Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Helped FBI Identify Alleged Owner of World's Largest Torrent Site
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple can't yet an external company can? Bull crap.
Apple didn't help with a terrorism related request, yet when it comes to competition with iTunes they sell their so called soul. Disgusting hypocrisy /
Until the US government treats stealing files over the internet like a real crime, this stuff will never end. The moment regular citizens have to worry about getting arrested for downloading an album or movie, it will all but cease to exist and we'll see the markets rebound.
These are two completely different cases. If you can't appreciate the distinction, you can't make a reasonable judgement on it.
Apple has little choice but to comply. It doesn't break their encryption protection and it is in their best interests to protect the content providers that provide the very thing these pirate sites offer access to free. If they start protecting pirates you can bet no content provider or music label will want to do business with them.
The FBI will plaster Apple's name on every press release from now on in retaliation for the encryption showdown. And so many fell for the misdirection. How many contents of emails, chat messages and other communications does Google, Facebook & Microsoft give up? They didn't challenge the DOJ so they won't be dragged through the press.
Last edited:
Yeah but, torrents aren't illegal. Illegal torrents are illegal, you know, sharing work with copyright on them/pirating stuff, but torrents themselves aren't illegal.
Anyway, you know the drill by now. 1 goes down, another 50 pop up. It's a lost battle before it even started. Companies should look at why their stuff gets torrented (no, it's not just "because its free yo"), then start looking at ways to reduce the pirating. Especially TV series that don't get a world-wide same-day release are popular on these sides, because people don't want to wait just because they live somewhere else (same with DVD regions which are just retarded).
Anyway, you know the drill by now. 1 goes down, another 50 pop up. It's a lost battle before it even started. Companies should look at why their stuff gets torrented (no, it's not just "because its free yo"), then start looking at ways to reduce the pirating. Especially TV series that don't get a world-wide same-day release are popular on these sides, because people don't want to wait just because they live somewhere else (same with DVD regions which are just retarded).
The criminal broke the law and must be brought to swift justice!
So, Apple won't help if it is a terrorist, but will help for iTunes....stupid, glad I got rid of my I-phone!
U.S. authorities have arrested the alleged owner of the world's largest torrent site after Apple shared personal details linked to an iTunes transaction that enabled federal investigators to locate their suspect.
According to TorrentFreak, Ukranian-born Artem Vaulin was arrested yesterday in Poland on suspicion of running KickassTorrents (KAT), which recently surpassed The Pirate Bay as the go-to site for unofficial copies of movies, TV shows, and music.
The U.S. Justice Department has requested 30-year-old Vaulin's extradition on charges of criminal copyright infringement and money laundering. The key piece of evidence that led authorities to Vaulin appeared to come when Apple handed over his personal details after investigators matched an IP address used to log in to the KAT Facebook page with one linked to an iTunes purchase.
Filed in a U.S. District Court in Chicago, the criminal complaint reads: "Records provided by Apple showed that tirm@me.com conducted an iTunes transaction using IP Address 109.86.226.203 on or about July 31, 2015. The same IP Address was used on the same day to login into the KAT Facebook."
According to the complaint, KAT operates in 28 languages and offered movies still in cinemas, as well as other content, earning significant revenue from advertising throughout the site. Investigators also reportedly posed as an advertiser to the site, which revealed a bank account associated with it.
The U.S. Department of Justice estimates KAT's value to be over $54 million, with annual advertising revenue in the range of $12.5 million to $22.3 million. KAT reportedly helped distribute over $1 billion in pirated files, according to assistant attorney general Leslie Caldwell, who commented on the case.
"In an effort to evade law enforcement, Vaulin allegedly relied on servers located in countries around the world and moved his domains due to repeated seizures and civil lawsuits," said Caldwell. "His arrest in Poland, however, demonstrates again that cybercriminals can run, but they cannot hide from justice."
In addition to Vaulin's extradition, the criminal complaint has also ordered the seizure of a bank account associated with the site, as well as the seizure of several KAT domain names. TorrentFreak reports that while the main KAT domain appears to be down, various proxies still lead to working versions of the site.
Article Link: Apple Helped FBI Identify Alleged Owner of World's Largest Torrent Site
Perhaps you can provide a link to them actually doing this? Or just fear mongering.
Do you think they just called Apple and they handed it right over?
Because google doesn't make sites disappear. If you send a DMCA notice, it just generates a "content has been removed from this page due to a DMCA claim, click here to see it anyway LOL"
Piracy sites can burn for all I care. Every time one is taken down, 30 or so more pop back up, and the smart sociopaths will just keep on torrenting content because they like to cause pain, even if that pain is closer to a bug bite instead of shark bite.
What makes you think Apple provided the user information without a court order?
How come they never go for the uploaders? They're the ones copying the stuff.
Good Apple! Very good Apple in fact. Thee is nothing worst than a thief and frankly that is all these guys are when offering up copyrighted material.
But when over 99% of the torrents being distributed on your website consists of pirated content, the distinction seems overly fine.
And people who want to pirate are always going to have a reason for not wanting to spend a cent on content. You solve one problem, they will just find another reason to justify their actions. So I am justified in breaking the law just because someone doesn't accede to my request or do things to my liking? At the end of the day, nobody owes me anything.
People want to torrent game of thrones because it isn't available in their country? Go ahead by all means, but also be a man about it and admit to being the shameless pirate that you are, rather than try to hide behind a veil of excuses.
As the Chinese saying goes, dare to do it, dare to admit it.
So, they matched the IP address from a facebook post and an iTunes transaction. Probably this IP is dynamic so it will be a bit harder to prove that both times it was used by the same person. ISP should get involved, along with Apple, and Facebook.
And please, don't kid yourselves. If google wanted they could wipe the results from such sites, but why should they do so ? Ads from high-traffic sites are their main revenue. They've built an empire out of it.
And please, don't kid yourselves. If google wanted they could wipe the results from such sites, but why should they do so ? Ads from high-traffic sites are their main revenue. They've built an empire out of it.
They are but it doesn't stop people directly visiting them still.
Google stopped listing Kickass Torrents ages ago.
Which part exactly? The fact that they meticulously profile on top of local file searches: calls, recent contacts and their mails as well as processes/files and physical presence at any given point in time? Or the fact that this information is used already by advertisers (that'd be Apple themselves, I suppose) for instance?
But, why don't we step back a little. Ask me about my previous argument regarding the illusion of choice when it comes to location services for example. This gets way more interesting, because it is a very clear example in which several million Apple users are simply tricked to believe that they can actually disable location services, where in fact this is not the case, and location data is collected anyway (just in an 'anonymous' way).
Can you explain how one follows from the other? I don't see how your sample population there can be extended to include all users without recomputing a percentage of requests that would be granted. This is not something pulled at random. If most of the requests are legitimate, I would expect the percentage of fulfilled requests to be high.