I see dodgy boxes are back in the news.
They are indeed. This week Michael McGrane (47) from Johnswood Drive, Ashbourne, pleaded guilty at Dublin District Court to two counts of selling a protection-defeating device and one count of possessing a protection-defeating device.
Sorry, what’s a protection defeating device?
That is the official name for a dodgy box. McGrane is due for sentencing on October 13th.
Katie Taylor and Amanda Serrano set to show true boxing values at strange big-money event
‘I want someone to take an actual stand on immigration’: How will TCD student debaters vote?
Spice Village takeaway review: Indian food in south Dublin that will keep you coming back
Trump’s cabinet: who’s been picked, who’s in the running?
That all sounds severe. I didn’t realise dodgy boxes were illegal.
Gwan out of that, of course you did – the clue is in the name and well you know it. Although for the sake of complete accuracy, we should point out that the boxes themselves are not illegal.
What are you talking about? If they are not illegal what’s the deal with the court appearances and sentencing?
Okay, well dodgy boxes are also called Android boxes. And as you probably know Android is just an operating system and one that runs on all manner of different technologies including phones, tablets and firesticks. Android boxes are commonly sold in entirely reputable electrical shops in Ireland and on online platforms, places that would never dream of falling foul of the authorities or facilitating the illegal streaming of content.
I’m more confused now that when this explainer started.
Okay, maybe a history lesson would help. Ever since the Web was in short pants the people who make and sell content have been fighting a fierce battle with those who make it free to view online. Napster and dozens of other start-up upstarts allowed people to share music files for free. They were quickly crushed by the music industry – and Metallica, weirdly – and the war moved on to film and television.
I’m with you so far.
So-called torrents then took centre stage. The torrent wars saw users download small sections of programmes or films from multiple sources and software on their computers pieced them all together. The downloadable content was decentralised in a way that made it – theoretically – harder to police than Napster. It soon proved easy to crack down on torrent providers because end users had to store complete files on their devices.
And that was the end of that?
No. Then there came the legally questionable dodgy boxes. They plug into a television and if they have certain apps installed users can stream content directly from the internet on to their televisions. As we said, the boxes are not illegal and many come loaded with legitimate apps. They just have the capacity to do illegal things. A person who buys a clean dodgy box can easily download dodgy apps themselves. Then there are those who sell the boxes pre-loaded with apps to facilitate questionable streaming and provide codes to dodgy platforms. So, in short, it is not the boxes that are dodgy but the apps that facilitate illegal streaming. And it is not the selling of the boxes that is illegal but the selling of boxes and access to copyrighted content that fall fouls of the law.
Right, I’m starting to understand. Now, I have this friend who has a dodgy box and uses it to watch football on the telly for free and the odd movie that is still on in the cinema. Is my friend breaking the law and could he be prosecuted?
Well, your “friend” is not alone in doing this. In fact there are dodgy boxes in as many as 80,000 homes around Ireland. And that is a number that is almost certainly going to rise in the months and years ahead. The simple answer to your question is that by knowingly circumventing properly applied restrictions to access copyrighted content, your “friend” is potentially exposed. But potentially exposed is a long way from being at risk of prosecution.
What do you mean?
There are ongoing efforts to target those involved in the illegal streaming of content but the focus of those efforts – by the industry at home and abroad and by police forces at home and abroad – is very much on the people who are suspected of being involved in providing illegal access to premium TV content and not – as yet – the end users who, in this case would be your “friend”.
Tell me more.
Well, we have covered this before and as recently as last month The Irish Times was told by Garda sources that while it regularly works with industry bodies to investigate piracy and copyright breaches, it is not engaged in any special operation targeting illegal streaming activity at present and is definitely not targeting individual householders. Sources have even expressed doubt that the force would have any jurisdiction when it comes to the use of such boxes, suggesting it would be a civil rather than a criminal matter.
So, my friend is in the clear then?
Well that depends on whether you mean morally or legally or even financially.
It won’t come as much of a surprise to you to hear that this explainer places value on content and believes good content is worth paying for. That is the first point.
And what’s your second point?
Another point worth making is that in this legally grey space there are a lot of less than reputable folk selling access to copyrighted streams on multiple platforms. Many promise a two-year subscription for €50. That subscription might work for a month or two or a week or two and then crash – if those behind the link decide to shut it down or are forced to by the authorities. And if that happens your “friend” can’t exactly go to the Small Claims Court to get their money back.
Anything else?
Well last month we spoke to Dr TJ McIntyre, associate professor and head of teaching and learning in the Sutherland School of Law in UCD about this very topic. This is what he had to say.
“There’s three things here really. There is the people selling physical devices and sometimes selling codes in relation to them, there are the people selling or setting up streams of content on the internet and then there are the individuals sitting at home watching the streams.”
He said the first two groups are regularly targeted by the holders of copyrights. While there are “some offences that theoretically can apply to individuals in relation to copyright infringement, in practice I don’t think any of these have actually been litigated or prosecuted in Ireland.”
