Tag: piracy

Dodgy Fire Stick crackdown: Eight new targeted areas named as police plan to swoop on illegal streamers

Police have launched a fresh crackdown on dodgy Amazon Fire TV sticks, with eight new areas across the UK being targeted.

Illegal Amazon Fire Sticks and ‘dodgy boxes’ are streaming devices that have third-party software installed in them, allowing users to watch premium content from providers such as TNT Sports, Sky Sports and Disney+ for free. 

The use of these devices is deemed a ‘serious crime‘, and police forces across the UK and Ireland, alongside the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT), have been targeting individuals who continue to watch unauthorised content. Sky, who pay billions to the Premier League to show matches, also have their own in-house piracy team.

The latest swoop is part of ‘Operation Eider’, a campaign led by FACT, with 14 more cases identified on November 14, 2025.

The eight areas targeted were: London, South West, North West, North East, Scotland, Wales, Yorkshire and Humber, West Midlands.

Of the 14 cases, 12 individuals received cease-and-desist (C&D) notices, while two were served with C&Ds via knock-and-talk enforcement. 

Keep reading

Spanish Court Orders NordVPN and Proton VPN to Block Piracy Streams

Spain’s soccer league has found a new target in its fight against pirate streams: the VPNs people use to protect their privacy online.

A court in Córdoba has ordered NordVPN and Proton VPN to block specific IP addresses broadcasting illegal LaLiga matches, requiring both companies to alter their “internal systems” to make those addresses “inaccessible from Spain.”

The ruling was issued without notifying either provider. Neither could challenge it before it took effect. The court says it cannot be appealed at all.

LaLiga and Telefónica Audiovisual Digital brought the case to Commercial Court No. 1 of Córdoba, framing the measures as “precautionary” and taken in “defense of [LaLiga] clubs’ audiovisual rights.”

The court’s theory of liability is that VPNs are “contributing” to piracy simply by doing what VPNs do, letting users change their IP address and location. The order also notes that VPNs “acknowledge and advertise” their effectiveness at evading internet restrictions. Offering a privacy tool that works, in other words, is now evidence of wrongdoing.

Both companies found out about the ruling the same way everyone else did. NordVPN and Proton have said that they have received no notice of this.

Keep reading

Tensions flare as Russian lawmaker accuses US of PIRACY after Trump’s forces seize two ships in daring raids

The United States has seized a tanker linked to Russia off the coast of Europe and a second vessel in the Caribbean in an escalation of the enforcement of the Venezuela oil blockade.

Dramatic footage showed American special forces boarding the M/V Bella 1 in the Northern Atlantic after pursuing it for weeks in an operation inflaming tensions with Moscow.

The Coast Guard also captured a second vessel – the Motor Tanker Sophia – off the coast of the Caribbean in the coordinated operation on Wednesday morning.

In response to the interceptions, Andrei Klishas, a member of the upper house of Russia’s parliament said the US actions were ‘outright piracy.’ 

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth put the world on notice by saying that the blockade of Venezuelan oil is in full effect, and said no ship is safe anywhere in the world.

The Russian Transport Ministry then responded by saying: ‘no state has the right to use force against vessels properly registered in other countries’ jurisdictions.’ It added that US forces boarded the Marinera at 3pm Moscow time, where communications were shortly lost with the vessel after.

Donald Trump appears to have dismissed the threat of Vladimir Putin‘s forces lurking nearby, including reports of a submarine.

Keep reading

Aargh! Letters of marque would unleash Blackbeard on the cartels

Just saying the words, “Letters of Marque” is to conjure the myth and romance of the pirate: Namely, that species of corsair also known as Blackbeard or Long John Silver, stalking the fabled Spanish Main, memorialized in glorious Technicolor by Robert Newton, hallooing the unwary with “Aye, me hearties!”

Perhaps it is no surprise that the legendary patois has been resurrected today in Congress. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) has introduced the Cartel Marque and Reprisal Reauthorization Act on the Senate floor, thundering that it “will revive this historic practice to defend our shores and seize cartel assets.” If enacted into law, Congress, in accordance with Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, would license private American citizens “to employ all reasonably necessary means to seize outside the geographic boundaries of the United States and its territories the person and property of any cartel or conspirator of a cartel or cartel-linked organization.”

Although still enshrined in Constitutional canon, the fact that American citizens can be empowered to make war in a wholly private capacity skirts centuries-long understanding over “the laws of war.” At best, a letter of marque is to be issued only in the circumstance of a legally issued state declaration of war. Hence, a licensed corsair or privateer is akin to a sheriff’s deputy, who even as a private armed person is sworn to abide by the order and laws of the state.

History, however, does not support this best case. The plain truth — again, over centuries — tells the story of private naval enterprise practically unfettered. These are no Old West deputies under direct command of a U.S. Marshal. These are licensed raiders, serving autonomously, as flag-waving freebooters.

A letter of marque, the King’s signature notwithstanding, is simply licensed predation at sea — and this is under the most favorable aegis, when said letter is actually granted to a private person when the nation is at war. Yet most often, for the last 700 years, a letter of marque is really no more or less legal piracy.

But why would states want to create such a legal justification for attacking rivals and competitors, pesky inconvenient minor states, or in this case, drug traffickers?

Keep reading

Putin accuses France of piracy

Russian President Vladimir Putin has denounced France’s detention of an oil tanker that it claims carried Russian cargo as “piracy,” noting the seizure took place in neutral waters without justification.

Speaking at the Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday, Putin argued that investigators were searching for “military cargo, drones, or something of that kind,” but insisted “none of that is there, never was, and never could be.”

Media reports have suggested the investigation may be linked to unidentified drones spotted near Danish airports and military sites last month. There have been suggestions that the UAVs may have been Russian, an accusation Moscow has denied.

Putin also noted that the tanker was sailing under a foreign flag with an international crew, questioning whether it had any connection to Russia at all.

The vessel in question, the Boracay, is sanctioned by the EU and was sailing under a Benin flag when French naval forces boarded it last week. It remains anchored near Saint-Nazaire, with its captain and first mate in custody as prosecutors investigate “serious irregularities.”

Keep reading

LaLiga’s Anti-Piracy Crackdown Triggers Widespread Internet Disruptions Across Spain

LaLiga, Spain’s top football league, is facing a firestorm of criticism after boasting about a staggering 142% increase in anti-piracy takedown notices in early 2025 while simultaneously causing extensive collateral damage across the internet.

As the 2025/2026 season began on August 15, LaLiga ramped up its enforcement strategy, triggering widespread outages for entirely lawful websites, services, and platforms.

These disruptions are tied to a controversial anti-piracy scheme operated in partnership with telecom giant Telefónica.

The initiative, which enjoys judicial backing in Spain, allows LaLiga to instruct major internet service providers, including Movistar, Vodafone, Orange, and DIGI, to block IP addresses suspected of hosting unauthorized streams.

The fallout is that entire chunks of the internet go dark for Spanish users, often during match broadcasts.

LaLiga doesn’t target specific infringing content. Instead, it flags entire IP ranges, many of which are shared by thousands of unrelated domains.

When one site is accused of hosting pirated material, everyone else sharing that IP address gets swept up in the block.

The result is a digital dragnet that has ensnared companies as diverse as Amazon, Cloudflare, GitHub, Twitch, and even Google Fonts.

TorrentFreak has documented repeated weekly blocks of platforms like Vercel since early 2025, while Catalonia’s own .cat domain registry has also reported service disruptions.

The issue became so disruptive that iXsystems, the team behind TrueNAS, a widely used open-source NAS operating system, was forced to shift its distribution model entirely. After its CDN IPs were repeatedly blocked in Spain, making critical security updates inaccessible to users, the developers resorted to distributing their software via BitTorrent.

“These locks have a significant collateral damage about legitimate services, which have nothing to do with football piracy,” TrueNAS noted. Their solution not only bypasses censorship but hands the bandwidth burden back to the same ISPs complicit in the blocking.

Keep reading

Anthropic broke the law by using pirated books to train its AI and agrees to create $1.5 billion fund to compensate authors

AI upstart Anthropic has agreed to create a $1.5 billion fund it will use to compensate authors whose works it used to train its models without seeking or securing permission.

News of the settlement emerged late last week in a filing [PDF] in the case filed by three authors – Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson – who claimed that Anthropic illegally used their works.

We’re going to see a lot more of this. AI companies wIll create ‘slush funds’

Anthropic admitted to having bought millions of physical books and then digitizing them. The company also downloaded millions of pirated books from the notorious Library Genesis and Pirate Library Mirror troves of stolen material.

The company nonetheless won part of the case, on grounds that scanning books is fair use and using them to create “transformative works” – the output of an LLM that doesn’t necessarily include excerpts from the books – was also OK. But the decision also found Anthropic broke the law by knowingly ingesting pirated books.

Plaintiffs intended to pursue court action over those pirated works, but the filing details a proposed settlement under which Anthropic will create a $1.5 billion fund which values each pirated book it used for training at $3,000. Anthropic also agreed to destroy the pirated works.

In the filing, counsel observes that this is the largest ever copyright recovery claim to succeed in the USA and suggest it “will set a precedent of AI companies paying for their use of alleged pirated websites.”

This settlement is indeed significant given that several other major AI companies – among them Perplexity AI and OpenAI – face similar suits. It may also set a precedent that matters in Anthropic’s dispute with Reddit over having scraped the forum site’s content to feed into its training corpus.

The filing asks the court to approve the settlement, a request judges rarely overrule.

Keep reading

Ninth Circuit Rules ISPs Can’t Be Forced to Unmask Users Under DMCA

The Ninth Circuit has ruled that internet service providers cannot be compelled to unmask users through subpoenas under the DMCA, reinforcing long-standing precedent that these subpoenas were never meant to apply to providers that simply offer access to the internet.

The decision blocks an increasingly common tactic copyright owners use to sidestep due process and extract user identities without judicial oversight.

We obtained a copy of the opinion for you here.

The case came about after a copyright owner targeted 29 Cox Communications subscribers accused of sharing the film Fall (2022) through BitTorrent. Rather than filing a lawsuit or seeking a judge’s permission, the copyright holder went straight to a court clerk to obtain a subpoena.

Although Cox was under no obligation to do so, the company notified the affected subscribers. Only one responded to object, triggering a legal dispute that has now resulted in a firm ruling from the Ninth Circuit.

The dispute is a simple but critical distinction. The DMCA outlines separate protections depending on the type of service provided.

Web hosts fall under Section 512(c) and can receive takedown notices for content they store, while IAPs are covered under Section 512(a), which protects them from liability as long as they are acting as neutral conduits for internet traffic.

Keep reading

This Hollywood-Backed Bill Would Give Government Power To Block Websites

Lawmakers in Washington are once again attempting to give the United States a legal pathway to block websites, a power the federal government has never officially held on a broad scale.

The latest push comes in the form of the Block Bad Electronic Art and Recording Distributors Act, better known as “Block BEARD,” introduced in the Senate by Thom Tillis, Chris Coons, Marsha Blackburn, and Adam Schiff.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

On its face, the bill targets foreign websites accused of piracy. But the mechanism it creates would establish something far more significant: a formal, court-approved process that could be used to make entire websites vanish from the American internet.

Under the proposal, copyright owners could go to federal court to have a site labeled a “foreign digital piracy site.” If successful, the court could then order US service providers to block access to that site.

The reach is broad. The term “service provider” here mirrors the broad definition in the DMCA, potentially covering everything from ISPs and search engines to social media platforms, and perhaps even VPNs.

Proponents say this is about protecting the entertainment industry. In reality, it’s about setting a precedent. Once the government has a tool to block certain sites, history shows the definition of “unacceptable” content can expand. Piracy today could easily become something else tomorrow.

The ramifications go beyond the music and movie business. If courts can order an ISP to make a site disappear from view, the same logic could eventually apply to other types of content deemed problematic.

And because the bill has no public transparency requirements, the public could be kept entirely in the dark about which sites are blocked, why they’re blocked, or how long the blocks remain in place.

Supporters in the entertainment industry, including the RIAA and Motion Picture Association, are openly cheering the bill, pointing to similar measures overseas they claim have worked without harming free speech.

But the US is not the same as other countries. The First Amendment’s protection of speech and access to information means this kind of censorship tool carries far more constitutional baggage here than it does elsewhere.

What Block BEARD really represents is a milestone. If passed, it would be the first time the US creates a standing legal process for cutting off access to entire websites at the network level.

Keep reading

5 Men Sentenced in America’s Largest Internet Piracy Case: DOJ

Final judgments for five men accused of operating “one of the largest illegal television streaming services” in the United States were issued on Monday, with the individuals having already been sentenced to probation and prison terms of up to 84 months, the Department of Justice (DOJ) said in a July 22 statement.

Defendants in the case operated Jetflicks, a subscription-based site that allowed users to stream or, at times, download copyrighted content, with the service never having secured permission from the copyright holders, according to the DOJ.

They used automation to scour sites hosting pirated content, downloaded it, processed and stored it, and eventually made it available “to tens of thousands of paid subscribers” across the United States, said the department. Episodes of popular shows were often made available for streaming or download a day after their original airing date.

“At one point, Jetflicks claimed to have 183,285 different television episodes, significantly more than Netflix, Hulu, Vudu, Amazon Prime, or any other licensed streaming service,” it said.

“This was the largest internet piracy case—as measured by the estimated total infringement amount and total number of infringements—ever to go to trial as well as the first illegal streaming case ever to go to trial.”

According to the DOJ, the defendants’ conduct harmed every major copyright owner of a television program in America, with owners losing millions of dollars.

Keep reading