house > News >
BREIN says it has reached a €10,000 settlement with a supplier of illegal IPTV services. A Dutch anti-piracy group obtained a unilateral court order against the individual, who was selling cheap subscriptions to other premium channels, accessible via a set-top box or a regular computer.
While movies can be obtained from BitTorrent sites and live TV watched on unlicensed streaming portals, the combined experience is generally lacking in convenience when compared to official services. However, there is a significant price difference to sweeten the deal.
On the other hand, illegal IPTV services fill the middle quite nicely. By providing decent TV broadcast quality with oftentimes VOD services alongside, they offer superior convenience at very low prices. As a result, these are increasingly being targeted by copyright holders.
IPTV services are spreading across Europe as many anti-piracy groups try to mitigate the threat. One such group is Netherlands-based BREIN which recently went to court in an attempt to shut down the IPTV supplier.
In a unilateral application dated April 27, 2017, BREIN sought an immediate injunction to block live television and on-demand streams offered by the provider. Breen described the breach as “extensive” and “professional”.
According to the anti-piracy body, the resource offered subscriptions worth between €80 and €119.95 per year, providing nearly 1,800 channels of infringing content.
The package included the VOD service, which offered about 545 HD movies organized into categories including action, comedy, sci-fi, kids, and drama. These types of services often have the latest movies, beyond what Netflix can offer.
Because content provided by the resource was accessed via a hyperlink (in this case a .M3U file), BREIN cited GS Media’s recent decision by the European Court of Justice, which found that there is a connection to an audience when illegal content is illegal. It is provided via a for-profit link.
The anti-piracy group also pointed out that streams are often accompanied by corresponding movie posters or DVD covers, which also amounts to copyright infringement according to local case law.
On May 1, 2017, the supplier received an ex parte order, according to which BREIN agreed to enter into a settlement agreement of €10,000 plus other possible multiple penalties in the same amount.
“The provider is obliged to pay a fine of 10,000 euros for each single IPTV subscription, single hyperlink or day on which it violates the court order and continues to sell IPTV subscriptions,” BREIN said in a statement.
While these amounts may seem large, the €10,000 initial settlement seems relatively reasonable given the large penalties that can be issued after a successful direct infringement lawsuit.
Of course, if the supplier wants to avoid further penalties, its service must collapse, something that is likely to infuriate pre-paid customers. BREIN is pleased to build on the pressure in this regard and encourages people to be proactive.
“We advise consumers who have purchased this media player and/or subscription to receive a refund from the seller,” says Kwik.
“Once you don’t track links, boxes and subscriptions stop working. People get excited. Your money is better spent on legal offerings, so that you pay for innovation and creativity and you can continue to enjoy new content.”
Meanwhile, dozens of similar suppliers will move in to fill the gap. Whether customers who have been bitten once will risk another spend remains unclear, but the usual advice on IPTV discussion forums is not to commit to long-term subscriptions – it can end in disappointment.