istock-672026950_adam-petto
26 February 2018Copyright

A game-changer? The Premier League’s live blocking order

The battle against piracy and illegal online streaming has led broadcasters across the globe to try a range of measures to stamp out the problems.

From offering cheaper products to clamping down on the initial piracy source, various tactics have been tried and their success debated.

In March 2017, the English Premier League, the country’s top football division, said after it was awarded a live blocking order from the English High Court that “this will enable us to target the suppliers of illegal streams in a proportionate and precise manner”.

Mr Justice Arnold handed down the ruling, which granted an injunction against six internet service providers (ISPs) forcing them to close down streams while the Premier League is broadcasting matches, without prior court action.

Previously, the Premier League had to apply for a court order to have a site shut down—good for targeting major known infringers but not so good for ‘pop up’ sites. The court order opened the possibility of a whole new way for broadcasters to attempt to clamp down on this type of copyright infringement online.

Initially, this was set to last only until the end of that Premier League season, in May 2017. However in July 2017, it was extended for another year.

The ruling was backed by several major broadcasters and described as a “game-changer” by Premier League director of legal services Kevin Plumb, who said it would allow the Premier League to “quickly and effectively block and disrupt the illegal broadcast of Premier League football via any means”.

Banding together

“Piracy is an issue that threatens the long-term interests of UK consumers, businesses and everyone earning a living from the creative sector,” UK telecoms provider BT said in a statement in the aftermath of the ruling.

The Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) is a UK-based organisation which has led several high-profile investigations into copyright infringement, helping to shut down many websites offering illegal content, and was behind the move to force ISPs to shut down these streams.

“As we understand, it has been very successful. It is a fantastic piece of work by the Premier League,” says FACT CEO Kieron Sharp.

“There are always going to be people who try to get round blocking orders and some will succeed, but on the whole it is very successful and it is being looked at by many other broadcasters.”

The ruling came into effect during the football season in which a record-breaking TV rights deal totalling £5.3 billion ($7.1 billion) kicked in. For Sky TV, this meant each live match it showed cost more than £10 million, according to the BBC.

The Premier League announced that it shut down more than 5,000 streams in the first weekend of the new Premier League season, in August 2017.

New ways to infringe

While the Premier League and FACT have both spoken about the positive impact the court order has had, infringers often move fast and evolve more quickly than courts and rights holders.

The High Court order made life difficult for those who stream online because simply searching “watch football for free” will be harder, but there is a new challenge facing rights holders: illicit streaming devices (ISDs).

These devices are often purchased online. The UK Intellectual Property Office said in a factsheet that they may be described as ‘Fully Loaded, Jail Broken, Plug and Play or Subscription Gifts’.

The devices themselves are legal, but the software that users can subsequently install to allow access to content makes them illegal. This is why rights holders have in some cases struggled to clamp down on their use: they provide users with a wide range of content that is normally available only as part of a subscription service, typically for a small fee, or in some cases completely free.

Kodi, the manufacturer of which describes itself as a non-profit organisation, is the software most people refer to when talking about this kind of infringement, to the point where some ISDs are actually labelled ‘Kodi boxes’.

When interviewed by WIPR for an article on the issue in the summer of 2017, Kodi project manager Nathan Betzen dismissed any connection.

“The team does at least as much to prevent IP infringement on the Kodi platform as Google and Microsoft do on their own platforms, yet because of the marketing of unrelated third-party retailers and YouTubers, Kodi is singled out,” he stated.

“Team Kodi do not support add-ons that infringe IP, and actively monitor for and ban them from the support forum and the official add-on repository at every step.”

However, a report by Sandvine, a Canadian networking equipment company, in May 2017, found that 70% of Kodi installations are configured for access to unlicensed video content.

“We are doing many different things to clamp down on these. We look at those responsible, and we try to stop ISDs at the border,” adds Sharp.

“We have tried to stop the major sellers and distributors. Many of those are substantial organised crime gangs and that is a big focus for all big broadcasters: to limit and restrict the availability of ISDs.”

There have been several stories of hefty punishments for those found to be selling or distributing these devices.

In October 2017, a shop owner in Teeside, UK was handed an 18-month suspended sentence after he was found guilty of making about £40,000 from selling set-top TV boxes allowing viewers to watch Premier League matches and movies for free.

He allegedly had a sign in his window saying: “Sick of paying monthly subscriptions? Free Sky, Virgin, Box Nation, Racing UK.”

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk