Jailed for IPTV

[teddybloat]

it wouldn't be implemented. it's not like recreational drug use is such a problem that it's worth putting non-violent, otherwise non-criminal and predominantly young people into prison. and non recreational drug users are going to be jailed for acquisitive crime anyway

also the judiciary in this country is fiercely independent. the gov can not simply demand that judges use overkill in this manner. it would have to be legislated, and well good luck with that.

more likely that end users are sued as the record industry did decades ago. but damages have to be proved and it's hard for damages to exceed more than a few quid.

cannot see a world where politicians decide it is worth criminalising and imprisoning people for this, when they are moving away from criminalising nonpayment of TV licenses.

 

[jigger121]

Why ruin a person's life and give them a criminal record, because sly are over pricing. The truth is, the way to stop piracy is to charge a reasonable monthly subscription and don't have hidden add ons, with the aim to steal more money from you. If they charged say £50 a month for all of it, 90% of people would pay it

 

[Dar1437]

I'm not condoning that they do this lol, just pointing out that if there are no consequences, people will continue to demand, and where there's demand, there'll always be supply. :)

 

[mike123]

In reality they don't even prosecute that many suppliers in a year. However, if you go around making youtube vids and selling openly on FB you are asking for trouble.

 

[channelking]

Supplies, uploaders for years in the piracy game have been the people these authorities have been trying to go after.

Remember years ago myself and friends were getting threatening letters and emails from VM for downloading torrents. I stopped myself but mates carried out and even without VPN and nothing ever happened to them lol.

Point is end users are very very unlikely to be prosecuted for piracy and courts would not want to waste their resources on such a petty crime when they could put their resources to better use.

 

[celldweller]

I read in the news a while ago that illegal sky users outnumber legal sky users so I guess the resources available to go after end users would use up resources that are already limited. If they did go after end users it would cost the government and companies like sky billions of pounds bringing forward court cases and it wouldn't exactly be on public interest to pursue such cases.

 

[bazcfc1]

Sounds like @Dar1437 is a fekking fed undercover✊💦💦💦💦😂😂😂😂with some of his replies the part in the article where there saying he's been done for 4 months of watching his service has most likely just been added into it as a scare tactic.
They've always said they will go after end users aswell if any of you remember when a particular provider got shut down I can’t openly name but it had the cyber crimes logo on there servers and end users got threatening emails to cease and deceast from streaming.

 

[Dar1437]

Someone needs to be the Devil's advocate ;)

 

[channelking]

It's all well and good these people saying they will go after end users but another actually carrying out such actions against them.

I don't think it will be as easy to take end users down as they might think and with how many illegally stream in the UK I don't think courts would take too kindly to time and resources being used on people illegally streaming than on serious crimes.

 

[mike123]

I read in the news a while ago that illegal sky users outnumber legal sky users so I guess the resources available to go after end users would use up resources that are already limited. If they did go after end users it would cost the government and companies like sky billions of pounds bringing forward court cases and it wouldn't exactly be on public interest to pursue such ca

Sky assume these people will sign up legit. I know I wouldn't and probably most on here. It is just far to expensive and it's not as good as IPTV