The Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) is unable to get a tight grip on live streaming piracy. The company sends out thousands of takedown notices to protect its live broadcasts but nearly a quarter of these remain unaddressed after an hour. UFC calls on online service providers to step up their game, which includes ‘instantaneous’ takedowns and putting a stop to repeat infringers.
The UFC’s efforts to combat online piracy underscore the significant challenges posed by unauthorized livestreams of its events. General Counsel Riché McKnight’s testimony highlights the widespread nature of the issue, with pirated streams attracting millions of views and impacting the organization’s subscription revenues.
Of particular concern are the organized crime groups involved in the distribution of pirated content, which often tap into the source signals of UFC events to rebroadcast them for profit. These groups capitalize on the popularity of UFC events to generate advertising revenue from the views they attract, exacerbating the financial impact on the organization.
Addressing online piracy requires a multifaceted approach, including legal measures such as site-blocking discussions, as well as efforts to disrupt the operations of organized crime groups involved in the distribution of pirated content. The UFC’s advocacy on this issue reflects the broader industry-wide efforts to protect the integrity of live sports broadcasts and combat online piracy effectively.
The UFC’s struggle against online piracy extends to the brazen advertising tactics employed by pirate websites on social media platforms. McKnight highlights the audacity of these platforms, which openly promote unauthorized streams with slogans like “Watch UFC Free” on social media sites, attracting hundreds of thousands or even millions of views before being taken down.
One of the major obstacles faced by the UFC in combating piracy is the relatively slow response time to DMCA takedown notices. Despite the legal requirement for online services to respond to such notices “expeditiously,” the lack of a clear definition for this term allows platforms to delay action, leaving pirated content available for extended periods.
UFC’s data reveals the extent of this problem, with a significant percentage of pirated livestreams and recorded content remaining online even after takedown requests are issued. To address this issue, UFC proposes updating legislative language to provide a clear definition of “expeditious,” particularly concerning live events. They advocate for a statutory definition that equates “expeditiously” with “instantaneously” or “near instantaneously” removal of pirated content to ensure effective enforcement against online piracy.
UFC’s efforts to combat online piracy extend beyond clarifying the definition of “expeditious” response to DMCA takedown notices. They also advocate for clearer guidelines regarding the termination of accounts for repeat infringers. While the DMCA currently mandates termination of accounts in “appropriate circumstances,” UFC suggests that stricter measures should be taken against individuals who repeatedly post infringing content, including implementing more stringent account verification measures.
Furthermore, UFC supports the implementation of site-blocking measures to address the activities of notorious streaming platforms that disregard copyright concerns. They propose updating U.S. law to allow courts to issue “no fault” injunctions, enabling ISPs to block pirate sites without assuming liability.
These recommendations have been presented to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, which will consider input from various stakeholders to determine whether legislative changes are necessary to enhance enforcement against online piracy.
