Quindici punti vendita presi di mira in un morsetto “Dodgy Box”
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2025/0902/1531299-dodgy-boxes-clamp-down/
di SitDownKawada
Quindici punti vendita presi di mira in un morsetto “Dodgy Box”
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2025/0902/1531299-dodgy-boxes-clamp-down/
di SitDownKawada
17 commenti
The FACT wars have begun. Many will die.
>This is the first time such enforcement has focused directly on retail outlets, a move that FACT said, “recognises that shops are a crucial gateway for consumers being drawn into illegal streaming and that disrupting activity at street level is key to protecting the public”.
How is the public harmed by it? Do they mean like if there’s a problem with the service they can’t take the dodgy box lads to the small claims court? Or that if everyone did it the big companies wouldn’t have the money to air shows?
Interesting that Dublin wasn’t one of the counties they went to
Hold on, sky carried out 4 of these ?
So a few Firesticks in the shop window is enough evidence for them – That’s a FACT
So, some lads from sky threatened to sue people in those shops that sell stolen mobile phones and vapes?
The way that this is being covered is insane. I get that sky are a big advertiser and so media organisations want to please them, but this is crossing the line into disinformation.
There has been no “enforcement clampdown”. There is no organ of the state involved here whatsoever. This is just some lads paid by Sky going to a shop to threaten to sue them. That’s it.
Anyone skimming the article, or anyone without any legal knowledge, would be forgiven for being confused about that.
The media shouldn’t be aiming to confuse people. The public broadcaster certainly shouldn’t. We all know that the media are primarily beholden to the interests of their advertisers, but this is incredibly blatant and craven.
> “We don’t want to criminalise everybody,” he said, adding: “We certainly don’t want to criminalise customers”.
What charge could they use to go after customers?
No data is stored locally, so copyright isn’t infringed on the customer end.
No sympathy for cash grabbing big buck companies, the industry is not under threat. Billions in profits and constantly raising prices.
Dodgey boxes are an evolution of streaming sites, there’s no winning this war.
If we had the money, we’d pay the 100+ monthly to watch good shows. We don’t, so we don’t
Will someone please think of the Comcast shareholders!
I’m confused – are they going to sue Amazon for selling Firesticks?
The people will be happy that Rupert Murdoch’s billionaire empire may save a few quid thanks to his hi-vis minions.
Hey how about tackling crimes the average person cares about instead of targeting the average person to protect giant companies profits
>The Chairperson of FACT said the notices delivered to the shops are not legally binding, but they do lay out the possible consequences for the business if they do not cease the illegal activity.
Ignore ha
This is the first time such enforcement has focused directly on retail outlets, a move that FACT said, “recognises that shops are a crucial gateway for consumers being drawn into illegal streaming and that disrupting activity at street level is key to protecting the public”.
It’s alright lads, they’re just protecting the public…
Thank God for that , I’ll be able to sleep soundly in my bed tonight
I just think it’s hilarious we call them ‘dodgy boxes’. Do they use the same term in the UK?
I don’t support vigilante groups going around to private businesses pressuring them to do this or that in accordance with the group’s agenda. Not sure why the article makes it look like this is some official state crack down.
Calling them dodgy boxes is the biggest mistake ever. If people want to claim they’re above board then calling them that is self defeating.