this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
14 points (100.0% liked)

United Kingdom

4108 readers
144 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The arrangement was referenced again in October 2020 when it was revealed that traffic data from UK ISP Sky supported a successful UEFA High Court ISP blocking injunction. A year later it emerged that Sky had compiled data on high-traffic IP addresses accessed via its network to help an anti-piracy company working for the Premier League.

It's quite a specific case. As this kind of monitoring will cost the ISP money (and could damage their reputation) there has to be some incentive for them to do it - Sky Sports had be a decent percentage of their revenue, with the Premier League matches driving a lot of that.

Even then, it doesn't seem to have been used to target individuals streaming the footie but the people providing the streams.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would be very surprised if their entire intention behind it wasn't protecting their own bottom line from piracy

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh indeed. They did the sums and it wouldn't take much of a crack in the dam to see those £20/channel subscriptions disappear. I'd be surprised if they weren't also keeping an eye on the priracy of their movies and TV shows but it won't be quite the impact on their bottom line.

[–] Tesco 1 points 1 year ago

I know I'm probably in the minority here but I wouldn't be against getting Sky to watch American football and maybe the odd other channel live, but I won't because I don't want to have to pay a bribe to the BBC just to watch it live.