IPTV e PEZZOTTO: cosa rischi e come TI SCOPRONO

Pirated IPTV: Administrative Penalties and Criminal Liability

Presenter: Avv. Giuseppe Di Palo

The presenter argues that discussions of pirated IPTV often confuse administrative penalties with criminal liability.

Resellers and distributors

The video discusses a March 2026 Court of Cassation ruling (No. 10451) involving a small-scale reseller who sold access codes to about 20 people. The court upheld convictions for unauthorized access to a computer system and computer fraud.

As the presenter explains the ruling, knowingly reselling codes can be treated as participation in a broader, coordinated piracy operation—not as an isolated, neutral sale.

Ordinary users

A person who only pays for and watches content is generally subject to an administrative, rather than criminal, penalty. The presenter says the fine starts at roughly €150—the subtitles give both €150 and €154—and can reach €5,000.

He argues that the maximum fine may reflect the size of the catalogue available through the subscription, not just the content the user actually watched. He also says that claims that the minimum fine has already risen to €500 are mistaken: that figure relates to a bill still under discussion.

When a user’s conduct may become criminal

Knowing that a very cheap subscription is illicit may undermine a claim of good faith. However, in the presenter’s analysis, that knowledge alone does not prove complicity in computer crimes.

Conduct such as sharing access codes, helping others configure the service, or collecting payments for a reseller could cross the line into active participation.

How users are identified

The presenter rejects the idea that Piracy Shield monitors individual households and automatically issues fines. He describes it instead as a system for rapidly blocking websites or addresses that distribute illegal streams.

Investigations typically begin with operators or resellers. Seized records and payment trails—such as bank transfers and prepaid-card top-ups—can then help identify customers. The presenter cites:

• The May 2026 Cinema Gold operation, which identified about 1,000 subscribers.
• A June operation in Crotone, which reportedly identified nearly 3,000 people across 43 provinces.

A legal gray area

Article 171-octies of the Copyright Law provides for prison sentences when equipment suitable for decoding audiovisual broadcasts is used fraudulently, including for private use.

The presenter notes that older cases concerned physical devices, whereas modern IPTV relies on software and digital access. Applying the provision to intangible tools such as apps or URLs raises questions under the criminal-law principle that offenses cannot be expanded by analogy to the defendant’s disadvantage. He presents this as an unresolved complication, not a settled rule.