Kickass Torrents shutdown reports: KAT clones become music industry's focus in Australia

Several months after its shutdown, Kickass Torrents keeps itself relevant in the torrent scene as clones and mirrors of the fallen file-sharing giant continue to thrive.

Back in July after KAT's alleged owner Artem Vaulin, copies of Kickass Torrents immediately sprung up. These bear no affiliation to the original site.

These are now the focus of industry groups Universal Music, Warner Music, Sony Music, and J Albert & Son, who first banded together in April in an effort to stop file-sharing in Australia in the music industry's first ever piracy site blocking application.

The labels sought Kickass Torrents blocked by the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) namely Telstra, Optus, TPG, and Foxtel in the land down under.

This led to the shutdown of the original KAT site, but this was the work of the US Department of Justice as opposed to the said ISPs. Now, the Kickass Torrents clones and mirrors have become their new targets.

According to TorrentFreak, the music labels seek to employ a straightforward and Domain Name System (DNS)-based blocking system fortified by a scheme that will block subsequent clones that appear.

CNET points out that following the removal of Kickass Torrents, the list of the sites the industry groups want blocked has drastically changed.

The sites include Kat.al and Kickasstorrents.immunicity.date, which TorrenFreak describes as an incomplete snapshot of pre-shutdown Kickass Torrents.

Also in the crosshairs are Kattor.zyx, which is not in any way affiliated with the original and just redirects to another site, Kickass.cd—a The Pirate Bay clone—along with Kickass.Ukbypass.download and Kickass.Unblocked, and the already inactive Kickass.pe.

However, the ISPs want the labels to take on the responsibility of funding the blocking systems to be used, which, as per Optus, will cost AUD $12,500 or US$9,533.

Such price will allow for the block implementation and its maintenance for at least three years. After that, it will cost $50 to block each domain name.

For now, it is unclear if the battle will push through or not with money a clear object in the case.