|As you may know, KickassTorrents was shut down this past summer, and its alleged operator was arrested in Poland. However, the fight against its clones and copies continued this week in Australia. Anti-piracy groups and ISPs were arguing over the implementation of blockades in court, trying to decide who must pay for the copyright protection.
Music labels filed the request to block KickassTorrents back in April 2016, claiming that the service demonstrated a complete disrespect for copyright owners and asking the leading ISPs in the country to prevent their subscribers from accessing the torrent tracker. Eventually, that job was effectively carried out for them by the US authorities, which seized the tracker’s domain. However, the court case in Australia has continued and focused on clones and copies of KickassTorrents, which used the fame of the now defunct tracker to get traffic while having nothing to do with the original service.
While the Internet service providers are not fighting the blocking demand per se, they are trying to find out who must foot the bill for legal proceedings and bear the costs of implementing the blockades. The ISPs are not objecting to paying for the blocking systems to be put in place, but want content creators to pay for the initial implementation and ongoing maintenance of a block, which will be put in place for 3 years.
The estimated cost of putting blocks in place was about $9,500. After the initial setup, each domain name would cost $50 to block. At the same time, the music industry is seeking straightforward DNS-based blocking where emerging clones, mirrors, and proxy websites can be subsequently blocked.
The content creators foresee an application to the court with details of any website they want the ISPs to block, and the service providers are given 10 days to object to the blocking demand. Then the court would decide whether another hearing is required before the domain is added to the blocklist.
In the case of KickassTorrents, which even no longer exists, the continuing of a case is quite unusual. It continues alongside the blocking case against The Pirate Bay, which is also experiencing argument over compensations of the costs and has also been affected by takedowns.
Thanks to TorrentFreak for providing the source of the article.
Friday, October 28th, 2016
|KAT may have met it's match. AU is giving KAT donkey punches all the way down. Yeah, donkey punches in the back of the head as KAT respawns on the 'net somewhere.|
|posted by (2016-10-29 04:14:36)|
|KAT wasn't the best but it had it moments.|
|posted by (2016-10-29 04:20:09)|
|Respawn in Iceland maybe?|
|posted by (2016-10-29 05:51:29)|
|I am more of a DOG person, but KAT was the ... cat's meow.|
|posted by (2016-10-29 20:47:41)|
|Some people inadvertently pick the most appropriate user names: dragnit's comment was a drag coming from a nit!|
|someone call a cat?|
|as a long time kat member making the shift over to et was kinda hard for me but it is nice here, but KAT will forever be my home|
|Lol, WTF they can do.. Nothing. KAT will rise.||
Most Popular Stories