Streaming Service Piracy Prosecutions
🔍 What Is Streaming Service Piracy?
Streaming piracy involves unauthorized broadcasting or accessing of copyrighted content — such as movies, TV shows, live sports — via the internet. Unlike traditional file sharing, streaming piracy may not involve downloading files, but instead offering or watching real-time access to unlicensed content.
Common Forms:
Hosting illegal IPTV services (Internet Protocol TV)
Selling jailbroken streaming devices (e.g., modified Firesticks)
Running piracy websites or apps (e.g., "123Movies" clones)
Re-streaming copyrighted content on platforms like Twitch or YouTube
Key Legal Tools Used:
Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.)
Anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA (17 U.S.C. § 1201)
Wire fraud statutes (18 U.S.C. § 1343)
Criminal copyright infringement (17 U.S.C. § 506, 18 U.S.C. § 2319)
📚 Key Cases in Streaming Piracy Prosecutions
1. United States v. David Sites (2020)
(IPTV Service Operator - Jetflicks)
Facts: David Sites and others ran "Jetflicks," an illegal subscription-based streaming service that copied and redistributed copyrighted TV shows. They scraped content from legit services like Netflix and Hulu.
Legal Issues: Copyright infringement, wire fraud, conspiracy.
Ruling: Sites and associates were federally indicted. The DOJ argued that Jetflicks earned over $1 million from piracy.
Significance: One of the first major U.S. criminal prosecutions targeting an IPTV operator offering Netflix-style piracy, not just torrenting.
2. United States v. Hossain (2021)
(IPTV Piracy Service - iStreamItAll)
Facts: Hossain operated iStreamItAll, an illegal streaming service with over 118,000 TV episodes and 10,000 movies, sourced through torrents and P2P.
Legal Issues: Criminal copyright infringement, wire fraud.
Ruling: Hossain pled guilty and admitted he ran the service for profit. He earned over $1 million and promoted the service as better than Netflix.
Significance: Showed DOJ's focus on high-volume pirates who monetize stolen content — even without downloads involved.
3. United States v. Joshua Streit (a.k.a. Josh Brody, 2021)
(Piracy of MLB, NHL, NBA Streams)
Facts: Streit illegally accessed and sold access to sports streaming services like MLB.TV, NHL.TV, and NBA League Pass. He used stolen credentials and sold logins to users.
Legal Issues: Wire fraud, unauthorized access (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act), and trafficking in passwords.
Ruling: Streit was charged federally. He attempted to extort Major League Baseball for $150,000 to keep quiet about the vulnerabilities.
Significance: Combined piracy with cybercrime and extortion, showing how streaming piracy overlaps with broader internet fraud.
4. United States v. Loretto (2019)
(Sale of Illegal Kodi Boxes for Streaming)
Facts: Loretto sold pre-configured Kodi devices (modified Firesticks and Android boxes) that allowed users to stream pirated content.
Legal Issues: Criminal copyright infringement, DMCA anti-circumvention.
Ruling: Convicted and sentenced to prison. The devices were advertised specifically to stream free movies, including new releases.
Significance: One of the first U.S. prosecutions targeting the sale of piracy devices instead of hosting content. This set an important precedent for anti-circumvention enforcement.
5. United States v. Omniverse One World Television (2020)
(Pirated Cable Content Reseller)
Facts: Omniverse resold content they falsely claimed to be licensed. Their service was used by many smaller illegal IPTV platforms.
Legal Issues: Copyright infringement, misrepresentation, and civil suits.
Ruling: Although not criminally charged, Omniverse was sued and agreed to a $50 million judgment with major Hollywood studios.
Significance: Landmark civil prosecution that dismantled a “master source” of pirated content distribution.
6. ACE (Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment) v. Vader Streams (2018)
(International Civil Enforcement Case)
Facts: Vader Streams was one of the world’s largest IPTV services, offering thousands of channels, including sports and PPV, for a monthly fee.
Legal Issues: Civil copyright infringement.
Ruling: Vader was shut down, and a $10 million judgment was entered against them.
Significance: Major international civil crackdown, showing how Hollywood studios target global piracy rings that evade U.S. criminal law.
7. United States v. Alrefai (2023)
(Reselling Pirated IPTV Access in the U.S.)
Facts: Alrefai ran a service selling illegal IPTV subscriptions with access to live sports and TV, using stolen or re-streamed feeds.
Legal Issues: Copyright infringement, unauthorized access, DMCA violations.
Ruling: Arrested and indicted under federal law; over $500,000 in illicit profits were traced.
Significance: Demonstrated increasing DOJ interest in targeting resellers and middlemen, not just major operators.
🧠 Legal Themes in Streaming Piracy Cases
| Legal Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Copyright Infringement | Unlicensed streaming, reproduction, or transmission of copyrighted works is illegal. |
| No Need to Download | Courts have accepted streaming as infringing, even without permanent file downloads. |
| Anti-Circumvention (DMCA) | Selling or using tools to bypass copyright protection (like Kodi boxes) can lead to charges. |
| Monetization = Criminal Risk | If piracy operations earn money (ads, subscriptions), prosecutors may pursue criminal cases. |
| Civil + Criminal Paths | Studios use civil lawsuits, while DOJ focuses on large-scale or financially motivated actors. |
| International Enforcement | Cross-border cooperation is growing; several services hosted overseas are still targeted. |
👨⚖️ Conclusion
Streaming service piracy has evolved from simple torrenting to sophisticated, subscription-based piracy businesses. U.S. authorities — both federal prosecutors and civil rights holders — now aggressively pursue IPTV operators, device sellers, and stream re-broadcasters under copyright and fraud laws.
RELATED Blog
0 comments