How to effectively tackle piracy: Expert insights

With the SportsPro OTT Summit drawing near, we have approached some top-level industry voices for their thoughts on subjects of keen interest in Madrid.

This roundtable discussion on matters related combating piracy offers a preview to the kind of insights on offer to delegates at the event and features Jean-Philippe Plantevin, NAGRA's vice-president, anti-piracy; Holger Blask, the German Football League's (DFL) executive vice-president, audiovisual rights; SmartProtection chief operating officer, Javier Capilla; and Britta Sölter, Athletia managing director.

What are the mistakes being made by broadcasters and rights holders in tackling piracy?

Holger Blask: First of all, we need to understand that piracy is a complex and global problem which has evolved over time.

All of the involved parties on the legal side, like rights holders, licensees and partners are doing their best they can, based on their local legislation. But we need to accept that anyone who is providing illegal services, is doing it on purpose and as such is not voluntarily following the same legal framework.

As long as the threat of piracy remains, it’s crucial to work with a number of key stakeholders including licensees, law enforcement, political entities, clubs and fans. The sharing of information, technologies and resources are to minimising the threat of piracy.

The importance of a strong, unified voice is mandatory combined with the sharing of information, technologies and resources are decisive to minimising the threat of piracy.

Javier Capilla: Satellite signals are used to broadcast live events to a wider audience, making their transmissions accessible to those living in rural zones where cable is unavailable. This helps to increase the level of coverage and viewership; however, it also opens the door to piracy.

Satellite signals are not coded which means anyone can access them. A retransmission using satellite will not provide a real time stream however we are talking about a delay of just a few seconds. Many pirates are intercepting these signals and sharing content illegally in this way.

Another way in which cybercriminals are retransmitting live broadcasts is by accessing the official broadcast and using video capture software to distribute it illegally online.

Technology does exist which allows official broadcasters to react efficiently and protect their events, the use of fingerprint or watermark technology makes it easier to track down and eliminate these illegal streams. Unfortunately, it’s proving difficult to develop preventative measure due to the reasons mentioned above. If consumers have access to the content, then unfortunately they also have the tools to distribute it illegally online.

Britta Sölter: I wouldn't say that broadcasters and rights holders are making mistakes. All of them take the protection of their copyrights very seriously and are well aware of the threats it imposes on their business models. But the digital environment is ever growing, fast changing and gaining in complexity every day. This makes it hard to keep track of and remain in control of the distribution of your content.

What technological advances are emerging to deal with the issue?

HB: From our perspective there are three particular important areas which represent the core advantages of our joint venture with Athletia, Ryghts. Firstly, fully automated detection and data mining working at global scale to gather as much as possible information about the illegal ecosystem and the involved parties and individuals. Also, manual review for quality assurance and legal evidence with efficient usage of human resources where it’s needed, providing the foundation for concrete legal actions. Last but not least, enhanced automated tracking and enforcement actions with the integration of legal partners and procedures, reducing the complexity of internal and external legal resources.

Jean-Philippe Plantevin: With protected infrastructure and solid legal frameworks in place, technology can be an even more effective way to tackle the piracy epidemic. From incorporating forensic watermarking into the content to track where the theft took place, to monitoring and blocking streams, employing advanced technologies to stop piracy are key to success.

JC: On social media channels we can identify illegal retransmissions through image and sound recognition systems. By comparing our clients official broadcast, we can match either the sound or image to illegal streams. In the case of sports broadcasts, the image remains the same. Take for example a Champions League game, this event is transmitted to numerous countries by a variety of different broadcasters. In order protect our clients broadcast against piracy we monitor the audio layer. We then use big data and our machine learning software to review large amounts of information to determine which are illegal streams.

BS: Detailed analysis of captured data will allow for more comprehensive detection of underlying structures and the provision of extensive evidence. However, efficient enforcement will require joint political and legal efforts, as well as cooperation by access providers to hold off unauthorised distribution that knows know borders or local legislation.

Nine per cent of Britons admit to illegally streaming the Premier League, is education a problem?

JPP: From our experience, we believe that in order to stop piracy, all stakeholders – from service providers and content owners to governments and consumer groups – need to work together and address the challenge from multiple angles. That should indeed include educating consumers about the impact of piracy, enact legislation to enable authorities to take action, as well as anti-piracy technologies that can identify, monitor and block illicit transmissions.

JC: There is clearly a cultural issue in the lack of industrial property protection and education is a factor to consider but perhaps not the most relevant one.

Demand for OTT services are growing and there is a constant fight for sports rights that is turning this facility into a problem. Previously just one service existed, which offered football, soccer, basketball etc. Now consumers must pay to access different platforms depending on the content they wish to view.

BS: This is an interesting point. Users that admit to illegally streaming content are well aware of their wrongdoing. Education will only have a very limited effect in these cases. But looking at the reasons for users accessing illegal activities, it's mainly three: ease of use, limited legal consequences and dissatisfaction with legal offerings. This is where measures to protect copyrights should start: providing attractive legal offerings while making it as hard and "dangerous" as possible to access illegal streams.

However, I'm still convinced education can play an important role in educating those users that unknowingly access and consume illegal content. Let's face it: illegal offerings oftentimes have highly professional structures and offerings: there's ads, logins, high quality streams and on some offerings even subscription models that users can pay via the various commonly used payment methods. If you aren't a sophisticated online user those offerings might not look suspicious to you after all.

How do you halt the rampant piracy of BeoutQ?

HB: Looking at the BeoutQ case specifically, they are undertaking one of the world’s most cynical and widespread piracies to date. As guardians of the game we must do all that we can to protect investment in its future which is being damaged by criminals like BeoutQ.

Since 2018, we have collectively been working with an international legal counsel to monitor and compile evidence against BeoutQ, whose broadcasts are regularly and on an industrial scale made available on an illegal basis. In addition, we spoke to nine law firms in KSA, each of which either simply refused to act on our behalf or initially accepted the instruction, only later to recuse themselves.

A conducted report has been published and confirmed that BeoutQ’s pirate broadcasts have been transmitted using satellite infrastructure owned and operated by Arabsat.

While we have received reports that BeoutQ transmissions are currently disrupted, we nevertheless call on Arabsat and all other satellite providers to stop - and going forward agree to refrain from - providing a platform for piracy, which harms not just legitimate licensees, fans and players but also the sports that it abuses.

Cutting off its access to transmission services would be a major step in the fight to stop BeoutQ.

JPP: For an operator’s anti-piracy activities to be truly successful, they need the support of legislatures across multiple territories to create legal frameworks that enable them to block streams wholesale and work with the authorities to arrest the criminals. It’s a complex situation with different legal regulations around the world but, as pirates become more international, so do much the activities that can stop them – and that’s only possible with the help of governments and industry associations.

Given the extra eyeballs piracy provides, should that be factored into partnership valuations?

HB: It is important that we and our partners have a direct engagement and that fans around the globe are aware where to find quality content in a safe, secure and reliable environment - without the negative impacts and risks illegal offerings are providing.

JPP: With sports industry revenue increasingly depending on sponsorship and advertising, any loss of official TV or video viewership is actually a growing and complex business issue. Hundreds of million dollars are already lost by brands that either suffer from lower official reported audiences or broadcasters that pay for rights they don’t monetise, as viewers watch though black or grey market offerings.

While accounting for pirate viewers seems an interesting proposition on paper, the industry stance is that no major organisation – from sponsors to teams - can rely on data coming from auditing the use of illegal services.

BS: Piracy is not about extra eyeballs - it's about illegitimately taking away eyeballs from those who invest in providing a sport or making it available to the public. All this while making significant amounts of money from it. Apart from the fact that pirates usually don't share data on their viewership, factoring in those eyeballs would legitimate an illegal activity. One that is completely out of control. At the same time, we have seen numerous discussions on brand safety over the past years - I'm not convinced, partners would value extra eyeballs in an unsafe environment.