He should have been a politician then it wouldn’t matter what he did.
Absolutely pathetic,
If the games were affordable and a better subscription service was available people wouldn’t seek the hassle of these dodgy services
When you can get a suspended sentence for literally killing someone, or not be arrested at all if you dog kills a child, sentences like this take the piss a little bit.
Insane how harsh this sentence is compared to things like actually killing someone.
This is a crime that is a response to greed and the only victim is still making money hand over fist so won’t actually be affected.
Break law to provide entertainment to people who can’t afford a ridiculous price – fined through the nose and jailed.
Break the law, laugh and drink your way through people not seeing anyone whilst you mingle with every Tom dick and Tory – £50 fine and still get to be prime minister.
Amazing.
Meanwhile paedophiles continue to walk free from court on a daily basis.
Similar to getting 10 years for selling knock off designer labels. Try to take money out of the pockets of the rich and you get a long jail sentence then Paedo’s literally walk free everyday with a slap on the wrist.
>At Warwick Crown Court on Monday, he was given three months to pay back £963,000 – equal to the amount he has made from from providing the illegal devices – or face having his jail term near doubled.
The £1m fine was the money he made selling the devices
>The three men behind Dreambox, who have since been jailed for a total of 17 years for conspiracy to defraud, provided illegal access to Premier League football to more than 1,000 pubs, clubs and homes throughout England and Wales.
Ah, so it wasn’t just a few firesticks to his mates, it was a big operation
The law has always been harsher to those who offend the elite or ruling classes. Today is no different.
Murder a peasant – meh
Steal a horse – death now and then another death.
Wow that is heavy. You’ll get less for sexual assaults and violent crimes. How dare a common folk/pleb scam the system. That privilege is only reserved for the select few!!
and yet child molesters get suspended sentences. Mad.
Makes me queasy to see people get far more for property crime than crime against the person. Not defending the fraudsters one bit, but oh if only we made this much effort to catch and punish sex offenders.
that is extremely harsh in my opinion – its on the same league as trafficking drugs.
These idiots don’t get it. People pirate because of cost and inconvenience.
F1 TV the official F1 streaming subscription app is $80 a year in the US but because of their exclusive contract with Sky in the UK the only way to watch it is to subscribe to Sky.
The cheapest way of watching live it is paying £408/$510 at £34 a month for Skys NowTV. Highlights are available on UK terrestrial TV but I want to watch live.
You better damn well know I am going to pirate the streams when I would be MORE than happy to pay $80 for a full year of live F1 races because of greed.
>he was given three months to pay back £963,000 – equal to the amount he has made from from providing the illegal devices – or face having his jail term near doubled.
I mean this is far beyond a bloke down the pub making a cheeky tenner or two selling a couple of devices. To make near enough a million quid is sounds closer to an organised (criminal) operation.
Victimless crimes should not be prosecuted
I recall reading about someone dosing someone in acid. Admittedly they didn’t die immediately; they had to go through the pain and agonies of disfigurement first
The person who did it got 8 years. This ‘judge’ has potentially set this Premier League games nicker, for a 14 year spell.
It’s all about money – and criminality, which resides in our so-called ‘judiciary’.
Meanwhile the Prime Minister gets a £50 fine for one of the multiple pissups at our expense.
All of us are equal. Its just some us are more equal than others. Now where have i heard that before?
Making a martyr isn’t going to do shit all.
These organisations will simply collapse eventually.
So kill someone in a car you might get a driving ban.
Sexually assault someone might get 3-5 years if you are unlucky.
Make a company lose money they likely wouldn’t have gotten in the first place 7 years ? That’s fucking insane.
7 years in prison for a non-violent offense?
I’d happily commute this guy’s sentence and give it to Boris Johnson instead!
The average sentence for rape by contrast was 8 years back in 2011 and probably lower now since other sentences have been falling.
This shouldn’t even be a criminal matter. Private law for the wealthy.
The sports channels are abhorrently expensive, I don’t live and breathe sport, I just want to watch international football and the occasional league game. So unless hell freezes I’m not paying and guess what? No one can afford the fucking pub anymore unless it’s spoons and that Tory cunt won’t put the football on anyway.
I’m not saying he didn’t deserve that punishment for such a large scale operation but what I will say is he wouldn’t have made so much if people could happily afford the sports channels for their businesses legally.
The main channels didn’t even get all the European friendlies this week. Fucked me off tbh.
Interesting isn’t it. A man lets people watch PL games for free and gets 7-14 years. A company literally steals the feed and rights for an entire region and the PL let them buy a football club.
There’s literally no excuse in this day and age not to have a streaming service showing ALL games live across ALL competitions for one yearly fee.
I watch football through ‘irregular’ means, but I’d be happy to pay a yearly sub at the right price to have everything conveniently in one place in HD.
But no, the Premier league has to chop up matches into ‘packages’ and then sell them to the highest bidder to rake in as much profit as possible. If you support a top 6 club then you’ll be able to see a decent amount of games for a hefty price. If you support a lower league club you’ll be lucky to see 10 televised games a season for the same price which will mostly be against top 6 clubs thrashing you 5-0 at home.
I wish Amazon would just come in with ‘fuck you’ money and buy up every possible game and stream everything live on one service. Sky and BT sport literally offer nothing of note on their services to justify the current prices.
Child molesters and rapists get less prison time than this.
If it wasn’t stupidly expensive then people wouldn’t pirate this shit
I feel sorry for the idiots that bought them when it’s never been easier to illegally stream on a laptop/phone, or so I’m lead to believe.
Good to see UK is still absolutely rotten with fucking corruption. One of the reasons I’m getting my degree is so I leave this philosophically desolate fucking hellscape.Poor/Lower middle class people can’t afford to go to the matches and most can’t afford the £1k+ per year subscriptions to all the sport channels hosting the prem games. Ofcourse poor people are going to turn to other means to watch a sport they’re being priced out of. How the fuck does a non-violent ‘criminal’ get 7 years? That is pure fucking evil.
Seems excessive.
He was selling them to pubs, so I suppose that was a bit worse than selling a Raspberry PI with KODI installed on it. He knew what the pubs were doing with them.
This is such bs. Did these guy made millions or something?
The punishment is disproportionate. There are drug dealers I know that for less for more harm to people. Fuck it, kiddies fiddlers got less!
What these guy really do anyway. Get people cheaper access to games they love?
Who this hurts? The footballers? Poor fucking them with their millions contract, commercial deals. They must be having problems paying for fucking food
The message here is don’t tread on Rupert Murdoch’s toes, for he is the true ruler of this country.
This is the problem with “digital crime” – you can steal a huge value without a significant amount of jeopardy.
By this I mean, if you wanted to steal millions of pounds worth of diamonds you’d have to perform an enormous armed robbery or suchlike, and so wouldn’t be surprised if you ended up a notorious criminal.
But you can ‘steal’ millions of pounds worth of TV rights by enabling people to stream for free whilst remaining relatively below the public radar – until you get caught and go to jail for years!
The question is then whether this is really fair, because if none of those people were ever going to pay for the TV legitimately, then have the providers really lost that amount of money? At the very least, the answer is somewhere in the middle.
well…that seems proportionate.
Yet peadophiles get a slap on the wrist! Infuriating!
Shame he didn’t have a hard drive full of child porn would have got an 18 month suspended sentence (if the judge was in a bad mood) cunts
It’s not clear from the article what exactly the defrauding component is. It might be really important in the context of the ruling but since we don’t have the information we can’t really factor it in.
Having said that, the whole point of the justice system is to protect society. Now, I have no idea what this guy’s character is like. He might be a complete scumbag but in the context of this ruling and what little information is given, it’s apparently necessary to completely exclude this guy from society for what amounts to providing a service that people clearly want, at a price they can afford that the companies who are supposed to satisfy those needs are seemingly incapable of doing.
Surely this raises questions about whether concepts like exclusive licenses are actually in the interests of society if they are ultimately preventing people from engaging in consuming content in a different way than what’s on offer. Let’s forget for a moment that the activity in question is technically illegal. The first mistake would be assuming that anything that’s illegal is objectively bad. Aside from some mega rich entities potentially losing out on money, there appears to be very little, or perhaps even zero societal damage done here.
If we care so much about protecting a private entities bottom line to the point where we’ll gladly send someone to prison for 7-14 years for causing no living entity an iota of suffering, surely we should care just as equally about getting suppliers in line so that they provide services that people want at a reasonable price?
Stop treating the benign symptoms and start treating the cancerous root causes.
That fine is a bit ridiculous. That’s like “you are now screwed for life”.
40 comments
He should have been a politician then it wouldn’t matter what he did.
Absolutely pathetic,
If the games were affordable and a better subscription service was available people wouldn’t seek the hassle of these dodgy services
When you can get a suspended sentence for literally killing someone, or not be arrested at all if you dog kills a child, sentences like this take the piss a little bit.
Insane how harsh this sentence is compared to things like actually killing someone.
This is a crime that is a response to greed and the only victim is still making money hand over fist so won’t actually be affected.
Break law to provide entertainment to people who can’t afford a ridiculous price – fined through the nose and jailed.
Break the law, laugh and drink your way through people not seeing anyone whilst you mingle with every Tom dick and Tory – £50 fine and still get to be prime minister.
Amazing.
Meanwhile paedophiles continue to walk free from court on a daily basis.
Similar to getting 10 years for selling knock off designer labels. Try to take money out of the pockets of the rich and you get a long jail sentence then Paedo’s literally walk free everyday with a slap on the wrist.
>At Warwick Crown Court on Monday, he was given three months to pay back £963,000 – equal to the amount he has made from from providing the illegal devices – or face having his jail term near doubled.
The £1m fine was the money he made selling the devices
>The three men behind Dreambox, who have since been jailed for a total of 17 years for conspiracy to defraud, provided illegal access to Premier League football to more than 1,000 pubs, clubs and homes throughout England and Wales.
Ah, so it wasn’t just a few firesticks to his mates, it was a big operation
The law has always been harsher to those who offend the elite or ruling classes. Today is no different.
Murder a peasant – meh
Steal a horse – death now and then another death.
Wow that is heavy. You’ll get less for sexual assaults and violent crimes. How dare a common folk/pleb scam the system. That privilege is only reserved for the select few!!
and yet child molesters get suspended sentences. Mad.
Makes me queasy to see people get far more for property crime than crime against the person. Not defending the fraudsters one bit, but oh if only we made this much effort to catch and punish sex offenders.
that is extremely harsh in my opinion – its on the same league as trafficking drugs.
These idiots don’t get it. People pirate because of cost and inconvenience.
F1 TV the official F1 streaming subscription app is $80 a year in the US but because of their exclusive contract with Sky in the UK the only way to watch it is to subscribe to Sky.
The cheapest way of watching live it is paying £408/$510 at £34 a month for Skys NowTV. Highlights are available on UK terrestrial TV but I want to watch live.
You better damn well know I am going to pirate the streams when I would be MORE than happy to pay $80 for a full year of live F1 races because of greed.
>he was given three months to pay back £963,000 – equal to the amount he has made from from providing the illegal devices – or face having his jail term near doubled.
I mean this is far beyond a bloke down the pub making a cheeky tenner or two selling a couple of devices. To make near enough a million quid is sounds closer to an organised (criminal) operation.
Victimless crimes should not be prosecuted
I recall reading about someone dosing someone in acid. Admittedly they didn’t die immediately; they had to go through the pain and agonies of disfigurement first
The person who did it got 8 years. This ‘judge’ has potentially set this Premier League games nicker, for a 14 year spell.
It’s all about money – and criminality, which resides in our so-called ‘judiciary’.
Meanwhile the Prime Minister gets a £50 fine for one of the multiple pissups at our expense.
All of us are equal. Its just some us are more equal than others. Now where have i heard that before?
Making a martyr isn’t going to do shit all.
These organisations will simply collapse eventually.
So kill someone in a car you might get a driving ban.
Sexually assault someone might get 3-5 years if you are unlucky.
Make a company lose money they likely wouldn’t have gotten in the first place 7 years ? That’s fucking insane.
7 years in prison for a non-violent offense?
I’d happily commute this guy’s sentence and give it to Boris Johnson instead!
The average sentence for rape by contrast was 8 years back in 2011 and probably lower now since other sentences have been falling.
This shouldn’t even be a criminal matter. Private law for the wealthy.
The sports channels are abhorrently expensive, I don’t live and breathe sport, I just want to watch international football and the occasional league game. So unless hell freezes I’m not paying and guess what? No one can afford the fucking pub anymore unless it’s spoons and that Tory cunt won’t put the football on anyway.
I’m not saying he didn’t deserve that punishment for such a large scale operation but what I will say is he wouldn’t have made so much if people could happily afford the sports channels for their businesses legally.
The main channels didn’t even get all the European friendlies this week. Fucked me off tbh.
Interesting isn’t it. A man lets people watch PL games for free and gets 7-14 years. A company literally steals the feed and rights for an entire region and the PL let them buy a football club.
There’s literally no excuse in this day and age not to have a streaming service showing ALL games live across ALL competitions for one yearly fee.
I watch football through ‘irregular’ means, but I’d be happy to pay a yearly sub at the right price to have everything conveniently in one place in HD.
But no, the Premier league has to chop up matches into ‘packages’ and then sell them to the highest bidder to rake in as much profit as possible. If you support a top 6 club then you’ll be able to see a decent amount of games for a hefty price. If you support a lower league club you’ll be lucky to see 10 televised games a season for the same price which will mostly be against top 6 clubs thrashing you 5-0 at home.
I wish Amazon would just come in with ‘fuck you’ money and buy up every possible game and stream everything live on one service. Sky and BT sport literally offer nothing of note on their services to justify the current prices.
Child molesters and rapists get less prison time than this.
If it wasn’t stupidly expensive then people wouldn’t pirate this shit
I feel sorry for the idiots that bought them when it’s never been easier to illegally stream on a laptop/phone, or so I’m lead to believe.
Good to see UK is still absolutely rotten with fucking corruption. One of the reasons I’m getting my degree is so I leave this philosophically desolate fucking hellscape.Poor/Lower middle class people can’t afford to go to the matches and most can’t afford the £1k+ per year subscriptions to all the sport channels hosting the prem games. Ofcourse poor people are going to turn to other means to watch a sport they’re being priced out of. How the fuck does a non-violent ‘criminal’ get 7 years? That is pure fucking evil.
Seems excessive.
He was selling them to pubs, so I suppose that was a bit worse than selling a Raspberry PI with KODI installed on it. He knew what the pubs were doing with them.
This is such bs. Did these guy made millions or something?
The punishment is disproportionate. There are drug dealers I know that for less for more harm to people. Fuck it, kiddies fiddlers got less!
What these guy really do anyway. Get people cheaper access to games they love?
Who this hurts? The footballers? Poor fucking them with their millions contract, commercial deals. They must be having problems paying for fucking food
The message here is don’t tread on Rupert Murdoch’s toes, for he is the true ruler of this country.
This is the problem with “digital crime” – you can steal a huge value without a significant amount of jeopardy.
By this I mean, if you wanted to steal millions of pounds worth of diamonds you’d have to perform an enormous armed robbery or suchlike, and so wouldn’t be surprised if you ended up a notorious criminal.
But you can ‘steal’ millions of pounds worth of TV rights by enabling people to stream for free whilst remaining relatively below the public radar – until you get caught and go to jail for years!
The question is then whether this is really fair, because if none of those people were ever going to pay for the TV legitimately, then have the providers really lost that amount of money? At the very least, the answer is somewhere in the middle.
well…that seems proportionate.
Yet peadophiles get a slap on the wrist! Infuriating!
Shame he didn’t have a hard drive full of child porn would have got an 18 month suspended sentence (if the judge was in a bad mood) cunts
It’s not clear from the article what exactly the defrauding component is. It might be really important in the context of the ruling but since we don’t have the information we can’t really factor it in.
Having said that, the whole point of the justice system is to protect society. Now, I have no idea what this guy’s character is like. He might be a complete scumbag but in the context of this ruling and what little information is given, it’s apparently necessary to completely exclude this guy from society for what amounts to providing a service that people clearly want, at a price they can afford that the companies who are supposed to satisfy those needs are seemingly incapable of doing.
Surely this raises questions about whether concepts like exclusive licenses are actually in the interests of society if they are ultimately preventing people from engaging in consuming content in a different way than what’s on offer. Let’s forget for a moment that the activity in question is technically illegal. The first mistake would be assuming that anything that’s illegal is objectively bad. Aside from some mega rich entities potentially losing out on money, there appears to be very little, or perhaps even zero societal damage done here.
If we care so much about protecting a private entities bottom line to the point where we’ll gladly send someone to prison for 7-14 years for causing no living entity an iota of suffering, surely we should care just as equally about getting suppliers in line so that they provide services that people want at a reasonable price?
Stop treating the benign symptoms and start treating the cancerous root causes.
That fine is a bit ridiculous. That’s like “you are now screwed for life”.
At which point did the UK become so anti-people?