Report: Site-blocking reduces piracy
September 19, 2024
By Colin Mann
Criminals overseas make billions of dollars targeting Americans while operating in countries out of reach of US law enforcement, but a new report suggests lawmakers consider an approach adopted by dozens of countries: blocking criminals’ websites from working in the United States.
The new research, Overseas and Out of Reach: International Video Piracy and U.S. Options to Combat It, produced by IP property protection expert IP House, analyses how site-blocking has worked in other countries to deter criminals who steal from the creative industry and then use pirated movies and TV episodes as bait to infect the devices of Internet users with malware or steal credit card information.
“As we grapple with the dangerous impact of the $2.3 billion (€2bn) piracy ecosystem, IP House has laid out the solution in simple terms,” said Tom Galvin, executive director of the advocacy body Digital Citizens Alliance, which commissioned the report. “If these criminals targeting Americans reside in countries outside the reach of U.S. law enforcement, then the logical step is to make it impossible for them to operate in the United States.”
Americans accessing stolen content are much more likely to encounter dangerous digital materials than those who use legitimate sites and apps. Visitors to piracy sites are bombarded with malicious ads that use scare tactics to trick them into downloading malware, including ransomware that takes over files to force victims to pay to regain access. In addition, Internet users who use a credit card to sign up for illegal piracy streaming services to gain access to movies, TV shows, and games face a serious risk of having their card run up with charges they didn’t authorise. According to a Digital Citizens investigation conducted in 2023, users who signed up for a piracy streaming subscription were four times more likely to report credit card fraud those who steered clear of such illicit piracy streaming services.
As part of IP House’s investigation, it conducted a comprehensive review of how the piracy ecosystem works, the bad actors who thumb their noses at US law enforcement, and the harms that international piracy causes. IP House determined that site-blocking has been effective without creating technical issues for the Internet infrastructure or curbing the principle of online speech.
Key findings:
- Site-blocking efforts are effective. For example, in the United Kingdom, Portugal, and Australia, when piracy sites were blocked, traffic to those sites decreased substantially, by 89 per cent in the United Kingdom, 70 per cent in Portugal, and 69 per cent in Australia.
- Site-blocking appears to encourage more people to use legitimate streaming services. For example, when site-blocking was implemented in India it resulted in a one-year 8 per cent increase in lawful streaming. In Brazil, site-blocking measures led to a 5 per cent boost in lawful streaming.
- While opponents of site-blocking have in the past claimed that it would “break the Internet” and limit free speech, IP House’s study of the 50-plus countries that have implemented it found those fears haven’t come to pass. Specifically, there has been no discernible harm done to the workings of the Internet, no impact on legitimate websites, and no impingement on legitimate speech.
Site-blocking usually involves a rigorous court process to identify websites that deal exclusively in illegal products and services (such as piracy) but are out of reach of domestic civil or criminal enforcement. If the website is found to be infringing by a court, an order is served upon relevant intermediaries, such as Internet Service Providers (ISPs), to stop these criminal websites from being readily accessible in that country.