While rightsholders in Belgium have been slightly less vocal in support of site-blocking measures than others around Europe, they now appear to be making up for lost time.

With rightsholders eager to block large swathes of pirate sites and local ISPs on record saying they want exactly the same thing , an application for a blocking injunction filed by DAZN’s Eleven Sports Network in March showed partners working together.

Eleven Sports Network / 12th Player BV

Filed at the Dutch-speaking Business Court in Brussels, the application saw DAZN’s Eleven Sports Network (ESN) and 12th Player BV, a joint venture between ESN and the Spanish company Mediapro Internacional, team up hoping to compel local ISPs to block around 90 pirate domains.

According to the claimants, the platforms are dedicated to streaming live football matches in violation of their rights. Visitors to these pirate services reside in Belgium and access matches illegally using local internet service providers.

In this matter, the main internet service providers in Belgium are the named defendants, but only for the purposes of establishing their role as intermediaries. The ISPs are supporters of site-blocking measures because they also stand to benefit: Telenet via its Play Sports service, Proximus via Proximus Pickx, and Voo via Voo Sports.

Rightsholders ‘Recommend’ ISPs Should Block the Sites

With claimants and defendants all aiming for the same thing, the language used in the decision handed down by the Brussels court is non-adversarial, to put it mildly.

The claimants asserted that the domains submitted for blocking “provide access to websites on which audiovisual content broadcast on the channels of Eleven Sports Network BV is communicated to the public” and that customers of Telenet NV, Proximus NV, Voo NV, and Orange Belgium NV, facilitate access to those domains.

To tackle this problem, the claimants “recommended” that in their roles as intermediaries, the ISPs should implement DNS measures to prevent access to the ‘pirate’ domains.

The claimants further suggested putting the DNS tampering to good use; customers attempting to access the domains should be redirected to a DAZN anti-piracy site (screenshot below) set up to advise visitors on the reasons for redirection.

All parties also agreed to bear their own costs.

Not Much for the Court to Do

With no evidence before the Court that the claims were inadmissible and no grounds being identified that they might be, the claims of the applicants were declared admissible. The ISPs disputed the applicants’ claims for the record but offered no argument in support. Instead, as part of the predetermined direction of the case, left judgment in the hands of the Court.

The Court determined that as providers of internet connectivity, the ISPs are intermediaries and, as such, are in a position to prevent their subscribers from accessing the pirate streaming sites. The ISPs were ordered to do just that.

The request by Eleven Sports for the ISPs to redirect subscribers to a block page provided by DAZN was rejected. However, the decision notes that the ISPs “are free to provide the public with such information about the blocked access that these parties deem appropriate.”

Given that the claimants and defendants worked together to present the blocking action to the Court, it’s possible that the ISPs will find it appropriate to redirect visitors to DAZN’s anti-piracy page after all. Describing it as a ‘block page’ seems insufficient, however.

The site, located at dazn-antipiracy.be where the image above is displayed, seems to have a lot going on behind the scenes considering its straightforward task. One might even conclude that the aim isn’t just to inform, but to track visitors longer term.

The domains to be blocked by the ISPs are listed below. Three domains (aliezstream.pro, cdnssd.ru, ustream.pro) appear to be duplicates.

dlhd.sx	cdnssd.ru	sportadds.xyz	hesgoal-tv.tv
cdn.xsportbox.com	ustream.pro	tntsports.site	koora.shoot-yalla.to
365streams.world	aliezstream.pro	viaplaysports.online	vipstand.pm
sporttuna.site	antenasports.ru	sportsnet.store	watchsportnow.com
365livesport.com	sportplus.live	tsnsports.online	vipleague.lc
365livesport.life	yalla-lives.net	newsoccer.store	viprow.nu
365livesport.me	noblockaabbddxcktb.xyz	mrsoccer.club	vipstand.st
bingsport.xyz	socceronline.me	ukhdstream.xyz	buffstreams.sx
flash-24.live	volkastream.xyz	tnt-sportslive.xyz	olympicstreams.me
fullassia.com	volkastream.fr	9goals.io	fbstreams.pm
tv247365.net	vipbox.lc	axscore.com	qatarstreams.me
hes-goals.io	vipboxtv.sk	bingsport.com	play24.808ball.com
vipleague.la	r.bingsport.xyz	bingsport.watch	premiertv.watch
vipleague.im	vstream.store	bingsportlive.com	ru.score808pro.com
koora.shoot-yalla.live	rivofutboltv.xyz	cdn.livetv767.me	rojadirectatvonline.nl
strikeout.im	7soccerhd.xyz	daddylivehd.pro	rojadirecta.nl
shoot-yalla.io	hdlivestreamer.xyz	es22.sportplus.live	rojadirectaenvivo.me
spworld.me	cr7soccer.com	primefoot.ru	soccerstream100.co
daddylivehd.icu	v2.nizarstream.com	hes-goals.tv	aliezstream.pro
xsportbox.com	games47.xyz	hesgoal-tv.io	ustream.pro
cdnssd.ru	tarjetarojatvenvivo.net	kai.superbb77.cfd

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

While rightsholders in Belgium have been slightly less vocal in support of site-blocking measures than others around Europe, they now appear to be making up for lost time.

With rightsholders eager to block large swathes of pirate sites and local ISPs on record saying they want exactly the same thing , an application for a blocking injunction filed by DAZN’s Eleven Sports Network in March showed partners working together.

Eleven Sports Network / 12th Player BV

Filed at the Dutch-speaking Business Court in Brussels, the application saw DAZN’s Eleven Sports Network (ESN) and 12th Player BV, a joint venture between ESN and the Spanish company Mediapro Internacional, team up hoping to compel local ISPs to block around 90 pirate domains.

According to the claimants, the platforms are dedicated to streaming live football matches in violation of their rights. Visitors to these pirate services reside in Belgium and access matches illegally using local internet service providers.

In this matter, the main internet service providers in Belgium are the named defendants, but only for the purposes of establishing their role as intermediaries. The ISPs are supporters of site-blocking measures because they also stand to benefit: Telenet via its Play Sports service, Proximus via Proximus Pickx, and Voo via Voo Sports.

Rightsholders ‘Recommend’ ISPs Should Block the Sites

With claimants and defendants all aiming for the same thing, the language used in the decision handed down by the Brussels court is non-adversarial, to put it mildly.

The claimants asserted that the domains submitted for blocking “provide access to websites on which audiovisual content broadcast on the channels of Eleven Sports Network BV is communicated to the public” and that customers of Telenet NV, Proximus NV, Voo NV, and Orange Belgium NV, facilitate access to those domains.

To tackle this problem, the claimants “recommended” that in their roles as intermediaries, the ISPs should implement DNS measures to prevent access to the ‘pirate’ domains.

The claimants further suggested putting the DNS tampering to good use; customers attempting to access the domains should be redirected to a DAZN anti-piracy site (screenshot below) set up to advise visitors on the reasons for redirection.

All parties also agreed to bear their own costs.

Not Much for the Court to Do

With no evidence before the Court that the claims were inadmissible and no grounds being identified that they might be, the claims of the applicants were declared admissible. The ISPs disputed the applicants’ claims for the record but offered no argument in support. Instead, as part of the predetermined direction of the case, left judgment in the hands of the Court.

The Court determined that as providers of internet connectivity, the ISPs are intermediaries and, as such, are in a position to prevent their subscribers from accessing the pirate streaming sites. The ISPs were ordered to do just that.

The request by Eleven Sports for the ISPs to redirect subscribers to a block page provided by DAZN was rejected. However, the decision notes that the ISPs “are free to provide the public with such information about the blocked access that these parties deem appropriate.”

Given that the claimants and defendants worked together to present the blocking action to the Court, it’s possible that the ISPs will find it appropriate to redirect visitors to DAZN’s anti-piracy page after all. Describing it as a ‘block page’ seems insufficient, however.

The site, located at dazn-antipiracy.be where the image above is displayed, seems to have a lot going on behind the scenes considering its straightforward task. One might even conclude that the aim isn’t just to inform, but to track visitors longer term.

The domains to be blocked by the ISPs are listed below. Three domains (aliezstream.pro, cdnssd.ru, ustream.pro) appear to be duplicates.

dlhd.sx	cdnssd.ru	sportadds.xyz	hesgoal-tv.tv
cdn.xsportbox.com	ustream.pro	tntsports.site	koora.shoot-yalla.to
365streams.world	aliezstream.pro	viaplaysports.online	vipstand.pm
sporttuna.site	antenasports.ru	sportsnet.store	watchsportnow.com
365livesport.com	sportplus.live	tsnsports.online	vipleague.lc
365livesport.life	yalla-lives.net	newsoccer.store	viprow.nu
365livesport.me	noblockaabbddxcktb.xyz	mrsoccer.club	vipstand.st
bingsport.xyz	socceronline.me	ukhdstream.xyz	buffstreams.sx
flash-24.live	volkastream.xyz	tnt-sportslive.xyz	olympicstreams.me
fullassia.com	volkastream.fr	9goals.io	fbstreams.pm
tv247365.net	vipbox.lc	axscore.com	qatarstreams.me
hes-goals.io	vipboxtv.sk	bingsport.com	play24.808ball.com
vipleague.la	r.bingsport.xyz	bingsport.watch	premiertv.watch
vipleague.im	vstream.store	bingsportlive.com	ru.score808pro.com
koora.shoot-yalla.live	rivofutboltv.xyz	cdn.livetv767.me	rojadirectatvonline.nl
strikeout.im	7soccerhd.xyz	daddylivehd.pro	rojadirecta.nl
shoot-yalla.io	hdlivestreamer.xyz	es22.sportplus.live	rojadirectaenvivo.me
spworld.me	cr7soccer.com	primefoot.ru	soccerstream100.co
daddylivehd.icu	v2.nizarstream.com	hes-goals.tv	aliezstream.pro
xsportbox.com	games47.xyz	hesgoal-tv.io	ustream.pro
cdnssd.ru	tarjetarojatvenvivo.net	kai.superbb77.cfd

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

While rightsholders in Belgium have been slightly less vocal in support of site-blocking measures than others around Europe, they now appear to be making up for lost time.

With rightsholders eager to block large swathes of pirate sites and local ISPs on record saying they want exactly the same thing , an application for a blocking injunction filed by DAZN’s Eleven Sports Network in March showed partners working together.

Eleven Sports Network / 12th Player BV

Filed at the Dutch-speaking Business Court in Brussels, the application saw DAZN’s Eleven Sports Network (ESN) and 12th Player BV, a joint venture between ESN and the Spanish company Mediapro Internacional, team up hoping to compel local ISPs to block around 90 pirate domains.

According to the claimants, the platforms are dedicated to streaming live football matches in violation of their rights. Visitors to these pirate services reside in Belgium and access matches illegally using local internet service providers.

In this matter, the main internet service providers in Belgium are the named defendants, but only for the purposes of establishing their role as intermediaries. The ISPs are supporters of site-blocking measures because they also stand to benefit: Telenet via its Play Sports service, Proximus via Proximus Pickx, and Voo via Voo Sports.

Rightsholders ‘Recommend’ ISPs Should Block the Sites

With claimants and defendants all aiming for the same thing, the language used in the decision handed down by the Brussels court is non-adversarial, to put it mildly.

The claimants asserted that the domains submitted for blocking “provide access to websites on which audiovisual content broadcast on the channels of Eleven Sports Network BV is communicated to the public” and that customers of Telenet NV, Proximus NV, Voo NV, and Orange Belgium NV, facilitate access to those domains.

To tackle this problem, the claimants “recommended” that in their roles as intermediaries, the ISPs should implement DNS measures to prevent access to the ‘pirate’ domains.

The claimants further suggested putting the DNS tampering to good use; customers attempting to access the domains should be redirected to a DAZN anti-piracy site (screenshot below) set up to advise visitors on the reasons for redirection.

All parties also agreed to bear their own costs.

Not Much for the Court to Do

With no evidence before the Court that the claims were inadmissible and no grounds being identified that they might be, the claims of the applicants were declared admissible. The ISPs disputed the applicants’ claims for the record but offered no argument in support. Instead, as part of the predetermined direction of the case, left judgment in the hands of the Court.

The Court determined that as providers of internet connectivity, the ISPs are intermediaries and, as such, are in a position to prevent their subscribers from accessing the pirate streaming sites. The ISPs were ordered to do just that.

The request by Eleven Sports for the ISPs to redirect subscribers to a block page provided by DAZN was rejected. However, the decision notes that the ISPs “are free to provide the public with such information about the blocked access that these parties deem appropriate.”

Given that the claimants and defendants worked together to present the blocking action to the Court, it’s possible that the ISPs will find it appropriate to redirect visitors to DAZN’s anti-piracy page after all. Describing it as a ‘block page’ seems insufficient, however.

The site, located at dazn-antipiracy.be where the image above is displayed, seems to have a lot going on behind the scenes considering its straightforward task. One might even conclude that the aim isn’t just to inform, but to track visitors longer term.

The domains to be blocked by the ISPs are listed below. Three domains (aliezstream.pro, cdnssd.ru, ustream.pro) appear to be duplicates.

dlhd.sx	cdnssd.ru	sportadds.xyz	hesgoal-tv.tv
cdn.xsportbox.com	ustream.pro	tntsports.site	koora.shoot-yalla.to
365streams.world	aliezstream.pro	viaplaysports.online	vipstand.pm
sporttuna.site	antenasports.ru	sportsnet.store	watchsportnow.com
365livesport.com	sportplus.live	tsnsports.online	vipleague.lc
365livesport.life	yalla-lives.net	newsoccer.store	viprow.nu
365livesport.me	noblockaabbddxcktb.xyz	mrsoccer.club	vipstand.st
bingsport.xyz	socceronline.me	ukhdstream.xyz	buffstreams.sx
flash-24.live	volkastream.xyz	tnt-sportslive.xyz	olympicstreams.me
fullassia.com	volkastream.fr	9goals.io	fbstreams.pm
tv247365.net	vipbox.lc	axscore.com	qatarstreams.me
hes-goals.io	vipboxtv.sk	bingsport.com	play24.808ball.com
vipleague.la	r.bingsport.xyz	bingsport.watch	premiertv.watch
vipleague.im	vstream.store	bingsportlive.com	ru.score808pro.com
koora.shoot-yalla.live	rivofutboltv.xyz	cdn.livetv767.me	rojadirectatvonline.nl
strikeout.im	7soccerhd.xyz	daddylivehd.pro	rojadirecta.nl
shoot-yalla.io	hdlivestreamer.xyz	es22.sportplus.live	rojadirectaenvivo.me
spworld.me	cr7soccer.com	primefoot.ru	soccerstream100.co
daddylivehd.icu	v2.nizarstream.com	hes-goals.tv	aliezstream.pro
xsportbox.com	games47.xyz	hesgoal-tv.io	ustream.pro
cdnssd.ru	tarjetarojatvenvivo.net	kai.superbb77.cfd

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

A press release issued by Spain’s Ministry of the Interior on Friday initially sounds straightforward.

Based on a complaint filed by the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, in November 2022 an investigation was launched to identify those responsible for two websites that marketed a service that allegedly violated the rights of ACE members.

“The complex computer and banking investigation carried out, together with several police investigation techniques, allowed the specialists of the Central Cybercrime Unit to prove that the websites investigated were registered, controlled and operated from several companies directed by the main suspect, a citizen of Dutch origin,” the statement reads.

“This man allegedly led a business and criminal network, made up of citizens living mainly in Gran Canaria, which appeared to be a legitimate business structure with which he managed to earn more than 5,300,000 euros.”

International TV Channels, Movies, TV Series

The press release describes an “international criminal organization” operating a pirate IPTV network using “the latest technology and the most advanced technical devices” to capture satellite signals from various countries.

“They subsequently amplified them and decrypted the multimedia content they transported, content that they then distributed publicly and illegally. In total, more than 130 international television channels and thousands of movies and series that they made available to citizens around the world,” the Ministry continues.

The service, which isn’t named by the Ministry, reportedly had more than 14,000 subscribers who paid between 10 and 19 euros per month, resulting in “damage to the rights of the authors, producers and distributors of these artistic works.”

Service Dismantled, Eight People Arrested

The Ministry of the Interior says that eight people, described as the main members of the network “who held or had held positions of responsibility” have now been arrested.

They were targeted in raids on addresses in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Madrid, Oviedo, and Málaga. Two home searches, executed simultaneously, led to the seizure of a vehicle and two computers. Bank accounts containing 80,000 euros were frozen.

“Likewise, the servers of the online platforms investigated were seized and blocked. Sixteen web pages controlled by this criminal organization were also blocked, so that when their users currently try to access them, their access is prevented. It redirects them to a National Police website where a message is displayed informing them that this page has been intercepted,” the government ministry concludes.

Service Targeted Was TVMucho, Recently Rebranded as Teeveeing

Supplied by the Ministry of the Interior, the video above is much like many others depicting raids against pirate IPTV services. In this case we can confirm the target was the service formerly known as TVMucho and more recently known as Teeveeing.

Launched around 2015 and originally incorporated in London as TVMucho Ltd early 2016, the company ran for 18 months before shutting down. Company data in Spain reveals that TVMucho Sociedad Limitada began trading just under nine years ago and was registered to an address in Las Palmas.

Unless there was a lot more going on than its public image suggested, TVMucho didn’t seem to exist for the purpose of usurping traditional pay TV providers or the likes of Netflix.

The premise was simple; expats away from home with zero access to the free-to-air channels they had come to rely on, could subscribe to TVMucho and the service would pipe those channels to them over the internet for viewing in Spain.

At least as far as we’re aware, the channels on offer from TVMucho were the channels expats would receive simply by switching on a TV at home. While a TV license would be required to view them in the UK, for example, none required a subscription or payment over and above that.

Beyond a handful of free minutes as a promotion, TVMucho did cost money to view but with no official alternative, the service proved popular.

Citing ‘Insurmountable Challenges’ TVMucho Shuts Down

In a message that appeared on its homepage in October 2023, TVMucho spoke of “unsurmountable challenges” presented by a company in the U.S. and advised its customers the company had ceased trading with immediate effect.

Since the authorities have refrained from revealing the identity of the main suspect, we won’t be naming him here either. However, the paragraph that references the “often misunderstood” business model is something the Dutch owner of TVMucho has spoken about for years.

We will revisit his position on legality at a later time once the charges against him have been made clear; what we can confirm is that while he believed that the law protected his business, major rightsholders have repeatedly argued quite the opposite.

TVMucho is Dead, long Live TeeVeeing?

The sudden demise of TVMucho was matched by the equally sudden appearance of an almost identical platform called TeeVeeing.

All former subscribers of TVMucho needed to do was agree to new terms and conditions and according to reports, normal service was resumed.

The marketing material pretty much confirmed that everything would remain the same, including access to the same free-to-air content from back home (but unavailable in Spain), all laid out nicely in a glossy EPG.

For reasons that still aren’t clear, the TeeVeeing app is still available on Apple’s App Store and still free to download from Google Play . That doesn’t seem to dovetail particularly well with the emphasis being placed on “dismantled” services and blocked websites in Spain.

Yet, the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment confirms that this action is indeed about TVMucho and TeeVeeing and the “125 channels, including major networks like BBC, ITV, Sky, and RTL” offered by the service(s).

The report avoids mentioning that the channels are all free-to-air but notes that due to the work of the Spanish National Police, “the access to infringed content and 15 related domains were blocked.”

Dismantled, or Just Dismantled a Bit?

When putting together this report on Friday, we had zero problems accessing the TVMucho website. We had zero problems accessing the website of TeeVeeing too, which in view of the statements about its dismantling is a bit of an issue. Through our Spanish contacts we asked if the websites were accessible in Spain and whether by pure luck or otherwise, neither were blocked.

While that’s not a particularly big deal for TVMucho’s website, the same can’t be said about that of TeeVeeing; quite obviously it’s still online and as the screenshot sent to us independently confirms, a live event that was taking place in the UK on Friday afternoon was being shown live, in browser, no complications.

Which 16 websites the Spanish government is referring to as blocked is unclear. The same seems to hold true for the dismantled services that, as least as far as we can tell, doesn’t include the main one. Other questions can be addressed in due course, including the claim that the suspects captured satellite broadcasts.

It’s possible they did just that, but there’s also information to suggest that content was more easily obtained from at least one other IPTV service.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

A press release issued by Spain’s Ministry of the Interior on Friday initially sounds straightforward.

Based on a complaint filed by the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, in November 2022 an investigation was launched to identify those responsible for two websites that marketed a service that allegedly violated the rights of ACE members.

“The complex computer and banking investigation carried out, together with several police investigation techniques, allowed the specialists of the Central Cybercrime Unit to prove that the websites investigated were registered, controlled and operated from several companies directed by the main suspect, a citizen of Dutch origin,” the statement reads.

“This man allegedly led a business and criminal network, made up of citizens living mainly in Gran Canaria, which appeared to be a legitimate business structure with which he managed to earn more than 5,300,000 euros.”

International TV Channels, Movies, TV Series

The press release describes an “international criminal organization” operating a pirate IPTV network using “the latest technology and the most advanced technical devices” to capture satellite signals from various countries.

“They subsequently amplified them and decrypted the multimedia content they transported, content that they then distributed publicly and illegally. In total, more than 130 international television channels and thousands of movies and series that they made available to citizens around the world,” the Ministry continues.

The service, which isn’t named by the Ministry, reportedly had more than 14,000 subscribers who paid between 10 and 19 euros per month, resulting in “damage to the rights of the authors, producers and distributors of these artistic works.”

Service Dismantled, Eight People Arrested

The Ministry of the Interior says that eight people, described as the main members of the network “who held or had held positions of responsibility” have now been arrested.

They were targeted in raids on addresses in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Madrid, Oviedo, and Málaga. Two home searches, executed simultaneously, led to the seizure of a vehicle and two computers. Bank accounts containing 80,000 euros were frozen.

“Likewise, the servers of the online platforms investigated were seized and blocked. Sixteen web pages controlled by this criminal organization were also blocked, so that when their users currently try to access them, their access is prevented. It redirects them to a National Police website where a message is displayed informing them that this page has been intercepted,” the government ministry concludes.

Service Targeted Was TVMucho, Recently Rebranded as Teeveeing

Supplied by the Ministry of the Interior, the video above is much like many others depicting raids against pirate IPTV services. In this case we can confirm the target was the service formerly known as TVMucho and more recently known as Teeveeing.

Launched around 2015 and originally incorporated in London as TVMucho Ltd early 2016, the company ran for 18 months before shutting down. Company data in Spain reveals that TVMucho Sociedad Limitada began trading just under nine years ago and was registered to an address in Las Palmas.

Unless there was a lot more going on than its public image suggested, TVMucho didn’t seem to exist for the purpose of usurping traditional pay TV providers or the likes of Netflix.

The premise was simple; expats away from home with zero access to the free-to-air channels they had come to rely on, could subscribe to TVMucho and the service would pipe those channels to them over the internet for viewing in Spain.

At least as far as we’re aware, the channels on offer from TVMucho were the channels expats would receive simply by switching on a TV at home. While a TV license would be required to view them in the UK, for example, none required a subscription or payment over and above that.

Beyond a handful of free minutes as a promotion, TVMucho did cost money to view but with no official alternative, the service proved popular.

Citing ‘Insurmountable Challenges’ TVMucho Shuts Down

In a message that appeared on its homepage in October 2023, TVMucho spoke of “unsurmountable challenges” presented by a company in the U.S. and advised its customers the company had ceased trading with immediate effect.

Since the authorities have refrained from revealing the identity of the main suspect, we won’t be naming him here either. However, the paragraph that references the “often misunderstood” business model is something the Dutch owner of TVMucho has spoken about for years.

We will revisit his position on legality at a later time once the charges against him have been made clear; what we can confirm is that while he believed that the law protected his business, major rightsholders have repeatedly argued quite the opposite.

TVMucho is Dead, long Live TeeVeeing?

The sudden demise of TVMucho was matched by the equally sudden appearance of an almost identical platform called TeeVeeing.

All former subscribers of TVMucho needed to do was agree to new terms and conditions and according to reports, normal service was resumed.

The marketing material pretty much confirmed that everything would remain the same, including access to the same free-to-air content from back home (but unavailable in Spain), all laid out nicely in a glossy EPG.

For reasons that still aren’t clear, the TeeVeeing app is still available on Apple’s App Store and still free to download from Google Play . That doesn’t seem to dovetail particularly well with the emphasis being placed on “dismantled” services and blocked websites in Spain.

Yet, the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment confirms that this action is indeed about TVMucho and TeeVeeing and the “125 channels, including major networks like BBC, ITV, Sky, and RTL” offered by the service(s).

The report avoids mentioning that the channels are all free-to-air but notes that due to the work of the Spanish National Police, “the access to infringed content and 15 related domains were blocked.”

Dismantled, or Just Dismantled a Bit?

When putting together this report on Friday, we had zero problems accessing the TVMucho website. We had zero problems accessing the website of TeeVeeing too, which in view of the statements about its dismantling is a bit of an issue. Through our Spanish contacts we asked if the websites were accessible in Spain and whether by pure luck or otherwise, neither were blocked.

While that’s not a particularly big deal for TVMucho’s website, the same can’t be said about that of TeeVeeing; quite obviously it’s still online and as the screenshot sent to us independently confirms, a live event that was taking place in the UK on Friday afternoon was being shown live, in browser, no complications.

Which 16 websites the Spanish government is referring to as blocked is unclear. The same seems to hold true for the dismantled services that, as least as far as we can tell, doesn’t include the main one. Other questions can be addressed in due course, including the claim that the suspects captured satellite broadcasts.

It’s possible they did just that, but there’s also information to suggest that content was more easily obtained from at least one other IPTV service.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

A press release issued by Spain’s Ministry of the Interior on Friday initially sounds straightforward.

Based on a complaint filed by the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, in November 2022 an investigation was launched to identify those responsible for two websites that marketed a service that allegedly violated the rights of ACE members.

“The complex computer and banking investigation carried out, together with several police investigation techniques, allowed the specialists of the Central Cybercrime Unit to prove that the websites investigated were registered, controlled and operated from several companies directed by the main suspect, a citizen of Dutch origin,” the statement reads.

“This man allegedly led a business and criminal network, made up of citizens living mainly in Gran Canaria, which appeared to be a legitimate business structure with which he managed to earn more than 5,300,000 euros.”

International TV Channels, Movies, TV Series

The press release describes an “international criminal organization” operating a pirate IPTV network using “the latest technology and the most advanced technical devices” to capture satellite signals from various countries.

“They subsequently amplified them and decrypted the multimedia content they transported, content that they then distributed publicly and illegally. In total, more than 130 international television channels and thousands of movies and series that they made available to citizens around the world,” the Ministry continues.

The service, which isn’t named by the Ministry, reportedly had more than 14,000 subscribers who paid between 10 and 19 euros per month, resulting in “damage to the rights of the authors, producers and distributors of these artistic works.”

Service Dismantled, Eight People Arrested

The Ministry of the Interior says that eight people, described as the main members of the network “who held or had held positions of responsibility” have now been arrested.

They were targeted in raids on addresses in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Madrid, Oviedo, and Málaga. Two home searches, executed simultaneously, led to the seizure of a vehicle and two computers. Bank accounts containing 80,000 euros were frozen.

“Likewise, the servers of the online platforms investigated were seized and blocked. Sixteen web pages controlled by this criminal organization were also blocked, so that when their users currently try to access them, their access is prevented. It redirects them to a National Police website where a message is displayed informing them that this page has been intercepted,” the government ministry concludes.

Service Targeted Was TVMucho, Recently Rebranded as Teeveeing

Supplied by the Ministry of the Interior, the video above is much like many others depicting raids against pirate IPTV services. In this case we can confirm the target was the service formerly known as TVMucho and more recently known as Teeveeing.

Launched around 2015 and originally incorporated in London as TVMucho Ltd early 2016, the company ran for 18 months before shutting down. Company data in Spain reveals that TVMucho Sociedad Limitada began trading just under nine years ago and was registered to an address in Las Palmas.

Unless there was a lot more going on than its public image suggested, TVMucho didn’t seem to exist for the purpose of usurping traditional pay TV providers or the likes of Netflix.

The premise was simple; expats away from home with zero access to the free-to-air channels they had come to rely on, could subscribe to TVMucho and the service would pipe those channels to them over the internet for viewing in Spain.

At least as far as we’re aware, the channels on offer from TVMucho were the channels expats would receive simply by switching on a TV at home. While a TV license would be required to view them in the UK, for example, none required a subscription or payment over and above that.

Beyond a handful of free minutes as a promotion, TVMucho did cost money to view but with no official alternative, the service proved popular.

Citing ‘Insurmountable Challenges’ TVMucho Shuts Down

In a message that appeared on its homepage in October 2023, TVMucho spoke of “unsurmountable challenges” presented by a company in the U.S. and advised its customers the company had ceased trading with immediate effect.

Since the authorities have refrained from revealing the identity of the main suspect, we won’t be naming him here either. However, the paragraph that references the “often misunderstood” business model is something the Dutch owner of TVMucho has spoken about for years.

We will revisit his position on legality at a later time once the charges against him have been made clear; what we can confirm is that while he believed that the law protected his business, major rightsholders have repeatedly argued quite the opposite.

TVMucho is Dead, long Live TeeVeeing?

The sudden demise of TVMucho was matched by the equally sudden appearance of an almost identical platform called TeeVeeing.

All former subscribers of TVMucho needed to do was agree to new terms and conditions and according to reports, normal service was resumed.

The marketing material pretty much confirmed that everything would remain the same, including access to the same free-to-air content from back home (but unavailable in Spain), all laid out nicely in a glossy EPG.

For reasons that still aren’t clear, the TeeVeeing app is still available on Apple’s App Store and still free to download from Google Play . That doesn’t seem to dovetail particularly well with the emphasis being placed on “dismantled” services and blocked websites in Spain.

Yet, the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment confirms that this action is indeed about TVMucho and TeeVeeing and the “125 channels, including major networks like BBC, ITV, Sky, and RTL” offered by the service(s).

The report avoids mentioning that the channels are all free-to-air but notes that due to the work of the Spanish National Police, “the access to infringed content and 15 related domains were blocked.”

Dismantled, or Just Dismantled a Bit?

When putting together this report on Friday, we had zero problems accessing the TVMucho website. We had zero problems accessing the website of TeeVeeing too, which in view of the statements about its dismantling is a bit of an issue. Through our Spanish contacts we asked if the websites were accessible in Spain and whether by pure luck or otherwise, neither were blocked.

While that’s not a particularly big deal for TVMucho’s website, the same can’t be said about that of TeeVeeing; quite obviously it’s still online and as the screenshot sent to us independently confirms, a live event that was taking place in the UK on Friday afternoon was being shown live, in browser, no complications.

Which 16 websites the Spanish government is referring to as blocked is unclear. The same seems to hold true for the dismantled services that, as least as far as we can tell, doesn’t include the main one. Other questions can be addressed in due course, including the claim that the suspects captured satellite broadcasts.

It’s possible they did just that, but there’s also information to suggest that content was more easily obtained from at least one other IPTV service.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

The invention of the MP3 format in 1993 didn’t make any mainstream news headlines. In hindsight, however, it was a pivotal moment that would revolutionize music consumption, and more.

Invented by the German engineer Karlheinz Brandenburg and colleagues at the Fraunhofer Society, the coding format made it possible to reduce the size of music files without any significant loss of audible sound quality.

Due to the size reductions, these digital files could be stored on flash-memory devices. This led to the invention of dedicated MP3 players capable of playing music ripped from CDs. Many considered this a more compact and shock-resistant alternative to the Discman .

At the time, music industry insiders were already fantasizing about the ‘celestial jukebox’; a tool or service that would make it possible to play any track on demand. The MP3 helped to bring this concept a step closer too, as Napster would soon prove.

Napster: June 1, 1999

At the end of the nineties, technology and the Internet were a playground for young engineers and ‘hackers’. Some of them regularly gathered in the w00w00 IRC chatroom on the EFnet network. This tech-think-tank had many notable members, including WhatsApp founder Jan Koum and Shawn Fanning , who logged on with the nickname Napster.

In 1998, 17-year-old Fanning shared an idea with the group. ‘Napster’ wanted to create a network of computers that could share files with each other. More specifically, a central music database that everyone in the world could access.

This idea never left the mind of the young developer. Fanning stopped going to school and flanked by his friend Sean Parker , devoted the following months to making his vision a reality. That moment came on June 1, 1999 , when the first public release of Napster was released online. Soon after, the software went viral.

Napster was quickly embraced by millions of users, who saw the software as something magical. It was a gateway for musical exploration, one that dwarfed even the largest record stores in town. And all for free. It sounds mundane today, but some equated it to pure technological sorcery.

For many top players in the music industry, Napster’s sorcery was pure witchcraft. At the time, manufacturing CDs with high profit margins felt like printing money and Napster’s appearance threatened to ruin the party.

Music Industry Shocked

According to the RIAA’s former CEO, Hilary Rosen, a few months after Napster’s release, the music industry shifted into full panic mode. In February 2000, all major label executives discussed the threat during an RIAA board meeting at the Four Seasons Hotel in Los Angeles.

“I will never forget this day. All of the heads of the labels, literally the titans of the music business, were in that room. I had somebody wheel in a PC and put some speakers up and I started doing a name that tune,” Rosen later recalled .

The major music bosses started to name tracks, including some that weren’t even released yet, and time and again Napster would come up with results. Needless to say, the board was terrified.

Within a year, the RIAA sued Napster Inc. and soon after artists including Metallica and Dr. Dre followed. These high profile cases only raised the popularity of Napster and MP3 players began to sell like hotcakes.

Peak Napster

At the start of 2001, Napster’s user base reached a peak of more than 26.4 million worldwide. Yet, despite huge growth and backing from investors, the small file-sharing empire couldn’t overcome the legal challenges.

The RIAA lawsuit resulted in an injunction from the Ninth Circuit Court, which ordered the network to shut down. This happened during July 2001, little more than two years after Napster launched. By September that year, the case had been settled for millions of dollars.

While the Napster craze was over, file-sharing had mesmerized the masses and the genie was out of the bottle. Grokster, KaZaa, Morpheus, LimeWire, and many others popped up and provided sharing alternatives, for as long as they lasted. Meanwhile, BitTorrent was also knocking on the door.

Ripple Effect

Today, 25 years later, music piracy certainly hasn’t disappeared, but it has changed. When Napster came out, there simply weren’t any legal options to buy digital music online; let alone one that offered ‘unlimited access’.

Napster paved the way for Apple’s iTunes store, to serve the demand that was clearly there. The boom in digital download sales never came close to mimicking the ‘all you can play’ experience and was soon marginalized.

The current music industry generates the bulk of its revenues from online streaming subscriptions, while CDs have been downgraded to rare artifacts. This music streaming landscape was largely pioneered by a Napster ‘fan’ from Sweden , Daniel Ek.

Like many others, Ek was fascinated by the ‘all you can play’ experience offered by file-sharing software, and that planted the seeds for the music streaming startup Spotify, where he still serves as CEO today. In fact, Spotify itself used file-sharing technology under the hood to ensure swift playback.

Spotify is just one of the many examples of the Napster ripple effect, which reaches far beyond technology. The entire music industry has changed, for better and worse, depending on one’s perspective. And the ripples that started 25 years ago will still be felt in the decades to come.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

The invention of the MP3 format in 1993 didn’t make any mainstream news headlines. In hindsight, however, it was a pivotal moment that would revolutionize music consumption, and more.

Invented by the German engineer Karlheinz Brandenburg and colleagues at the Fraunhofer Society, the coding format made it possible to reduce the size of music files without any significant loss of audible sound quality.

Due to the size reductions, these digital files could be stored on flash-memory devices. This led to the invention of dedicated MP3 players capable of playing music ripped from CDs. Many considered this a more compact and shock-resistant alternative to the Discman .

At the time, music industry insiders were already fantasizing about the ‘celestial jukebox’; a tool or service that would make it possible to play any track on demand. The MP3 helped to bring this concept a step closer too, as Napster would soon prove.

Napster: June 1, 1999

At the end of the nineties, technology and the Internet were a playground for young engineers and ‘hackers’. Some of them regularly gathered in the w00w00 IRC chatroom on the EFnet network. This tech-think-tank had many notable members, including WhatsApp founder Jan Koum and Shawn Fanning , who logged on with the nickname Napster.

In 1998, 17-year-old Fanning shared an idea with the group. ‘Napster’ wanted to create a network of computers that could share files with each other. More specifically, a central music database that everyone in the world could access.

This idea never left the mind of the young developer. Fanning stopped going to school and flanked by his friend Sean Parker , devoted the following months to making his vision a reality. That moment came on June 1, 1999 , when the first public release of Napster was released online. Soon after, the software went viral.

Napster was quickly embraced by millions of users, who saw the software as something magical. It was a gateway for musical exploration, one that dwarfed even the largest record stores in town. And all for free. It sounds mundane today, but some equated it to pure technological sorcery.

For many top players in the music industry, Napster’s sorcery was pure witchcraft. At the time, manufacturing CDs with high profit margins felt like printing money and Napster’s appearance threatened to ruin the party.

Music Industry Shocked

According to the RIAA’s former CEO, Hilary Rosen, a few months after Napster’s release, the music industry shifted into full panic mode. In February 2000, all major label executives discussed the threat during an RIAA board meeting at the Four Seasons Hotel in Los Angeles.

“I will never forget this day. All of the heads of the labels, literally the titans of the music business, were in that room. I had somebody wheel in a PC and put some speakers up and I started doing a name that tune,” Rosen later recalled .

The major music bosses started to name tracks, including some that weren’t even released yet, and time and again Napster would come up with results. Needless to say, the board was terrified.

Within a year, the RIAA sued Napster Inc. and soon after artists including Metallica and Dr. Dre followed. These high profile cases only raised the popularity of Napster and MP3 players began to sell like hotcakes.

Peak Napster

At the start of 2001, Napster’s user base reached a peak of more than 26.4 million worldwide. Yet, despite huge growth and backing from investors, the small file-sharing empire couldn’t overcome the legal challenges.

The RIAA lawsuit resulted in an injunction from the Ninth Circuit Court, which ordered the network to shut down. This happened during July 2001, little more than two years after Napster launched. By September that year, the case had been settled for millions of dollars.

While the Napster craze was over, file-sharing had mesmerized the masses and the genie was out of the bottle. Grokster, KaZaa, Morpheus, LimeWire, and many others popped up and provided sharing alternatives, for as long as they lasted. Meanwhile, BitTorrent was also knocking on the door.

Ripple Effect

Today, 25 years later, music piracy certainly hasn’t disappeared, but it has changed. When Napster came out, there simply weren’t any legal options to buy digital music online; let alone one that offered ‘unlimited access’.

Napster paved the way for Apple’s iTunes store, to serve the demand that was clearly there. The boom in digital download sales never came close to mimicking the ‘all you can play’ experience and was soon marginalized.

The current music industry generates the bulk of its revenues from online streaming subscriptions, while CDs have been downgraded to rare artifacts. This music streaming landscape was largely pioneered by a Napster ‘fan’ from Sweden , Daniel Ek.

Like many others, Ek was fascinated by the ‘all you can play’ experience offered by file-sharing software, and that planted the seeds for the music streaming startup Spotify, where he still serves as CEO today. In fact, Spotify itself used file-sharing technology under the hood to ensure swift playback.

Spotify is just one of the many examples of the Napster ripple effect, which reaches far beyond technology. The entire music industry has changed, for better and worse, depending on one’s perspective. And the ripples that started 25 years ago will still be felt in the decades to come.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

The invention of the MP3 format in 1993 didn’t make any mainstream news headlines. In hindsight, however, it was a pivotal moment that would revolutionize music consumption, and more.

Invented by the German engineer Karlheinz Brandenburg and colleagues at the Fraunhofer Society, the coding format made it possible to reduce the size of music files without any significant loss of audible sound quality.

Due to the size reductions, these digital files could be stored on flash-memory devices. This led to the invention of dedicated MP3 players capable of playing music ripped from CDs. Many considered this a more compact and shock-resistant alternative to the Discman .

At the time, music industry insiders were already fantasizing about the ‘celestial jukebox’; a tool or service that would make it possible to play any track on demand. The MP3 helped to bring this concept a step closer too, as Napster would soon prove.

Napster: June 1, 1999

At the end of the nineties, technology and the Internet were a playground for young engineers and ‘hackers’. Some of them regularly gathered in the w00w00 IRC chatroom on the EFnet network. This tech-think-tank had many notable members, including WhatsApp founder Jan Koum and Shawn Fanning , who logged on with the nickname Napster.

In 1998, 17-year-old Fanning shared an idea with the group. ‘Napster’ wanted to create a network of computers that could share files with each other. More specifically, a central music database that everyone in the world could access.

This idea never left the mind of the young developer. Fanning stopped going to school and flanked by his friend Sean Parker , devoted the following months to making his vision a reality. That moment came on June 1, 1999 , when the first public release of Napster was released online. Soon after, the software went viral.

Napster was quickly embraced by millions of users, who saw the software as something magical. It was a gateway for musical exploration, one that dwarfed even the largest record stores in town. And all for free. It sounds mundane today, but some equated it to pure technological sorcery.

For many top players in the music industry, Napster’s sorcery was pure witchcraft. At the time, manufacturing CDs with high profit margins felt like printing money and Napster’s appearance threatened to ruin the party.

Music Industry Shocked

According to the RIAA’s former CEO, Hilary Rosen, a few months after Napster’s release, the music industry shifted into full panic mode. In February 2000, all major label executives discussed the threat during an RIAA board meeting at the Four Seasons Hotel in Los Angeles.

“I will never forget this day. All of the heads of the labels, literally the titans of the music business, were in that room. I had somebody wheel in a PC and put some speakers up and I started doing a name that tune,” Rosen later recalled .

The major music bosses started to name tracks, including some that weren’t even released yet, and time and again Napster would come up with results. Needless to say, the board was terrified.

Within a year, the RIAA sued Napster Inc. and soon after artists including Metallica and Dr. Dre followed. These high profile cases only raised the popularity of Napster and MP3 players began to sell like hotcakes.

Peak Napster

At the start of 2001, Napster’s user base reached a peak of more than 26.4 million worldwide. Yet, despite huge growth and backing from investors, the small file-sharing empire couldn’t overcome the legal challenges.

The RIAA lawsuit resulted in an injunction from the Ninth Circuit Court, which ordered the network to shut down. This happened during July 2001, little more than two years after Napster launched. By September that year, the case had been settled for millions of dollars.

While the Napster craze was over, file-sharing had mesmerized the masses and the genie was out of the bottle. Grokster, KaZaa, Morpheus, LimeWire, and many others popped up and provided sharing alternatives, for as long as they lasted. Meanwhile, BitTorrent was also knocking on the door.

Ripple Effect

Today, 25 years later, music piracy certainly hasn’t disappeared, but it has changed. When Napster came out, there simply weren’t any legal options to buy digital music online; let alone one that offered ‘unlimited access’.

Napster paved the way for Apple’s iTunes store, to serve the demand that was clearly there. The boom in digital download sales never came close to mimicking the ‘all you can play’ experience and was soon marginalized.

The current music industry generates the bulk of its revenues from online streaming subscriptions, while CDs have been downgraded to rare artifacts. This music streaming landscape was largely pioneered by a Napster ‘fan’ from Sweden , Daniel Ek.

Like many others, Ek was fascinated by the ‘all you can play’ experience offered by file-sharing software, and that planted the seeds for the music streaming startup Spotify, where he still serves as CEO today. In fact, Spotify itself used file-sharing technology under the hood to ensure swift playback.

Spotify is just one of the many examples of the Napster ripple effect, which reaches far beyond technology. The entire music industry has changed, for better and worse, depending on one’s perspective. And the ripples that started 25 years ago will still be felt in the decades to come.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.