Clampdown on TV 'Dodgy Boxes'

Whack a mole can be quite effective at hugely curtailing activity. They'll never get rid of it completely, but making it harder and more expensive.

I've already made the point that this is different to other media with the live element of it. Not only does it help them pin down and curtail it (it's hard to deny knowledge when you are literally streaming it), but they cut the live element of it out. Nobody likes their live tv being cut - especially at a key moment in a sporting event.

Besides throughout history the holders have found ways to make it very hard to pirate, this particularly goes for TV. I mean it's the history of tv that shows that this will never work long term. Not for live tv.

And on a general scale, as a slightly tangential point - it's good that it won't. These people who create the media can't/won't work for free, why deny them their just rewards by pirating their tv.

There was a total compromise of Sky's VideoCrypt system in the 1990s and the first ever PPV match screened by Sky was hacked with the necessary codes appearing before the match. What was different was that the system used a dedicated decoder and required a pirate smartcard or official smart card. Dodgyboxes do not require dedicated and proprietary hardware.

Apart from technical countermeasures, the programme provider's main avenues of attack were legal action and demonitisation. The original piracy model relied heavily on cash. Piracy on operations like Sky wasn't completely illegal outside the UK. There was no single EU (or EEC as it was then) legal framework on protecting channels.

Some operations were businesses with creditcard facilities. The legislation was changed both at a European and national level and the lobbyists were very effective. Handling the money was always a problem. The creditcard facilities could be revoked as well. The major problem for the programme providers isn't the availability of cheap devices that can then have the necessary software loaded. It is that the monetisation model has changed. It is possible for dodgybox operations to collect payments electronically and also to use cryptocurrencies.

The main drivers of dodgybox usage are no different to the drivers of smartcard piracy in the 1990s and pirate descramblers in the late 1980s and early 1990s. They are pricing and availability. If a programme provider's service is perceived as being too expensive, then people will rationalise using a pirate device. If some programming isn't available in a country and people cannot get access, they try to obtain access in other ways. The delivery method has changed somewhat from satellite and cable TV to IPTV. The other major change is that the model has changed from being a heirarchical one where one large pirate operation invests in breaking and copying a smartcard and then selling pirate devices to their distrbution change to a distributed one with multiple dodgybox operations operating independently with ordinary and easily purchased hardware. The pirate smartcards required a proprietary decoder and that ultimately limited the potential losses. The dodgybox model does not have that limitation.

Well, that's not going to happen any time soon and SES are retiring Astra 28.2 at the end of 2029, sky has not yet renewed their contract which expires then, after that anyone on SKY Satellite will have to go I.P

When sky changed their encryption some years back on Astra it was and still is very secure, a lot more than IPTV. It's unbelievable easy to access pretty much all of SKY's channels on IP for free. I haven't watched live TV in a long time so not really interested in IPTV.

Some other channels have disappeared off Astra and will continue to do so over the next 4 years, they can extend the life maybe another year or two if the TV networks show the interest but with SKY gone, that's a huge loss for SES but they will get their monies worth by then as it's due for decommission anyway.

Freesat is being replaced with Freely TV, currently they make people buy a new TV but recent rumours suggest a stand alone device will be available but no confirmation on that yet. Perhaps a VPN will work on it, maybe not, if you can't side load apps which I'd say will be highly unlikely then there's be no way to side load VPN software, they only other way is to get a router that can work with your VPN provider but that could dramatically slow down your overall bandwidth.

Amazon are starting to use their Vega OS and it won't be possible to side load apps and they probably won't release any Android based firesticks again , I guarantee that will dramatically cut sales.

IMO … [tldr: … easy to be a safe user of dodgy service]

If I were to get a dodgy IPTV sub and not watch Sky broadcasts through it, what business is it of Sky's?
How can it be shown that Sky are at a loss for my sub? Do Sky claim to represent others whose content is being illegally provided via dodgy IPTV?

If 'innocent until proven guilty' is put aside I guess an assumption could be made that because the dodgy service provides Sky's content that I am therefore using it. I thought proof was needed for a court case to succeed … but maybe I am naive.
On the other hand if it can be shown that I contributed to an illegal organisation or aided a person acting illegally, then I guess I could be charged as an accessory.

Using a 'good' VPN, that does not store any records of the destination IP address of any connection through that VPN, makes it impossible to prove that I accessed any particular IP address, and thus any illegal service. Yes the VPN provider will comply with a legal request for information they hold about my use of their service, but if they do not hold useful information in their logs then there is nothing to tie me to any specific dodgy service.

On the other hand, if a payment can be traced from me to the 'dodgy' IPTV provider, and that provider is operating illegally, then I could be charged as an accessory. Maybe the provider would first need to be proven in court to be operating illegally?

So, if I were to get such a sub I would only run it through a "good" VPN and I would find a means of paying the provider that could not be traced back to me (bitcoin, cash?).

As an aside, my router (a Fritzbox) has the function to set up a VPN, and in addition I can select what should use that VPN, within the router settings.

I have often seen people claim that using a VPN will seriously degrade the connection speed, but I have to say that has not been my experience with ProtonVPN. Yes there is a very small reduction in speed, using wireguard protocol, but nothing that impacts the use of the 1Gb/s service -- about 30Mb/s of the 1,000Mb/s was the difference the last time I checked.

Regarding prosecution of individuals using such services, I really do not see any real cause for concern for the vast majority. Yes a few 'sample' cases might be tested, but the effort and cost of such cases to the state, with little or no benefit to the state, makes it highly unlikely there will be many such cases.

Prosecuting someone for contributing €100 in a year to a criminal enterprise is unlikely to be taken!

If both VPN and untraceable payment are used, then I can see no way for a prosecution to proceed without the user incriminating themselves.

As I said - just IMO.

My wife cancelled our Sky a number of years back, she regrets not recording the call because they tried everything up to and including guilt tripping! She said they were trying to make her feel bad about leaving, talking about how many years she was with them - she said it was like a boyfriend trying to stop a break up.

"I think most normal people just want the geo-unlocking features but an extra bit of protection doesn't help torrent users."

I actually meant, an extra bit of protection helps torrent users.

Once content providers decided to go IP then as I said earlier they released the genie out of the bottle and there's no way to stop it,

IPTV was being sold long before providers did IPTV. I'm not sure it matters at all whether the provider provides IPTV or not. The mp4 stream is the same, maybe there are certain nuanced benefits - the stream is going to be mp4 either way. Whether it's being delivered over satellite or internet it's the same data, I doubt it makes any difference at all, IPTV providers can just as easily take up a satellite signal which is in fact what they do by default.

IPTV really is the gift that keeps giving !

This is a very stupid statement. IPTV can be really good yes, I was probably subscribed to IPTV before the vast majority of people here. However it's not perfect and like I keep saying once the amount of people using it reaches critical mass the gravy train will be over.

Why are you openly celebrating is my problem. Why not just keep it to yourself? What will happen if noone subscribes to Sky anymore, do you think they're just going to keep putting things out? Something is seriously fallacious with how some of you seem to think how the world works. It's not going to be just that the overpaid people at Sky get less money, that's not how it works. It reminds me of little kids who think credit cards mean everything is free with a credit card.

NDS's Videoguard had Sky Satellite really secure in the last number of years as it completely ended card sharing, that was brilliant service you could get on a Linux Sat TV box,

You seem to be confusing key sharing and card sharing. Unlike other encryption services across European satellite Sky's NDS encryption for satellite tv has never been broken. Every few months you'd hear some gossip or rumours about they were starting to get it to work but it never happened and at this point never will be. Key sharing among the other (european) providers was literally free generally speaking.

Card sharing was more sophisticated - you would emulate the card on your device and all the keys would have to be renewed every few minutes so you would have to be connected to the internet. There would also need to be at least one valid subscription - the person who was sharing the card, and people would generally have to pay for the service. After this started to take off big time - and even people like yourself ended up getting it, is when they started going hard after the whole thing and now it doesn't work anymore, except maybe for a tiny few channels and even then only at certain times during the day. This had little to do with the security of NDS/videogaurd.

but it might as well be free to air at this point with IPTV it's so easily available it actually has to be an embarrassment to the TV networks and studios at this point.

I really don't know wtf you're talking about here. How are they "embarrassed" when they've been completely successful in shutting it down? How can it might as well be free to air when you have to pay for it?

It only "might as well be free to air" same as how it "might as well" have been free to air if you were cardsharing in the past or keysharing european satellites in the more distant past, except it was far harder to track those people and in the case of keysharing literally impossible since you wouldn't even have to be connected online (you could even input the keys through your remote control, I used to do it).

It's the exact same cycle happening again and again - people who think that this is going to go on forever are delusional. And if they can't get rid of IPTV (which would only be if the Irish government doesn't help curtail it) then Sky will shut down all services in Ireland and the same for UK if they don't clamp down on it there, ie. no Sky anymore period.

What a load of nonsense! Someone is very defensive of poor little sky 😂

But there is a middle ground.

It's called NOW.

It will give you everything you get with a Sky Sports for far less than getting it over satellite and without a contract.

although a great option, it still doesnt provide some of the services iptv does

feck sake, come on folks, the whole model is clearly de-funked, piracy is rampant, yet theres still plenty of football!

again, we dont care where the money is going to, we dont care that its going to criminals, we simply dont care!

ridiculing and shaming us isnt going to work, cause we simply dont care!