DOCSLIB.ORG

The Blocking of File Appropriate Tool, Or a Fruitless Effort to Saf E Blocking Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Name: Samaa Kanani ANR: 672673 Supervisor: M. Schellekens Program: Law and Technology LLM Word count: [13723 ] Master Thesis The blocking of file -sharing websites by ISPs – an appropriate tool, or a fruitless effort to safeguard copyrights? 1 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 PIRACY 4 1.1.1 WHAT IS BIT TORRENT ? 5 1.2 PIRACY IN THE NETHERLANDS 6 2 – THE REASON BEHIND PEOPLES DOWNLOADING BEHAVIOR 10 2.1 FILESHARING 2©12 REPORT 10 2.2 CORE DATA REPORT 12 2.2.1 TV-SHOWS 12 2.2.2 MOVIES 12 2.2.3 MUSIC 13 2.3 ATTITUDE TOWARDS ONLINE PIRACY SURVEY (ATOPS) 14 2.3.1 FINDINGS OF ATOPS 15 2.3.2 ASSESSING THE THREE MAIN REASONS FOR PIRATING MEDIA CONTENT 19 2.3.3 ATTITUDE TOWARDS LEGAL DOWNLOADS AS AN ALTERNATIVE 20 3 BREIN V ZIGGO & XS4ALL 22 3.1 CASE SUMMARY 22 4 APPROPRIATENESS OF BREIN V ZIGGO/XS4ALL 25 4.1 PROPORTIONALITY 25 4.2 SUBSIDIARITY 27 4.3 EFFECTIVENESS 29 5. ALTERNATIVES TO ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING 34 5.2 (M ICRO ) DONATIONS 34 5.3 CROWD FUNDING 35 5.4 PRIVATE COPYING LEVY 35 6 CONCLUDING REMARKS 37 WORKS CITED 39 2 1 Introduction The Internet has changed the way in which people obtain and consume information. It has also created new and easy ways for media to be accessed. But this ability to access media content over the Internet, also gave rise to online piracy. Copyrights holders are often hindered from fully exercising their copyrights, since their materials are being distributed illegally online. In recent years, the courts have seen an influx of copyright cases linked to file sharing websites which host illegally obtained media content. Initially, the courts tried to solve the issue by taking websites down, or ordering the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to disclose the copyright infringers name and address. Since these websites are often operated abroad, they fall outside of the jurisdiction of the court. Therefore, shutting entire file-sharing websites down has proven to be impossible many times. ISPs are also unable to identify the operators of these foreign websites. Therefore, a solution often applied by courts, is to order the ISPs to block the access of its users to that particular website. This means that the website itself is not taken down, but merely the access to it from a particular ISP is blocked. Recently, a court in the Netherlands held that ISPs have to block the access to The Pirate Bay, one of the most well known file-sharing websites 1. The effectiveness of this measure however is questionable, which is why one of the key questions we have to ask ourselves is how effective this measure actually was in preventing violations of copyrights. As we will see in detail later on, a study by the University of Amsterdam has shown that the traffic on this website has actually increased since its blocking, which may indicate that the measure was actually not effective 2. In this paper the focus lies with the solution which blocks access to file-sharing websites, rather than shutting them down completely, or prosecuting the individual perpetrators. One of the goals of this paper is to find out whether the outcome of the judgment of the BREIN v ZIGGO/XS4ALL case is in line with the empirical findings of the various reports and surveys (which can be found in chapter 2) that provided research in this field. BREIN v ZIGGO/XS4ALL is taken as an example because it is a landmark case, in which the access to an entire website had to be blocked by many ISPs in order to prevent copyright infringements. The outcome of the case has broad implications since BREIN can now ask for IP addresses of sites mirroring the initial website to be blocked ex-parte. This research is vital, because the issue of online piracy is an ever growing problem for copyright holders, and an appropriate tool for combating copyright infringement is yet to be found. A lot of time and resources are invested in a court decision such as that of BREIN v ZIGGO/XS4ALL, but the effects of the judgment on peoples downloading behavior seem to not have been taken into consideration. The aim of this paper therefore is to assess whether the blocking of file-sharing websites by ISPs is an appropriate tool, for safeguarding copyrights, or whether it’s a fruitless effort. In this paper the concept of piracy, how it works and its legal status in the Netherlands will be assessed. Next, the paper will be probing deeper into the human behavior 1 BREIN v ZIGGO/XS4ALL, 2012 2 Van der Ham, Rood, Dumitru, & al, 2012 3 relating to the downloading of copyrighted materials, through the assessment of various surveys and reports in this field. Then the abovementioned case, whereby a court ordered the blocking of the Pirate Bay by ISPs, will be examined. The appropriateness of the ruling will be assessed based on three tests: proportionality, subsidiarity, and effectiveness. Finally alternative measures for dealing with problems relating to the downloading of copyrighted material will be suggested. Methodology The research will focus on the following question: The blocking of file-sharing websites by ISPs – an appropriate tool, or a fruitless effort to safeguard copyrights? In order to determine whether the blocking of file-sharing websites by ISPs help safeguard copyrights, the landmark case of BREIN v ZIGGO/XS4ALL was studied and analyzed thoroughly. This landmark case is a good example of how court ordered blockings of Filesharing websites may or may not affect peoples downloading behavior. The research will orient itself along these sub questions: 1) Is the judgment proportional? 2) Is the judgment in line with the subsidiarity principle? 3) Was the blocking of The Piratebay in the Netherlands effective in reducing copyrights infringement? For determining the effectiveness of the courts judgment, a survey was conducted with the aim to find out: 1) Why people download illegally 2) Whether they have changed their illegal downloading habits since The Piratebay has been blocked. This survey was conducted via an online survey tool, and had a total of 100 respondents, all of whom downloaded some form of media on a regular basis. The reason why this survey was only to be filled in by those who regularly download, is because the aim of this survey was not to find out which percentage of the population downloads illegally, but rather to find out why those who download illegally, actually do it. 1.1 Piracy In this first chapter we will look into what piracy actually is and the current legal status of pirating in the Netherlands. Merriam Webster describes piracy as: “ the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright”3. 3 Merriam-Webster, piracy 4 In this case the “production” is usually a song, movie, book, computer came, or other form of media. The use is “unauthorized,” because the production or work is made publicly available on the Internet without consent of the rights holder. Piracy falls into four distinct categories 4: Physical music piracy, counterfeits, bootlegs, and Internet Piracy. Physical music piracy refers to the copying of music onto physical sound carriers. This form of piracy can be traced back to the time when the first mix- taped were made on cassette tapes. Counterfeits are false reproductions trying to pass off as the original work. Bootlegs are for instance recordings of shows or concerts, which were done without permission and then sold or distributed. One of the newest forms of piracy is Internet Piracy. It refers to various forms of pirating, using the Internet as a tool for these illegal downloads. This will be the form of piracy most used throughout this paper. There are various means of pirating media from the Internet. There are websites that offer direct downloads from their servers. There is the possibility to put a YouTube videos URL into a converter program and convert it into an mp3 format, to then download it. Another, quite popular method is the P2P (Peer to Peer) method of file- sharing, whereby the media is not downloaded from one website provider/ server, but rather from a “peer”5. This is done through the use of a software program, which locates the file one wants to download on another server. A very popular form of P2P has become the BitTorrent. This is a form of P2P file sharing whereby one simultaneously uploads and downloads the file. 1.1.1 What is BitTorrent? BitTorrent, also known, as Torrent is a method used for downloading, invented by the Python-programmer Bram Cohen and debuted in 2001 6. In order to operate, BitTorrents use “swarming and tracking.” Swarming describes the act of splitting up large files into many smaller bits, in order to then share those bits amongst a swarm of users. So torrents work by simultaneously downloading bits of the same file from different sources. The term tracking refers to the fact that a server will help all the various swarmers find each other’s files. In order to be able to download a BitTorrent file, a user will have to first install a BitTorrent client on their computer, such as uTorrent or Transmission. This protocol will then be able to download the BitTorrent files. The Torrent files themselves do not contain the file that is to be downloaded; instead they contain information regarding the file. This information is the used by the BitTorrent client to communicate to the tracker in order to find fellow swarmers who are downloading and sharing a specific file 7.
Recommended publications
  • From Sony to SOPA: the Technology-Content Divide

    From Sony to SOPA: the Technology-Content Divide

    From Sony to SOPA: The Technology-Content Divide The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation John Palfrey, Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Lisa Brem, From Sony to SOPA: The Technology-Content Divide, Harvard Law School Case Studies (2013). Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11029496 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP http://casestudies.law.harvard.edu By John Palfrey, Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Lisa Brem February 23, 2013 From Sony to SOPA: The Technology-Content Divide Background Note Copyright © 2013 Harvard University. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise – without permission. "There was a time when lawyers were on one side or the other of the technology content divide. Now, the issues are increasingly less black-and-white and more shades of gray. You have competing issues for which good lawyers provide insights on either side." — Laurence Pulgram, partner, Fenwick & Westi Since the invention of the printing press, there has been tension between copyright holders, who seek control over and monetary gain from their creations, and technology builders, who want to invent without worrying how others might use that invention to infringe copyrights.
  • A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The

    A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The

    A Framework for Application Specific Knowledge Engines Item Type text; Electronic Dissertation Authors Lai, Guanpi Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 25/09/2021 03:58:57 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/204290 A FRAMEWORK FOR APPLICATION SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE ENGINES by Guanpi Lai _____________________ A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF SYSTEMS AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2010 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Dissertation Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Guanpi Lai entitled A Framework for Application Specific Knowledge Engines and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy _______________________________________________________________________ Date: 4/28/2010 Fei-Yue Wang _______________________________________________________________________ Date: 4/28/2010 Ferenc Szidarovszky _______________________________________________________________________ Date: 4/28/2010 Jian Liu Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent
  • International Intellectual Property Alliance®

    International Intellectual Property Alliance®

    I NTERNATIONAL I NTELLECTUAL P ROPERTY A LLIANCE® 1818 N STREET, NW, 8TH FLOOR · WASHINGTON, DC 20036 · TEL (202) 355-7924 · FAX (202) 355-7899 · WWW.IIPA.COM · EMAIL: [email protected] September 14, 2012 Filed via www.regulations.gov, Docket No. USTR–2012–0011 Stanford K. McCoy, Esq. Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Intellectual Property and Innovation Office of the U.S. Trade Representative Washington, DC 20508 Re: IIPA Written Submission Re: 2012 Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets: Request for Public Comments, 77 Fed. Reg. 48583 (August 14, 2012) Dear Mr. McCoy: In response to the August 14, 2012 Federal Register notice referenced above, the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA)1 provides the Special 301 Subcommittee with the following written comments to provide examples of Internet and physical “notorious markets” – those “where counterfeit or pirated products are prevalent to such a degree that the market exemplifies the problem of marketplaces that deal in infringing goods and help sustain global piracy and counterfeiting.” We hope our filing will assist the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) in “identifying potential Internet and physical notorious markets that exist outside the United States and that may be included in the 2012 Notorious Markets List.” We express appreciation to USTR for publishing a notorious markets list as an “Out of Cycle Review” separately from the annual Special 301 Report. This list has successfully identified key online and physical marketplaces that are involved in intellectual property rights infringements, and has led to some positive developments. These include closures of some Internet websites whose businesses were built on illegal conduct, greater cooperation from some previously identified “notorious” and other suspect sites, and the facilitation of licensing agreements for legitimate distribution of creative materials.
  • List of Search Engines

    List of Search Engines

    A blog network is a group of blogs that are connected to each other in a network. A blog network can either be a group of loosely connected blogs, or a group of blogs that are owned by the same company. The purpose of such a network is usually to promote the other blogs in the same network and therefore increase the advertising revenue generated from online advertising on the blogs.[1] List of search engines From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia For knowing popular web search engines see, see Most popular Internet search engines. This is a list of search engines, including web search engines, selection-based search engines, metasearch engines, desktop search tools, and web portals and vertical market websites that have a search facility for online databases. Contents 1 By content/topic o 1.1 General o 1.2 P2P search engines o 1.3 Metasearch engines o 1.4 Geographically limited scope o 1.5 Semantic o 1.6 Accountancy o 1.7 Business o 1.8 Computers o 1.9 Enterprise o 1.10 Fashion o 1.11 Food/Recipes o 1.12 Genealogy o 1.13 Mobile/Handheld o 1.14 Job o 1.15 Legal o 1.16 Medical o 1.17 News o 1.18 People o 1.19 Real estate / property o 1.20 Television o 1.21 Video Games 2 By information type o 2.1 Forum o 2.2 Blog o 2.3 Multimedia o 2.4 Source code o 2.5 BitTorrent o 2.6 Email o 2.7 Maps o 2.8 Price o 2.9 Question and answer .
  • Searching for Malware in Bittorrent∗

    Searching for Malware in Bittorrent∗

    Searching for Malware in BitTorrent∗ Andrew D. Berns and Eunjin (EJ) Jung April 24, 2008 Abstract One of the most widely publicized aspects of computer security has been the presence and propagation of malware. Malware has adapted to many different changing technologies, in- cluding recently-popular P2P systems. While previous work has examined P2P networks and protocols like KaZaA and Gnutella for malware, little has been done so far that examines BitTor- rent. This project explored BitTorrent for the presence of malware, and discovered a significant portion of malware in the downloaded file set. Statistics on torrents infected with malware were gathered and analyzed to find patterns that are helpful in creating basic filtering heuristics. While these heuristics may work in simple cases, several easy ways they can be defeated were found. 1 Introduction Recently, peer-to-peer networks have emerged as a popular paradigm for Internet applications. In fact, a study in 2005 estimated that P2P traffic accounted for around 70% of all traffic on the Internet [2]. P2P technology is finding new applications as it grows, including voice-over-IP systems and streaming video delivery. While P2P has found several different uses, perhaps the most widely-known use is for file sharing. One concern with P2P file sharing is that it can be used to distribute malware (malicious software, such as worms, viruses, and rootkits). On the one hand, users have access to huge amounts of data, while on the other hand, this data can easily be tainted with viruses, worms, and other forms of malware. An important consideration, then, is if the concern about malware in P2P networks is warranted, and if it is, are there ways to protect a computer and minimize the risk of malware infection from P2P networks.
  • Torrents for Mac

    Torrents for Mac

    1 / 2 Torrents For Mac Mac Torrent Download - Torrents for Mac. Free Apps, Games & Plugins. Apple Final Cut Pro & Logic Pro X, Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom, Illustrator, Premiere .... H. D. Mac Murdo , residing in Glasgow , v . ... Torrents of abuse were poured upon Lord Eldon , as a judge wavering in his mind , and dilatory in his decisions .... Quickly play torrent files and magnet links · Download torrents on Mac from your favorite browser · Supporting MacOS Catalina and below.. Jun 28, 2019 — Vuze, which was previously known as Azureus, offers far more detail than qBittorrent and Transmission, but still has a good macOS-friendly .... 11 hours ago — Google search now casually highlights 'best torrent sites . ... torrent torrentfunk site torrents mac torrenting software movies downloading ... Nov 14, 2020 — Can anyone suggest which is the best Torrent client on macOS Big Sur 11.0.1 ? Vuze torrent client which was running smoothly on Catalina , it .... May 28, 2021 — uTorrent; Transmission; WebTorrent; BitTorrent; Vuze; Deluge; qBitTorrent. The problem is, if you have a Mac device, installing a quality torrent .... Jan 29, 2021 — You could also have a firewall feature turned on your Mac. In this case, disabling it will likely let the torrent client downloads go through:.. A site offering torrents: It will serve as torrent search engine; A Torrent download software: Install on your Mac, it is he that will let you upload your file .... Find: Search for torrents or browse artist-sponsored content, directly from your software interface. Get: Download torrents and manage your files in the torrent .... Mar 16, 2006 — Softonic review. The original Bittorrent client.
  • 10 Best Game Torrent Sites in 2019 Torrenting Is Undeniably a Favorite Activity of a Majority of Netizens Today. Considering

    10 Best Game Torrent Sites in 2019 Torrenting Is Undeniably a Favorite Activity of a Majority of Netizens Today. Considering

    10 Best Game Torrent Sites in 2019 Torrenting is undeniably a favorite activity of a majority of netizens today. Considering the sad demise of many torrent sites in the past, netizens are actively looking for torrent websites that are working properly. Since the past year brought turmoil in the lives of binge watchers and gamers as the entire torrent industry was shutdown. The copyright watchdogs and state-sponsored departments imposed a ban on many dominant torrent sites. We have created a guide to the best torrent website in 2019 that work and offer reliable and high speed torrent downloads. Netizens can download their favorite movies, seasons, TV shows, games, e-books, music, and more media hassle-freely from the following torrent websites: RARBG RARBG is one of the leading torrent websites. It offers worthwhile content and updates media library on a regular basis. Fanatics can download new and old torrents. Being powered by an active community of torrenters, RARBG offers unlimited seeding topping of lists for on-demand movies, TV shows, music, shows, and more media. Zoogle Zoogle is relatively a fresh websites in the list of torrent websites. It offers an unrestricted access to more than 1,300 TV appears and 30,000 motion pictures. The websites provides torrenters with a plain and sleek UI. The user-friendly UI makes Zoogle one of the fan-favorite torrenting websites in the modern-day. Interestingly, Zoogle does not offer popup or promotional content, allowing users to download torrent without facing any unwanted ads. Users require providing email address, username, and a key to download media from Zoogle.
  • How Does Torrenting Affect the Media Industry in The

    How Does Torrenting Affect the Media Industry in The

    University of Manchester Management, Technology and Innovation Report How does torrenting affect the media industry in the UK? Should the UK continue to block torrenting websites? Author: Supervisor: Pez Cuckow Mohammad Hajhashem Student ID: Word Count: 7565025 1644 Abstract Torrenting is used to download copyrighted works from the Internet. This report gives an overview of the technology behind it, investigating its effect on the media industry. The consequences of introducing blocking measures is reviewed from support- ing and opposing evidence. In conclusion there are four suggestions for more specific research and legislation related specifically to the UK media industry. Keywords: BitTorrent, Torrenting, Copyright Law, CDPA June 15, 2014 CONTENTS CONTENTS Contents Glossary 2 1 Introduction 3 2 Torrenting 3 2.1 Popularity . .3 2.2 Technology . .3 3 Intellectual Property Rights 4 3.1 Legal Options . .4 3.2 In the UK . .5 3.3 Keeping IP Laws Up to Date . .5 4 Effect of Torrenting 6 4.1 Negative Effects . .6 4.2 Opposition . .8 5 Blocks in the UK 9 5.1 Supporting Evidence . .9 5.2 Opposing Evidence . .9 6 Conclusions 10 Appendix A BitTorrent 17 A.1 Popularity . 17 A.2 Overview . 17 Appendix B Prosecuting a User 17 B.1 Downloading . 18 B.2 Sharing . 18 Appendix C Prosecuting a Tracker 18 Appendix D BPI vs UK ISP's 18 D.1 Charges . 19 Appendix E HADOPI 19 Appendix F Avoiding the Blocks 19 Appendix G Tables 20 7565025 1 of 20 LIST OF FIGURES Glossary List of Figures 1 Client/Server VS Peer2Peer Network (Sheehan, 2009) .
  • EZTV Proxy List Documentation Release Latest

    EZTV Proxy List Documentation Release Latest

    EZTV Proxy List Documentation Release latest Apr 12, 2021 CONTENTS 1 EZTV Proxies 3 2 Top EZTV Proxy and Mirror Sites:5 3 Is EZTV blocked in my country?7 4 How to unblock EZTV 9 i ii EZTV Proxy List Documentation, Release latest The EZTV site is the best source where you can download TV torrents. If your ISP blocks eztv or for some reason cannot access it, just go to one of the EZTV proxy sites article. You will get instant access through the EZTV mirror so that you can download all the multimedia content you need. CONTENTS 1 EZTV Proxy List Documentation, Release latest 2 CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE EZTV PROXIES Perhaps the easiest way to access the site is through EZTV proxies. A proxy server is a server that acts as an inter- mediary for requests from clients looking for resources from other servers. When accessing EZTV through a proxy server, external observers only see that you are connected to the proxy server and do not see that the proxy server is transmitting EZTV data to you. EZTV proxies are sometimes mistaken for EZTV mirrors. Mirror 1337x is just a clone of the source site with a different domain name and servers. The EZTV proxy server, on the other hand, is a separate site that makes it easy to connect to the original EZTV, as well as often to other websites. In practice, it doesn’t matter if you connect to EZTV through a proxy server or use an EZTV mirror, as they both provide about the same degree of privacy.
  • Site Blocking Efficacy – Key Findings Australia

    Site Blocking Efficacy – Key Findings Australia

    Site Blocking Efficacy – Key Findings Australia February 2018 Site Blocking Efficacy: Australia | ASA Overall usage of piracy sites in Australia is down Site blocking in Australia has had a positive impact upon the usage of blocked piracy sites, reducing the usage in Australia of the websites targeted by the blocking orders by 53.4% since December 2016, when the blocking regime began. The key points from this report are as follows: • Site blocking in Australia has resulted in a usage reduction of 53.4% to blocked sites when comparing usage recorded in November 2017 to before blocking took effect. Usage has decreased for each blocking wave implemented in the country; • The usage of the top 50 piracy sites in Australia has decreased by 35.1% since October 2016. This is 25.5% further than the 10.6% in the previous report. The impact of the two August 2017 blocking injunctions is the driving force behind these changes; • The graph below summarises the findings of this report and shows the change in usage for the top 250 unauthorised sites1 in Australia over the recorded period of October 2016 to November 2017. The blocked sites have decreased in usage by a total of 53.4%. Overall usage of the top 250 unauthorised sites has decreased by 25.4% in Australia. 1 Appendix C shows how top-heavy piracy consumption is with most activity in the Top 50 sites, and demonstrates that a Top 250 is a valid proxy for piracy overall. 2 Site Blocking Efficacy: Australia | ASA Direct effect of site blocking To understand the effect of site blocking on the targeted domains it is useful to start by looking at the direct impact on the sites themselves.
  • Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2012

    Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2012

    Ernesto, January 7, 2012 Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2012 Continuing a long-standing New Year’s tradition, we present an up-to-date list of the world’s most visited BitTorrent sites. At the start of 2012 The Pirate Bay continues to pull in the most visitors, followed by Torrentz and KickassTorrents. The six-year-old TV-torrent distribution group EZTV appears in the list for the first time, ranked 8th. Which torrent sites get the most visitors at the start of 2012? At first glance little seems to have changed, as many of the sites in the top 10 have been among the top torrent sites for more than half a decade. But moving down the list we see quite a few movers and shakers as well as three newcomers. The most notable absentee this year is TorrentReactor, one of the oldest torrent sites on the Internet. The Russian-based site hasbeen featured in the top 10 since 2006, but missed the cut in 2012. Last year’s best newcomer LimeTorrents took an even bigger hit in traffic and has dropped off the list as well. Below we have compiled a list of the 10 most-visited torrent sites at the start of the new year. Only public and English language sites are included. The list is based on traffic rank reports from Compete and Alexa. In addition, we include last year’s ranking for each of the 10 sites. 1. The Pirate Bay The Pirate Bay is probably the best known BitTorrent brand on the Internet.

  • Bittorrent (Protocol) 1 Bittorrent (Protocol)

    BitTorrent (protocol) 1 BitTorrent (protocol) BitTorrent is a peer-to-peer file sharing protocol used for distributing large amounts of data over the Internet. BitTorrent is one of the most common protocols for transferring large files and it has been estimated that peer-to-peer networks collectively have accounted for roughly 43% to 70% of all Internet traffic (depending on geographical location) as of February 2009.[1] Programmer Bram Cohen designed the protocol in April 2001 and released a first implementation on July 2, 2001.[2] It is now maintained by Cohen's company BitTorrent, Inc. There are numerous BitTorrent clients available for a variety of computing platforms. As of January 2012 BitTorrent has 150 million active users according to BitTorrent Inc.. Based on this the total number of monthly BitTorrent users can be estimated at more than a quarter billion.[3] At any given instant of time BitTorrent has, on average, more active users than YouTube and Facebook combined. (This refers to the number of active users at any instant and not to the total number of unique users.)[4][5] Description The BitTorrent protocol can be used to reduce the server and network impact of distributing large files. Rather than downloading a file from a single source server, the BitTorrent protocol allows users to join a "swarm" of hosts to download and upload from each other simultaneously. The protocol is an alternative to the older single source, multiple mirror sources technique for distributing data, and can work over networks with lower bandwidth so many small computers, like mobile phones, are able to efficiently distribute files to many recipients.