EU and NL Domain Registries Take Down Piracy-Linked Domains

The easiest way to hurt a pirate site, at least temporarily, is by taking away its domain name. Historically, domain name registries have been hesitant to take action but with the right approach, progress can be made. This week, anti-piracy group BREIN reported that following their complaints, the .nl and .eu registries took action against several 'pirate' domains. On closer inspection, it appears that copyright has little to do with it.

eurid sidn There are plenty of options for copyright holders to frustrate pirate site operations, but attacking their domain names is particularly effective.

In recent years, various entertainment industry groups have called on the domain name industry to help out on this front.

The MPA previously signed landmark agreements with registries, enabling the movie industry group to act as a “trusted notifier” of “pirate” domains. Other players in the domain name market have been more reserved.

EU and NL Registries Tackle Pirate Domains

The Public Interest Registry (PIR), for example, which oversees the .org gTLD, previously denied requests to take action against The Pirate Bay. According to PIR, caution is advised to ensure a “free, open, safe and secure internet”.

In recent years, rightsholder pressure hasn’t abated. Domain name registries that fail to take action are now listed as “notorious piracy markets” themselves, as recent reports against the .cc, .io, and .tv domain extensions have shown.

Politics also play a part. For example, U.S. lawmakers previously asked domain name registry VeriSign, known for managing the .com domain, to help tackle online piracy.

EU and NL Registries Tackle Pirate Domains

Despite these developments, there’s little public discussion about new agreements between domain registries and rightsholders. Given the sensitivities involved, not all collaboration needs a spotlight.

This week, Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN reported that it had booked new success with its previously unknown ‘registry strategy‘.

Following a notice from BREIN, the SIDN (.nl) and EURid (.eu) registries took several pirate site domains offline. SIDN’s actions targeted IPTV-related domains, such as streamdeal.nl, iptvproviders.nl, omniptv.nl and iptvstreamplus.nl.

Streamdeal Quarantined

quarantined
EURid reportedly removed seven domain names after BREIN reached out. These domains, which were used to provide access to pirated films, music, books and games, were registered though domain proxy services that shield the identity of the owners.

The .eu domain names are not publicized as those sites use alternative gTLDs that remain active. Mentioning these domains in public could therefore serve as an unwanted advertisement.

Reporting Illegal Content?

BREIN says that these registries take responsibility by helping to shut down illegal activity. On what grounds these companies take action isn’t immediately clear.

“Pirates like to use trustworthy top-level domains such as .nl and .eu for their illegal websites. The organizations responsible for this, SIDN and EURid, know this and take their responsibility by helping to combat illegality,” BREIN writes.

The anti-piracy group goes on to mention that pirate IPTV services infringe copyrights. That violates the terms and conditions of the domain registries, so they can be terminated on these grounds. But were they?

TorrentFreak reached out to both SIDN and EURid, requesting more information and both registries say that the domain name terminations referenced by BREIN were not copyright related.

Inaccurate WHOIS Information

SIDN spokesperson Marnie van Duijnhoven explains that the domain name registrations were canceled, because the owners didn’t provide or confirm the correct WHOIS registration data.

“This is a standard procedure at SIDN that we apply if there is reason to doubt the correctness of the registrant’s data. The reason may be a report from a third party such as Stichting Brein, but also, for example, the Police,” Van Duijnhoven says.

While these verification procedures were initiated in response to BREIN’s notifications, the decision to cancel the domain names was not directly related to the content on the sites. Instead, the cancellations were made under Articles 16 and 18 of SIDN’s terms and conditions, which cover inaccurate WHOIS information

EURid spokesperson Reelika Kirna confirmed that inaccurate registrant data also triggered their response. This is a terms of service violation, but not one related to copyright.

“Following the request from BREIN regarding seven .eu domain names, we carried out our standard procedure for registration data validation and subsequently suspended these domain names due to a breach of Articles 3(b) and 4(d) and (e) of our Terms and Conditions,” Kirna informed us.

Roads to Rome

BREIN’s director Bastiaan van Ramshorst informs us that SIDN and EURid are indeed correct. In these instances, copyright wasn’t the reason to report the domains, at least on paper.

The anti-piracy group previously reported domains to SIDN on the basis of copyright infringement. These complaints are handled under the separate notice and takedown procedure. That wasn’t the case here, but the aim is the same.

“BREIN’s goal is the same: to take the domain offline because copyright and related rights are being violated on a large scale. The grounds on which SIDN takes action does not matter to us.”

“Both roads lead to Rome. Obviously illegal websites almost always have incorrect WHOIS data because infringers want to remain anonymous. BREIN can and does use both grounds,” Van Ramshorst adds.

Whether any of these roads is easier than the other is unknown, but SIDN’s latest transparency report shows that notice and takedown (NTD) reports are rare. The registry received 39 NTD requests in the first three quarters of the year.

During the same period, SIDN launched over 5,000 procedures under article 16 and 18 of its terms and conditions, which includes claims concerning inaccurate WHOIS information.