other images from the raids made available by DSI. That includes the image below which doesn’t appear to have an official explanation beyond being taken as part of the raids.

The number of graphics cards tends to point in one direction, so additional offenses may be announced at a later date. In any event, whether from the car wash or elsewhere, the DSI is advising those intending to make a clean getaway to reconsider.

“In this search and arrest operation, the Department of Special Investigation would like to inform those involved or suspects with arrest warrants who intend to flee, to surrender or provide information to enter the justice process, because the Department of Special Investigation will not exempt offenders from prosecution.”

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

Major rightsholders are constantly seeking tougher legislation, more effective anti-piracy tools, and enhanced cooperation with governments and other stakeholders.

Even in countries where authorities view protection of intellectual property rights as a priority, achieving any of the above usually involves significant periods of negotiation. In Asia, where attitudes to IP crime vary considerably from one country to the next, tackling piracy may not be out of the question but may be considered less of a priority than other crime.

Thailand’s Perfect Storm

In Thailand, where anti-piracy operations are already more common than in most of its neighbors, legal Premier League streams are readily available at affordable prices.

Nevertheless, the piracy problem persists year after year, in part due to Thailand’s prohibition of most forms of gambling. In the absence of legitimate businesses to separate gamblers from their money, organized crime offers the forbidden fruit via illegal websites, with pirated Premier League live streams laid out like a red carpet.

The use of pirated content, to promote and support crimes typically considered to be more serious, provides rightsholders with a golden opportunity to place copyright infringement in the same conversation as illegal gambling and money laundering. An operation carried out by the government’s Department of Special Investigation (DSI) this week shows how effective that can be.

DSI Raids 21 Locations Across Thailand

According to the DSI, an investigation uncovered a network of sites broadcasting live Premier League matches for free. These streams were used to attract potential gamblers who were greeted with banner ads and links to sites, including those operated from other countries, ready to take their bets.

The DSI says that Thai nationals and foreigners, mostly poor with no fixed jobs, operated more than 100 ‘mule’ accounts through which revenue from illegal gambling was processed.

To tackle all of the above, a joint operation on July 31 under the Ministry of Home Affairs, saw the DSI and the Minburi Metropolitan Police carry out raids at 21 locations in several regions of Thailand.

The suspects reportedly operated around 10 websites from an office in the Minburi district of Bangkok.

A document obtained by TorrentFreak reveals several domain names including TVsod.com, Bee789.com, Ballza.com, 7mscorethai.com, 7mscorethai.net, Dooballdottink.com, Suckballhd.com, Amloin789.com and 7upth.com. At the time of writing, none are operational.

“Two suspects were arrested: Mr. Athiwat (surname withheld) and Mr. Yutthaphong (surname withheld) ,” a DSI statement reads.

“They were arrested in front of the Songkhla Provincial Court, Bo Yang Subdistrict, Mueang Songkhla District, Songkhla Province, for the offense of jointly violating the copyright of others for commercial purposes by publishing creative works such as movies and artworks without permission.”

The authorities say that the arrested men are programmers, responsible for running the servers used to provide the pirated match streams and operating ‘mule’ accounts for transferring money. The second suspect is also accused of receiving money from gambling websites.

No Longer Working at the Car Wash

A video released by the authorities on social media shows a press conference and various clips from one of the raided locations.

That appears to be a car wash and according to information made available separately, may have been involved in the supply/distribution of pirated Premier League streams.

The scale of the law enforcement response suggests that washing cars probably wasn’t the extent of the business, butt that appears to be true of other images from the raids made available by DSI. That includes the image below which doesn’t appear to have an official explanation beyond being taken as part of the raids.

The number of graphics cards tends to point in one direction, so additional offenses may be announced at a later date. In any event, whether from the car wash or elsewhere, the DSI is advising those intending to make a clean getaway to reconsider.

“In this search and arrest operation, the Department of Special Investigation would like to inform those involved or suspects with arrest warrants who intend to flee, to surrender or provide information to enter the justice process, because the Department of Special Investigation will not exempt offenders from prosecution.”

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

Major rightsholders are constantly seeking tougher legislation, more effective anti-piracy tools, and enhanced cooperation with governments and other stakeholders.

Even in countries where authorities view protection of intellectual property rights as a priority, achieving any of the above usually involves significant periods of negotiation. In Asia, where attitudes to IP crime vary considerably from one country to the next, tackling piracy may not be out of the question but may be considered less of a priority than other crime.

Thailand’s Perfect Storm

In Thailand, where anti-piracy operations are already more common than in most of its neighbors, legal Premier League streams are readily available at affordable prices.

Nevertheless, the piracy problem persists year after year, in part due to Thailand’s prohibition of most forms of gambling. In the absence of legitimate businesses to separate gamblers from their money, organized crime offers the forbidden fruit via illegal websites, with pirated Premier League live streams laid out like a red carpet.

The use of pirated content, to promote and support crimes typically considered to be more serious, provides rightsholders with a golden opportunity to place copyright infringement in the same conversation as illegal gambling and money laundering. An operation carried out by the government’s Department of Special Investigation (DSI) this week shows how effective that can be.

DSI Raids 21 Locations Across Thailand

According to the DSI, an investigation uncovered a network of sites broadcasting live Premier League matches for free. These streams were used to attract potential gamblers who were greeted with banner ads and links to sites, including those operated from other countries, ready to take their bets.

The DSI says that Thai nationals and foreigners, mostly poor with no fixed jobs, operated more than 100 ‘mule’ accounts through which revenue from illegal gambling was processed.

To tackle all of the above, a joint operation on July 31 under the Ministry of Home Affairs, saw the DSI and the Minburi Metropolitan Police carry out raids at 21 locations in several regions of Thailand.

The suspects reportedly operated around 10 websites from an office in the Minburi district of Bangkok.

A document obtained by TorrentFreak reveals several domain names including TVsod.com, Bee789.com, Ballza.com, 7mscorethai.com, 7mscorethai.net, Dooballdottink.com, Suckballhd.com, Amloin789.com and 7upth.com. At the time of writing, none are operational.

“Two suspects were arrested: Mr. Athiwat (surname withheld) and Mr. Yutthaphong (surname withheld) ,” a DSI statement reads.

“They were arrested in front of the Songkhla Provincial Court, Bo Yang Subdistrict, Mueang Songkhla District, Songkhla Province, for the offense of jointly violating the copyright of others for commercial purposes by publishing creative works such as movies and artworks without permission.”

The authorities say that the arrested men are programmers, responsible for running the servers used to provide the pirated match streams and operating ‘mule’ accounts for transferring money. The second suspect is also accused of receiving money from gambling websites.

No Longer Working at the Car Wash

A video released by the authorities on social media shows a press conference and various clips from one of the raided locations.

That appears to be a car wash and according to information made available separately, may have been involved in the supply/distribution of pirated Premier League streams.

The scale of the law enforcement response suggests that washing cars probably wasn’t the extent of the business, butt that appears to be true of other images from the raids made available by DSI. That includes the image below which doesn’t appear to have an official explanation beyond being taken as part of the raids.

The number of graphics cards tends to point in one direction, so additional offenses may be announced at a later date. In any event, whether from the car wash or elsewhere, the DSI is advising those intending to make a clean getaway to reconsider.

“In this search and arrest operation, the Department of Special Investigation would like to inform those involved or suspects with arrest warrants who intend to flee, to surrender or provide information to enter the justice process, because the Department of Special Investigation will not exempt offenders from prosecution.”

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

Similar to other user-generated content platforms, X allows people to freely share content online.

This includes text, images, music, video, and live streams. In some cases, content is shared by users of X without first obtaining permission from rightsholders.

Over the years, various parties have called out Twitter/X over alleged copyright infringement. Research published by the EU Intellectual Property Office found that X is rife with piracy-related discussions. U.S. lawmakers, meanwhile, suggested that piracy is part of the company’s business model .

Last year, these complaints resulted in a lawsuit, filed by the major music labels. The companies accused Elon Musk’s X Corp of “breeding” mass copyright infringement and demanded damages, which could reach $250 million. The lawsuit continues as copyright pressure continues to build.

Sports Leagues and Broadcasters Demand Action

This week, AP reported that a group of sports leagues and broadcasters had contacted X CEO Linda Yaccarino, urging the platform to take live-streaming piracy more seriously. The letter, signed by the Premier League, LaLiga, Bundesliga, Serie A, UEFA, CONMEBOL, DAZN, Sky, beIN, DirecTV and Movistar Plus+, claims that the platform is falling short on its enforcement actions.

X is legally obliged to process DMCA takedown notices. While the company stopped releasing transparency reports after Elon Musk took over, the company hasn’t halted this practice. However, the letter, which appears to address Musk too, suggests that technical support for rightsholders decreased after he acquired Twitter.

“X’s approach to taking down unlawful live content notified to them is woefully insufficient and inadequate,” the letter notes. “Critically, since you acquired the platform, we have witnessed a demoralizing reduction in technical support making it ever more difficult to engage with the platform in any kind of meaningful discussion on this topic.”

‘X: The Home of Social Media Piracy’

While all social media platforms have to deal with piracy, the letter complains that X’s response to the problem falls short. This, purportedly, gives pirates the idea that they can abuse the platform without serious repercussions.

According to the rightsholders, the problem is getting worse, evidenced by an increased number of pirated live-streams on the platform. At the same time, moderation efforts have reportedly decreased.

“X is increasingly the home of unlawful social media piracy,” the letter reads.

The rightsholders are calling for a meeting with X to discuss these matters. Ideally, they want X to turn the tide by taking piracy more seriously, while meeting its obligations under the Digital Services Act. No concrete measures are mentioned, but the DSA calls for increased takedown transparency and prioritizing takedowns by ‘trusted flaggers’.

META and YouTube Do Better

The AP hasn’t released the letter in full, so it’s unknown whether it includes more concrete demands. What’s clear, however, is that X stands out in comparison to other platforms, with rightsholders stating that it “lacks many of the features which other responsible social media operators deploy to combat piracy.”

This notion is supported by Cameron Andrews, Legal Director at BeIN, who addressed X’s shortcomings in a BroadcastPro article yesterday.

“While some of the big players like META and YouTube have worked with rights owners to reduce the availability of pirated live content on their platforms, others like X, are doing very little,” Andrews writes.

During the Euro 2024 football championship this summer, BeIN identified 1,198 illegal streams, with hundreds of thousands of unauthorized viewers tuning in. Ideally, these streams should be shut down near instantly.

“In the absence of any effective cooperation from X, there is very little that rights owners can do to prevent the massive abuse of broadcast rights in this way,” BeIN’s anti-piracy director notes.

Just how receptive X is to this critique has yet to be seen. The company hasn’t officially commented on the matter, and Elon Musk hasn’t weighed in yet either. However, he previously made it clear that he’s not a fan of broad takedown measures.

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

Similar to other user-generated content platforms, X allows people to freely share content online.

This includes text, images, music, video, and live streams. In some cases, content is shared by users of X without first obtaining permission from rightsholders.

Over the years, various parties have called out Twitter/X over alleged copyright infringement. Research published by the EU Intellectual Property Office found that X is rife with piracy-related discussions. U.S. lawmakers, meanwhile, suggested that piracy is part of the company’s business model .

Last year, these complaints resulted in a lawsuit, filed by the major music labels. The companies accused Elon Musk’s X Corp of “breeding” mass copyright infringement and demanded damages, which could reach $250 million. The lawsuit continues as copyright pressure continues to build.

Sports Leagues and Broadcasters Demand Action

This week, AP reported that a group of sports leagues and broadcasters had contacted X CEO Linda Yaccarino, urging the platform to take live-streaming piracy more seriously. The letter, signed by the Premier League, LaLiga, Bundesliga, Serie A, UEFA, CONMEBOL, DAZN, Sky, beIN, DirecTV and Movistar Plus+, claims that the platform is falling short on its enforcement actions.

X is legally obliged to process DMCA takedown notices. While the company stopped releasing transparency reports after Elon Musk took over, the company hasn’t halted this practice. However, the letter, which appears to address Musk too, suggests that technical support for rightsholders decreased after he acquired Twitter.

“X’s approach to taking down unlawful live content notified to them is woefully insufficient and inadequate,” the letter notes. “Critically, since you acquired the platform, we have witnessed a demoralizing reduction in technical support making it ever more difficult to engage with the platform in any kind of meaningful discussion on this topic.”

‘X: The Home of Social Media Piracy’

While all social media platforms have to deal with piracy, the letter complains that X’s response to the problem falls short. This, purportedly, gives pirates the idea that they can abuse the platform without serious repercussions.

According to the rightsholders, the problem is getting worse, evidenced by an increased number of pirated live-streams on the platform. At the same time, moderation efforts have reportedly decreased.

“X is increasingly the home of unlawful social media piracy,” the letter reads.

The rightsholders are calling for a meeting with X to discuss these matters. Ideally, they want X to turn the tide by taking piracy more seriously, while meeting its obligations under the Digital Services Act. No concrete measures are mentioned, but the DSA calls for increased takedown transparency and prioritizing takedowns by ‘trusted flaggers’.

META and YouTube Do Better

The AP hasn’t released the letter in full, so it’s unknown whether it includes more concrete demands. What’s clear, however, is that X stands out in comparison to other platforms, with rightsholders stating that it “lacks many of the features which other responsible social media operators deploy to combat piracy.”

This notion is supported by Cameron Andrews, Legal Director at BeIN, who addressed X’s shortcomings in a BroadcastPro article yesterday.

“While some of the big players like META and YouTube have worked with rights owners to reduce the availability of pirated live content on their platforms, others like X, are doing very little,” Andrews writes.

During the Euro 2024 football championship this summer, BeIN identified 1,198 illegal streams, with hundreds of thousands of unauthorized viewers tuning in. Ideally, these streams should be shut down near instantly.

“In the absence of any effective cooperation from X, there is very little that rights owners can do to prevent the massive abuse of broadcast rights in this way,” BeIN’s anti-piracy director notes.

Just how receptive X is to this critique has yet to be seen. The company hasn’t officially commented on the matter, and Elon Musk hasn’t weighed in yet either. However, he previously made it clear that he’s not a fan of broad takedown measures.

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

Similar to other user-generated content platforms, X allows people to freely share content online.

This includes text, images, music, video, and live streams. In some cases, content is shared by users of X without first obtaining permission from rightsholders.

Over the years, various parties have called out Twitter/X over alleged copyright infringement. Research published by the EU Intellectual Property Office found that X is rife with piracy-related discussions. U.S. lawmakers, meanwhile, suggested that piracy is part of the company’s business model .

Last year, these complaints resulted in a lawsuit, filed by the major music labels. The companies accused Elon Musk’s X Corp of “breeding” mass copyright infringement and demanded damages, which could reach $250 million. The lawsuit continues as copyright pressure continues to build.

Sports Leagues and Broadcasters Demand Action

This week, AP reported that a group of sports leagues and broadcasters had contacted X CEO Linda Yaccarino, urging the platform to take live-streaming piracy more seriously. The letter, signed by the Premier League, LaLiga, Bundesliga, Serie A, UEFA, CONMEBOL, DAZN, Sky, beIN, DirecTV and Movistar Plus+, claims that the platform is falling short on its enforcement actions.

X is legally obliged to process DMCA takedown notices. While the company stopped releasing transparency reports after Elon Musk took over, the company hasn’t halted this practice. However, the letter, which appears to address Musk too, suggests that technical support for rightsholders decreased after he acquired Twitter.

“X’s approach to taking down unlawful live content notified to them is woefully insufficient and inadequate,” the letter notes. “Critically, since you acquired the platform, we have witnessed a demoralizing reduction in technical support making it ever more difficult to engage with the platform in any kind of meaningful discussion on this topic.”

‘X: The Home of Social Media Piracy’

While all social media platforms have to deal with piracy, the letter complains that X’s response to the problem falls short. This, purportedly, gives pirates the idea that they can abuse the platform without serious repercussions.

According to the rightsholders, the problem is getting worse, evidenced by an increased number of pirated live-streams on the platform. At the same time, moderation efforts have reportedly decreased.

“X is increasingly the home of unlawful social media piracy,” the letter reads.

The rightsholders are calling for a meeting with X to discuss these matters. Ideally, they want X to turn the tide by taking piracy more seriously, while meeting its obligations under the Digital Services Act. No concrete measures are mentioned, but the DSA calls for increased takedown transparency and prioritizing takedowns by ‘trusted flaggers’.

META and YouTube Do Better

The AP hasn’t released the letter in full, so it’s unknown whether it includes more concrete demands. What’s clear, however, is that X stands out in comparison to other platforms, with rightsholders stating that it “lacks many of the features which other responsible social media operators deploy to combat piracy.”

This notion is supported by Cameron Andrews, Legal Director at BeIN, who addressed X’s shortcomings in a BroadcastPro article yesterday.

“While some of the big players like META and YouTube have worked with rights owners to reduce the availability of pirated live content on their platforms, others like X, are doing very little,” Andrews writes.

During the Euro 2024 football championship this summer, BeIN identified 1,198 illegal streams, with hundreds of thousands of unauthorized viewers tuning in. Ideally, these streams should be shut down near instantly.

“In the absence of any effective cooperation from X, there is very little that rights owners can do to prevent the massive abuse of broadcast rights in this way,” BeIN’s anti-piracy director notes.

Just how receptive X is to this critique has yet to be seen. The company hasn’t officially commented on the matter, and Elon Musk hasn’t weighed in yet either. However, he previously made it clear that he’s not a fan of broad takedown measures.

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