Dutch Court Orders ISP to Block Torrent Site TorrentGalaxy

BREIN, the Dutch anti-piracy organization, has secured a new court order mandating internet service provider Odido to block TorrentGalaxy, one of the world’s most frequented torrent platforms. This ruling by the Rotterdam District Court highlights the increasing efforts to combat online piracy, which continues to be a major concern for copyright holders worldwide. TorrentGalaxy, known for offering access to a vast array of pirated movies, TV shows, music, and software, has been a target for anti-piracy groups for some time. By blocking the site, BREIN aims to limit its reach within the Netherlands, making it harder for users to access illegal content. The case underscores the importance of copyright protection in an increasingly digital world, where the ease of accessing pirated materials is a significant threat to creative industries. This legal action is part of a broader strategy to curb piracy, which includes blocking various websites and targeting those responsible for distributing illegal content. The ruling also serves as a reminder of the growing responsibility for ISPs to take action against illegal online activities, reinforcing the idea that they must play a more active role in preventing piracy.

Pirate Site Blocking: A Global Enforcement Trend

According to industry news, blocking access to pirate sites has become a cornerstone enforcement strategy for the entertainment industry. While widely adopted internationally, the Netherlands initially lagged in implementing such measures. It wasn’t until 2020 that the first site-blocking order was issued against The Pirate Bay, following extensive legal battles through the Dutch Supreme Court and the European Court of Justice. The approval of that landmark order created a pathway for future cases. Since then, rights holders and ISPs have streamlined the process through a cooperative covenant. Once one ISP receives a court mandate to block a site, others are expected to comply voluntarily.

Expansion of Pirate Site Blocking in the Netherlands

Following the initial blocking of The Pirate Bay, the Netherlands saw an increase in enforcement actions. In 2022, YTS, EZTV, and other torrent sites were targeted, with dynamic blocking orders enabling additional domain inclusions over time. Last year, sites like Lookmovie and Flixtor faced similar actions, along with shadow libraries such as Anna’s Archive and Library Genesis. The latest court decision against TorrentGalaxy further expands this framework. The site and its proxy and mirror domains must now be blocked by Dutch ISPs, marking another step in curbing copyright infringement within the country.

ISP Odido’s Opposition Rejected

Despite the order, ISP Odido raised objections, arguing that BREIN should have pursued the problem closer to its origin by targeting TorrentGalaxy’s hosting provider. BREIN had previously contacted FlokiNET, the former host, with no success. When TorrentGalaxy moved to a new hosting provider, Virtual Systems, there was a delay in BREIN’s communication. Odido asserted that these delays indicated BREIN could have done more. However, the Court determined that BREIN had taken all reasonable steps, including reaching out to hosting providers, domain registrars, and registries. It concluded that BREIN’s actions satisfied the requirements of the blocking covenant and dismissed Odido’s arguments.

Effective and Expanding Measures

BREIN director Bastiaan van Ramshorst praised the ruling, noting the effectiveness of dynamic blocking orders in significantly reducing visits to pirate sites. Beyond ISPs, Google also cooperates by removing blocked domains from local search results. This dual action ensures fewer avenues for users to access pirated content. The current Dutch blocklist spans 574 domains, covering popular torrent sites and their mirrors, including The Pirate Bay, YTS, and now TorrentGalaxy. This comprehensive approach reflects the Netherlands' commitment to addressing online piracy and supporting copyright protection.

The Path Forward for Anti-Piracy Efforts

The Dutch Court’s decision reinforces the efficacy of collaborative enforcement between rights holders, ISPs, and search engines. While some challenges remain in targeting offshore hosting providers, the ongoing expansion of dynamic blocking demonstrates significant progress in reducing illegal access to copyrighted content. As new domains and piracy platforms emerge, organizations like BREIN will likely continue advocating for dynamic, adaptive strategies to keep up with the evolving landscape of digital piracy.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. Why did the Dutch court order TorrentGalaxy to be blocked?

The Dutch court ruled that TorrentGalaxy facilitates copyright infringement by providing unauthorized access to protected works. BREIN, an anti-piracy group, sought the order to limit access to the site. ISPs like Odido are legally required to block such sites as intermediaries under Dutch copyright law. The court determined that BREIN had made sufficient efforts to address the issue, including contacting the hosting providers, registrars, and domain registrants. Blocking the site was deemed necessary to curtail piracy activity effectively, as other methods proved insufficient.

Q2. What is BREIN, and what role does it play in this case?

BREIN is a Dutch anti-piracy organization dedicated to protecting copyrighted works from unauthorized distribution. In this case, BREIN pursued legal action to block TorrentGalaxy, alleging it enabled copyright infringement. The organization contacted TorrentGalaxy's hosting providers, domain registrants, and other stakeholders to mitigate piracy. When these efforts failed, BREIN sought a court order to mandate ISPs block the site. The court recognized BREIN’s extensive efforts, concluding that blocking the site was a reasonable enforcement step under Dutch copyright law.

Q3. How does blocking TorrentGalaxy help combat piracy?

Blocking TorrentGalaxy reduces access to a prominent source of pirated content, discouraging copyright infringement. When major ISPs restrict access, it limits users’ ability to download unauthorized media. This action, combined with Google’s voluntary removal of blocked domains from search results, creates additional barriers for users seeking illegal content. Over time, these measures contribute to a decrease in piracy rates by disrupting access to major platforms and raising awareness about copyright laws. BREIN’s strategy aligns with a broader effort to protect creative industries.

Q4. What is the “subsidiarity requirement” mentioned by the ISP?

The subsidiarity requirement ensures that anti-piracy groups, like BREIN, exhaust feasible alternatives before requesting a site blockade. ISPs argued that BREIN should target TorrentGalaxy’s hosting providers or registrants before seeking an order to block access. However, the court found that BREIN had fulfilled this obligation by reaching out to these entities without success. The court ruled that BREIN is not required to pursue multiple lawsuits abroad against foreign parties before seeking local blocking measures. The subsidiarity principle supports a balanced approach to enforcement.

Q5. What is the significance of dynamic blocking orders?

Dynamic blocking orders allow BREIN to add new domains, proxies, or mirror sites linked to TorrentGalaxy without requiring separate court orders. This ensures that as pirate sites relocate or adapt to avoid restrictions, enforcement can keep pace. Dynamic blocking is particularly effective in countering piracy because it reduces the administrative burden and delays often associated with pursuing individual cases. Dutch ISPs, along with search engines like Google, follow these orders to maintain a comprehensive blocklist, significantly reducing access to pirated content.