1,000 UK Broadband Users Warned of “Illegal” TV Streaming by FACT
The Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) has sent a warning message (via email and text) to over 1,000 broadband internet users in the UK that have been identified as using “illegal TV streaming services“, which calls on them to “immediately cease using illegal TV streaming services or face the risk of prosecution“.
“People who access illegal TV streaming services are potentially liable to prosecution for criminal offences, including under Section 11 of the Fraud Act 2006. FACT’s latest campaign warns end users that they are not anonymous and that watching unauthorised content carries serious risks,” states the new announcement.
The latest campaign comes shortly after a recent high-profile case involving Jonathan Edge, from Liverpool, who was jailed for his role in running and personally using an illegal streaming service. Edge was sentenced to three years and four months in prison, in a prosecution supported by FACT and Merseyside Police.
Advertisement
Crucially, Edge’s own use of the unauthorised service was “treated as a distinct crime“, leading to a separate concurrent sentence of two years and three months, “highlighting that end users, not just suppliers, can face criminal prosecution for illegal streaming“.
Detective Sergeant Adam Dagnall, Merseyside Police’s Cybercrime Unit, said:
“Merseyside Police takes illegal streaming seriously because it often helps fund organised crime and puts users at real risk. Not only is it a criminal offence, but the unauthorised streaming services frequently contain malware that can compromise personal devices and lead to the loss of information such as banking details, or be used to commit identity fraud.
Legitimate providers have security measures that protect users from these threats. Please don’t be tempted by cheap so-called ‘fully loaded’ or ‘jailbroken’ devices, even as Christmas gifts – you could end up getting more than you bargained for.”
However, it’s worth noting that Edge’s case was rather at the extreme end of things, which in reality means that casual viewing is more likely to be treated like a civil offence (unless you’re also assisting in the distribution of copyright content). The cost and complexity of successfully prosecuting casual viewing usually means that rights holders will adopt other methods, such as warnings and demands for settlement, where viable (e.g. the difficulty of identifying the person who actually committed the offence on a shared internet connection and or whether it was a brief accidental or full viewing).
The example case used above is also much more clear-cut than the casual viewing of a dodgy stream via a random copyright infringing website. This is because the c.1,000 people being contacted reflect those who had purchased access to so-called “loaded” Firesticks, Android, or Kodi devices from Edge. The details were uncovered as part of the police’s investigation into Edge’s operation. Most such viewing on dodgy streaming websites, which rarely keep logs, doesn’t provide such clear and linkable evidence. Lest we forget all the usual challenges from those using proxy servers, VPNs and other methods to mask their activity.
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook, BlueSky, Threads.net and Linkedin.
« 2025 vs 2024 – UK Broadband and Mobile Speeds vs the World
Advertisement
Leave a Reply
Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message and display names can be almost anything you like (provided they do not contain offensive language or impersonate a real person's legal name). By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your entries for comment content, display name, IP and email in our database, for as long as the post remains live.
Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.
Could all be stopped if pricing for streaming services wasn’t absolutely ridiculous.
Not just streaming services either, what about sport, like football, not that i like football or motor racing?
I watch F1, after the race, but from some website, I would pay a decent amount to watch it if i did not have to pay for anything else. To get f!, i would have to pay sky £15 a month for their Sky Essential TV then all the sport channels for another £20, so £35 a month, plus TV licence, just to watch F1, maybe F2, but other sports I have no interest in.
so yes, if I could watch it for around a tenner a month I would, but I can’t, so since I can grab the qualifying and races from a site I will do that.
That is no excuse.
Except even if you do pay you can still end up with an inferior service.
I remember someone saying to me ‘oh you can already get this film via x dodgy service’, whilst I had to wait several months for it to appear on my legal services.
Then there’s things like the 3PM rule among other regionally restricted content, basically ‘forces’ allot of people to pirate if you want to watch the content as there can be few, if any, practical legal alternatives.
You used to be able to watch F1 legally on F1 TV for the price you would pay. You had to sign up with a VPN but once signed up they couldn’t stop you streaming it legally in the UK under EU single market rules. The 52% put a stop to it with their big day in 2020 but you could still stream with a VPN for a few years – until they clocked on and started blocking them. Now we pay NOW TV twice the price (plus BBC protection money) which also cannot be streamed outside of the UK’s borders anymore.
@Far2329Light, I am not looking for an excuse, just saying that if they allowed me to watch it at a decent price, I would pay for it. But Sky are greedy and want people to pay over the odds.
Using your logic you’d nick a Bentley and claim it was Bentley’s fault for not selling the car at ‘a decent price’.
@125us, not really nicking anything as such, okay, so I am watching F1 for free, but it is being streamed anyway, so may as well get something from it.
I presume you never recorded anything onto tape, depending how old you are.
FACT’s use of the term “streaming service” gives, I believe, the illegal streaming sites a degree of legitimacy. They are NOT a service IMHO.
I wonder, for every 1000 cease and desist letters sent, how many other ‘users and providers’ are out there masking their illegal streaming?
I’m sure it doesn’t “help fund organised crime” anywhere near as much as drugs, but it’s easier for Merseyside Police to go after a few people using dodgy streaming devices than to take down drug dealing networks that blight Liverpool in particular.
That is the same for all police forces, is it not?
They rather have a go at someone filming than do their proper job. got no time for them what so ever.
Or sort out the criminal driving on their roads, you know, Dangerous drivers failing to leave safe distanceing on motorways, illegal and obstructive parking, etc. polution of environment / water, Missconduct in Public Office (turning a blind eye to crimes..) etc.
But of course these wouldn’t bolster imoral corporate profits – who do the police work for?
Now do AI companies!
Get real, the wealthy have shares in AI companies……
We cannot watch every football game in England, even if we were prepared to offer a streaming service a million pound a match in order to see it. Yet, everywhere else but England can see every Premiership game. This is beyond stupid. This would be like America blocking Baseball games for Americans but letting the rest of the world view them.
“Americans blocking baseball games for Americans”.
I think this actually happens for a lot of US sports on Cable TV in the US (and maybe streaming); “local blackouts” meaning you can’t watch local teams playing live.
Again shows how broken the system is copyright is a civil matter the police has no business being involved.
The whole BS about it funding organized crime etc is just that a loophole they use.
The world is corporate puppets.
This could easily be solved if they just made things available & at a fair price it’s unacceptable that UK people pay double the price of other countries for less content.
The world is corporate puppets.
i worked that out years ago, just have to look at our government, who ever they are
Paul Faulkner and Stephen Millington, both given prison sentences in 2021 for watching dodgy streams, disagree on this being purely civil.
They were nicked, prosecuted and sentenced both for enabling/distribution and for viewing. Unless FACT have prosecution powers it isn’t a purely civil thing.
Unfortunately since 2001 and a certain spectacular event, leading to intrusive spying on the citizen being normalised (some of us remember the difference), copyright has gotten more a criminal thing and less a civil thing. Shame that when the same corporations who expect taxpayer-funded enforcement of their DRM, are abusing their customers the UK state is nowhere to be seen! Try contacting Trading Standards directly, and you’ll see what I mean. Mobile providers and ISPs selling bandwidth they don’t even have, is rife. Privacy to organise against this corruption is being eviscerated by Gov. Sure, you’ll catch all the nasty tax dodgers that way, suuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrre. Panama Papers were ignored, right?
yeah, the panama papers, where the journalist who released them was murdered?
Just use freeview and freesat (everything free to watch) and watch the free highlights sports via youtube video! That’s what I will do. Thanks for free snooker on freeview channel 5, bbc, itv4 etc.
There are some things you can’t get, Sky poached most of the sport. We used to have F1 on BBC and then ITV and then sky grabbed it, that was one of the reason I got rid of the TV licence.
I went for years without watching F1, only when someone at work gave me a link to watch it, I started to watch it again and F2 and F3
ITV have got Formula E which is nice, but I have to watch it after the sessions due to not having a TV licence, so watch it on catch up
Terrestrial TV used to be good with sport when I was younger, I remember darts and snooker, with some football on, but now you get bits. but that is what you get when you allow big companies to take over.
no facts, just scare mongering?
The arguments about “fair price” are as old as the bible. There is no “fair price” and companies can’t be forced to sell an entertainment product at a specific price. The price for a product or service is purely based on what others are willing to pay for it. As there is enough people willing to pay for it what it costs now that’s why it costs that. Could they sell more specific sports subscriptions if they sold them cheaper? Of course they would. But probably won’t make as much money as they do now as otherwise they will switch to that business model.
At last a sensible post! Well said mate.
With the amount of money $ky pay for TV rights for football (1.6bn a year deal for the premier league at the minute)
I don’t think they can really afford to reduce the cost for everyone, regardless of subscription numbers.
A “fair price” can only be set in an undistorted free market. Sports exclusivity is inherently monopolistic and we can be very sure that the price is higher than it would be in a free market and therefore unfair. For example I mentioned F1 TV above if they were allowed to sell their product in the UK Sky Sports would lose customers or be forced to lower their price in order to compete. Sports rights are regulated by competition authorities for this reason, badly IMO.
@James, but that is football, well the higher levels, greedy players and greedy clubs, more and more they want. I can’t stand football myself, but some people I know that do like football say they see a better game from local clubs than they see from the big clubs.
Mate we live in a country where some of the richest people had their wealth stolen for them by their Norman ancestors in an invasion and still charge rent to this day for that land. Explain how the market can be free when it is so distorted by literal and figurative Rent Seeking behaviour, instead of innovation, meritocracy, competitive excellence and ethical customer service being rewarded instead? To perpetuate toxic business models requires keeping the UK population dumbed-down and unaware of their rights, and also low-self-esteem, conformist and depressed, whilst being spied upon with no privacy, just in case they get any ideas.
@Lord Have Mercy that comment has a lot of good points in it.
The problem with Sky Sports is they will not break it down into smaller groups.
You want F1, you have to package it with football, cricket, netball, golf etc.
I’m pretty sure the fans of a lot of the other sports are heavily subsidising the football channels since they have to pay astronomical fees for the licence.
They did have a one sport subscription many years ago, which was great for my F1 fix, but now I have to pay for the whole bundle, despite only watching one sport.
I remember when HD (not UHD) first arrived, they gave away F1 HD as a freebie and I had that for years without paying any extra – the good ‘ole days!
You got it, and that is the problem,
Also, what law allows anyone’s personal data (phone, email) to be shared with unelected FACT? No one consented to that. “We are policed by consent” – some Gov liar, every few years.
That’d be section 11 of the Fraud Act of 2006. The people buying the devices were guilty of a criminal act. The people who committed the criminal act of purchasing the devices unmasked themselves as far as privacy goes, and given FACT work with the police offering digital forensics and other services the police are allowed to share the data they obtain during a joint operation seizure with the partner involved.
Seems all above aboard. If you’re committing a crime you don’t get to decide if you’re consenting to being cautioned, arrested, or contacted by a third party partner of the police gently suggesting you stop committing the crime.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/notes/division/5/11
Perhaps sometime in the future, the Football Association will allow clubs to televise their own games live at a fair price.
james ref ‘With the amount of money $ky pay for TV rights for football (1.6bn a year deal for the premier league at the minute)
So Sky carelessly overpaid, so the rest of us have to pay the price of their questionable judgement
No you don’t have to pay anything, nobody is forcing you to subscribe and pay those fees, its a personal choice.
How long until this government starts locking people up for ripping their own media, that they BOUGHT, for use with their personal media servers (Plex, Jellyfin, Emby, etc.)?
I often wonder what kind of apathetic populace it takes to allow a government to strip them of their consumer rights and call them “criminals” for not playing along.
In the eyes of this government and FACT, there’s no distinction between that and “illegal streaming”. The concept of private use went out of the window years ago, and few people who should care actually do.
This is precisely why the EFF exists and needs constant support.
FACT is a despicable entity representing a despicable group of companies that ultimately have more rights than you do.
If buying isn’t ownership then piracy isn’t theft. You cannot call ordinary people “criminals” and think you’re on the right side of anything.
Presumably these people would not have been caught if they used a VPN ?
Greed, then those trying to avaoid the greedy, get greedy.
Supply and demand, just get some principle and don’t support any of them.
Some used to prevent monoplies / unfair competition…
Another perspective, drug dealers peddling their wares to addicts are seen as criminal, yet corporations selling their wares to addicts aren’t.
Legal systems aren’t necessarilly systems of real Justice, thanks to those after something other than justice.
Kick the addictions and the habbit, cull the demand and see what happens to the suppliers.