Researchers Find that Web Site Blocking Has No Long-Term Affect in Combating Online Piracy

New research from Boston’s Northeastern University shows that blocking or censoring sites has no long-term effects on combating the proliferation or availability of pirated materials. If anything it has a short-term effect. Researchers monitored thousands of files across several of the most frequented file-hosting services and found that DMCA notices are a ripple in an ocean.

Researchers noted that file-hosting services such as Uploaded, Wupload, RapidShare, and Netload disable access to many files after receiving DMCA takedown notices, but that action ultimately does little to decrease the availability of pirated content. Researchers also said that the very public and dramatic Megaupload shutdown did little to hinder pirates.

"There is a cat-and-mouse game between uploaders and copyright owners, where pirated content is being uploaded by the former and deleted by the latter, and where new One-Click Hosters and direct download sites are appearing while others are being shut down,” the researchers write. "Currently, this game seems to be in favour of the many pirates who provide far more content than what the copyright owners are taking down,” they conclude.

The study also looked at the number of sites where copyrighted content is available and found that there were nearly 10,000 distinct domain names and 5,000 IP-addresses where alleged pirate content was hosted.

Ultimately researchers came to the conclusion that innovation often beats out legislation when it comes to online piracy.

"Given our findings that highlight the difficulties of reducing the supply of pirated content, it appears to be promising to follow a complementary strategy of reducing the demand for pirated content, e.g., by providing legitimate offers that are more attractive to consumers than pirating content."

You can check out the study here.

Source: TorrentFreak

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    Thipp says:

    I used to get all of my tv through torrents or cyberlockers until Hulu came out and Netflix started offering quality streaming. Now most of the tv I watch comes from those services which I am happy to pay for the convenience of watching tv and movies around my schedule. I still download programming that is not offered legitimately through channels like that though so the legitimate streaming market still has plenty of room to expand into the downloading market. 

  2. 0
    Mrxknown_JG says:

    Don't forget, they stated the best strategy is to reduce the demand for pirated content, such as offering competing opportunities that are legit.

    Take a look at TV studios and how some will host a full episode of a show the day after it airs (very few the same day) while others offer the full episode 7-8 days (sometimes on hulu 30 days) afetr the original air date.

    Why would I wait 30 days for legit content, when I can either watch it on my friend's DVR, go to a website like hulu or amazon that hosts content.

    I just cut the cord from TV service late last month, I plan on using the TV studios that host the content more immediate and weigh my options for content I want when the studio doesn't want to give me it.

    If all the studios agreed to pay hulu or some service to host the content more immediately after the air date, then I would pay for hulu plus, but for now there is not enough content that I haven't seen on that site for me to pay up.

    All the studios are trying to offer their own service, at some point they are going to need a better solution.

    It terms of gaming, well I don't have much time to write up my thoughts. But give us better service/content for the right price and most people would be willing to pay. Services like Origin are a bad idea and are not offering quality service.

    When I have to pay Microsoft an XboxLIVE subscription to play Netflix, Hulu,, Amazon Prime, etc, then it gets worse.

Leave a Reply