Clampdown on TV 'Dodgy Boxes'

dxhound2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598950#Comment_123598950

I should be saying They instead of He. Is their company registered in Ireland? Like Sky Ireland is.

https://www.solocheck.ie/Irish-Company/Sky-Ireland-Limited-547787

allybhoy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598966#Comment_123598966

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598965#Comment_123598965

I would keep the current structure, which is a standard flat fee and then a combination of league position and TV broadcasts (would be subscriptions sold in new model) .

At moment each team in PL gets a standard share of the TV money roughly 100 million, then they get an additional payment based upon their league position and the amount of times their games wre shown live on TV. From the below article, even though Man City won the PL in 23/24, they only recieved 500k more than Arsenal, who benefited from having the most games televised.

https://www.football365.com/news/premier-league-prize-money-table-tv

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598788#Comment_123598788

Once again doing something like that will require the EPL changing their whole structure.

Media rights in the EPL are shared, there are no individual team media rights.

So if you were to allow some sort of package that allowed you to just watch a single teams games then you would have to restructure the whole EPL, and the debate about big teams getting richer and smaller teams getting poorer would go into hyperdrive.

The next four years will bring in a total of £6.7bn in domestic media revenue for the EPL.

If they go it alone how will they fill that £6.7bn hole and still have to pay tje actual costs for production of the product?

So tell me how do the EPL get you your teams games for €10-15 a month,the price you said you would pay for them?

By the way on the NFL

The NFL in this part of the world is almost €200 for a season, and even though that runs until the end of July, the season only really runs from September to mid February.

That's not cheap.

In the US if you want to watch "out of market" games live it will cost you anything between $300 and $440 a year.

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598932#Comment_123598932

Not if theyre at a reasonable price. Then IPTV will have competition.

In the meantime its a long road ahead for you cribbing and whining about it on here. No-one's going to jail.

Rocket_GD

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598984#Comment_123598984

You did say that They'rethe same lads doing the dodgy boxes.

Still not providing any evidence that they were bank robbers or scammers in India, so can we take it that you've none?

How does it affect your life in any way shape or form?

Boggles

The premier league will not rock the boat yet on it. But something different to the traditional model is inevitable, The CEO has basically confirmed this.

But any streaming service will more than likely start with overseas rights.

The likes of Liverpool and United have already made noises that they want exclusive broadcast rights to a number of their matches broadcast overseas.

If PSR starts biting down harder the big clubs will demand a bigger slice of the cake and that cake at the moment is growing non domestically.

I suppose cutting out all the middle men and running the premier league themselves would in theory maximise profits but would also incur far more costs.

Will be an interesting 6-8 years.

allybhoy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599021#Comment_123599021

You're right—changing the EPL’s media rights structure would be a huge shift. But honestly, the current setup just isn’t working anymore . The rise in dodgy boxes show that fans are fed up with how fragmented and expensive it is to watch matches. If prices keep going up and access stays this inconvenient, more people will turn to illegal options, eventually the broadcasting deals with PL will be reduced because they wont be able to afford it.

We’ve seen with services like Netflix and Spotify that when people are given affordable, flexible, and easy-to-use options, they’re happy to pay. The problem is, Sky hasn’t adapted to that reality. Instead of innovating, they’re threatening consumers and even talking about monitoring WhatsApp groups, ffs give me a break.

No one expects the EPL to replace £6.7 billion in revenue overnight. But long-term, I really think a direct-to-consumer model—even if it starts as a hybrid—is the only sustainable path forward. It’s about giving fans what they actually want, in a way that works for everyone.

Manc-Red_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599021#Comment_123599021

This is how I get all my premier league games for 8 dollars per month and a tonne of channels too with the Premier League.

All legal. Just have to use you’re head.

It can be done with ease. VPN is the key.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599385#Comment_123599385

Good for you.

I'm guessing the C$ is Canadian.

Which makes sense that it would be that cheap in the Canadian market because to be honest, feck all care about the EPL over there and the time zones make it harder to watch.

But people here in Ireland are looking for it for that price, straight up, no VPN, no currency conversion etc, which will obviously never happen.

dxhound2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599025#Comment_123599025

Yes, even if they are at a reasonable price, as has been pointed out many times here. The dodgy box owners would not give up their cheap access to dozens of providers pirated content. Just to get one cheap one on a legal box. Which the pirates would throw in for free.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599465#Comment_123599465

absolutely, model is done!

Manc-Red_

Canadian it is indeed but the US via Peacock is a similar price but has a Massive fan base and enormous viewing figures.

We here with Sky/TNT/Premier are being ripped off massively and no wonder people like myself go to a provider overseas for less.

dxhound2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599518#Comment_123599518

It's a shame that the new model is built on a vast criminal network.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599529#Comment_123599529

Canadian it is indeed but the US via Peacock is a similar price but has a Massive fan base and enormous viewing figures

It's still niche though, that's why it's so cheap.

irishgeo

All I am doing is correcting misinformation that people are posting here saying people watching IPTV are not breaking the law.

The same with people saying a VPN makes you invisible on the internet.

BP_RS3813

A lot of the recent discussion has been around Sky/the EPL but movies/tv shows and streaming services hasn't been discussed much.

I have a wild idea: lets combime all the streaming sites into 1, charge the average of them all per month/annum - lets say 10-15 per month.

Lets say netflixes shows got 40% of all streams, they get 40% of the money and same goes for all the other companies. Would provide an incentive to create good shows whilst its convient and affordable for the consumer.

The UI and stream quality must be good of course - none of this crap of paying extra for 4k/HD. No ads either - i'm paying for a service so I should not receive ads. There may be a free plan with ads if the companies wish.

The issue that caused piracy was greed, back when netflix had everything in one place other companies who were selling the streaming rights for the shows were already getting paid but decided to try cash in on netflixes success not realising why they were successful - it was fairly priced, affordable (for most) and convient. Splitting the sites and raising subscription costs caused this wave of piracy.

Lets say you make X amount of money whilst covering all your costs and making a decent profit. Assuming your costs have not risen, you have no good reason to increase costs - charging the lowest you can possibly can keeps customers happy and returning. Get greedy and they will go elsewhere or just resort to piracy.

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599465#Comment_123599465

Many here (myself included) have stated we'd pay 15 euro per month to include all matches for a chosen team in UHD. Similar has been said for F1. You're frothing at the mouth pushing the notion of a "vast criminal network" attempting to shame anyone with an IPTV sub. Its not working. IPTV is here to stay until targeted packages appear at a reasonable price.

eagle eye

I have Netflix, Prime and Disney+ for the wife and kids.

I'm not against paying a fair price for something.

Sky with sports, sport is what interests me, is a ridiculous price and it hurts my pocket too much. It affects holiday savings and nice weekends.

They'd need to half the price for me to go back. Get rid of all these red buttons crap with different angles etc. I've no interest in any of that, I just want to watch sports and Premier league is not near the top of my list. Golf, American football, rugby and basketball are what interest me.

As of now they have American football and golf but they've lost Basketball and have only Southern hemisphere rugby on a regular basis. It's too expensive for me and even if it was cheaper they don't have all I need. Right now I'd need TNT and Premier sports as well to cover all four sports. That's ludicrous.

fear corcaigh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123595281#Comment_123595281

Get an Nvidia Shield, far superior interface, more control over the operating system, can use Google play and your not at the mercy of Amazon disabling certain features in to the future

Rocket_GD

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123600288#Comment_123600288

That is what the few people anti IPTV people on here don't seem to understand. They seem to thin that we're all too tight to pay for any services. I have IPTV but I also pay for Netflix. I can access 99% of it on my IPTV but I still find Netflix to be reasonable value, excellent audio/visual quality, handy to download stuff for travelling, ease of use etc.

If I could pay €10/15 for this to watch every Manchester United match in UHD I would be the first to sign up.

What I won't do is pay for a few hundred channels that I don't want just to maybe see 1 or 2 matches a month.

FaganJr

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599733#Comment_123599733

Answer the question, have you ever used, watched or had contact with "illegal" IPTV in your whiter that white life?

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599540#Comment_123599540

or maybe it could be viewed that the old model is also built on a vast criminal network of wealthy companies that simply couldnt give a sh1te about anyone, and have been extracting vasts amounts of wealth from the whole process, and have also managed to successfully lobby state processes including the legal system in order to do so, maybe!

dxhound2005

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123600739#Comment_123600739

It could be viewed that way, and it is by 99% of the posters here. Other people would use the same logic to justify robbing stuff from Tesco.

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123600747#Comment_123600747

similar dynamics at play, i.e. monopolisation of markets, including critical markets such as food distribution, in order to again, extract wealth, enrich small proportions of society, i.e. shareholders, i.e. same same!

good call!

yes we re breaking the law, but sometimes people need to in order to fulfill needs, including critical needs such as eating, and no, viewing sports is not a critical need, but its an important one, hence the rapid growth of iptv, i.e. the current model is beyond broken, and the people have had enough, so best of luck to rights holders, cause they have a job on their hands with stopping this one!

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599385#Comment_123599385

Is it legal to sign up to a service with the purpose of using it entirely outside of the home country? At a minimum it'll be against the terms of service, right?

Wanderer78

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123600793#Comment_123600793

against terms id imagine, so breaking the law

jj880

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123599385#Comment_123599385

Just had a look at this. Rises to full price after 3 months... Any way round that?

Manc-Red_

Always is.

jmcc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123598204#Comment_123598204

I don't think that he or she knows the answer.

With legal actions, it depends what can be proven in court. The subscriber to Sky has a contract with Sky and the terms of that contract probably forbid redistribution of the service. If the subscriber can be linked to a dodgybox network, then things are a lot cleaner in terms of legal action.

The user of a dodgybox may have no Sky subscription and that would make it more difficult for Sky to prove in court that they were infringing Sky's intellectual property rights even with a customer list from a dodgybox network. There is also the question of costs. Taking out the operators or resellers of a dodgybox network is more cost effective than trying to prosecute an individual dodgybox user.

A British company making examples of Irish people would be counterproductive. Making examples of Gardai or politicians would be more so. Sky and the broadcasters have to work with them and a good relationship is necessary.

If that 400K figure is anywhere close to being real then that would, potentially, mean 400K individual legal actions. Then there is the uncertainty over whether the issue is more a civil law issue than a criminal law issue. If the legislation that specifically stated that using a dodgybox was illegal existed then it would be simpler. I don't think that any legislation specifically mentions dodgyboxes. That's not the way that things are framed in legislation.

The legislation covering the operation of a dodgybox network is well founded and is, from what I remember, a criminal issue. This is not legal advice. With individual users, it may be more of a civil law issue due to Sky's intellectual property rights being infringed and it would have to be proven than the dodgybox user infringed those rights.

The 400K dodgyboxes, dodgybox users or dodgybox using homes (depending on the article and technology journaist) would be of considerable value to Sky as paying subscribers. Pay-TV is a business and the bottom line matters.

Perhaps some people from the Boards.ie Legal forum can give an opinion on which legislation applies to the use of a dodgybox. It might be more reliable than some of the speculation here.

Regards…jmcc

Manc-Red_

The hardware is legal but the issues start to appear with them when apps can be side-loaded onto them via the developer option being opened and the download via unknown apps being ticked.

That’s an issue that could have been totally blocked at the source and has left the streaming box open for “illegal server/streams” to be utilised.

I’ve a legal subscription to a provider with an official app on my streamer and a VPN to open the country up at the reasonable price that I’ve been seeking for years because of the crazy prices our providers here in UK/Ireland are charging.

I’ll sleep well on that basis.