Illegal IPTV providers jailed.

Fr Tod Umptious

Interesting story from the UK.

A gang of IPTV providers have been jailed from anything from 3 to 11 years for providing illegal IPTV service, mainly EPL games for £10 per month.

Even though cracking down on illegal IPTV is "whack a mole" it's still not a bad outcome for the rights holders.

And God only knows where the personal details of the subscribers ended up.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65697595

Atlantic Dawn

The elephant in the room is the non provision of legal means to watch the 3pm kick off games on Saturday's.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660641#Comment_120660641

Yep

And that can only be addressed by the UK parliament.

Any removal of the 3pm blackout would meet strong opposition from smaller clubs and the match day businesses that are involved with them.

SteM

This story is getting a lot of attention this morning considering these providers were a drop in the ocean.

ELM327

Glad to see the real criminals are being caught and jailed.

icdg

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660681#Comment_120660681

To be clear, the U.K. Parliament has nothing to do with the 3pm ban. It is a UEFA rule (Article 48) and can be invoked by any member association, only England and Scotland currently do so.

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/about-uefa/administration/marketing/blocked-broadcasting-hours/

In rhe end it will be resolved, not by politicians, not even by the FA or UEFA, but by the Premier League; they will eventually move all games out of the 3pm slot. It’s the only solution that preserves the blackout for the lower leagues while allowing the maximum amount of PL games on TV. It’s been happening slowly over the past thirty years - perhaps slowed a bit by the Covid-caused rollover without change of the 2019-22 deals - and I fully expect that from 2025 on we’ll be down to maybe three matches of the ten each week remaining in the 3pm slot. I know that’s three matches too much for some people, but 3pm has been a huge tradition in England and they’re very slow to change it. The EFL will also be moving more matches out of 3pm in the next deal, by the way with five Championship games set to be televised each week in the next deal.

icdg

On the OP’s substantive post, prosecutions are happening here too:

https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2023/04/27/man-who-sold-dodgy-boxes-to-150-customers-sentenced-to-240-hours-of-community-service/

Gusser09

The fleecing by the PL, Sky BT etc isnt helping matters really. Until they start going after people using the service rather than selling it they are at nothing. 70 quid a year instead of 120 a month is a no brainer even for the most law abiding people.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660792#Comment_120660792

Ok, thanks for that.

I always thought that it was a act of parliament that governed the 3pm blackout.

What you have said is correct, the next tv deals will move more games away from 3pm.

Which will cause a lot of angst amoung soccer fans.

Many are wedded to tradition and bemoan the fact that 3pm on a Saturday is no longer a thing, while at the same time they want to see their club on TV as much as possible.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660698#Comment_120660698

I think there are two factors bringing it the attention.

The severity of the sentence, 11 years is a fair stretch.

And the fact that this was a "private prosecution" by the Premier League.

Newtown90

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660848#Comment_120660848

This is the real reason...

The music model has shown ( Spotify, Apple Music, etc ) make your service at a reasonable cost that most can afford and pirating will be reduced greatly.

I was paying €140 a month for Sky+ HD with all sports last year when my offers went - madness when you can't even see all the games.

This is just an attempt to make a stand against a massive battle that authorities won't win in my eyes anyhow.

bennyineire

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660848#Comment_120660848

There is no legal mechanism to "go after" users though as they are simply streaming a service

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660896#Comment_120660896

There is too much greed in football though. The presenters on sky, the players and the managers are all on mental money all back boned by the TV deals. I fully agree that the model has to change but it's hard to see how they sell it cheaper given the money being made.

If I want to watch Liverpool v ManUtd in the PL and want to purchase that game only the most I'd be willing to pay is 5 euro. They will never sell it that cheap though.

I'm happy enough to use alternative means to stream. Ironically I think it's morally more acceptable than what legitimate providers are charging. They are the ones who are morally bankrupt at this stage.

icdg

Those wishing to justify illegal activities should bear in mind a few things.

Firstly, you can argue all you like about morality, but they are illegal, and morals will not save you in a court of law, as these successful prosecutions have shown.

Secondly, the continued existence of these “alternative means” is completely dependant on there being enough paying subscribers to keep the TV broadcasters, who are providing the pictures and sound that those “alternative means” are pirating, in business. Who in turn are paying more in order to finance the loss of income. So you, in case you think you are some kind of Robin Hood, robbing from the rich to give to the poor, you are robbing from paying subscribers too. But hey, as long as I’m alright Jack, who cares about those suckers. The fools, the fools!. Right????

The private prosecution thing is a red herring. At common law the private prosecution was the only means of prosecution. Directors of Public Prosecutions are in the great scheme of things a relatively modern invention. In Ireland you can still take a private prosecution in the District Court for a summary offence (the DPP can effectively block, and does so, private prosecutions for indictable offences by refusing to give directions when the case comes to that stage. That’s a by the by). The system in England may be different in that respect.

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661034#Comment_120661034

One thing doesn't make sense though.

The people who stream illegally aren't likely to pay for a subscription though a legitimate source anyway as they won't be able to afford it. I'd like to see what Sky and BT claim are the losses they are suffering in this regard.

I agree with most of what you said btw. I just don't care though. It would be different if Sky or BT were offering the service at a reasonable price.

Lionel Fusco

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661034#Comment_120661034

I'd say you're fun at parties.

Lionel Fusco

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660896#Comment_120660896

Of course if the service was available at a reasonable price people would pay it but as long as Sky BT and the rest continue to rip people off people will seek alternative methods to view the product.

Hoboo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661034#Comment_120661034

No ones going to court anytime soon unless they’re supplying the service, €100 a year for every channel, anyone stupid enough to prop up sky paying that a month can go right ahead, if they refused it wouldn’t be so expensive.

highpressisbest

Have to laugh at some people on here making a moral argument for not paying SKY and BT but then happily paying a reduced fee to organised criminal gangs! Very likely these gangs are also involved in drug smuggling, prostitution, and people smuggling. Unless the illegal streamers are above all that and have a higher calling?

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661371#Comment_120661371

They probably aren't you know. But sell that narrative all you want.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661496#Comment_120661496

It's a bit nieve to think that organized crime is not involved in illegal streaming in some shape or form.

Where illegal activity is happening and making money organized crime is never far away.

facehugger99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661705#Comment_120661705

Any stats or evidence to back this up or is it something you just invented in your head?

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660896#Comment_120660896

The reason why the music platforms are "reasonably priced" is because they are high volume and low cost.

And the reason they are low cost is because they are fleecing artists.

You can't compare it to live sports.

Sport is the only entertainment genere that continues to be most attractive when it's live.

Everything else has become "on demand" but sport would not be the same if it was not live.

And the EPL has become so strong and so attractive because of the money invested in it.

Media companies can't "low ball" the EPL like the music platforms do to artists.

If they did all the good players, investment etc would go somewhere else, and then the media companies product would be worse off.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661721#Comment_120661721

I'll take Interpol's word for it.

https://www.interpol.int/en/Crimes/Illicit-goods/Shop-safely/Digital-piracy

Hoboo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661371#Comment_120661371

You’re listening to Sky News too much.

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661796#Comment_120661796

And because of the greed shown by PL clubs and players I and many others will continue to stream using alternative providers. I can guarantee you the Erling Halaand doesn't lose sleep at night knowing that only the well of can afford to watch him.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120661805#Comment_120661805

On another note do we know what interpol's views are on the the PL being propped up by Middle Eastern states? The same states who have committed countless human rights violations and still do to this day.

The hypocrisy is jaw dropping. PL clubs, Broadcasters and players have some neck to complain about these alternative illegal services but have zero issues getting into bed with the Saudis, Qataris or UAE who persecute certain sections or society.

Until the PL ban these deplorable states from owning PL clubs and forgo the BILLIONS which they get from them I'll quite happily stream matches using my 70 quid a year service.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662034#Comment_120662034

Well you are doing the right thing if you want the cost of watching the EPL to come down.

The fewer subscriptions the TV companies get, the less they will be able to pay for the rights, so the cost of the package to the man on the street will come down.

But of course at the same time the quality of the product on offer will come down as the money and players will flow somewhere else, and you'll probably have less games broadcast.

But still, you won.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662150#Comment_120662150

MOD: Post deleted due to nature of allegations contained against named persons.

Fr Tod Umptious

A real brain dead, gobshyte man down in the pub, stupid piece of analysis there.

Well done.

How on earth could Sky be criminals for buying the rights to sports and then selling them on their platform?

And how could they be monopolies if BT also offer coverage ?

Oh and while we are here, Rupert Murdoch sold Sky in 2018.

monkeybutter

Mod: deleted, repeated same allegations against named person.

kippy

A couple of things, there's been more headline stories of this nature the past few months (in my opinion) as well as some stories about "AI catching pirate providers" so there's definetly a drive by the rights holders to highlight the seriousness of this particular crime and the stamp down they are making. They are trying to project the fact that time is running out on these providers.

Hard to know - the reality is the providers that are based outside of the UK/Ireland/EU will be very difficult to shut down without some significant assistance from ISP's and local governments etc.

Nowadays the average Joe on the street is using IPTV (from what I have heard) and thats a significant loss to the rights holders and it is a loss - there are a large number of people who have ditched traditional TV for this particularily in the past couple of years so there is significant loss to rights holders.

Now, whether your moral compass is flexible enough to pay unknown people to steal content is neither here nor there - many people will just do it if it's significantly cheaper.

It's not just Sky, the PL losing out here, any legiitimate provide of video or live content is losing out.

The changes made a few years ago to the PL rights issueance to allow for more "Competition" have done the opposite to what they were intended to do. The ideas was to reduce costs on the individual but they have ended up significantly increasing costs.

The business model isn't sustainable - and neither is the spending in the PL. Something will go bang.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662507#Comment_120662507

its a victimless crime, the amounts paid for TV rights and profits of these companies seems to be unaffected

The competition brought in isn't real, its manufactured, there is a cartel of companies and they are laughing at the consumer

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662538#Comment_120662538

Nobody really knows if it's a victimless crime in fairness.

Your take on competition is wrong - the PL have made the most of the new rules by splitting up the rights so a number of platforms can bid for them - they are the ultimate winners. The media companies themselves, I believe, arent acting in a cartel like manner.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662538#Comment_120662538

Victimless crime.

TV companies decide to bid less for sports rights because they are losing ground to illegal operators.

Clubs are getting less money from TV deals.

Clubs decide that they have to let x amount of background people (office staff, maintenance staff, hospitality staff) go because their income streams are reduced.

Well done monkeybutter, you won, but people lost their jobs.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662578#Comment_120662578

Think of a business with actual competition

does it look like the sports broadcasting business?

yes the PL are taking the piss too

if I want to watch a certain PL game, I have no options, just the one

wheres the competition

Butson

As long as footballers are being paid 100k per week, on the back of TV money that is then passed back onto fans, I don't think anything will be changing anytime soon.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662608#Comment_120662608

All those football managers are they losing their jobs because of steaming 🤣

oh the tears

they are burning this money, hilarious

totally victimless

Gusser09

it's remarkable that during a crippling cost of living that Sky keep putting their prices up. I bet Jamie Carragher and Gary Neville haven't taken a pay cut. They certainly aren't being impacted by the cost of living live posters on this forum.

Any morality or unlawful arguments go firmly out the window when I see them raising their prices by a fiver here and there.

And the thing is they will do absolutely nothing to stop the speed of this growing. Their approach is futile. A new model is needed. I do agree though that something will go tits up eventually. 100k a week is probably the average for a PL player now.

monkeybutter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662626#Comment_120662626

how will they afford all big sams bungs now 😂

Butson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662663#Comment_120662663

Both Neville and "Carra" are paid over £1million per year from Sky. That doesn't include their work with the likes of Bien sports, US TV etc.

The whole football model needs a serious reality check. Fans are dead right to take things into their own hands.

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662623#Comment_120662623

The competion angle was brought into ensure there wasn't a monopoly of one organisation that controled ALL of the rights (Sky).

This just ended up meaning that an individual could end up having to pay multiple subscriptions to multiple providers. That's the "Competition" that is at play.

So it's ended up costing a consumer who might only have one bill to pay for content, pay numerous bills monthly.

The PL were the winners and remain the winners with that money filtering down through the leagues etc.

In relation to "victimless" crime here - I appreciate that people don't really have much time for the faces of top level soccer when they take home hundreds of thousands a week etc but these IPTV services also pirate many other channels, many movies and series and the ACTUAL impact of their use on the various industries involved is difficult to measure.

icdg

Mod Note:

An allegation against a named person was made in a particular post, I have deleted the allegation but have also had to edit other posts which had quoted it. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Monkeybutter is specifically warned and will be banned if the allegation is repeated.

A number of posts have breached the play the ball not the person rule. This is a general warning on that.

Gusser09

I'd imagine this thread won't last long. Boards.ie seem to sh1te themselves when we start having a debate about IPTV, the cost of legitimate products and why we won't pay it.

So take carraghers salary of 1 million. That's 8333 subscriptions at €120 per month. FFS. That's not taking into account the pubs that pay way more than that.

We've been saying for years that this bubble in football couldn't possibly last so let's see. With more and more quality alternative providers now available it should suck away more over paying customers. People who I know that aren't tech savvy have even switched and think it's great. They would have been people before who would have struggled hooking up a new tv. Everyone has a price and I really think Sky/ BT and the PL are starting to hit the point where customers say no thanks.

It's almost impossible for them to block these services which is great. My guy operates out of the middle east so won't be out of business soon.

Gusser09

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662608#Comment_120662608

That's bollix Tod with the greatest of respect. If the clubs decide to let go of catering staff and cleaners that's on them. Not me with my Firestick. Would it be too much to ask Harry Kane or Rashford to take a 1 percent pay cut in order to retain these staff? I seem to remember during Covid Spurs trying similar tactic with non playing staff. Scummy carry on.

Rashford earns 200k per week. I'm guessing 1 percent of that would pay for 4 or 5 cleaners / caterers etc in Manchester.

Look no further than the greed and the profits these lads want to make. Don't be blaming the man sitting at home not able to afford 120 a month.

Are you seriously putting forward that argument?

SteM

In all honestly if a man sitting at home can't afford €120 a month (although the Sky website tells it's €55pm for 12 months) then maybe it's just a service that's out of range for him. Nobody HAS to watch sport and there are free alternatives to watch regular TV. If he misses football he can watch highlights, CL football on free tv or go down the pub for a match if he really wanted to. If he can't afford a Tesla he might buy an MG. If he can't afford to drink in a pub he might drink at home.

Just because something is available doesn't make it okay to take it if you can't afford it.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120663034#Comment_120663034

I'm putting forward the argument that if there is a downturn in the EPL revenues from TV rights the people at the bottom end of the pile that will be out of a job.

All your rebellion against Sky etc will only hurt the little guy.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662687#Comment_120662687

The whole football model needs a serious reality check

That's been the case for decades and it's still rolling along.

I thought COVID would burst the bubble but that didn't happen. The only outcome was a rollover of the TV rights because of the uncertainty.

And now the EPL has been turned into a sports washing vehicle for less than reputable national governments.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662507#Comment_120662507

Nowadays the average Joe on the street is using IPTV (from what I have heard) and thats a significant loss to the rights holders and it is a loss - there are a large number of people who have ditched traditional TV for this particularily in the past couple of years so there is significant loss to rights holders.

I think the likes of Now TV is mitigating again illegal IPTV to a certain extent.

No contract and plenty of discount offers.

I've not had Sky sports or BT through the Sky box in years but grab Sky Sports or BT Sports for a month on Now TV here and there depending on what's on and what offers are out there.

Butson

It will be very interesting to see the value paid for the rights in the next round. Will Sky keep paying billions to keep them or maybe they'll take a step back?

People think thr likes of Netflix will bid, I wouldn't be so sure. Average cost of a Premier league game at present works out around £10m. I read somewhere that they make an episode of The Crown, all costs in, for less than half of that. Far better value for them as a business. It lives on the platform for ever and is watched by all ages and demographics. When the match is over, it's over.

kippy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120663459#Comment_120663459

I dont think it is to be honest.

When you see the average joe on the street using whatever the current technical pirating option is around at the moment, you know that is is being used all over the shop. I know of people who have dropped their sky/BT/racing UK/Netflix subs to use an IPTV service - these people aren't "techie" nor would they have been aware of other "workarounds" in the past.

I suppose only a certain age cohort might be interested in these services. I genuinely believe that the "younger" generation don't have the interest to watch full matches. They are used to getting their content from youtube and other short highlight clips - it's hard to know what impact that will have in the coming years.

Butson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120664201#Comment_120664201

That was one of the reasons that the top clubs wanted to introduce the European Super league.

Shorten the games, younger folk growing up on short clips, don't have the patience or interest in 90 mins of a match.

On IPTV, a whole new generation of aul lads in Ireland have them now since GAA Go came in this summer (My dad and his two brothers being 3).