Anti-Piracy Measures Threaten Internet Access

Have you ever tried to visit a website only to have it not load at all? It turns out this isn't just a random glitch. In Italy and Spain, strict measures to fight online piracy have led to unexpected disruptions for many regular internet users.

In an effort to combat illegal streaming, the authorities have resorted to blocking entire websites and even whole IP addresses. The problem? These blocks often trap lots of perfectly normal sites and online services along the way.

For example, both countries are targeting shared infrastructure. Instead of isolating the culprits, they're blocking IP addresses used by major companies like Cloudflare, Vercel, and even Google. Since these companies host thousands of websites from various clients, blocking one IP may inadvertently shut down many legitimate services.

Italy's "Piracy Shield": Fast But Flawed

Italy launched its "Piracy Shield" initiative back in early 2024, managed by its communications watchdog, AGCOM. The aim was to swiftly block illegal live sports streams. Companies owning streaming rights can now directly report websites or IP addresses they believe are infringing, and Italian ISPs must act fast—often within just 30 minutes.

However, this rapid response system has its downsides:

• Cloudflare Incident (February 2024): On February 24, 2024, one particular Cloudflare IP address (188.114.97.7) was blocked. Because many websites share this IP, tens of thousands of perfectly legitimate sites were affected. Cloudflare advised affected website owners to contact AGCOM.
• Google Drive Disruption: Even parts related to Google Drive (hosted on a subdomain of Google) were mistakenly blocked, causing widespread inconvenience.
• Legal Battles: Serie A, Italy's top football league, even took Cloudflare to court. Eventually, a Milan court ruled that while Cloudflare wasn't directly at fault, it had to restrict certain pirate services specifically for Italian users.

Critics argue that the Piracy Shield is poorly designed and may violate European Union laws.

Spain: LALIGA's Broad Blocking Mandate and "Indiscriminate" Enforcement

A similar, and arguably more technically blunt, situation has unfolded in Spain, driven by LALIGA, the country's premier football league, in partnership with telecommunications giant Telefonica.

• Court Authorization: In December 2024, Commercial Court No. 6 of Barcelona granted LALIGA the authority to require major Spanish ISPs (including Movistar, Vodafone, and Orange) to block IP addresses associated with unauthorized football streaming. This ruling was upheld by the court in March 2025.
• Indiscriminate IP Blocking: Critically, the enforcement mechanism involves Spanish ISPs blocking entire IP addresses associated with alleged piracy. As Vercel highlighted, this is done without using more precise techniques like inspecting the Server Name Indication (SNI) header, which would allow blocking specific domains while leaving other legitimate sites on the same IP address untouched. This results in any website or service sharing the blocked IP being rendered inaccessible in Spain, regardless of its legitimacy. Vercel described this as "indiscriminate internet blocking" and "unaccountable internet censorship."
• Targeting Critical Infrastructure: The blocking orders have impacted major infrastructure providers, including Vercel, Cloudflare, GitHub Pages, and BunnyCDN. These blocks are often enforced specifically during LALIGA match days (typically weekends and select weekdays).
• Vercel Impact and Resolution: Vercel confirmed that specific IPs it uses (including 66.33.60.129 and 76.76.21.142) were blocked, affecting legitimate Spanish customers like Tinybird and Hello Magazine, despite these services having no connection to piracy. Vercel emphasized the lack of review, due process, or transparency in how LALIGA, a private organization, triggers these IP-wide blocks.
• Legal Challenges Dismissed: Despite the collateral damage, attempts by Cloudflare and RootedCON to challenge the blocking orders were dismissed by the Barcelona court, which found insufficient evidence of damage presented at that time and affirmed LALIGA's right to pursue the blocks.

The Underlying Problem: Targeting Shared Infrastructure

Both the Italian and Spanish incidents highlight the fundamental problem of trying to police the modern internet by blocking IP addresses:

• Shared Resources: CDNs and cloud platforms host vast numbers of websites on shared IPs.
• Blunt Instrument: Blocking an entire IP is indiscriminate, affecting numerous innocent parties. The failure to use available, more targeted methods like SNI inspection in the Spanish case makes the collateral damage even more pronounced.
• Ineffectiveness vs. Harm: While causing significant harm, IP blocking is often ineffective against pirates who can change IPs, while legitimate businesses and users suffer disruptions.

Conclusion: A Call for Proportionate and Technically Sound Measures

The experiences in Italy and Spain, particularly the detailed account from Vercel regarding the Spanish situation, serve as stark warnings. Implementing broad, automated, or technically indiscriminate IP blocking systems as an anti-piracy tool leads to significant collateral damage, effectively censoring legitimate content and disrupting essential online services. Vercel's call for enforcement efforts to be "targeted, transparent, and technically sound" resonates strongly. While the resolution concerning specific Vercel IPs shows that collaboration can mitigate immediate harm, the underlying court orders and the potential for future indiscriminate blocking remain concerns. Protecting copyright is vital, but it must be balanced against the need for an open, accessible internet. For a deeper dive into these challenges, check out this video where theo explains the problem in detail.