Streaming Piracy Offences
Streaming piracy refers to the unauthorized distribution or viewing of copyrighted audiovisual content (such as movies, TV shows, sports events, or music videos) via the internet, particularly through streaming platforms. It is considered a form of copyright infringement and is typically prosecuted under copyright law and anti-piracy statutes in various jurisdictions.
Streaming piracy differs from traditional download-based piracy in that the content is consumed in real-time (streamed) without being permanently downloaded or stored by the user. However, both forms are treated as serious offences by courts, with increasing severity in enforcement in recent years.
⚖️ Key Legal Provisions Involved (General Overview)
Copyright Act, 1957 (India) / Digital Millennium Copyright Act (US) / Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (UK)
Information Technology Acts
Criminal offences: Willful infringement for commercial gain may attract criminal liability.
Civil remedies: Injunctions, damages, and account of profits.
📚 Detailed Case Law Analysis – Streaming Piracy
Below are five major case laws (from multiple jurisdictions) that have shaped the legal landscape of streaming piracy:
1. BREIN v. Filmspeler (C-527/15) – Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), 2017
Jurisdiction: European Union
Facts:
The Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN sued the seller of a media player called "Filmspeler" that was pre-loaded with add-ons allowing users to stream pirated content.
The seller argued that he was not hosting the pirated content, only providing access.
Legal Issue:
Whether selling a media player pre-configured to stream pirated content constitutes a “communication to the public” under EU copyright law.
Judgment:
The CJEU held that making available a device configured to access illegal streams is a communication to the public.
It ruled against the defendant and deemed the sale of the device an act of copyright infringement.
Impact:
Set a precedent that facilitating streaming piracy (even without hosting) is illegal.
Clarified that intent and knowledge of infringement are critical in assessing liability.
2. United States v. David Rock (a.k.a. "iStreamItAll") – 2019
Jurisdiction: United States, Federal Court
Facts:
David Rock operated a subscription-based streaming service, “iStreamItAll,” offering more than 118,000 TV episodes and 11,000 movies, most pirated.
He scraped the content from torrent and piracy websites and made it available to paying customers.
Legal Charges:
Criminal copyright infringement
Conspiracy to commit wire fraud
Judgment:
Rock pled guilty and admitted the service was designed to compete with legitimate platforms like Netflix.
He was sentenced to 46 months in prison.
Impact:
Demonstrated the criminal liability involved in commercial streaming piracy.
Sent a strong message to operators of piracy services.
3. Nintendo Co. Ltd. v. LoveROMS.com and LoveRETRO.co – 2018 (U.S. District Court, Arizona)
Jurisdiction: United States
Facts:
Jacob and Cristian Mathias ran two websites that hosted pirated video game ROMs, including emulated versions of Nintendo games.
Users could stream or download and play these games via emulators.
Legal Issue:
Nintendo claimed massive copyright infringement and sought both injunctions and damages.
Judgment:
The defendants settled and agreed to pay $12 million in damages (symbolic + deterrent).
Websites were taken offline.
Impact:
Established that interactive streaming of copyrighted games also constitutes infringement.
A significant example of streaming as public performance.
4. Bell Media Inc. v. GoldTV.biz – Federal Court of Canada, 2019
Jurisdiction: Canada
Facts:
GoldTV was an IPTV (Internet Protocol TV) service that streamed pirated television channels, including those owned by Bell Media and other broadcasters.
The service was sold via set-top boxes and online.
Legal Issue:
Plaintiffs sought a site-blocking injunction to prevent ISPs from allowing access to GoldTV’s streams.
Judgment:
The Federal Court issued Canada's first-ever site-blocking order against the piracy service.
ISPs were compelled to block domains associated with GoldTV.
Impact:
A major victory for anti-piracy enforcement in Canada.
Introduced network-level enforcement measures like DNS blocking.
5. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. v. Scener Inc. – 2020 (U.S. District Court, California)
Jurisdiction: United States
Facts:
Scener allowed users to host virtual watch parties using Netflix, HBO, etc.
Warner Bros alleged that users streamed their content without proper licensing.
Legal Issue:
Whether providing a platform where users stream copyrighted content in sync with others constitutes infringement.
Judgment:
The case led to an out-of-court settlement, with Scener agreeing to adopt more robust measures to prevent unauthorized sharing.
Impact:
Focused on the grey area of user-coordinated streaming platforms.
Encouraged platforms to implement stricter licensing and content control mechanisms.
📌 Key Legal Principles Derived from These Cases
Facilitation = Liability
Even if one is not hosting content, enabling access to pirated streams is an offence.
Streaming = Public Performance
Streaming content without authorization, whether via web or IPTV, is treated as a public performance and thus infringes copyright.
Commercial Intent Aggravates Offence
Piracy done for profit leads to criminal sanctions, not just civil liability.
ISP and Platform Liability
Courts are increasingly willing to impose injunctions on intermediaries (like ISPs) and platforms that fail to curb piracy.
Territorial Jurisdiction Expanding
With global streaming, courts are asserting jurisdiction based on where content is accessed, not just where it's hosted.
🧾 Conclusion
Streaming piracy is a serious and evolving legal issue. Courts globally are treating both operators and enablers of piracy with increasing scrutiny. From hardware sellers to IPTV services and even users in some cases, liability can extend broadly. As the law adapts to new technologies, the message is clear: unauthorized streaming is a prosecutable offence, with real-world consequences—both civil and criminal.
RELATED Blog
0 comments