{"id":77871,"date":"2024-07-04T09:00:41","date_gmt":"2024-07-04T09:00:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/?p=77871"},"modified":"2024-07-04T09:00:41","modified_gmt":"2024-07-04T09:00:41","slug":"doodstreams-traffic-takes-a-battering-as-hollywood-lawsuit-takes-its-toll","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/?p=77871","title":{"rendered":"DoodStream\u2019s Traffic Takes a Battering as Hollywood Lawsuit Takes Its Toll"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"doodstream\"<\/a>In 2022, it was public knowledge that the MPA had its eye on video hosting and streaming service DoodStream. <\/p>\n

When the MPA\u2019s top lawyer called the site out a year later, DoodStream\u2019s operators may have underestimated how significant that was. What followed was a copyright infringement lawsuit<\/a>, filed at the Delhi High Court in India, DoodStream\u2019s home turf.<\/p>\n

DoodStream Ordered to Remove All Content Owned By The Plaintiffs<\/h2>\n

The details of an injunction obtained by the studios and the subsequent fallout are available in two<\/a> in-depth articles<\/a> published last month. <\/p>\n

The bottom line is that DoodStream\u2019s efforts to remove all copies of the plaintiffs\u2019 copyrighted works failed to meet the requirements of the injunction. The site\u2019s operators complained that they weren\u2019t allowed enough time to remove between 500,000 and 1,000,000 links to pirated videos. Needless to say, the Court was unsympathetic.<\/p>\n

In light of DoodStream\u2019s rejection of various proposals to limit ongoing infringement, a poor outcome for the defendants seemed increasingly likely. Removing download links, for example, was dismissed as a complete non-starter since that \u201cwould end up in the website being completely bare and inept.\u201d<\/p>\n

Infringing Content Removal Devastates DoodStream\u2019s Traffic<\/h2>\n

The Court\u2019s response was to issue an order that banned DoodStream\u2019s owners, Raja Durai and Sarvesh Chandran, from directly or indirectly operating their own website, pending a hearing listed for September 18, 2024. <\/p>\n

In the meantime, measures to prevent the plaintiffs\u2019 content being made available via the DoodStream platform appear to be having a catastrophic effect on the service\u2019s traffic. <\/p>\n

The MPA previously estimated that DoodStream was good for 82.7 million visits during August 2022 alone. Semrush<\/a> data indicates that during March 2024, doodstream.com received a very healthy 95.91 million visits. A month into the lawsuit, visits had plummeted to 35.95 million. In May, the number of visits was less than 27 million, almost 25% down on the previous month.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\"doodstream-com-traffic\"<\/a><\/center><\/p>\n

In common with similar sites operating in the same sector, DoodStream has many domains. The order that restrains the site\u2019s owners from operating the site lists around 20. We can\u2019t say with any certainty how many more exist beyond that, but it\u2019s more than a handful. The traffic for these domains shouldn\u2019t be added together due to the way they\u2019re used, but the decline overall is significant.<\/p>\n

Traffic Takes a Hammering<\/h2>\n

One of the domains the Court did list in its order is ds2play.com. According to Semrush data for March, the domain received 102.97 million visits. A month later, visits were down to less than 35 million and in May, a further 43% decrease in visits left the domain with barely a fifth of the visits it had before the lawsuit.<\/p>\n

\"ds2play-traffic\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Domains with considerably less traffic include dood.watch; visits in March were roughly 2.73 million, but in May, that had reduced to 977K. Similar levels can be seen for doodstream.co, which in May received 968K, a decrease of 34% on the previous month. Likewise, dood.sh, down 45% on April\u2019s figures in May along with a 22,000 place decline in global site ranking. <\/p>\n

There is a domain with more interesting features, however.<\/p>\n

Millions of Visits, But to Watch What?<\/h2>\n

Perhaps the most intriguing domain overall is dood.re. In March, it received almost 143 million visits, but in May, that had collapsed to less than 25 million, a 35% decline compared to the previous month.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\"dood-re-traffic\"<\/a><\/center><\/p>\n

What we see with this domain are some apparent gains being made amid the chaos of the headline losses. With links to mainstream movies being removed in their hundreds of thousands, there is at least some content that Hollywood can\u2019t touch; or at least, refuses to touch \u2013 pornography.<\/p>\n

In May, traffic to dood.re from X actually increased by almost 15%, but the big riser was way out ahead. With a 43% boost over the previous month, adult site PornHoarder became one of the domain\u2019s leading sources of traffic.<\/p>\n

On one hand, this might be considered a small positive in a sea of otherwise bad news and collapsing traffic. However, the Delhi High Court recently noted that by storing and distributing material that is illegal in India, any hope of seeking refuge under Section 79 of the IT Act, as an intermediary exempt from liability, is futile.<\/p>\n

Perhaps the big question is who, if anyone, is running the site. Some uploaders to the site claim they are being paid as normal. Some uploaders claim they are not being paid at all. <\/p>\n

Whatever the truth, the uncertainty appears to be harming confidence, as the wait for September\u2019s hearing continues. It may not kill the site, especially when others seem prepared to pick up the slack, but the studios will settle for the disruption, at least for now.<\/p>\n

From: TF<\/a>, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.<\/p>\n

Powered by WPeMatico<\/a><\/small><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In 2022, it was public knowledge that the MPA had its eye on video hosting and streaming service DoodStream. When the MPA\u2019s top lawyer called the site out a year later, DoodStream\u2019s operators may have underestimated how significant that was. What followed was a copyright infringement lawsuit, filed at the Delhi High Court in India, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":77872,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[308],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-77871","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-torrent"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77871","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=77871"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77871\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/77872"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=77871"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=77871"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=77871"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}