Prosecutions of those involved in the sale of pirate IPTV subscriptions appear to be on the rise, not just in the UK, but also in the EU and beyond.
Resources made available for these cases are in limited supply but by carefully selecting those with the best chance of success, there appears to be a high rate of conviction, despite attitudes to infringement differing in various regions.
A persistent difficulty when attempting to compare similar cases, is whether aggravating or mitigating factors played a significant role in sentencing. Whether a sentence is too harsh, not harsh enough, or simply par for the course, becomes almost impossible to determine when this relevant information is excluded.
Husband and Wife Team Sentenced
On Friday, the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) reported on the sentencing of a man and woman from County Londonderry for IPTV-related offenses. Cormac McGuckin (38) and Maura McGuckin (34), a married couple from Bellaghy, had appeared on FACT's radar before the anti-piracy group referred the matter to the police. That led to a “lengthy and complex investigation” by detectives which FACT says concerned the sale of subscriptions “with more than £700,000 involved.”
FACT's report notes that on June 4, 2024, Cormac McGuckin pled guilty to charges including participating in a fraudulent business between January 1, 2016 and June 18, 2020. “He also admitted possessing articles for use in fraud on June 18, 2020. He also pled guilty to charges of converting criminal property, possessing criminal property and transferring criminal property,” FACT notes.
At Omagh Crown Court on Friday, Cormac McGuckin received a four-year sentence, two years to be served in prison with the remaining two years spent on license.
On the same day, Maura McGuckin pled guilty to “converting criminal property on holiday-related expenses and car payments, and possessing criminal property,” FACT reports. For these offenses, committed between April 21, 2017 and June 18, 2020, the 34-year-old received a 12-month prison sentence, suspended for two years.
Too Long, Too Short, Or About Right?
In IPTV piracy cases, how much the offenders “made” is often interpreted as profit by the media but usually relates to the total amount customers paid, with no costs taken into consideration.
In this case, FACT's comment of “more than £700,000 involved” is a reference to the total sum of money involved in all of the charges to which the defendants pled guilty. Our best estimates suggest the following;
• ~£737,000 was transferred into and out of a joint PayPal account (total amount)
• ~£684,000 of total relates to charges of ‘transferring criminal property' (five counts)
• ~£367,000 of total relates to charge of ‘possessing criminal property'
• ~£30,000 in seized cash relates to charge of ‘possessing criminal property'
• -Seized laptops/mobile phones relate to a charge of ‘possessing items for use in fraud'
The charges of converting criminal property against Maura McGuckin (and Cormac) initially reported by FACT concerns around £45,000 in finance payments for high-end cars and around £26,700 spent on holidays. When combined, that's over £70,000 spent on obvious luxuries. The Court didn't buy the claim that McGuckin failed to grasp her husband's line of business but with an otherwise clean record, 12 months' prison suspended for two years isn't especially surprising.
The same can't be said about a laundry list of aggravating factors relevant to the sentencing of her husband.
IPTV Offenses Occurred Shortly After Release From Prison
The investigation into McGuckin's activities led detectives to the El Paso Burrito Bar in Dungannon, a takeaway/delivery restaurant owned by McGuckin at that time. When police eventually swooped, searches took place at both the takeaway and at McGuckin's home.
Evidence seized included electronic devices and information that showed IPTV sales to around 2,000 subscribers. If 2,000 customers paid £7.50 per month and subscribed every month for four years, that's £15,000 for 48 months, to a grand total of £720,000. Of that amount, it's estimated that £475,000 represented profit. In broad terms, the figures sound about right.
Less easily consumed is the fact that McGuckin's pirate IPTV-related offenses began soon after he'd been released from prison after serving eight months, while still on license for a fraud offense the court described as “shocking.”
In 2012, McGuckin had been working at a company selling wine. There he befriended a customer, a 71-year-old pensioner suffering with Alzheimer's. Through abuse of the customer's account at the wine company and writing out fraudulent checks to himself or his soon-to-be wife, the pensioner was conned out of at least £17,000. He only found out when the bank called about a £10,000 overdraft he knew nothing about.
After being arrested and interviewed twice, on both occasions McGuckin claimed the money was a loan. He later admitted that part of the money was used to pay for his wife's wedding dress and bridal accessories, a local news outlet reports.
Involved in Other Criminality?
Anti-piracy groups like FACT push specific messaging to the public through repetition, but mostly without practical examples that would serve to make those claims more credible. One key claim is that many of those involved in the sale of pirate IPTV are often involved in other criminality too.
Yet despite that clearly being the case here, with previous convictions mentioned in court as an aggravating factor, the above received no mention. The same applies to a one-month prison sentence (suspended for two years) in 2012 for one count of fraud and 13 of theft for using a former employer's credit card to steal around £1,000.
Not even impersonating a police officer, in order to have his wife's wedding tiara released from a shop, when the shop had refused to release it because of police inquiries into credit card transactions, made it as background. According to an Irish News report, McGuckin has 23 previous convictions for fraud and dishonesty, including the theft of £17,000 from the 71-year-old which the paper says was partly used to replace money stolen from his then fiancée, now wife.
Conclusion
That the IPTV-related offenses took place while on still on license following another conviction for fraud, is clearly problematic. The report claiming 23 previous convictions for fraud and other dishonesty-based crimes not only shows a prolific offender, but one that the courts could've stopped longed ago, but failed to do so.
To that background and the money sums involved, two years in prison seems unlikely to act as a deterrent and tends to make the justice system appear somewhat weak. A comment from Detective Sergeant Robinson thanked FACT for its support and reminded everyone that piracy is not a victimless crime. It also came with a warning, most impactful if read in isolation, less so in the context of the above.
“Users and subscribers of illegal services should also be aware that they too are committing an offense for which they can be identified and prosecuted,” Det Sgt Robinson said.
From: _, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.
Written by David Minister
By David Minister
Be the first to comment