Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul><li>Media platform Disney+Hotstar filed a first information report (FIR) at Bengaluru cyber cell against a few digital platforms indulging in piracy this week.</li><li>Disney+Hotstar is the latest victim in a long list of streaming platforms that have lost their revenues to piracy.</li><li>Last year, Zee Entertainment Enterprises had filed an official complaint, pertaining to the pirated version of the film ‘Radhe’ being circulated across messaging platforms, including WhatsApp and Telegram.</li></ul>There is something common between Rajamouli’s RRR, Yash starrer KGF: Chapter 2 and Salman Khan’s Radhe. They’re not just superhit movies, they were all pirated way ahead of their release. The latest victim of this cybercrime is Disney+Hotstar. It has filed an FIR <a href="https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/disney-star-lodges-fir-against-websites-app-in-fight-against-piracy-122052900405_1.html">complaint </a>against TamilMV, TamilBlasters, Tamilrockers, and application PikaShow TV for carrying leaked content on their platform. “The cumulative traffic on these platforms is estimated at 62 million,” Santosh Ram, station house officer, cybercell, Bengaluru Police told <a href="https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/disney-star-lodges-fir-against-websites-app-in-fight-against-piracy-122052900405_1.html">Business Standard</a>. It joins the long list of complaints and cases against piracy. Star, along with Viacom 18 Media Private, had also filed <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/rogue-mobile-app-developer-held-in-content-piracy-case/articleshow/91801209.cms">a case against</a> android software aggregator Thop TV right before the ICC World Test Championship Final. <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/rogue-mobile-app-developer-held-in-content-piracy-case/articleshow/91801209.cms">Thop TV</a> is a rogue app that illegally provides access to films, shows and live sports on TV, as well as video-on-demand content, without consent from its producers. Its CEO was arrested last month in April 2022. After Radhe was leaked before its release on OTT platforms, Zee Entertainment Enterprises filed an FIR against it at the cyber branch. The movie was circulated across messaging platforms, including WhatsApp and Telegram. Piracy, however, is not new to the industry. Since the dawn of professional film production, pirates have been looking for ways to make a few quick extra bucks. After the advent of the internet and social media, it has become easier to download, mirror and circulate content. How vast is the sea of pirates? OTT players have been paying millions to movie producers for exclusive rights – and without direct earnings from the releases, they stand to lose future subscribers. A <a href="https://www.livemint.com/industry/media/indian-ott-market-to-touch-13-15-bn-in-10-years-deloitte-11645515343481.html">report </a>by Deloitte India released earlier this year estimates that OTT platforms may record 20% growth to touch $13 billion–$15 billion over the next decade. However, these numbers could grow at a faster rate if piracy is out of the picture. According to a <a href="https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/as-digital-piracy-rises-amid-pandemic-original-content-creators-losing-money-ey/article34743362.ece">report </a>by Digital TV Research, the loss of revenue for OTT players on account of piracy in India is expected to hit $3.08 billion by 2022. India is expected to become one of the largest regions for online piracy this year, said Digital TV Research’s report. <table style="border-width: initial; border-style: none; table-layout: fixed; width: 468pt;" class="redcator-table-advance"></colgroup><tbody><tr><td colspan="3" style="border-left:solid #000000 1pt;border-right:solid #000000 1pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#a2c4c9;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">Title: Top five countries to lose their revenues to online piracy in 2022 (in $ millions) </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">Ranking </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">Country </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">Estimated losses in 2022 </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">1 </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">USA </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">$11,583 mn </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">2 </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">China </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">$9,778 mn </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">3 </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">India </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">$3,078 mn </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">4 </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">Brazil </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">$2,584 mn </td></tr><tr><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">5 </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">Mexico </td><td style="border-left:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-right:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-bottom:solid #000000 1.5pt;border-top:solid #000000 1.5pt;vertical-align:top;background-color:#d0e0e3;padding:5pt 5pt 5pt 5pt;overflow:hidden;overflow-wrap:break-word;">$1,576 mn </td></tr></tbody><tbody></tbody><tbody></tbody></table>Source: Digital TV Research The TV and film industries support millions of jobs, from set designers, makeup artists, and musicians to producers and directors — and piracy is eating out of their pockets. As per a <a href="https://www.akamai.com/site/en/documents/white-paper/protecting-the-bank-of-ott-whitepaper.pdf">report </a>by Akamai Technologies, a cybersecurity and cloud service company, Indian pirated websites saw 6.5 billion visits in 2021 and the country is ranked third in the world in accessing piracy websites. India has also earned the dubious distinction of ranking first in music piracy. Fine and punishment for piracy in India Piracy is considered a criminal act across the world. In India, as per the Cinematograph Act of 2019, <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/3-year-jail-for-viewing-pirated-films-online/articleshow/53818024.cms">offenders </a>could attract a three-year prison term and a fine of up to ₹3 lakh for viewing, downloading, exhibiting or duplicating an illicit copy of copyrighted content. Content released on OTT platforms or television is protected by copyright. If the content is downloaded without the producer’s consent and circulated, it is a violation of the copyright act of 1957. If an FIR is registered against the offender, the police officer is not required to obtain a warrant (or permission from the court). They can seize the offender’s property (computer or laptop).

Indian OTTs might lose $3 bn to piracy this year as leaked content sites see 62 mn footfalls

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Package theft is a staple of the e-commerce age, and is more common in some states than others.</li><li>Efforts to up the penalty for package theft are controversial.</li></ul>Since the e-commerce explosion of 2020 and 2021, package theft has become a constant consumer concern, and lawmakers are taking notice. The crime is difficult to track, but some trends are clear. It's more common in apartment complexes and shared buildings than single-family homes. And it's more common in urban areas over suburban ones, <a href="https://www.consumerreports.org/theft/how-to-keep-holiday-packages-being-stolen-a5439792808/">according to Consumer Reports</a>. But there's no rock-solid way to know how often "porch pirates" strike, and upping the punishment is a controversial move. Though 11% of people who receive packages they order online have had at least one stolen, according to a <a href="https://article.images.consumerreports.org/prod/content/dam/surveys/Consumer_Reports_AES_22_SEPT_2021">Consumer Reports survey from 2021</a>, only 9%<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/guides/tech/what-to-do-if-your-package-gets-stolen"> filed a police report. </a>In the same survey, 65% of the affected people said they had at least two packages stolen.And even if they had logged the theft with police, the crime of package theft is filed and charged differently depending on the location. In some places it's simple theft, like any other. In others, there's a separate charge for package theft. And in states where there's a distinction, lawmakers are cracking down, hard. In the last four years, eight US states have elevated package theft from a misdemeanor to a felony: <ul><li>Texas — Package theft has been a <a href="https://www.khou.com/article/news/attention-porch-pirates-new-texas-law-makes-it-a-felony-to-steal-packages-starting-sept-1/285-e47b421c-e896-4123-82a4-308422d43325">felony since 2019</a>, with a penalty of six months to 10 years in prison, which can be increased if the crime involved disabled or elderly people. </li><li>Michigan — Package theft is considered a <a href="https://www.monroecountylawyers.com/blog/2019/12/porch-piracy-and-mail-theft-becomes-felony-crimes-in-michigan/">felony on the second violation</a>, with a penalty of up to five years in prison. </li><li>Oklahoma — Package theft can be <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/11/02/porch-piracy-act-oklahoma-takes-effect-prison-time/6134537002/">charged as a felony</a> if the perpetrator is convicted of three instances within 60 days. The punishment is up to five years in prison. </li><li> Arkansas — Package theft has been a <a href="https://www.thv11.com/article/news/local/stealing-packages-porch-felony-arkansas/91-8d54ffd1-943f-43bc-acb3-746daeb7b362">felony since 2021</a>, punishable by up to six years in prison. </li><li>Tennessee — Package theft has been a <a href="https://www.wate.com/investigations/new-law-gives-porch-pirates-tougher-punishments-in-tennessee/">felony since 2021,</a> punishable by up to six years in prison.</li><li>Georgia — Since 2021, package theft can be charged as a <a href="https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/stealing-packages-a-felony-in-georgia/85-545570df-be8a-4179-861e-d64b561afa12">felony since</a> if the perpetrator has taken three packages or pieces of mail from one address or 10 or more pieces from three or more addresses. The crime is punishable by up to five years in prison. </li><li>New Jersey — At the end of 2022, package theft became a <a href="https://www.nj.com/politics/2022/01/porch-pirates-in-nj-face-up-to-5-years-in-jail-under-new-law.html">"third-degree crime"</a> in New Jersey with a punishment of up to five years in prison. </li><li>Kentucky — Package theft became a felony punishable by up to <a href="https://www.wlwt.com/article/kentucky-bill-porch-pirate-felony-bill-law-beshear/40176611">five years in prison</a> last year.</li></ul>California, New York, South Carolina, Kansas, and Missouri all have similar laws drafted and pending passage through state legislatures, according to a list compiled by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/25/porch-piracy-package-thefts-doorstep-delivery">The Guardian</a> and the investigative journalism outfit <a href="https://www.typeinvestigations.org/investigation/2022/08/25/when-porch-piracy-became-a-felony/">Type Investigations.</a><h2>Where is package theft most common?</h2>There isn't much of a correlation between the states cracking down on package theft and the places that experience it. Only one of the top 10 metro areas experiencing the most package theft is in a state where porch piracy is a felony. Those <a href="https://www.safewise.com/blog/metro-areas-porch-theft/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">cities were ranked by Vivint</a>, a home security firm, using Google Trends data combined with FBI data on larceny: <ol><li>San Francisco, California</li><li>Seattle, Washington</li><li>Austin, Texas</li><li>Hartford, Connecticut</li><li>Sacramento, California</li><li>Los Angeles, California </li><li>Portland, Oregon</li><li>Fresno, California</li><li>Milwaukee, Wisconsin</li><li>New Orleans, Louisiana </li></ol><h2>Delivery worker dragnet?</h2>Stealing anything delivered by the US Postal Service is already a felony, but a <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/6852/text?r=8&amp;s=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">bill to extend that rule to all delivery companies nationwide</a> was introduced in the US House of Representatives last year by democrat Rep. Dean Phillips of Minnesota. It was referred to the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security in November."It's theft and it needs a higher level of punishment," Rep. Dan Meuser, a Republican from Texas, stated. "It sends a message that we're getting tough on those who prey on customers waiting for their items they've paid for, including medication and gifts." Supporters of escalating punishment for package theft see the concept as a natural extension of existing protections for USPS packages in the e-commerce age — and a necessary deterrent to criminals that can end up stealing crucial items like prescription drugs. Last year, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/25/porch-piracy-package-thefts-doorstep-delivery">The Guardian</a> analyzed all of Texas's porch piracy charges since its law passed in 2019. Out of 113 charges, none appeared to be cases of organized crime, and were more likely crimes of desperation or opportunity. Critics say that these laws could end up disproportionately affecting people of color, especially delivery workers. Given the popularity of doorbell camera security systems, delivery workers can easily end up accused of package theft without conclusive evidence, said Aiha Nguyen, program director for Data and Society, a nonprofit research organization. When packages disappear, delivery personnel are often the last known person in contact with them and in clear view of now-ubiquitous cameras, she said. "We think that these are pretty misguided because they'll likely pull this low wage workforce, which is made up of many people of color, into the law enforcement dragnet," she said. When packages disappear, delivery personnel are often the last known person in contact with them and in clear view of now ubiquitous doorbell cameras, she said. The American Civil Liberties Union has <a href="https://californiaglobe.com/articles/increased-porch-pirate-penalty-bill-introduced-for-the-second-time-in-the-senate/">taken issue with several "porch piracy"</a> bills around the country, including the one currently being considered in California, which it said "could be used as a pretext for arresting people against whom law enforcement or property owners are explicitly or implicitly biased." The ACLU and Nguyen also pointed out that theft is already illegal and making package theft an automatic felony takes out the nuances out of existing larceny laws. "A lot of these a lot of the laws don't have minimums," Nguyen said. "It could be a felony for stealing a $5 lipstick."

Package theft is now a felony in 8 states and counting as lawmakers crack down on 'porch piracy'

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">Reuters/Tobias Schwarz</div></div></div>The <keyword id="6354868" type="COUNTRY" weightage="60" keywordseo="UK">UK</keyword> government is considering an online piracy crackdown that will target companies like Google that "facilitate" copyright infringement with formal legal action unless they do more to try and stop it, <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/web-giants-must-stamp-out-piracy-or-face-legal-action-sk76mxgtd">according to a report in The Times</a>.Search engines are a frequent target of rights-holders' ire for allegedly facilitating piracy. Even though a site like Google doesn't hosted any copyrighted content, regulators claim that it makes it extremely easy to find that content, and should take more responsibility for tackling it.Reached for comment, a Google spokesperson told Business Insider in a statement that the company has "reviewed more than 80 million alleged links to pirated content in the last month alone, and we have refined our algorithm to demote sites that receive high numbers of copyright takedown requests."They also asserted that it isn't search that is driving people towards piracy sites: "Search is not the primary problem - all traffic from major search engines accounts for less than 16 per cent of traffic to sites like The Pirate Bay."Nonetheless, the UK government is apparently considering introducing legislation if required. Ros Lynch, director of copyright and enforcement at the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/web-giants-must-stamp-out-piracy-or-face-legal-action-sk76mxgtd">told The Times that</a> the government is first going to push for "voluntary initiatives" before turning to sterner measures if these fail. "A number of companies do have procedures in place and they are taking some action. I'm not saying they've been wholly effective. Some are not doing as much as they could ... there are still some issues with the Google advertising service not doing as much to stop ads going on infringing sites."The IPO did not immediately respond to a request for comment.In April, <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-government-plans-10-year-jail-sentences-for-online-pirates-consultation-copyright-infringement-2016-4">the UK government announced plans</a> to raise the maximum possible jail sentence for online pirates from two to 10 years following a public consultation.However, this decade-long punishment will likely only be reserved for the most serious, financially-motivated commercial infringers - not people torrenting the occasional movie. <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/dwayne-the-rock-johnson-rock-clock-alarm-app-2016-5">We dare you to oversleep with Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson's new motivational alarm clock app</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="dyOWM5MzE6ejG-EYlwc9rzIH7RN-gJsB" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

The UK government is considering legal action against tech companies that don't do more to tackle piracy

<table class="image-container float_right" width="200"><tr><td><div class="image"></div><a href="&lt;a href="></a>"&gt;<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/1967chevrolet/3752826739/"> mybulldog </a> via Flickr</td></tr></table><a href="http://www.timewarnercable.com/en/gateway.html"></a><keyword id="52712" type="CITY" weightage="60" keywordseo="time-warner">Time Warner</keyword> Cable is apparently being punished for <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/warning-system-for-illegal-downloaders-2013-2">a new policy</a> that's trying to deter customers from illegally downloading their favorite music, TV, and movies.
Hacker group NullCrew defaced Time Warner's customer support page early this morning with a picture of a cartoon gorilla, <a href="http://www.dailydot.com/news/hackers-gorilla-time-warner-cas/">Daily Dot reports</a>. It was back to normal by 8 a.m.
NullCrew is seeking retribution for a new program that major Internet providers are participating in known as "six strikes," which issues a series of warnings to illegal downloaders.
"We hacked Time Warner Cable, due to them attempting to participate in the six strikes," NullCrew <a href="https://twitter.com/NullCrew_FTS/status/309172610204315648">tweeted</a>
Illegal downloaders might get warning letters at first, but eventually their ISPs could lock their browsers to try to stop their illicit activity.
<a href="http://news.softpedia.com/news/Time-Warner-Cable-Website-Hacked-for-Supporting-quot-Six-Strikes-quot-Anti-Piracy-Scheme-334830.shtml">Softpedia</a> posted a mirror page of the Gorilla that <a href="http://www.freezepage.com/1362546977OFVSJKBYGE">defaced the Time Warner page.</a>
Clarification: A previously published version of this article failed to specify that it was Time Warner Cable that was hacked and not Time Warner Inc. The article has been clarified.

Time Warner Cable Site Defaced With Gorilla Over Its New Anti-Piracy Policy

Companies are taking away your ability to actually own the stuff you buyAndy Harding has been running his small electronics-repair shop, Salem Techsperts, in Salem, Massachusetts, for the past eight years. He does steady business fixing phones for college students and nurses from the nearby hospital. But soon after the release of the iPhone 13 in September 2021, Harding noticed a minor change to Apple's software that he thought might shut down his small shop for good.One of the most frequent repairs Harding does — and one of his biggest revenue drivers — is fixing cracked iPhone screens. But Apple added a new feature to the latest model that would detect when the display was swapped, including screen repairs, and then disable the <a href="https://9to5mac.com/2021/11/04/iphone-13-third-party-screen-repair/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">FaceID feature</a>. The shift freaked out the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/iphone-repair-shops-get-apple-certified-parts-2019-8">owners of many repair shops</a>, including Harding."People pay good money for a phone with FaceID, and they want it to work," Harding told me recently. "Broken iPhone screens are the number-one repair for shops like mine. I couldn't survive without that part of the business." Eventually, <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/16/22786274/apple-iphone-13-screen-replacement-face-id-ios-15-2-beta-fixes" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Apple rolled out a software update</a> that allowed FaceID to work after a screen repair. But the phone still warns users the<a href="https://9to5mac.com/2021/11/17/ios-15-2-beta-no-longer-disables-face-id-on-iphone-13-after-screen-replacement/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> screen is not genuine</a> unless they use an "Apple-authorized" repair provider. But why does anyone need Apple's blessing to fix their phone? You already paid for it — you own the phone, you should be able to fix it on your terms.Apple isn't the only company to put restrictions on goods that <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-will-finally-let-you-fix-your-own-iphone-mac-2021-11">people have already bought</a>. As more devices in our lives run on software, manufacturers have started to exert more control over their products even after the customer has taken them home. In some cases, companies force customers to use their repair services, disabling the product if they try to fix it themselves. In other instances, corporations <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/car-feature-subscriptions-add-ons-bmw-ford-toyota-gm-2022-2">require people to pay for ongoing subscription</a> to access basic features of the goods. Modern software allows manufacturers to tether product users to them, forever. Companies are just beginning to monetize this control, with dystopian methods and the assistance of America's unbalanced copyright laws. But there are ways that consumers and policymakers can push back on this corporate attempt to redefine what it means to "own" a product. <h2>You bought it, but you don't really 'own' it</h2>Imagine the start of a hypothetical summer Monday, some time in the future. You remotely start your coffee machine ($5 a month for the app to schedule brewing in advance and another $25 for <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2015/2/5/7986327/keurigs-attempt-to-drm-its-coffee-cups-totally-backfired" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recurring delivery</a> of <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/new-keurig-machine-uses-different-k-cups-2014-9">compatible pods</a>) while you hit your stationary bike for a quick workout ($30 a month for access to classes). When you're ready to head into the office, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/05/revolv-devices-bricked-google-nest-smart-home" target="_blank" rel="noopener">smart thermostat</a> automatically turns down the air-conditioning (a $10-a-month feature) as you use an app on your phone to <a href="https://www.consumerreports.org/automotive-industry/why-you-might-need-to-subscribe-to-get-certain-features-on-your-next-car-a6575794430/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">remotely start your car</a> (which costs you $20 a month). And if you want to get any of that fixed? Put away your screwdriver, because you'll have to go to the manufacturer for even a minor tune-up.While this may seem far-fetched, the explosion of subscription services for consumer products is pushing reality closer to this hypothetical. The global market for e-commerce subscriptions is expected to increase from around $73 billion in 2021 to <a href="https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/subscription-ecommerce-market-growth-rate-reaches-a-whopping-65-301534371.html#:~:text=The%20global%20subscription%20e%2Dcommerce,(CAGR)%20of%2064.64%25." target="_blank" rel="noopener">some $904 billion in 2026</a>. In addition to the proliferation of meal-delivery boxes and streaming services, companies are in many cases making access to the very thing you bought contingent on your payment: no subscription and you've got a brick taking up space. For companies, the appeal of subscriptions is pretty straightforward: a steady stream of revenue and a lot more money raised from their customers over time. While software development and maintenance comes with its own set of costs, the overhead is much lower than hardware manufacturing and gives companies more opportunities to make an additional sale — meaning that recurring revenue comes with huge profit margins.Businesses use a slew of tactics to keep customers on the hook after they've purchased a product. One tactic is to use technical sensors to prevent unauthorized changes to the product. Take the experience of America's farmers: Newer equipment like tractors and combines often require special tools that manufacturers offer exclusively to authorized dealers. Along with highly technical computer systems, this makes it nearly impossible for farmers to fix their own vehicles. My organization, Public Interest Research Group or PIRG, calculated that repair restrictions cost farmers an <a href="https://pirg.org/edfund/resources/out-to-pasture/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">additional $4.2 billion each yea</a>r, with $1.2 billion going to the local authorized dealers and another $3 billion lost to equipment downtime. Similarly, Tesla's software can detect and <a href="https://pirg.org/articles/software-lockouts-shouldnt-be-the-reason-i-cant-use-my-car/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">restrict features from car owners that equipment</a> not from the company, such as after-market tow hitches (while <a href="https://www.thedrive.com/news/tesla-wont-sell-its-trailer-mode-software-to-owners-with-aftermarket-tow-hitches" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tesla's own hitches are out of stock</a>).In other cases, companies have tried to block consumers from accessing certain features at all unless they pay up first. Car companies have taken the lead on pushing this trend. Mercedes-Benz and BMW made headlines for charging users monthly fees for<a href="https://www.carthrottle.com/post/mercedes-is-introducing-an-acceleration-subscription-fee/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> better acceleration</a> and the<a href="https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/12/23204950/bmw-subscriptions-microtransactions-heated-seats-feature" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> use of heated seats</a>, respectively. You already bought the seat heater (and the luxury car that contains it), but now you need to pay for the right to turn it on? <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/02/home-printer-digital-rights-management-hp-instant-ink-subscription/672913/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Printer companies have used similar tactics</a> to get people to sign up for subscriptions that remotely monitor ink levels but can also shut off your machine if you fail to pay. Imagine if you had to pay the contractor who built your house a monthly fee so the light switches would work!Finally, manufacturers use internet connectivity to monitor and control what you do. If they detect you did something they don't like (maybe hot-wiring your heated seat), they can take away or disable other features. Tesla has been accused of<a href="https://twitter.com/wk057/status/1551713024171548672" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> revoking charge capacity</a>,<a href="https://electrek.co/2020/02/12/tesla-disables-supercharging-salvaged-vehicles/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> fast-charging compatibility</a>, and other features remotely. Consumers are afraid to do anything that displeases manufacturers, knowing that they can be punished.You might think there ought to be a law against policies that make people simultaneously "buy" and "rent" things. But existing laws work against consumers, allowing manufacturers control what you can and cannot do. For example, overly broad copyright laws, in the hands of overzealous manufacturers, can make it a copyright crime to bypass technical systems to tinker with or repair your own device. The<a href="https://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> Digital Millennium Copyright Act</a> was intended to prevent people from pirating music, games, or movies. But manufacturers have argued that the DMCA applies to software or firmware needed to fix or operate a piece of hardware. This overly broad definition of intellectual property has been leveraged to prevent independent repair and has redefined consumers' relationship with the goods they buy. By this interpretation, if the manufacturer installs a digital-protection measure around the heated seats, bypassing that could be seen as essentially piracy. If that's confusing, it's because it's silly. Manufacturers also author <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/23/opinion/sunday/online-terms-of-service.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">dense user agreements</a> that contain language to prevent customers from tinkering with the product. Most people have run into long "Terms of Use" documents chocked full of legalese that stretch on for pages and pages. In most cases, consumers simply check "agree" with little to no knowledge about what they're signing. A 2017 Deloitte survey of 2,000 consumers found that <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/deloitte-study-91-percent-agree-terms-of-service-without-reading-2017-11">91% click to agree</a> with terms and conditions without reading them.But inside these dense documents are rules that prevent people from fixing their goods or let the company take back ownership if they don't approve of how customers use the product. Sneaking these terms and conditions past people undermines basic consumer rights. <h2>Tinker, tailor, service, mod</h2>I believe in truth in advertising. If you're going to sell somebody something, sell it to them. If you are going to lease something to somebody, lease it to them. If you tether their future purchases to a secret "agreement" that you baked into the technology that they don't know about, that is deceptive. Not to mention, tinkering and fixing are American traditions. The ethos of "if it's broke, then fix it" has other benefits, too. Repair teaches critical skills, it saves consumers money, it helps cut waste and product obsolescence. Tinkering and fixing also leads to product innovations that can benefit everyone. There are solutions to protect ownership. The first is right-to-repair legislation, which I've worked to pass in various states over the past five-plus years. Right to repair requires manufacturers to make the parts, tools, and information needed to conduct repairs available to consumers, on fair terms. It also says that those parts and tools cannot require remote authentication to become operable, meaning no more having to ask for permission to conduct repairs. So far in 2023,<a href="https://pirg.org/resources/what-is-right-to-repair/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> 28 states</a> have considered some form of right-to-repair legislation, and Congress has held<a href="https://smallbiztrends.com/2022/09/hearing-on-small-business-right-to-repair.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> multiple</a><a href="https://pirg.org/updates/pirgs-proctor-testifies-in-congressional-hearing/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> hearings</a> on the topic. Legislatures have now passed laws in Massachusetts, Colorado, and New York — and we're just getting started. Another step is to clarify that repair isn't a copyright crime. The<a href="https://www.ifixit.com/News/56976/freedom-to-repair-act" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> Freedom to Repair Act</a>, introduced last year, would give a broad, permanent exemption to repair activities under copyright law. In addition to passing new laws, we need to enforce the laws we already have on the books. It's supposed to be a violation of antitrust laws to create a<a href="https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/tying-sale-two-products" target="_blank" rel="noopener"> "tying" arrangement</a> that forces someone who buys one product to buy other products or services. Anyone with a printer who has tried to find cheaper ink knows this isn't enforced effectively. The US Federal Trade Commission and the US Department of Justice need to crack down on embedded software that forces product owners to pay monthly fees to use hardware they own. Regulators should also crack down on toxic legal terms put into user license agreements, just as they banned certain anti-consumer terms from <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/credit_card_accountability_responsibility_and_disclosure_act_of_2009" target="_blank" rel="noopener">credit-card-use agreements</a>. In the digital age, we need new consumer protections to reflect our agency as product-owning people. We need to be able to repair things without fear of reprisal. We shouldn't be forced to sign away our rights when we buy something. We need to end the continual monitoring of our behavior by some far-off manufacturer that can approve or reject the choices we make with products we bought. Until then, we, like Andy Harding of Salem Techsperts, wait nervously to see what we will lose when the newest "innovation" hits the shelves. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/author/nathan-proctor">Nathan Proctor</a> is the Senior Director of US Public Interest Research Group's (PIRG) Right to Repair campaign.

Companies are using sneaky software and legal tricks to make you endlessly pay for stuff you already bought

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Helen Sloan/HBO</div></div></div>Warning: Spoilers ahead for "Game of Thrones" season six.The internet is darker and more full of spoilers than ever these days - and "Game of Thrones" is no exception. But the problem that has arisen in the last several weeks has nothing to do with spoiler-filled discussions of the episodes after they air. A man known as the "Spanish Spoiler" is uploading videos to YouTube in which he details the entire plot of the upcoming week's episode.But he's doing it two full days before HBO airs the show.In each video description, the mysterious YouTuber writes the following disclaimer (roughly translated using Google):I cannot put spoilers for the 3rd episode of the 6th season of Game of Thrones, because HBO forbids it. But we can always count predictions, theories, and make analysis of what will happen. And who knows, maybe guess everything.Nothing about the Spanish Spoiler's descriptions is guesswork. Multiple plot details were revealed to be accurate for the first two episode "predictions," and it has become clear to viewers that he has an inside source with the series.Plus, HBO is onto him. The Spanish Spoiler's videos have all been taken down from YouTube, marked as a "copyright claim by Home Box Office Inc." <div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">YouTubeThe latest video, detailing events in episode three, was removed hours after it was uploaded.</div></div></div>But before the video gets pulled, a summary (translated from Spanish to English) makes its way to Reddit. The two largest subreddits for "Game of Thrones" are <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/gameofthrones">/r/GameofThrones</a> and <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf">/r/asoiaf</a>, with 635,000 and 264,000 subscribers, respectively. Each of these communities has a strict <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/gameofthrones/wiki/posting_policy">no-piracy policy</a> <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/wiki/piracypolicy">in place</a>. This means subscribers to those subreddits are prohibited from linking to any pirated or leaked material from the series, though discussion of leaks is allowed. However - the "Spanish Spoiler" has found a much more leak-friendly home at the /r/FreeFolk subreddit.Free Folk, as we'll refer to it, is a community of only 6,200 Redditors - all of whom believe pirating, leaking, and spoiling of the series should be encouraged. The group was born out of a disagreement with the strict no-piracy policy created by moderators of the /r/GameofThrones and /r/asoiaf subreddits. <div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">RedditThe /r/FreeFolk homepage banner reflects the community's love for leaks.</div></div></div>The Redditors active in Free Folk quickly picked up on the Spanish Spoiler's legitimate information, and even invited him to do an AMA (Ask Me Anything) on their subreddit. <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/freefolk/comments/4hwvxz/i_am_frikidoctor_otherwise_known_as_spanish/">He obliged</a>."I am Frikidoctor, otherwise known as Spanish Youtube spoilers guy! AMA!" he wrote on May 4. When asked about how he gets the information, he replied simply: "My Spoiler connection is just 3 weeks old."Redditor <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/freefolk/comments/4hwvxz/i_am_frikidoctor_otherwise_known_as_spanish/d2t1cjm">iamBlov asked</a> "Are you worried you won't be able to get spoiler info now that you have all of this notoriety?""Yes, I am very concerned about that, especially because I don't want to risk [my] source," the Spanish Spoiler replied. "This is a hobby for me, so it ends when YouTube bans me forever or when it stops being entertaining, or someone has to pay the consequences."Two days later, he uploaded the video detailing the events of episode three, "Oathbreaker." HBO had it pulled from YouTube claiming copyright violation within a few hours.HBO did not have any comment on the ongoing leaks at the time Tech Insider reached out.<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Helen Sloan/HBO</div></div></div>Some of the Free Folk view HBO's actions as "abuse" of the DMCA (The Digital Millennium Copyright Act) protection system YouTube has in place.After the recent Spanish Spoiler video was removed, Redditors began fervent discussions about whether or not HBO was in the right when it came to censoring these leaks. "HBO is blatantly and maliciously abusing the DMCA request system with frivolous claims to suppress spoilers, IsFullOfit (an apt username?) wrote.<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Reddit</div></div></div>The Spanish Spoiler himself even started a new discussion post, <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/freefolk/comments/4i7y4b/so_can_a_video_be_taken_down_even_if_it_does_not/">posing a question to the Free Folk group</a>: "So can a video be taken down even if it does not have a single frame of copyrighted content?"The YouTube videos contain no video footage or stills of the upcoming episode, just the man speaking in Spanish about his "predictions." But it is clear that his video content is 100% information HBO has not released to the public, even if it's missing specific script lines or imagery."So HBO took down my last video, even if it does not have a single frame of copyrighted content," Spanish Spoiler wrote. "It's just me saying what is going to happen in the third chapter. Any American lawyers around? Is talking about spoilers illegal?"Many of the responses were in favor of the Spanish Spoiler, instructing him on ways to fight the takedowns through YouTube and claiming HBO has no basis for a copyright claim in this case. "Youtube will ALWAYS side with the accuser regardless of how many false claims they have made, there is no punishment for this," one Redditor wrote. <div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">HBO</div></div></div>Last year, HBO gave four full episodes of season five as advanced screeners for press. Two DVDs were mailed to media sites around the world, each with a four-digit code overlaid on the video in the bottom corner. Days before the season five premiere, all four episodes appeared online via torrents. That was 40% of the season available overnight to anyone who took no issue with piracy. This year, likely in response to the 2015 leaks, HBO <a href="http://www.techinsider.io/how-hbo-is-stopping-game-of-thrones-spoilers-2016-3">did not issue any advanced copies</a> of the episodes. Though no video footage of season six has surfaced this year, many significant details are becoming public knowledge before the episodes make it to television. Most of them thanks to the Spanish Spoiler.When a media giant like HBO is faced with keeping its most popular program of all time underwraps, the spoiler culture of the internet becomes enemy #1. We will continue to watch the battle unfold as the series progresses, a digital fight between the Free Folk and HBO's right to protect the contents of its <a href="http://www.techinsider.io/game-of-thrones-season-6-cost-10-million-per-episode-2016-3">$100 million production</a>. <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/game-of-thrones-season-six-hidden-details-hbo-2016-5">10 details you might have missed in 'Game of Thrones' so far this season</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="N4N3hhMzE6yq28aPHd5F9vlRiPu82Oa5" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

Someone is leaking the plot of every new 'Game of Thrones' episode on YouTube - and HBO is trying its best to stop it

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">Flickr/Emanuele RossoThe hacked affair site is going after websites hosting its stolen content.</div></div></div>Affair site Ashley Madison has denied allegations it is not deleting customers' data when requested.The allegations were published on Sunday when <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/ashley-madison-hack-attack-stolen-data-2015-7" title="Hackers may have cost the Ashley Madison affair site $200 million">hackers, operating under the name "Impact Team" used an unspecified method to breach Avid Life Media (ALM).</a>ALM is a Toronto-based company that owns Ashley Madison and a number of other "hookup sites," such as Cougar Life and Established Men.The attacks were designed to punish the site, which the hackers accused of charging for a bogus full-delete service, <a href="http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/08/cheaters-hook-up-site-ashley-madison-makes-account-deletion-confusing/" title="Do you really need to pay $20 to delete your Ashley Madison profile?">previously reported on by Ars Technica.</a>The feature promises to completely purge customers' information from ALM's database for a $19 fee. According to Impact Team the service is "a complete lie" and doesn't actually delete the paying customers' information.An Ashley Madison spokesperson denied the allegation in a statement sent to Business Insider."Contrary to current media reports, and based on accusations posted online by a cyber criminal, the "paid-delete" option offered by <a href="http://ashleymadison.com/" target="_blank">AshleyMadison.com</a> does in fact remove all information related to a member's profile and communications activity," read the statement."The process involves a hard-delete of a requesting user's profile, including the removal of posted pictures and all messages sent to other system users' email boxes. This option was developed due to specific member requests for just such a service, and designed based on their feedback."The hackers had leaked a small percentage of the site's 37 million users account data online as proof of their claim.The data included users' real names and addresses, as well as maps of ALM's internal company servers, employee network account information, company bank account data, and salary information.The hacker group claimed the leaked customer list includes Ashley Madison members who had paid to have their data deleted.ALM has not confirmed how much of the data is legitimate. The spokesperson said ALM is also working to delete the leaked data and has already "successfully removed the all posts related to this incident as well as all Personally Identifiable Information (PII) about our users published online."The company says it had the data removed using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and various other unspecified techniques. <a href="https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca" title="Digital Millennium Copyright Act">The DMCA is US legislation that was originally designed to combat digital piracy.</a> It lets companies block access, or mount takedown operations against sites or services hosting infringing content.The firm added it is continuing to work with law enforcement and unnamed "forensics security experts" to find the root cause of the breach. <a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/statement-from-avid-life-media-inc-300115394.html?tc=eml_cleartime" title="Statement From Avid Life Media Inc.">ALM announced it was working with specialists from the security firm Cycura</a> to plug the undisclosed security holes used by the hackers in a prior statement on Monday. ALM declined Business Insider's request for more details about how it removed the content.Services like bulletproof hosting and the deep and dark web would make it difficult for ALM to completely remove its customer's details from the internet.Bulletproof hosting is a service offered by less scrupulous domain hosting or web hosting firms that grants customers increased freedom to upload and distribute illegal material.In the past, Bulletproof hosts have been used for a variety of criminal purposes, including running cyber black markets, digital piracy rings and child pornography sites.The deep and dark web are areas of the web that do not index on the public internet and, or cannot be accessed through regular web browsers. They are regularly used by criminals and dissidents in oppressive regimes to host and distribute information. <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/belly-button-challenge-skinny-test-good-figure-weibo-china-twitter-2015-6">We tried the 'belly button challenge' that's taking over China - and it's way harder than it looks</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="lwcGptdToDDCDjEGdqgU8zhnQOfICZwc" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

Affair site Ashley Madison denied claims it's not deleting customer data despite charging them to do so

<div class="KonaFilter image-container float_right"><div class="image on-image"></div></div>In a Philadelphia suburb last year, cops seized the home of a couple who <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/03/us/philadelphia-drug-bust-house-seizure/">had never been charged with a crime</a>. Their son had allegedly dealt heroin out of the house, and cops said the home could be seized because it was tied to illegal activities.
Markela and Chris Sourovelis - who owned the house - said they had no knowledge of their son's alleged drug deals, as CNN reported. However, as unbelievable as it sounds, the Supreme Court has ruled it's Constitutional for the government to take away your property <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bennis_v._Michigan">even if you're innocent</a>.
Under federal and state laws <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/981">known as civil forfeiture</a>, police can seize cash or property if they suspect it's tied to an illegal activity even if the property owner isn't charged with a crime. On its face, this practice seems like an obvious violation of the Fifth Amendment's stipulation that you can't "<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment">be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law</a>." 
The Supreme Court has ruled otherwise. That court <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/forfeiture">has issued a number of rulings</a> upholding civil forfeiture, including <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-8729.ZO.html">one in 1996</a> that said seizure of an innocent person's property didn't violate due process. In that case, a Michigan woman named Tina Bennis fought the seizure of her car after her husband was caught having sex with a prostitute in it.
For her part, Bennis argued she had no clue her husband would use the car for the illegal tryst. The high court ruled that didn't matter, citing the following case <keyword id="6355470" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="Law">law</keyword>:
It has long been settled that statutory forfeitures of property entrusted by the innocent owner or lienor to another who uses it in violation of the revenue laws of the United States is not a violation of the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.
In its 1996 decision, the high court pointed to a bizarre line of reasoning it made in its first-ever decision on civil forfeiture handed down back in 1827. That case involved the government's attempt to seize a ship used for piracy. When the owner of the ship claimed it couldn't be forfeited until he'd been convicted of a crime, the Supreme Court had this to say:
The thing is here primarily considered as the offender, or rather the offence is attached primarily to the thing.
While it sounds odd that the government would want to punish "the thing," civil forfeiture cases today still reflect that line of reasoning. When the government attempts to seize property these days, it files a civil complaint against the property or cash. This leads to funny-sounding lawsuits, like "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Approximately_64,695_Pounds_of_Shark_Fins">US v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins</a>." But for people whose property or cash is seized, forfeiture can be seriously disruptive.

Why Cops Can Seize Your Property Even If You're Innocent

<keyword id="2974268" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="80" keywordseo="Illicit-market">Illicit market</keyword>, with respect to seven sectors of the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=manufacturing">manufacturing</a> industry, had led to a loss of Rs 32,239 crore to the exchequer during 2014, according to a report released by <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=FICCI">FICCI</a>. 
 The <keyword id="6355001" type="CITY" weightage="80" keywordseo="FICCI">FICCI</keyword> report prepared by its Committee Against Smuggling and Counterfeiting Activities Destroying the <keyword id="34412" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="economy">Economy</keyword> and titled “Illicit Market: A Threat to Our National Interest” released said the loss was inclusive of both indirect and <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=direct+taxes+">direct taxes</a> -- Rs 34,020 crore and Rs 5,218 crore, respectively. 
 
According to the report, there was a loss of Rs 26,190 crore in 2012. 
 FICCI released its nine sector report titled 'Illicit Market: A Threat to Our National Interest' in Guwahati on Tuesday. This is a quantitative study evaluating the impact of illicit markets on various economic aspects of the <keyword id="6362048" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Manufacturing">manufacturing</keyword> industry, including sectors like <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=FMCG">FMCG</a>, packaged foods and personal goods, computer hardware, automobiles, mobile phones, tobacco &amp; alcohol, and media and entertainment industry. 
 
The study found that the revenue loss to the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=central+government+">central government</a> due to illicit trade increased 49.8% to Rs 13,049 crore from 2011-12 to 2013-14. 
 
Amongst the various sectors, the maximum revenue loss was from counterfeiting and illicit trade is tobacco products—23% and Rs 9,139 crore. 
 When it comes to states, <keyword id="6354915" type="CITY" weightage="100" keywordseo="Assam">Assam</keyword> saw a significant growth in illicit trade in these sectors in the last couple of years. It was one of the fastest growing markets for illegal cigarettes and alcohol in the country. 
 
In 2014, illegal cigarettes accounted for more than 25% of the total cigarette market in the state. 
 
Assam's illegal market for alcohol too grew significantly in value terms, especially for IMFL and imported liquor. 
 "During the last twenty years, the volume of the counterfeiting activity has increased 100 times and the size of trade in counterfeited goods is 10% of the legal <keyword id="35028" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="international-trade">international trade</keyword> (around 2% of the world's overall economic output)," said PC Jha, adviser, <keyword id="2974267" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="FICCI-CASCADE">FICCI CASCADE</keyword>, and former chairman of the <keyword id="514301" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="80" keywordseo="Central-Board-of-Excise-Customs">Central Board of Excise &amp; Customs</keyword>. 
 
Deep Chand, advisor to FICCI CASCADE and former Special Commissioner of Police, New Delhi, said: "In the past few decades, leading intelligence and law-enforcement agencies around the world have found conclusive evidence of the increasing involvement of terrorist organizations in counterfeiting, piracy and smuggling activities to fund their activities…The need of the hour is tangible actions to increase enforcement and to impose increased punishments." 
 
The study said that high state-level taxes like VAT and imposition of health cess on the legal cigarette industry is resulting in high prices for legal cigarettes, and this is the key reason for such an alarming growth of illegal cigarette industry in the state. 
 
Most of the manufacturers of such illegal <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=cigarettes+">cigarettes</a> (mostly based in the surrounding states and in some northern states) evade the high central <keyword id="6356916" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="80" keywordseo="excise-duty">excise duty</keyword> and state taxes/cess and thus are able to offer their products to consumers at rock-bottom prices. Price of an illegal cigarette pack in Assam is a fifth of the price of a legal packet. 
 
According to the study, smuggled international contraband cigarettes contribute significantly to the alarming growth of the illegal cigarette industry in Assam. Assam shares a porous international border with Bangladesh. In addition, other states in the north-east also share a similar border with Myanmar, Bangladesh and China. Therefore, there is a sizeable influx of cheap king-sized smuggled cigarettes from across the border into Assam. 
 
These smuggled cigarettes are transported from Assam and other north eastern states to the rest of the country by air, bus and train, the report said. 
 
"Such illegal cigarettes defeat the tobacco control objectives of the government as they neither bear any health warnings required as per Indian laws nor have other mandatory declarations like MRP, date of manufacture or place of Manufacture. High VAT compared to the rest of the country and the recent imposition of health cess on cigarettes have also resulted in large-scale diversion of the cigarettes trade into the state," the report pointed out. 
 
(Image: Indiatimes)

Over Rs 39, 000 crore loss to exchequer in 2014 all thanks to illicit trade!

<div class="KonaFilter image-container float_right click-to-enlarge"><div class="image"><a title_source="IAB" title_caption="Interactive Advertising Bureau president and CEO Randall Rothenberg." class="zoomin" href="http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/52f24fb769bedd480367dd53-960/randall-rothenberg-headshot-iab-1.jpg"></a>IABInteractive Advertising Bureau president and CEO Randall Rothenberg.</div></div>Randall Rothenberg is the president and CEO of the Interactive Advertising Bureau, an interactive marketing trade association that represents more than 500 digital advertising and publishing companies.
What would happen if any rubber manufacturer anywhere, no matter how new or unqualified, could, at will, inject its tires onto the assembly line on which Chrysler makes its cars? Almost immediately, the result would be a lot of dead and injured motorists, as defective tires start shredding and blowing up on the world's highways.
An analogous scenario threatens the Internet. The supply chain by which digital advertising is created, delivered, measured, and optimized is so porous and perilous that it jeopardizes consumer trust and business growth. The risk is so severe that the underlying innovativeness of the Internet itself is in danger of grinding to a halt-unless the interactive advertising industry agrees to police its own precincts and root out the malefactors.
The story of the Internet's advertising-funded influence is hidden in plain sight. Attracted by the $500 billion advertisers spend annually worldwide, this generation's Internet entrepreneurs are like the wildcatters of Texas's early oil boom - but instead of digging wells, they have deployed business concepts and programming skills to unlock those riches, unleashing much of the inventiveness that has transformed the lives of consumers and the operations of industries.
The result: <a href="http://investor.fb.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=780093">More than 1 billion people globally use Facebook</a> to share their lives with friends and family - all of it funded by advertising. Over 472 million people a day tap Google to search the world's storehouse of information-thanks to advertising. Backed by its advertisers, <a href="http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1418091/000119312513390321/d564001ds1.htm">Twitter enables 218 million people to communicate</a> ideas to and gather intelligence from across the globe. These and the countless ad-supported Mommy blogs, hobbyist sites, mobile apps-the sine qua nons of civilized existence - account for 3.7 percent of U.S. GDP, according to <a href="http://www.iab.net/about_the_iab/recent_press_releases/press_release_archive/press_release/pr-100112_ecosystemstudy">research by Harvard Business School professor John Deighton</a>.
But like oil, advertising dollars are a finite resource, whose unfettered pursuit has grim downsides:
<ul>
<li>
Nearly one-quarter of the traffic that Internet display ads attract may be fraudulent, generated by automated programs called "bots," according to Solve Media, an Internet security company.
</li>
<li>
Forty-six percent of online advertisements are served to websites and charged to advertisers without consumers ever having had the chance to see them, <a href="http://adage.com/article/digital/viewability-half-online-ads/242026/">comScore</a> reports. Non-viewable ads result when users leave a web page before an ad loads, or when consumers fail to scroll down to reach an ad below the screen line. "Pop-unders" and other shady activities also contribute to non-viewability.
</li>
<li>
Seventy-two percent of consumers say their biggest concern about the Internet is identity theft, malware, or viruses, according to a <a href="http://www.aboutads.info/resource/image/Poll/Zogby_DAA_Poll.pdf">survey just released by Zogby Analytics</a> for the Digital Advertising Alliance.
</li>
<li>
Advertising, much of it purchased via automated systems, inadvertently supports Web sites that deliberately steal and distribute movies, music, and other copyrighted intellectual property, leading to an untold fortune in losses annually to news and entertainment companies.
</li>
<li>
Provoked by revelations about the ease with which the National Security Agency peers into users' digital activity, <a href="http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/study-nsa-scandal-still-setting-privacy-alarm-bells-among-consumers-151835">57 percent of Internet users say they are concerned about their privacy online</a>, according to the Omnicom Group, the world's second largest advertising agency holding company.
</li>
<li>
<a href="http://www.emarketer.com/Article/Ad-Verification-Gains-Urgency-Among-Marketers/1010029">Almost a third of advertisers say they are concerned</a> about their Internet advertising appearing on sites where the content is not "brand safe," say the Online Publishers Association and the research firm Advertiser Perceptions.
</li>
</ul>
Taken together, these problems account for billions of dollars in wasted money for marketers, with fraudulent traffic alone accounting for at least $6 billion annually, according to one analysis. But the actual total is undoubtedly more, because advertisers have lowered the prices they will pay for online ads, in part to offset the cost of fraud, non-viewability, and unsafe environments. This hurts legitimate publishers and innovators, even as it rewards a small number of villains.
Amid digital advertising's growth into a $40 billion industry in the U.S. and <a href="http://techcrunch.com/2013/09/30/digital-ads-will-be-22-of-all-u-s-ad-spend-in-2013-mobile-ads-3-7-total-gobal-ad-spend-in-2013-503b-says-zenithoptimedia/"> $100 billion worldwide</a>, the industry has addressed some of these problems - such as consumer privacy, click fraud, piracy, and fraudulent traffic - aggressively, even as we dismissed many of the naysayers as self-interested fear mongers. But given the scale and potential impact of consumer and customer disaffection, we must recognize that all these nuisances are symptoms of a more destructive failing: The digital advertising supply chain is too open. It is too easy for anyone to plug in and play.
The advertising supply chain works like those underlying most other sectors. It starts with raw materials-a marketing strategy and creative ideas-and then turns them into products called ads, which are delivered to consumers. These are trafficked among the main players-advertiser, agency, online publisher, and consumer-and an array of interconnected companies: ad servers, ad verification companies, measurement vendors, data management platforms, audience buying exchanges, and more. Members of this supply chain perform their functions by placing little bits of code or text inside an ad or a Web page, invisible to the consumer, to personalize an advertisement, count it, determine whether it was clicked on, analyze its effectiveness, and to accomplish a host of other activities.
The big difference between the digital advertising supply chain and that of other industries is openness: anyone can participate. There are no overarching checks to control for quality, and no one company can see all of the entities involved in its transactions. Even if you know that your own suppliers are reliable, you can't tell whether your suppliers' suppliers are secure. And because of the interconnected nature of the web, any imperfection inserted into one site-unintentionally or deliberately, through corruption or carelessness-can damage others. On the Internet, no one may know you're a dog, as the old adage goes, but any dog can start a digital advertising company and spread its fleas to the entire industry.
It is countercultural and perhaps a little coarse to say, but the digital advertising industry must stop having unprotected sex. We need a standard-setting body, a trust monitor, to guarantee the sanctity and probity of the digital advertising supply chain.
Models already exist. The Fair Labor Association has coalesced many giant apparel makers in a worldwide effort to eliminate sweatshops. In our own industry over the past six years, the major advertising industry trade associations, representing the interests of the entire supply chain, came together to forge a lauded self-regulatory program, the Digital Advertising Alliance, to assure that consumers have the ability to protect their privacy in digital advertising environments. But we need to step up our game, and create a quality control program that covers the entire ad-supported internet.
Make no mistake: This means an industry behavior change, at an unprecedented scale.
We must create an all-inclusive program that identifies qualified participants, and commits them to good actions, guaranteed by continual monitoring and sanctions for non-compliance. We must make it clear that doing business with unqualified companies subjects customers and shareholders to undue risk. We have to be willing to call out the bad guys, and punish repeat offenders with public ostracism (and perhaps the threat of treble damages if they are sued).
At the IAB Annual Leadership Meeting on February 9-11 in Palm Desert, California, the call for more trustworthy supply chain will be heard loudly from me as well as from the leaders of the IAB Traffic of Good Intent Task Force. Businesses must have a viable way to protect their customers, and every consumer who "logs on" from any device anywhere in the world. Innovations that have improved the quality of life on a scale not seen since the industrial revolution will be stymied if the digital advertising supply chain is not fixed.

You Searched For "piracy punishment" and got 11 results

Indian OTTs might lose $3 bn to piracy this year as leaked content sites see 62 mn footfalls

Karuna Sharma

Package theft is now a felony in 8 states and counting as lawmakers crack down on 'porch piracy'

Emma Cosgrove

The UK government is considering legal action against tech companies that don't do more to tackle piracy

Rob Price

Time Warner Cable Site Defaced With Gorilla Over Its New Anti-Piracy Policy

Erin Fuchs

Companies are using sneaky software and legal tricks to make you endlessly pay for stuff you already bought

Nathan Proctor

Someone is leaking the plot of every new 'Game of Thrones' episode on YouTube - and HBO is trying its best to stop it

Kim Renfro

Affair site Ashley Madison denied claims it's not deleting customer data despite charging them to do so

Alastair Stevenson

Why Cops Can Seize Your Property Even If You're Innocent

Erin Fuchs

Over Rs 39, 000 crore loss to exchequer in 2014 all thanks to illicit trade!

BI India Bureau

IAB Head: 'The Digital Advertising Industry Must Stop Having Unprotected Sex'

Randall Rothenberg, president…

How A 'Bunch Of Commies' Are Forcing the Fortune 500 To Stop Destroying Rainforests, Overfishing, And Burning Fossil Fuels

Aaron Gell

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides