Revolut Ordered to Disclose Pirate IPTV Subscribers in Landmark Irish Copyright Case

Ireland's High Court has granted Sky an unprecedented Norwich Pharmacal order compelling Revolut Bank UAB to disclose the identities of 304 subscribers and 10 resellers connected to the now-defunct pirate IPTV service "IPTV is Easy," marking the first time in Ireland that end users of illegal streaming services face potential legal action from rightsholders.

{{IMAGE:1}}

The ruling comes after Sky's investigation into David Dunbar, a Wexford man who operated "IPTV is Easy" and sold subscriptions for €80 to €100 per year. Last August, Dunbar consented to a €480,000 damages judgment and was separately fined €30,000 for contempt of court after destroying evidence and refusing to allow investigators to search his home under an Anton Piller order.

According to court documents, Dunbar's Revolut statements showed he received €118,992 from resellers and €72,414 plus £9,256 from end users over roughly three and a half years. While much of the service's customer data was lost or destroyed, Sky identified 12 resellers and 304 subscribers who transferred money via Revolut. The bank initially refused to disclose customer information without a court order.

Sky investigator Damien Gilmore stated in an affidavit that at least five of Dunbar's resellers continue to sell pirate IPTV services. With the English Premier League football season nearing its end and major golf and Formula 1 events approaching, Gilmore told the court Sky is anxious to take "decisive action" while demand for premium sports content is at its peak.

Sky's barrister, Theo Donnelly, acknowledged it wouldn't be possible to bring cases against all 304 subscribers, but legal action against even a subset of them would be unprecedented in Ireland. Judge Brian Cregan restricted the use of the disclosed information to initiating legal proceedings against the alleged infringers.

This Irish ruling fits a growing pattern in Europe of pursuing individual IPTV subscribers. On March 20, a French public prosecutor's office fined 19 IPTV subscribers between €300 and €400 after their identities were exposed through a reseller bust. Meanwhile, Italian authorities identified thousands of subscribers following the dismantling of a pirate network last year, with rightsholders sending civil damages demands on top of criminal fines.

Under Ireland's Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000, using illegal streaming services can carry fines of up to €127,000 and up to five years' imprisonment. No Irish court has yet applied those penalties to subscribers, but the coming cases will test whether enforcement extends beyond operators.

The case highlights the evolving tactics in anti-piracy enforcement, where financial institutions are increasingly being compelled to assist in identifying infringers. Revolut's role as an intermediary payment processor made it a crucial link in tracing the network of subscribers and resellers.

Ireland is estimated to have around 400,000 pirate IPTV users, making this enforcement action a significant escalation in the country's approach to copyright infringement. The timing of the court's decision, coming just before major sporting events, suggests a strategic effort to maximize deterrent effect during peak demand periods for premium content.

For the technology sector, this case raises important questions about the responsibilities of financial service providers in preventing copyright infringement. As digital payment platforms become increasingly central to all types of transactions, their potential role in facilitating or preventing illegal activities becomes more significant.

The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how courts handle similar requests in the future, particularly regarding the balance between user privacy and intellectual property rights. It also demonstrates the increasing sophistication of anti-piracy efforts, which now extend beyond targeting service operators to pursuing the end-user customer base.

For consumers, this development serves as a stark reminder that using illegal streaming services carries real legal risks, not just the possibility of service disruption. The relatively low cost of pirate subscriptions (€80-€100 annually) may no longer seem like such an attractive bargain if users face potential fines and legal proceedings.

As the case progresses, industry observers will be watching closely to see how many of the 304 subscribers ultimately face legal action and what penalties, if any, are imposed. This will provide valuable data on the effectiveness and proportionality of pursuing individual end users in copyright enforcement efforts.