MAN IN HIS 60S JAILED FOR 6.5 YEARS AFTER MAKING MORE THAN £980,000 THROUGH ILLEGAL STREAMING

A 68‑year‑old man from Chorley has been sentenced to six and a half years in prison for running a large‑scale illegal IPTV operation that generated £980,812 in criminal profits.

Milan Ibrahim was convicted of conspiracy to defraud at Preston Crown Court and now faces additional proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act to recover the money he made from selling unlawful streaming subscriptions.

The investigation, led by the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU) at the City of London Police, uncovered a sophisticated criminal enterprise supplying illegal IPTV services to thousands of customers in the UK and overseas, particularly British expats. Ibrahim captured and redistributed TV broadcasts from major rights holders — including the BBC, ITV, Sky, the Premier League and the Motion Picture Association — converting them into IPTV‑ready formats and selling access worldwide.

The business operated across 80 servers located at premises in Chorley, generating close to £1 million over three years. All servers were seized and shut down during enforcement activity, significantly disrupting the illegal service.

Detective Inspector Emma Warbey of PIPCU said Ibrahim’s actions caused real financial harm. She stressed that illegal IPTV “is not a victimless crime,” noting that piracy deprives broadcasters, rights holders and creative professionals of legitimate revenue. She added that PIPCU will continue to pursue offenders both in the UK and internationally.

Industry bodies also welcomed the conviction. FACT investigations manager Nick Sumner said the sentence “sends a clear message” that selling unlawful access to premium content carries serious consequences. Sky’s anti‑piracy director Matt Hibbert praised the collaboration required to dismantle the operation, while Premier League legal director Stefan Sergot called Ibrahim “one of the UK’s most prominent and long‑standing suppliers of pirate services.”

BBC Studios also highlighted the wider impact of piracy, saying it harms creators, businesses and licence fee payers, and welcomed PIPCU’s diligence in bringing the case to court.

Source: broadbandtvnews.com

27. 8. 2026

AMID ‘SPIDER-MAN’ AND ‘THE ODYSSEY’ LEAKS, HOLLYWOOD’S BATTLE AGAINST PIRACY ENTERS A WHOLE NEW ERA

The Oscar winner and generation-defining talent spent three years writing, directing, producing and editing “The Odyssey,” making his movie into its own kind of myth: a hand-crafted spectacle shot across six continents on the most rarefied cameras in the world, powered by the biggest stars and designed to be seen exclusively in movie theaters. But after only eight days of wide release last month, millions of viewers globally watched a pirated version of Matt Damon’s struggle to return to Ithaca on the social platform X. Audio and visual quality was as premium as the site could handle, and pixels on smartphones broadcast Nolan’s labor of love for free before it was yanked over copyright violation.

This is the lawless new universe of piracy. In the ’90s, outlaws in the aisles filmed “Jurassic Park” on camcorders and sold copies on street corners. In the early aughts, “Finding Nemo” was burned onto blank DVDs and hustled all over major markets by the caseload. These were physical goods dealt in the shadows. Now, the moviegoing public can stumble on perfect replicas of theatrical blockbusters on numerous social apps and screen them in full before copyright teams can hit the panic button.

The losses for media companies sit in the high tens of billions of dollars, a number that will climb as technology advances. This kind of piracy has become a double-edged sword for legacy media companies. To the delight of Hollywood, the “selfie generation,” Gen Z, has unexpectedly packed movie theaters lately — but they’ve brought along their digital habits. Audience members film crucial plot points and wild crowd reactions to show that they were there, and the studios look the other way and call it marketing.

“It’s terrifying,” says Jonathan Eirich, the co-CEO of Rideback and producer of Disney live-action remakes “Lilo & Stitch” and “Aladdin.” Eirich wonders, “Do consumers understand how serious this is, or does it still feel harmless?”

Just ask Peter Parker. “Spider-Man: Brand New Day” fell victim to the same scheme as “The Odyssey” this summer. The gargantuan Sony Pictures hit is barreling toward becoming the highest-grossing movie ever in the U.S. It also played for 5.9 million X accounts — on opening day — before the studio shut down the bootleg version. Management consulting firm Kearney and anti-piracy company Muso estimate that piracy costs the industry $75 billion a year, and project it will reach $125 billion by 2028. With the average movie ticket costing $16, those 5.9 million views of “Brand New Day” on X surely cut into its potential revenue. In other words, Spidey himself can’t stop the astonishing speed with which illegal versions of brand-new tentpole films are appearing online.

“Once a movie is out in the world, some piracy is inevitable,”

one top film studio source says. “That’s the reality of releasing content globally in a digital environment.”

The current method for catching and killing pirated movies online is about as complicated as filling out customer service forms. Studios submit takedown requests to TikTok, Instagram and other social media companies and await responses. If the stolen files are replicated widely enough, alarmed phone calls are made and lawyers get involved, the source adds, and most platforms act swiftly (with the exception of Elon Musk’s “notoriously difficult” X, per the source). A spokesperson for X did not respond to a request for comment.

The timing of this plundering couldn’t be worse. The industry is reveling in a rare moment of triumph as the summer box office hits $4 billion in ticket sales for only the second time since COVID closed theaters and cratered the economy (the 2026 total box office was more than $6.5 billion at press time). Titles like “Obsession,” “Backrooms,” “Toy Story 5” and “The Devil Wears Prada 2” — in addition to this summer’s smash hits “The Odyssey” and “Brand New Day” — have all contributed to this milestone. And all have been just as vulnerable to the near-instantaneous bootlegging.

Despite the streaming revolution and fierce competition from social media, gaming and YouTube, Hollywood largely makes money the way it always has. That means a film’s theatrical opening is gravely important for a studio — in terms of both recouping its investment and setting up a film for profitability in later release windows. Diminished ticket sales due to piracy also affect actors and producers, who negotiate profit participation as part of their compensation for mounting a movie or TV show.

“The Producers Guild and the MPA have their estimates on losses, but not knowing the specifics is almost more painful. It could be $5 million, $20 million or $50 million,” says Eirich. Most producers don’t see a dime until break-even, he says, when a studio recoups the entire cost of its production budget.

Any harm to box office within this sensitive first window is a crisis. Audiences may be showing up in droves this summer, but moviegoing habits have yet to fully reach pre-pandemic levels. Internally at the studios, copyright divisions spend their energy targeting larger criminal operations enabling these digital pirates — the hives sharing and disseminating premium content.

“We build out the more complex cases against bigger piracy groups. We try to take them down and prevent them from reconstituting,” says Larissa Knapp, chief content protection officer at the Motion Picture Association. The trade group represents Hollywood’s interests in Washington, D.C., and has long crusaded to prevent billions in revenue from slipping through the cracks. Going after one rogue account showing “The Odyssey,” after all, is like picking cracked pepper out of a salad.

Groups like the MPA still encounter piracy in the form of physical media. For example, the MPA routinely goes after rogue manufacturers of set-top boxes that help users pirate Netflix, Disney+ and other subscription media platforms. Policing that involves working with security departments at major companies like Amazon and Walmart to keep illegal goods off their commerce sites, where third parties are permitted to sell merchandise.

There are also still hustlers sitting at the movies with cameras. These days, the equipment is a bit more subtle. “They make pretty creative contraptions to conceal how they record. It’s not Kramer with the camcorder anymore,” Knapp says, referring to an episode of “Seinfeld” about movie piracy.

Another new threat is camera-enabled eyewear such as Meta AI glasses. Although the devices currently can record only three to five minutes of video, Knapp worries that criminals will be able to use AI to improve the quality of pirated recordings, smoothing out jerkiness or camera glitches. Who would spend their time capturing an entire movie on their glasses in three-minute blocks? Motive is a complicated question when it comes to piracy.

Dig long enough in any Reddit thread, and you’ll find Robin Hood figures who want to stick it to the ever-consolidating media conglomerates. Others have genuine accessibility issues, from those who don’t live close to movie theaters to superfans thwarted by rights deals that block their geographic locations from showing a movie or series. Regional culture also comes into play. Pirating “Heated Rivalry” in China is the only way to see it, given the country’s strict censoring of LGBTQ+ content and explicit depictions of sex.

While Hollywood adapts to these sophisticated new digital enemies, perhaps it is reconciling with the milder forms of piracy that they enable. For this year’s indie horror smash “Obsession,” TikTok was flooded with live reactions to the film’s many jump scares, and they’re still live on the platform. The same thing happened during a pivotal moment in 2025’s “A Minecraft Movie” when a beloved character from the titular game entered a scene, and Gen Z audiences went apeshit, screaming and cheering at AMC and Regal screenings around the world (and posting every second of their joy). The year before that, Cynthia Erivo’s rousing anthem “Defying Gravity,” which closed the first chapter of Universal’s “Wicked,” was clipped everywhere as fans wept in their reclining theater seats.

“Finding a full and perfect copy of a movie online will probably keep you from buying a ticket and seeing it in person,” Eirich says, weighing the complex calculus of how much piracy is too much. “But if the studio makes a decision that a little is OK? If it galvanizes people? Marketing is full of risk. The matter here is a lack of control. It’s when someone else makes that decision for you, it becomes a violation.”

Source: variety.com

21. 8. 2026

STUDY: 174 BILLION ILLEGAL STREAMS DURING FIFA WORLD CUP 2026

There were 6.2 billion illegal streams of 90 seconds or more globally for the Spain vs Argentina Final match according to GCI.

While the FIFA World Cup 2026 broke viewing records in the U.S. on linear TV and on streaming platforms, new data from Gaming Compliance International (GCI) suggests that an enormous amount of illegal streaming also occurred around the world. Its first complete global measurement of illegal streaming across the 2026 FIFA World Cup, estimates that there were 174.3 billion qualifying illegal stream views of 90 seconds plus globally across the tournament.

19. 8. 2026

‘THE ODYSSEY’ STREAMING SCAM COULD STEAL YOUR BANK INFO

Fake streaming sites are using Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster to steal payment details, passwords and personal information.

Christopher Nolan’s “The Odyssey” is one of the biggest movie releases of the summer. You have been hearing about it for months, but maybe you have not made it to the theater yet. Then an ad pops up promising you can watch “The Odyssey” online for free. The site looks polished. Reviews make it appear legitimate. Better yet, you can supposedly start watching within minutes.

There is one catch. You need to create an account. Then the supposedly free service asks for your credit card information to activate a trial. Enter those details, and you could soon discover there was never a movie waiting for you. The real purpose of the site was to get your financial information.

Security researchers say scammers are taking advantage of the enormous interest surrounding “The Odyssey,” which Universal Pictures released in U.S. theaters in July. Here’s how these fake streaming traps work and what you can do to avoid getting caught in one.

How ‘The Odyssey’ streaming scam works

Cybercriminals have created fake websites that claim to let you stream “The Odyssey” online for free. Some sites appear through online ads or search results. Others can be reached through questionable streaming and piracy sites. The pages can look surprisingly convincing. According to reports citing Kaspersky researchers, scammers have created versions in different languages. Some even advertise dubbed versions based on the visitor’s location. Fake reviews and ratings help make the service look trustworthy.

When you try to play the movie, the website asks you to register. You may first be asked for your name and email address. Eventually, the site requests your bank card information. It claims the information is needed to activate a free trial. There is no free movie. Instead, you have handed sensitive information to people who may use it for fraudulent transactions or other scams.

The U.S. government has warned about free streaming malware

The Federal Trade Commission has specifically warned that websites offering free movies and TV shows can infect computers with malware. The agency says criminals use malware to steal personal information and commit fraud. That can include login information for online accounts. The FTC also warns that malware can steal usernames and passwords as well as bank account numbers.

That makes a fake movie site more than an annoyance. Clicking the wrong download or following a bogus instruction could put information stored on your device at risk. We’ve seen this playbook before when we previously reported on how hackers use free streaming movies to lure people toward malware. We also covered how illegal movie downloads can hide dangerous malware. Scammers keep recycling the same strategy whenever a major release creates enough interest.

Malware scams appeared right after ‘The Odyssey’ hit theaters

There is another reason to be careful when searching for copies of “The Odyssey” online. Cybersecurity company Malwarebytes found scams targeting people searching for pirated copies within hours of the movie’s release. Researchers found cloned piracy sites displaying fake browser warnings. Other scams offered movie downloads that were actually Windows executable files disguised as video files. One fake warning claimed the browser was missing a component and encouraged visitors to click a button to fix it.

There was no missing browser component. According to Malwarebytes, clicking the button could push visitors into a malvertising network. Where they ended up could vary depending on the advertising campaign running at that moment. Researchers also found a supposed Odyssey movie download ending in .exe. That is a huge warning sign. An .exe file is a Windows program, not a video. If a website says you need to install software or fix your browser before watching a movie, leave the site.

Why fake movie scams can be so convincing

Criminals understand timing. When a movie becomes a cultural event, millions of people start searching for it. Some want to know when it will arrive on streaming. Others hope they can find a free copy. That creates an opening for scammers.

A fake website does not have to convince everyone. It only needs to catch the person who is excited enough to click before checking where the movie is actually available. Fake reviews make that easier. So does a professional-looking video player. We saw a similar tactic during the Barbie craze. CyberGuy reported on scammers using the movie’s popularity to steal bank information from moviegoers. The next bait could be whichever movie or show everybody is talking about next.

How to spot a fake streaming site

A slick website does not prove you are dealing with a legitimate streaming service. Start with availability. If a movie has only recently arrived in theaters, be suspicious when an unfamiliar website suddenly claims you can stream it for free. Universal Pictures currently lists “The Odyssey” as a theatrical release. Next, look closely at the website address. A scammer may use a domain that resembles a familiar streaming service. A small spelling change or an unusual domain ending can be easy to miss when you are moving quickly.

Do not rely on reviews posted on the streaming site itself either. Reports about “The Odyssey” scam say fake ratings and reviews were used to make fraudulent pages appear legitimate. You should also be wary when a website promises something for free but suddenly needs your credit card. Legitimate companies can require payment information for free trials. The difference is that you should already know and trust the service before handing over your card.

We reached out to Universal Pictures for comment about the fraudulent sites targeting “The Odyssey” but did not hear back before our deadline.

Tips to stay safe from fake streaming scams

A few extra seconds of checking can save you from a much bigger headache later.

1) Use strong antivirus protection

Strong antivirus software can help detect malicious downloads and warn you about dangerous websites. That protection becomes particularly valuable when a scam starts with an innocent-looking search or advertisement. Get my picks for the best 2026 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.com.

2) Stick with official streaming services

Use established streaming platforms or check the movie studio’s official website to see where a film is available. If you have never heard of the streaming service, investigate it before creating an account.

3) Stop when a free offer suddenly asks for your card

Do not enter payment information simply because the page says it needs to verify your account. Open a new browser tab and research the service independently.

4) Check the full website address

Look carefully at the domain before entering personal information. Do not assume the first search result or a sponsored result is automatically legitimate.

5) Never install a mystery movie player

A streaming site should not require you to install an unfamiliar program to watch a movie. Be especially careful with .exe files. Malwarebytes found one being disguised as a supposed Odyssey movie download.

6) Use unique passwords and turn on MFA

If you create an account on a fraudulent website and reuse a password from another service, scammers may try those credentials elsewhere. Use a password manager to create and store a unique password for every important account. Then turn on multi-factor authentication wherever it is available.

What to do if you already entered your information

  • Act quickly if you entered financial information into one of these sites.
  • Contact the bank or card issuer using the number printed on your card or information from its official website. Tell them you may have given your card details to a fraudulent website.
  • If you paid a scammer with a debit or credit card, contact the issuing company or bank, report the fraudulent charge and ask whether the transaction can be reversed.
  • Next, change any password you created on the fake streaming site.
  • If you reused that password on another account, change it there as well.
  • The FTC also recommends going to IdentityTheft.gov if a scammer obtained sensitive personal or financial information. The site provides recovery steps based on the information that was exposed.
  • If you downloaded something suspicious, update your security software and run a scan using strong antivirus software. We recommend scanning your device if you believe a malicious link or attachment installed harmful software. Get my picks for the best 2026 antivirus protection winners for your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.com.
  • Finally, keep checking your bank and credit card accounts for transactions you do not recognize.

Kurt’s key takeaways

I think movie scams work so well because they arrive at exactly the moment we are looking for something. You already want to see the film. Then somebody puts a shortcut in front of you. That is where a little skepticism pays off. “The Odyssey” may be the bait this summer, but criminals can use the same idea around the next blockbuster. A few minutes of entertainment are never worth giving a stranger access to your credit card or computer. I would much rather wait for a movie to reach an official streaming service than spend the next few weeks disputing charges or changing compromised passwords. When “free” entertainment asks for your financial information, the price can become very real.

Would a professional-looking streaming site with convincing reviews ever persuade you to enter your credit card for a movie you have been dying to see, or are you now too suspicious to take that chance? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

Source: foxnews.com

17. 8. 2026

NOVA PREPARES NEW MONETISATION MODEL FOR ONEPLAY AND AIMS TO RETAIN KEY SPORTS RIGHTS

Nova is getting closer to launching a new ad-supported subscription tier for its Oneplay video platform. The move will also introduce a new approach to advertising sales across linear and digital viewing. Nova plans to reveal the details this autumn. At the same time, Nova CEO Daniel Grunt expects the cost of sports broadcasting rights to continue rising.

Nova Group is preparing to introduce an advertising-supported model for its Oneplay video platform. As part of this initiative, it is also developing Max Reach, a project designed to connect advertising sales across linear television and digital viewing.

Another upcoming change will be restrictions on ad-skipping in catch-up viewing. Nova will, however, disclose the full details when it presents its commercial policy for 2027 this autumn.

At the same time, the broadcaster expects competition for sports rights to intensify. According to Nova Group CEO Daniel Grunt, the launch of rival channel Prima sport is likely to increase competitive pressure.

Speaking to MediaGuru.cz following Nova Group’s autumn programming press conference, Grunt also indicated that the company would not rule out collaborating with other broadcasters when acquiring sports broadcasting rights.

Nova announced in June that it was preparing to launch an ad-supported tier for Oneplay. According to our information, you are also developing the Max Reach project, which is expected to connect digital and linear advertising in some form. Can you tell us more about it?

It is still too early to go into detail. We will present the full concept together with our new commercial policy for next year, which we will announce during the autumn.

Will that also include details on ad measurement and options for buying advertising across both linear TV and Oneplay?

Yes. All commercial aspects will be presented as part of the new commercial policy.

We will also provide details of the consumer proposition, including the pricing of ad-supported subscription tiers, how many tier options will be available, the amount of advertising inventory, and other related parameters.

All of this will be announced well ahead of the launch.

Will you also announce restrictions on ad-skipping in catch-up viewing at the same time?

It is already public knowledge that operators have received the relevant information.

From mid-November, viewers should no longer be able to fast-forward through advertising. This is the first step towards enabling us to subsequently monetise this inventory through advertising sales.

The notification to operators has already been issued, and we can confirm that. We will, however, provide the detailed information together with our commercial policy.

Your competitor Prima is now launching a new sports channel, Prima sport. Nova already has an established portfolio of Nova Sport channels and, following the merger with O2 TV, also Oneplay Sport. Acquiring rights to premium competitions has required significant investment. How difficult will it be to retain those rights? Does Prima have the potential to win some of them away from Nova?

We will have to see.

Prima is at the beginning of its journey and needs to build its sports channel around strong properties and brands. I therefore expect it will actively compete for attractive rights packages.

Which will push the price of rights higher.

More broadly, this confirms a trend we are seeing worldwide.

Sports rights are becoming more expensive, particularly due to pressure from streaming platforms. International services often acquire global rights to individual competitions, typically including US leagues such as the NHL and others.

This leads to a certain degree of market fragmentation, because fans increasingly need to use several different services to follow the competitions they are interested in.

The NFL is a typical example, where viewers often need subscriptions to multiple streaming or cable services in order to access all games.

That is a development we are somewhat concerned about in the Czech market.

We can expect competition to intensify, and this may also be reflected in rights pricing. Our objective is to continue offering Oneplay users the most attractive sports broadcasts, tournaments and events in one place.

That does not necessarily mean that all rights need to be carried under the Oneplay Sport or Nova Sport brands.

We already distribute a number of other sports channels today, including Eurosport, Sport1 and Sport2, and that model will continue.

My goal is to retain the key brands and local rights, because these are particularly important to the value proposition and brand perception of Oneplay.

If an opportunity emerged, would you be interested in acquiring any rights currently held by Česká televize (Czech Television)?

It is difficult to say whether such an opportunity will arise.

For example, Česká televize secured the rights to the Ice Hockey World Championship for the next rights cycle without us having an opportunity to participate in the relevant tender.

Generally speaking, however, we monitor what becomes available in the market, and any sport or major sporting event with strong audience appeal is of interest to us.

We will always seek to acquire such rights where the commercial terms make economic sense for us.

Could you also imagine jointly acquiring rights with Prima? For example, could Prima obtain some UEFA Champions League matches from Nova?

The situation regarding UEFA Champions League rights for the next three-year cycle, beginning next year, has not yet been finalised, so it will depend on how the process develops.

It is not our strategy or intention, but I can imagine circumstances in which it could make sense to cooperate with another broadcaster on certain competitions — whether that is Česká televize or another partner.

Source: MediaGuru.cz

12. 8. 2026

‘I DON’T WANT TO WAIT THREE EPISODES BEFORE SOMETHING GRIPPS ME,’ SAYS ONEPLAY’S HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT

These days, it only takes viewers a few minutes to decide whether to give a series a go. Michal Reitler, Head of Development at TV Nova and Oneplay, talks in an interview about how the TV audience has changed, why people say they mainly want comedies but actually watch a lot of crime dramas, and the new programmes Nova has in the pipeline. He also revealed why some series need to hook the viewer right from the start and what determines whether they are renewed.

You can find the full interview at forbes.cz
Source: forbes.cz
12. 8. 2026

PRIMA IS PLANNING CHANGES TO ITS TERRESTRIAL TV SERVICE; A SHUFFLE IS ON THE WAY

The Prima Group is set to expand its collaboration with Digital Broadcasting and plans to move most of its channels to its DVB-T2 multiplex 24 next year. In an interview, the director of the Prima Group explains the reasons behind the change in distribution strategy and also clarifies why the new Prima Sport channel will only be available in SD resolution via terrestrial broadcasting.

The Prima media group’s long-standing contract with České Radiokomunikace is due to expire next year. It intends to continue working with the operator, but plans to broadcast most of its programmes on the rival network operated by Digital Broadcasting. Lukáš Kubát, CEO of the Prima Group, outlined the planned move to MediaGuru.cz.

Mr Kubát, the launch of your new nationwide channel, Prima Sport, on Digital Broadcasting’s DVB-T2 multiplex 24 comes as a big surprise. What led you to take this step?

We have entered into a long-term partnership with Digital Broadcasting, and Prima Sport is the first sign of this collaboration. Next year, we plan to move other channels to this multiplex as well.

Until now, you’ve had very close ties with ČRA, and it was no secret that you had your own dedicated data capacity there.

Yes, we did have a reserved bandwidth, but we have now received a significantly more favourable offer, which is why we are planning to switch to this network. I am very pleased about the partnership with Digital Broadcasting.

Can you reveal which programmes you intend to move to DVB-T2 multiplex 24?

The vast majority. As for České Radiokomunikace, we’re deciding whether to stay there with just one or two channels.

And is the portfolio of channels you’ll have after the launch of Prima Sport now final?

If we were to launch anything else, it would be some FAST channels with pay-TV operators. I don’t see any scope for us to launch another traditional thematic channel on top of sport at this stage.

And can Prima Sport operate on the FAST model?

No, it won’t be a FAST channel. Prima Sport will be part of a large ecosystem. That means the content will primarily be on the Prima platform, and then Prima Sport will acquire certain rights that we want to promote, or possibly broadcast them directly on free-to-air television.

I’d like to ask about picture quality. Given the pay-TV operators, your programmes on terrestrial television – with the exception of CNN Prima News – are only available in SD resolution. Now, all of a sudden, Prima Sport has appeared and is broadcasting in Full HD. Is this some sort of new trend that other channels will follow?

Prima Sport will be available in SD on terrestrial TV.

So was the HD just some sort of introductory promo?

Exactly. The channel isn’t officially broadcasting yet, so it was a sort of trial run, but it will then be in SD because we can’t breach our contracts with the operators.

So is this just a promotion lasting a few weeks?

No, it’ll just be those two Sparta matches, and then from 17 August the channel will be broadcast terrestrially in SD resolution only. Viewers will be able to find it in HD via operators and on Prima.

The operator Digital Broadcasting claims around 98 per cent coverage of the Czech Republic, which might be sufficient. However, from my experience, I know of viewers who really can’t tune into DVB-T2 multiplex 24. Aren’t you worried about that?

No. When I look at the development of IPTV, which has been growing steadily over the long term, I’m not worried about it. Whether DTT has one or two per cent less coverage doesn’t matter.

Well, it’s precisely the terrestrial broadcasting that’s the issue…

I know, but it’s been losing ground in the long term. If you look at the main source of revenue by platform, you can see how DTT is declining.

So, to sum up, how will your distribution mix develop?

For the time being, it’s staying as it is. We maintain a certain standard of quality for our terrestrial broadcasts, but we provide a higher quality service to pay-TV operators. From next year, we’ll be ‘splitting our services’, so we won’t just be with one terrestrial multiplex operator, but with both Digital Broadcasting and ČRA.

České Radiokomunikace retains its clients through long-term contracts. I assume that means those contracts are coming to an end for you?

Exactly. They’re due to end next year.

Source: mediaguru.cz

11. 8. 2026

CANADA INTRODUCES A GROUNDBREAKING MECHANISM TO BLOCK PIRACY WEBSITES – EVEN THOSE THAT DO NOT YET EXIST

The fight against the illegal distribution of audiovisual content on the internet has reached unprecedented levels in Canada. The country’s Federal Court has issued an injunction that goes significantly beyond previous practice: in addition to currently active piracy platforms, it also targets websites that had not even been launched at the time of the ruling.

The order follows a joint lawsuit brought by Netflix, Disney and Warner Bros., in collaboration with the Canadian telecoms operators Rogers and TVA.

According to information from the TorrentFreak website, Canadian internet service providers – specifically Bell, Telus and TekSavvy – are required to immediately block access to an initial list of 18 domains and subdomains. This list includes, in particular, popular streaming sites such as 123Movies and FMovies, as well as a number of paid IPTV services.

This sets a precedent illustrating how quickly regulatory requirements for ISPs can change and what demands may be placed on European operators in future as part of copyright enforcement.

How the ‘Expanded Scope’ mechanism works

A key element of the decision is a simplified procedure for the ongoing updating of the blocking list, known as ‘Expanded Scope’. The previous model was a lengthy process for copyright holders: every time they identified a new alternative domain or a clone of a pirate site, they had to go through the entire court proceedings and obtain a new court order.

The new approach significantly shortens this process. Film studios and television companies can now add new piracy platforms to the blocking list virtually independently. All they need to do is submit a statutory declaration confirming that the specific website meets the court’s criteria – namely, that its primary purpose is the unauthorised distribution of protected content.\n\nIf none of the internet service providers concerned raises a formal objection within five working days, the new domain is automatically included in the block. The entire process requires no further court proceedings or a judge’s signature.

From the perspective of the studios involved, this represents a dramatic acceleration in the fight against digital piracy, which naturally adapts to the speed with which the operators of pirate websites themselves respond to blocking measures – usually by immediately launching new domains.

Net neutrality under pressure: operators’ concerns

Representatives of the entertainment industry describe the new mechanism as a key tool in the fight against the rapid proliferation of mirror sites. However, digital rights advocates and some operators are significantly more sceptical.

The Canadian ISP TekSavvy, which was one of the few to have actively challenged the country’s first blocking orders in the past, did not file a formal legal objection this time, though it did publicly distance itself from the order. On its page dedicated to regulatory compliance, the company emphasised that blocking orders of this type constitute a serious infringement of the principles of net neutrality and alter the very fundamental mission of internet service providers – whose historical role has been to transmit data traffic without any discrimination based on content.

The question of where the line lies between the enforcement of rights and operator neutrality remains open. The court order itself is valid for a period of two years. Its actual impact will depend on how many new domains Hollywood studios manage to add to the blocking list without direct judicial oversight before this period expires.

Source: procomputing.cz

27. 7. 2026

THOUSANDS OF WEBSITES TAKEN DOWN FOR ILLEGAL WORLD CUP STREAMS

According to the US Department of Justice (DOJ), nearly 3,000 websites were blocked or seized for illegally streaming World Cup matches.

In the US alone, more than 1,000 domains were blocked during the tournament, with a similar number also blocked in Colombia. Law enforcement agencies in the US and across South America carried out this operation as part of investigations known as ‘Operation Offsides’ and ‘Operation Red Card’.

Ivan J. Arvelo, director of the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Centre (NIPRCC), stated that the unauthorised streaming of World Cup matches infringes intellectual property rights and “supports criminal organisations”.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced at the end of last month that it had taken down 400 websites in connection with the illegal streaming of the World Cup. Hundreds more have now been taken down or blocked. “The ongoing efforts to seize more than a thousand domains used for the illegal streaming of the World Cup confirm the government’s commitment to enforcing intellectual property rights and ensuring the success of the 2026 FIFA World Cup,” said A. Tysen Duva, Deputy Assistant Attorney General at the DOJ. Enforcement of these measures is primarily overseen by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a federal agency of which the NIPRCC forms part.

Illegal broadcasting of sporting events often takes place via websites or sites created specifically for a given event. Companies and broadcasters estimatethat this activity costs them billions of dollars annually.

Given its global popularity, football is, according to analysts, pirated on an “industrial scale”. The rising cost of broadcasting rights contracts for matches has led to higher prices for fans at home, particularly if they choose to pay for multiple services to watch their team’s matches. This has led some fans to turn to illegal streams of major matches to avoid these costs.

Charles Rivkin, chairman of the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE) – an organisation focused on combating digital piracy which assisted with the police operation – said on Monday that the World Cup is “the sort of global live event that pirate networks are quick to exploit for their own gain”.

The crackdown on illegal streaming was also supported by FIFA, which organises the World Cup, as well as beIN Media Group, NBC Universal, the Ultimate Fighting Championship and Warner Brothers.

A large proportion of FIFA’s revenue comes from the sale of broadcasting rights to various global media networks wishing to broadcast the matches on television. Neither FIFA nor the other media organisations responded immediately to requests for comment.

The Colombian Attorney General’s Office stated that it had even made several arrests in connection with these operations.

Four members of the so-called ‘cybercrime group’ Los Ciberinfiltrados were arrested for allegedly illegally obtaining and distributing access to World Cup matches. A further 830 websites were also blocked in Argentina, Ecuador, Peru, Brazil and the Dominican Republic.

In addition to illegal streaming, the Colombian police carried out “nationwide search and seizure operations” targeting counterfeit sportswear.

The Ministry of Justice stated that 11 people had been arrested and convicted in the country for the illegal manufacture and distribution of counterfeit sports goods.

Source: bbc.com

20. 7. 2026

FACT AND SKY TARGET IRISH IPTV RESELLERS

FACT and Sky have issued legal warnings to 10 suspected illegal IPTV resellers in Ireland as part of their latest action against so-called dodgy boxes.

The cease-and-desist notices were served on individuals operating in Carlow, Cork, Dublin, Galway, Kildare, Laois and Limerick, following investigations by FACT and Sky. The resellers have been told to stop selling illegal IPTV subscriptions or face possible civil proceedings or referral to the Gardaí.

The services are believed to have supplied thousands of end-users with unauthorised access to premium TV, films and live sport. FACT also warned that people using illegal services could have their details identified and passed to authorities.

Nick Sumner, FACT Investigation Manager, said illegal streaming depended on “a chain of people who promote, sell and provide access to unauthorised content”.

“Resellers are often the direct link between illegal streaming operations and members of the public,” he said. “They sell subscriptions locally through personal recommendations, social media and messaging services, while exposing customers to unreliable services and wider risks involving fraud, malware and the misuse of personal information.”

The action follows a series of Irish enforcement moves by Sky and FACT. Earlier this year, Sky obtained a High Court order requiring Revolut to disclose the details of 304 subscribers and 10 resellers linked to the IPTV Is Easy service. Sky subsequently sent cease-and-desist letters to around 200 individuals who had paid for illegal subscriptions.

In September 2025, FACT and Sky also served legal notices on 15 shops and resellers across nine counties accused of selling illegal streaming subscriptions, supplying configured devices or referring customers to resellers.

There have also been recent court outcomes in Ireland. In July 2025, the High Court ordered County Wexford man David Dunbar, who ran IPTV Is Easy, to pay €480,000 in damages to Sky, with a further €30,000 fine for contempt of court. In 2024, Naas Circuit Criminal Court sentenced Kildare-based King Kong Media operator Ciaran Donovan to three years and four months in prison, with the final two years suspended, for money laundering offences linked to more than €900,000 in criminal proceeds.

Matthew Hibbert, Group Director of Anti-Piracy at Sky, said: “Illegal streaming is not a victimless crime – it damages jobs, drains investment from the Irish creative industries, and places viewers at risk. It also puts money into the hands of criminals.”

The campaign comes as broadcasters and rights holders continue to focus enforcement on illegal IPTV resellers and customers, particularly around live sport, where piracy remains a significant challenge.

Source: broadbandtvnews.com

17. 7. 2026

WHAT INDUSTRIALIZED ILLEGAL STREAMING IS COSTING THE INDUSTRY IN 2026

In this clip from her keynote fireside chat at Streaming Media Connect 2026, Verimatrix Director of Product Management Maria Malinkowitsch offers a snapshot of live-streaming piracy in 2026, what it’s costing major sports rightsholders, why the fragmentation of sports rights and the cost burden on fans is making the industry susceptible to pirates, and how the industrialization of illegal streaming and the rise of “piracy as a service” are adding fuel to the fire and making antipiracy efforts more challenging than ever.

How Piracy Has Evolved

Streaming Media Editor-in-Chief Steve Nathans-Kelly opens the conversation by saying, “Streaming piracy I think is often described as a moving target or, even more colorfully, as a game of whack-a-mole. And the pirates are always doing whatever they can to stay out of your way or a step ahead of you.” He asks Malinkowitsch to talk about how piracy has evolved, how much money the industry loses to illegal streaming, and what these factors have meant for anti-piracy strategies.

Malinkowitsch says that the streaming industry is losing $67 billion to illegal IPTV platforms these days. “And if you want to compare it to something apart from it being the whole budget of a small- to mid-size European country, it actually, funny enough, equals exactly the amount which is estimated in 2026 for sports rights globally. So basically the money you make for sports rights is in parallel being completely stolen by pirates,” she notes. “We can also clearly state that piracy has mostly moved away—when it comes really to a high- and premium-level content—from the torrents.”

Torrents and downloadable content have decreased by more than 40% over the last few years, Malinkowitsch says, with a shift toward even “pay TV” offerings coming from piracy along with an excellent user experience. Streamers need to follow “how the user behavior changes. … And looking at how segregated [the] sports market has become, specifically when it comes to European football—soccer—or also other rights where you really need a bunch of subscriptions to watch all the matches you would like to see, that’s leading to a lot of frustration with the subscribers,” she explains. “Most pirates, when asked why they’re using these piracy offerings, it’s not price anymore. It’s really convenience and user experience.”

It’s Easier and Cheaper to Be a Pirate Now

Nathans-Kelly brings up the concepts of “the industrialization of illegal streaming” and “piracy as a service.” He asks, “Can you describe a little bit about what that is, what it means, and how it complicates anti-piracy?”

Malinkowitsch notes that 10 or 15 years ago, “you had to be a hacker to start piracy as a business. Nowadays, you really can go on the dark web and acquire a complete platform with most beautiful recommendation engines, layout, and a platform which looks like the best in class like Netflix and Disney+. And what you get in this platform would be thousands of channels, all of the sports you want in brilliant quality, 4K, everything, and starting at as little as say five bucks per month, which is kind of in no relation to what you pay for potentially five sports channels and some premium VOD.”

The new methods for retrieving and stealing content have facilitated this shift. It’s now “popular to take the content directly from the content delivery networks, from the CDNs, and make the legitimate content provider whom you are stealing the content from pay for the traffic,” Malinkowitsch says. Pirates keep their costs low; they are only paying the hacker for running the platform.

Companies Have Difficulty Competing

“And so as long as this goes on, legitimate streamers can’t compete with that, really,” Nathans-Kelly laments.

“It is enormously hard really to compete,” Malinkowitsch agrees. She points to the differing legislation surrounding piracy around the world. “So for instance, in Switzerland, using piracy is not even illegal. And from that perspective, people, when really watching these piracy streams, they don’t feel like they’re committing a crime. They even push back by saying, ‘Listen, you made it so hard for me. You made me pay, I don’t know, 150 bucks in five different subscriptions. And the only thing I have from that, I cannot find the stream I want to watch.’ So it’s really kind of pushing the conscience to be on the right side.”

Malinkowitsch concludes, “And in the end, obviously that leads to enormous revenue losses, because when we think about the fight with churn, with the cost of a subscriber acquisition and then losing all of that to platforms which are so much cheaper, is really bitter for the companies running it, indeed.”

Source: streamingmedia.com

9. 7. 2026

ONE IN FIVE ILLEGAL STREAMERS HIT BY MALWARE, RESEARCH FINDS

Nearly one in five people who illegally stream television, films or live sport have suffered a malware infection in the past year, according to new research published by the BeStreamWise anti-piracy campaign.

BeStreamWise is a cross-industry initiative backed by BBC, ITV, Sky, the Premier League and enforcement partners including the IPO and Crimestoppers.

The survey found 18% of illegal streamers reported malware infections on their devices over the previous 12 months, adding to growing evidence of the cybersecurity risks associated with piracy. Previous BeStreamWise research found that 41% of illegal streamers had their bank details compromised, with victims losing an average of £1,680.

The latest findings also highlight potential risks for employers. More than two-thirds (68%) of respondents who admitted accessing pirated content said they had done so using a work-issued smartphone, while 58% had streamed illegally on a work laptop, potentially exposing corporate systems to malware and data theft.

To coincide with the research, BeStreamWise has opened a one-day “device amnesty” pop-up in London’s Soho, where consumers can have their devices checked for malicious software and receive cybersecurity advice from independent experts.

James Bores, an independent cybersecurity expert, warned that pirate streaming sites pose far greater risks than legitimate services.

“Illegal streaming sites and apps sit outside the security checks that legitimate platforms go through. This means the risk of running into malware, or being scammed into handing over information or money, is much higher,”

he said.

“The fact that one in five illegal streamers have had a malware infection in the past year shows that these aren’t rare. Once malware is on a device, it’s no longer yours: it’s under the control of the criminals behind it. That means everything you use the device for – every password you enter, every message you send and all your private information – is potentially visible to them.”

The campaign also published anonymised case studies illustrating the financial impact of illegal streaming. One user lost more than £2,000 after entering PayPal details to upgrade an illicit sports streaming service, while another lost £80 and had a social media account compromised after attempting to watch a newly released film on a pirate website.

Source: broadbandtvnews.com

3. 7. 2026
© AKTV 2026
Facebook
Linkedin
Youtube
Terms of use Information on personal data processing
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.