Earlier this year, The Motion Picture Association (MPA) revealed that it’s planning to work with Congress to establish site-blocking legislation in the United States. With such an order in place, broadcasters, rights holders and content owners would be able to ask the court to order Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block websites sharing stolen content. MPA CEO Charles Rivkin highlighted that many countries use blocking as a tool against piracy and he strongly believes that the U.S. should be one of them.
For years, sports providers and media and entertainment companies outside the U.S. have been using domain and server blocking because it is a sophisticated enforcement method that stops piracy more effectively than traditional approaches.
Testing the Waters: What is Blocking?
In simple terms, blocking disrupts access to illegal content. Once an organization identifies that content is being stolen, blocking can rapidly make a significant impact, cutting off access to illegal streams and helping content owners and rights holders secure their revenue.
Although there are multiple deployment methods, there are two main types of blocking: Domain blocking, which works to stop access to pirated content at a domain resolution level; and server blocking, which restricts access to pirated content at a residential ISP level in real time.
Domain blocking works by deleting certain records in the Domain Name System (DNS) – essentially the phonebook of the internet. So, if an address has been subject to a domain blocking order, the record of the domain is removed from the public register so that when someone types in the URL in their browser, no result will appear.
In countries where it can be used, server blocking proved to be one of the most effective forms of supply-side content protection actions. It allows ISPs to block their subscribers from accessing pirated content, following specific legislation issued by the appropriate regional authority.
Blocking is especially effective in changing consumer behavior: as viewers get blocked by their ISP, it encourages them to watch their content on legitimate commercial sites – either because they discovered that they were unknowingly using a pirate service, or simply because they still want to access the content and are now forced to view it legitimately.
On the other hand, establishing which targets should not be blocked is equally critical. That means ensuring that any blocking target won’t cause collateral damage on unrelated and legitimate services. To prevent over-blocking and ensure proportionality, the IP block list should be updated every five minutes, and any IP addresses should be subjected to a battery of customizable tests.
Blocking is a technical tool approved by legal governing bodies in more than 40 jurisdictions. These regions have either adopted and implemented blocking, or are legally obligated to adopt measures ensuring that ISPs can block access to copyright-infringing websites.
Navigating International Waters
If the United States were to establish and enforce site-blocking legislation, they would be far from a test case.
Blocking technology has proven to effectively stop piracy. In fact, in Indonesia, blocking caused a significant drop in reach of pirated content—from 437 million to 118 million views, a 75% reduction from 2020 to 2022.
In France, blocking has also proven to be successful for live sports streaming. Between January and June 2022, the overall pirate sports audience decreased by 49%, thanks to blocking measures.
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has closely examined the use of blocking and determined it to be effective and fair, based on its success in Europe. With that, the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) – an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research and educational institute recognized as a leading think tank for science and technology policy—among other organizations also shared their support for the U.S. pursuing blocking, noting that, “it would be a massive step in the right direction if policymakers in the United States and around the world could focus on the facts and weigh up the various interests and stakeholders in a similarly sober and dispassionate way as the CJEU.”
Other countries closer to North America have also explored blocking to combat piracy. For example, key Canadian operators have worked with an advanced video security and anti-piracy provider to detect piracy. And with that, government orders to dynamically block pirated access were swiftly implemented.
With blocking, illegal streams can be stopped in under four minutes, a timeframe that is critical when it comes to live sports content. Their provider monitors illicit streams so illegal servers can be blocked in an instant, ultimately reducing pirated streams of NHL and NBA games in Canada.
Steering the Ship: The Path Forward with Blocking
The evidence is clear: blocking is an effective tool in the fight against video piracy. The United States, with its massive media and entertainment industry, stands to benefit immensely from adopting such measures. By following the examples set by other countries, the U.S. can protect its premium content, secure revenue for rights holders, and maintain a fair and legal digital landscape.
It would be in the best interest of U.S. businesses to test the waters and get aboard with site-blocking, charting a course towards a more secure and prosperous future for digital media.
