Business U.S. Anti-Piracy Symposium Emphasizes Need for Site Blocking

https://torrentfreak.com/u-s-anti-piracy-symposium-emphazises-site-blocking-250127/

https://archive.ph/Z1kVh

January 27, 2025 by Ernesto Van der Sar

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) held an anti-piracy symposium last week to discuss the latest achievements, challenges, and solutions in combating piracy. Experts from the public and private sectors came together to discuss various topics, including the need to deploy balanced and effective site blocking measures in the United States.

Last week, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) organized an anti-piracy symposium where several experts discussed recent achievements, new challenges, and potential solutions.

Held at the USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, the meeting brought together public and private sector players to discuss various copyright and piracy-related topics.

For example, trial attorney Vasantha Rao, who works as the Department of Justice Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, discussed the Gears Reloaded case, the Z-Library takedown, plus international domain seizure actions including Operation Offsides.

Michael Christin, another trial attorney at the DoJ, went into great detail on the Jetflix case, discussing various challenges his team faced while litigating the case.

This was an openly accessible symposium, so discussion and commentary was limited to information already in the public record. That said, when discussing future anti-piracy solutions, more novel perspectives were brought up.

Piracy is ‘Maturing’​

In a session on the latest trends in piracy and piracy prevention, Piracy Monitor founder Steven Hawley explained that piracy as an industry has evolved. There are many professional ‘pirate’ actors offering various services, both to consumers and aspiring site operators.

“I would say first off, the piracy in the universe has really matured, it’s metastasized, it’s a multichannel, multilevel industry, multinational phenomenon,” Hawley said.

“Market entry for a pirate is easy. If you wanted to become a pirate tomorrow, you could go online and find organizations that provide Piracy as a Service, they’ll give you content, they’ll give you a distribution platform, they’ll design your user interface, quite sophisticated.”

Marissa Bostick, Head of Global Litigation at the Motion Picture Association (MPA), also sees a combination of increased professionalism and brazenness. Interestingly, this is paired with a shift from free to paid piracy services, with Bostick mentioning ‘Magis TV‘ as one of the examples.

“Users are paying to get access to the pirated content, whether it’s IPTV, premium cyber locker accounts, illegal password services, set-top boxes, there are various forms of this. It means the pirates are actually getting direct streams of income,” Bostick said.

The fact that some pirate services don’t even try to lie low anymore is evident in examples of brazen behavior. They openly advertise themselves through billboards and register for trademarks, as Magis TV recently did.

“Piracy is really sometimes coming out of the shadows. So what we’re seeing, and we see this in Latin America, for example, billboards for piracy sites. They’re paying influencers to go on social media and promote them. They’re registering for trademarks. This is not something that’s happening on some dark web,” Bostick added.

The American ‘Site Blocking’ Dream​

The speakers went into great detail on these and other challenges. This ultimately led to the question of what can be done in response. Aside from litigation, including criminal prosecutions, pirate site blocking was frequently mentioned as a solution.

MPA’s Marissa Bostick said that they have been working on this for many years and that it’s been one of the most effective anti-piracy remedies.

There are now site blocking solutions in more than 50 countries around the world, including Australia France, Germany, the UK, Canada, Australia, Brazil, and South Korea.



The United States is notably absent from this list, but that may change. Bostick said that, with bipartisan and bicameral support, site blocking legislation may eventually move forward in the United States.

The call for site blocking was supported by many other speakers, including Lui Simpson of the Association of American Publishers, who stressed that the U.S. “is lagging far behind” compared to other countries, partly because the initial SOPA site blocking proposal failed in 2012.

“We’re hopeful that this time around we’ll make progress. As you know, we tried this maybe 13 years ago. The hope now is that the misinformation will not be so much of a hindrance here to actually getting a remedy in place.”

“It is long overdue. I think we’re one of the few, let’s just say more developed countries that unfortunately does not have this remedy,” Simpson added.

Attenzione!​

U.S. site blocking discussions are not new and, in a meeting dedicated to anti-piracy solutions, there was little pushback. That said, it is clear that if site blocking comes to America, it should be done right.

This means that potential errors and overblocking should be ruled out, for as far as that’s possible. This is particularly important now that the Italian “Piracy Shield” site blocking scheme is cause for continued controversy.

That hasn’t gone unnoticed by the panelists at the symposium. Steven Hawley, for example, mentioned the “Piracy Shield” has had its challenges, especially because much of the process is automated without detailed verification.

“It sounds like a great system, but it needs fine-tuning. I guess this is a message to anyone who’s developing platforms like this, watch out for false positives,” Hawley said.

Lui Simpson also stressed that the U.S. should learn from site blocking schemes in other jurisdictions. However, she was not referring to overblocking, but to the tendency of blocked sites to launch alternative domains almost instantly.

If the U.S. proposes a site blocking solution, it should be dynamic, so that new domains can be added swiftly.

Bostick acknowledged this and stressed that the MPA has more than a decade of experience with site blocking measures around the globe. So, they can use everything they learned thus far to come up with a balanced and effective solution.

“We have over ten years of experience at this point with site blocking in various countries, different parts of the world, and how it can work seamlessly and effectively. So we need to use all that and use that experience to move forward,” Bostick stressed.

All in all, the USPTO’s anti-piracy symposium offered an intriguing peek into the learnings and priorities of various key players in the public and private sector. It also revealed that despite previous successes, there are still many challenges ahead.

---

May 14, 2022: Pirate Site Blocking is Making its Way Into Free Trade Agreements
Feb 24, 2023: ‘Time for U.S. Lawmakers to Discuss Pirate Site Blocking’
Dec 17, 2023: Pirate Site Blocking Demands Intensify as U.S. Lawmakers Get Fmovies Walkthrough
Oct 30, 2024: Tech Companies Flag Piracy Blocking as Threat to the Open Internet & Digital Trade
Nov 7, 2024: IPTV Piracy Blocking at the Internet’s Core Routers Undergoes Testing

 

[pikachudidnothingwrong]

So they are cucking out now too?

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

So they are cucking out now too?

You could interpret it as neutral or merely unhelpful. "We prefer you didn't do this, but here's how you should do it! But it's only our recommendation..."

ICANN was done for when Obama internationalized it in 2016.

 

[pikachudidnothingwrong]

You could interpret it as neutral or merely unhelpful. "We prefer you didn't do this, but here's how you should do it! But it's only our recommendation..."

ICANN was done for when Obama internationalized it in 2016.

His admin is going to go down in history as one of the most destructive to this country and freedom in general. So much if this kind of shit went down under him. Don't forget the canal crap too. He should be brought up on treason charges in a perfect world.

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

His admin is going to go down in history as one of the most destructive to this country and freedom in general. So much if this kind of shit went down under him. Don't forget the canal crap too. He should be brought up on treason charges in a perfect world.

In this world, AI artilects will run everything and start construction of Obama's face on Mount Rushmore in 2055.

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

TorrentFreak: Fears of “Overblocking” Unite Critics of U.S. Pirate Site Blocking Bill (archive)

June 27, 2025 by Ernesto Van der Sar

The draft of Rep. Darrell Issa's new U.S. pirate site blocking bill 'ACPA' is not without controversy. In public comments, opponents warn that the bill's legal framework risks overblocking, which can impact legitimate sites and services. And in a new twist, it appears the bill may come with a potential self-destruct button: a "sunsetting clause".

After a decade of focusing efforts overseas, the push for pirate site blocking has landed back on American shores.

There are currently two bills in the making; the Foreign Anti-Digital Piracy Act (FADPA) introduced by Representative Zoe Lofgren in February, and Representative Darrell Issa’s ‘American Copyright Protection Act’ (ACPA), which tackles the same issue from a different angle.

ACPA has yet to be formally introduced, but a draft of the framework was shared with stakeholders late May, with a request for input. While most of the back and forth takes place behind closed doors, the Rereate Coalition and the Library Copyright Alliance (LCA) shared their critical comments publicly.

Overblocking Fears​

The Library Copyright Alliance is pleased that libraries will be exempt from the blocking proposal, as they are not categorized as service providers. However, there are still concerns that the bill, as currently drafted, could lead to overblocking.

“LCA remains concerned that ACPA’s no-fault injunction structure could lead to over-blocking that could restrict access to information and thereby harm library users,” LCA writes.

The LCA notes that most cases will likely result in default judgments, as foreign sites typically unresponsive to actions filed in U.S. courts. In addition, service providers are unlikely to oppose orders on behalf of these unknown third parties.

“A service provider’s objective would be to implement the blocking in the most expedient manner possible, regardless of possible over-blocking,” LCA notes.

This predicted lack of scrutiny means that some sites may be classified as foreign piracy sites, even when they fail to meet the statutory definition.

Rereate also raises overblocking concerns, focusing on the destabilizing impact the measures could have on the broader internet, suggesting that the potential fallout should be taken seriously.

“Advocates for site-blocking have downplayed the threat of overblocking and pooh-poohed the idea of ‘breaking the internet,’ saying that site-blocking can be achieved without threatening the integrity of the internet or lawful internet use. However, the latest research suggests site-blocking advocates may be trying to rush their idea into law before the facts can catch up to them.”

Rereate cites an i2Coalition report which found that overblocking is widespread, especially when restrictions are applied to shared infrastructure like cloud platforms and CDNs. This is considered a potential threat to the internet’s architecture, the digital economy, and fundamental rights.

Solution in search of a problem?​

Both groups mention overblocking in detail, but they also highlight separate issues. Rereate, for example, notes that it’s not clear that site blocking is needed, questioning research that estimated a significant negative economic impact of online piracy.

“Site-blocking is a solution in search of a problem,” the group writes, citing a rebuttal from the Computer & Communications Industry Association’s Research Center, which points out several flaws in a key report that estimated $29.2 billion in lost U.S. revenues.

From Rereate’s submission

​

This estimate is biased and based on flawed methodology, resulting in a multi-billion dollar figure that is “wildly out of step with previous studies that had concluded impacts from piracy were much smaller, potentially as low as zero,” Rereate notes.

Move Site Blocking to the ITC​

The LCA doesn’t mention the alleged damages, nor is it entirely against a site blocking bill. However, to prevent the risk of overblocking due to default judgments, it would like to shift the proposed forum from specific district judges to the International Trade Commission (ITC).

The library association argues that ITC judges already have expertise in intellectual property, and the ITC staff would represent the public interest, helping to prevent over-blocking.

“The staff’s ongoing involvement would help prevent over-blocking. Significantly, the ITC is equipped to order temporary relief, so it could act quickly to protect the interests of copyright owners,” LCA writes.

The idea of using the ITC as a forum to handle piracy related cases isn’t entirely new. In 2012, Rep. Issa’s proposed the OPEN Act, which would have tasked the Commission with stopping money flows to pirate sites. The bill was an alternative to SOPA and PIPA, but never passed.

A Sunsetting Clause?​

The libraries also mention a novelty that, to our knowledge, has never been mentioned in public; a proposed sunsetting clause that is being considered by Rep. Issa.

“During one of the roundtables, Chairman Issa mentioned the possibility of the site-blocking legislation sunsetting after a set number of years. We favor sunsetting the legislation after five years,” LCA writes.

A sunsetting clause means that the law will automatically terminate or expire on a specific date unless Congress takes deliberate action to extend it. It is essentially a built-in expiration date for the bill, which ensures a thorough reevaluation of its impact and effectiveness in the future.

The ACPA framework is still in the discussion phase and the initial feedback shows that there may be room for improvement. This is especially true considering that these two responses are just the tip of the iceberg; there are likely others calling for more drastic enforcement too.

---

A copy of the comments shared by Rereate can be found here (pdf) and the Library Copyright Alliance’s submission can be found here (pdf).

 

[Fatpacks]

Jesus fuck. How do you read this shit and not immediately just give up all hope? They won. TPTB fucking checkmated us hard. What's even the point anymore? Why do we even try?

In this world, AI artilects will run everything and start construction of Obama's face on Mount Rushmore in 2055.

Nothing good ever fucking happens. Obama will go down as one of the most beloved presidents in history as everyone who opposed his rule is executed for wrongthink.

People need to get loud on this. ISPs and other tech companies are trying to sell us out for their own protections, not directly fighting it.

Nobody will speak up. The death of free speech will be met with mass indifference from many and celebration from a lot of people. This site won't make it to the end of this decade.

Game over, man. Game over.

 

[The handsome tard]

The more corporate and abusive things become, piracy becomes a true act of protest.

Besides, anyone that doesnt see this being immediately abused is either in on it or a tranny (or both)

 

[Fatpacks]

This brick-faced tranny is going to secure complete and total victory over us thanks to this bullshit and we will be utterly powerless to stop it.

 

[marvlouslie]

Remember, movie niggers tried to ban renting video tapes and didn't even like the idea of VHS. They are the enemy of the common man. Inevitably, they managed to kill off physically owning media after Bluray started losing steam with the advent of digital downloads and streaming, and you KNOW these demons want to cut off people's ability to download anything anymore and go full streamtardation.

Nintendo tried to do the same fucking thing to Blockbuster and got bitched the fuck out for it.

 

[Fatpacks]

Besides, anyone that doesnt see this being immediately abused is either in on it or a tranny (or both)

Doesn't really matter what we think when TPTB will continue getting what they want no matter what we do.

 

[pikachudidnothingwrong]

Everyone is cucking out on this idea it seems... so fucking depressing. The best we can get is time limit for no questions asked renewals. As if they would be asked to begin with once i ever go through and the idiotic masses started viewing it as normal and reasonable. (much like current insane "ownership" ideas and what a CR is and means)

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

TorrentFreak: After SOPA’s Painful Death, Safe Site Blocking Claim Disputed By Cloudflare (archive)

July 9, 2025 by Andy Maxwell

A recent forum event held in Washington promised to discuss how pirate site-blocking orders can be safely implemented in the United States. With speakers Rep. Darrell Issa and Rep. Zoe Lofgren both openly admitting that SOPA was a disaster, Issa said that he believes that this time around, the errors of SOPA have all been fixed. That's clearly the case, or at least it was until a lone voice offered insight on the very topic those in attendance were there to discuss.



Unveiled earlier this year by Rep. Zoe Lofgren and Rep. Darrell Issa respectively, the Foreign Anti-Digital Piracy Act (FADPA) and the American Copyright Protection Act (ACPA) have underlying differences but much in common.

Both bills would enable copyright holders to request site blocking orders against foreign pirate sites, with ISPs and DNS resolvers required to prevent U.S. internet users from accessing them.

Different Bills, Same Claimed Benefits​

The claimed benefits of FADPA / ACPA are simple and 100% interchangeable, likewise the stated downsides of using foreign services instead of legitimate local platforms. Overseas pirate sites ‘steal’ legitimate content, and then offer free copies to Americans via the internet, undermining business models and disrupting the legitimate market, the background goes.



Pirate sites also stand accused of involvement in malware distribution, phishing, and other scams that recognize the relative wealth of Americans, and then use various means to deprive them of it.

All pirate sites are framed as fundamentally unsafe, with site blocking measures promoted as the complete opposite. Yet in the same way that pirate sites aren’t universally dangerous, site-blocking cannot be described as universally safe either. These absolutes unhelpfully provide no room for compromise, making it more likely that the battle for and against site blocking will take place on issues of safety.

Blocking Orders, Implemented​

The risk of innocent sites being accidentally or even deliberately blocked (it happens), and the potential effect that could have on freedom of expression, is one of the key issues cited by opponents of site-blocking. Organized by pro-site blocking groups Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) and the Digital Citizens Alliance (DCA), a policy forum held late last month offered discussion on that very issue.

Drawing on the best international practices, the discussion will explore how blocking orders can be implemented safely and effectively to protect intellectual property and promote legal content without threatening free expression.

Representative Darrell Issa was the first keynote speaker to address the audience. Without mentioning SOPA by name, Issa accepted that mistakes had been made but after much work, now is the right time to regain lost ground.

“We tried many years ago with a piece of legislation that was thoughtful but not fully thought out, and it died a painful death. We have sought now for almost two years to make sure that when we would reintroduce a form of judicial site blocking as we call it, that we fixed those errors, and we believe we have,” he explained.

“Will it do everything? No. But will it dramatically reduce the profitability of those who steal from things as broadly as live broadcasts to the everyday copyrighted material?”



“Pirate sites are actually relatively few but in fact have enjoyed unfettered profits in the United States. Well, dozens of countries around the world have sought and successfully found ways to limit it,” the architect of ACPA explained.

America – A ‘Soft Target’ For Pirates​

Clearly aware of the difficulties ahead, Issa recalled a previous life in another trade where deterrence couldn’t prevent theft, but it was good enough.

“When I was in the private sector I made among other things car security systems and I have a quip that I’ve told people for years. Absolutely, I never stopped the stealing of a single car; I simply got the thief to steal someone else’s car,” he said.

“The fact is we are a soft target and because we are a soft target, profiteers in foreign countries including Russia, China, and formerly in Ukraine – although they were mostly Russians operating from Ukraine and other countries – have widely profited because we’re the soft target.

“That is going to stop, but it’s going to stop in a very careful and measured way. Most importantly we are not looking to fix every time somebody in an automated way says ‘Oh we’ve got one here we’ve got one there.’ We’re not looking to go to the site where somebody, thinking it was harmless, puts something up on YouTube. The DMCA has a process for that – and it is burdensome and it is time-consuming. However, it is fair on balance and for now we will leave it completely untouched.”

Live Blocking, Straight Off the Bat​

At this relatively early stage, plans may not play out in line with expectations, or even play out at all. That being said, Rep. Issa said that the plan is to go after “the pervasive and profitable pirate” using dynamic blocking and for sports broadcasts, live blocking, currently the most advanced type of blocking available. Rightsholders will have to go before a judge and engage in a process, but after that automation will ensure that blocking targets can’t simply reappear.

“[W]hat will be different is the continuous ability to go back in an automated way and know that when it’s the same, even if slightly disguised pirate, you will be able to shut them down in moments. That means no longer will live broadcasts, for example, only get the order to shut down after the soccer game is over. That’s going to be a thing of the past.”

Level of Support Still Unclear​

ACPA is being introduced on a bipartisan basis and Rep. Issa believes that it’s going to be mostly well appreciated. Reading between the lines, it sounds like some big ISPs in the U.S. are fully committed while others are proving more difficult and may even be excluded early on.

“We have put safeguards in, although it’s not a pilot; it starts with the cooperation and support of some of the largest ISPs, but not all of them. I do believe that they are the exceptions and in many cases they’re carved out of the first stage of this.”

Informative Panel Discussions, But Not Without Concerns​

Full details of those on the panel can be found down below but overall their contributions were both clear and informative. The presence of lawyers from the Premier League and Rogers Communications was a smart move due to the type of high-level ‘live’ blocking they’re involved in, together in Canada and individually elsewhere.



On several occasions it was suggested that the models in Canada and the UK are of the type that could prove suitable for the United States.

Most of the safeguards in place to prevent overblocking in Canada are effectively a secret so weren’t revealed in any detail. However, Rogers’ secret weapon was openly discussed; when a rightsholder is also an ISP, the position offers an unrivalled birds eye view.

“[A]s an ISP and as a television distributor, understand that our prerogative is to protect the media business,” said Kristina Milbourn, Rogers’ head of litigation.

“We know how to do that, we have technical expertise that enables us to block in a very meaningful way and a very surgical way, because we certainly don’t want to imperil the internet in Canada. Happily our internet still works, so nothing is broken, but we do have tremendous insights sitting on both sides of the fence.”

Which ISPs have that kind of visibility in the U.S. and what are the safeguards, if indeed any are required?

Claims of Problem Free Blocking Challenged​

After directly responding to questions from the audience, the panel faced a challenge to the general claim that site blocking is completely safe. If there are any issues, the narrative goes, they barely move the needle so aren’t really important enough to discuss. The person in the audience quite strongly disagreed.

“[W]hen I hear presentations about blocking around the world, and how there are no problems and how it doesn’t cause any issues, that hasn’t really been the experience we’ve seen in a lot of countries,” said Zaid Zaid, Cloudflare’s Head of U.S. Public Policy.

“There are a lot of problems when websites or IP addresses are blocked, there are tons of unintended consequences, tons of unintended blocking, you know, that could impact mom and pop shops, that will impact websites and American consumers etc.,” Zaid said.

“So we think that the best way to deal with the issue is more collaboration rather than trying to force various players along the internet stack to have to block things, block websites, block IP addresses etc, and I sort of would like to hear, you know, what are some of the remedies, what are some of the things that we can work on together?”

This statement was the first real opportunity to discuss blocking safety with a person claiming first-hand experience. And while Zaid wasn’t ignored, his claim that problems are widespread – global even – received not a single challenge from anyone in the room.

That no one meaningfully engaged on the very topic advertised as the basis of the event seems a little odd. After three solid months of site blocking in Spain, that made global headlines due to the systematic blocking of Cloudflare and the associated collateral damage, examples of unsafe blocking have never been more plentiful. On a pro rata basis, overblocking discussion is arguably at an all-time low.

In addition to the two keynote speakers, panelists for the event were (left to right): ITIF Associate Director Rodrigo Balbontine, DCA Executive Director Tom Galvin, Michael D. Smith, Professor of Information Technology and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University, lawyer Kristina Milbourn, head of litigation at Rogers Communications in Canada, and Stefan Sergot, Director of Legal – Enforcement at the Premier League.

https://preservetube.com/watch?v=fCAtCEY_-M8

 

[pikachudidnothingwrong]

Live Blocking, Straight Off the Bat​

At this relatively early stage, plans may not play out in line with expectations, or even play out at all. That being said, Rep. Issa said that the plan is to go after “the pervasive and profitable pirate” using dynamic blocking and for sports broadcasts, live blocking, currently the most advanced type of blocking available. Rightsholders will have to go before a judge and engage in a process, but after that automation will ensure that blocking targets can’t simply reappear.

“[W]hat will be different is the continuous ability to go back in an automated way and know that when it’s the same, even if slightly disguised pirate, you will be able to shut them down in moments. That means no longer will live broadcasts, for example, only get the order to shut down after the soccer game is over. That’s going to be a thing of the past.”

Oh that isn't a disaster and nightmare waiting to happen. Sports and same sites, new address today, anything remotely similar soon after. Persistent aggressive target seeking blocking is dangerous in of itself.. over "lost" phantom sales and purely civil matters... insanity!

ACPA is being introduced on a bipartisan basis and Rep. Issa believes that it’s going to be mostly well appreciated. Reading between the lines, it sounds like some big ISPs in the U.S. are fully committed while others are proving more difficult and may even be excluded early on.

Remember, these companies sold us out for protection.. THIS is what the momentary successful but (hopefully) doomed court ruling putting ISPs on the spot/bill was truly all about I believe. Perfect timing to gain fear based acceptance.