STUDY: “THE PRICE OF PIRACY”: ILLEGAL STREAMING CAN COST VIEWERS DEARLY. FINANCIAL LOSSES FROM FRAUD AND THEFT ARE ESTIMATED AT 270 MILLION LIBER ANNUALY

Illegally streaming films, TV shows and sports broadcasts is not just a matter of copyright infringement. It can also expose viewers themselves to financial scams, identity theft and other security risks. According to a UK survey, 37% of active users of illegal streams encountered harmful or unsafe content while accessing pirated material. The study also highlights potential links between piracy services and organised crime and proposes measures that could help curb illegal streaming.

Football fan Neil began using unofficial streaming services to watch sports broadcasts at a lower cost. After he paid via PayPal for an upgrade to one of these services, unauthorised transactions followed, with a total of £2,500 disappearing from his account. In addition to the financial loss, the incident caused him considerable stress as he tried to recover his money.

Neil's story is one of the real-life cases described in the UK study The Price of Piracy: Hidden Costs of Illegal Streaming to the UK Economy. Alongside the economic consequences of piracy for the audiovisual industry, the report also examines the risks faced by users of illegal streaming services themselves. The authors highlight financial fraud, theft of personal information and payment details, malware and potential links between piracy services and organised crime. The study also points to measures that could help reduce piracy.

Fraud and theft are estimated to cost illegal streaming viewers £270 million a year

According to WPI Economics, the annual financial losses suffered by UK users of illegal streaming services as a result of fraud, theft and identity theft amount to approximately £270 million. The research used a relatively narrow definition of financial harm, and its authors consider the figure a conservative estimate. Actual losses could therefore be even higher. Some respondents reported financial losses of up to £5,000. The study also cites earlier research that used a broader definition of financial fraud. According to that research, average losses could reach £1,680 per person.

More than one-third of illegal streaming viewers have encountered harmful or inappropriate content

One of the most significant risks of illegal streaming is exposure to malware and unsafe websites. According to WPI Economics' own survey, 37% of active users of illegal streams encountered harmful or unsafe content when accessing pirated sources. Among active illegal streaming viewers, 30% encountered malware, viruses or pop-up advertisements, while 11% encountered content they considered inappropriate. These groups may overlap.

The authors note that a common tactic used by fraudsters is to trick users into installing malicious software. Such software can be used to steal login credentials, collect personal information or misuse payment details. The study also mentions banking Trojans, malicious programs designed to steal banking information.

In this context, WPI Economics refers to earlier research conducted for the AAPA (Audiovisual Anti-Piracy Alliance) in 2022. That research found malware in 57% of the illegal streaming devices and IPTV applications examined. Another study by FACT and Webroot from the same year classified 90% of the illegal streaming websites examined as risky because of malware or inappropriate content. These figures are therefore not findings from WPI Economics' own 2026 survey, but results drawn from previous research.

A US study from 2023 also highlighted a possible connection between visits to piracy websites and identity theft. According to data cited in the UK report, 44% of people who had visited a piracy website experienced identity theft, compared with 10% of those who had not visited such sites. This substantial difference highlights the security risks associated with the piracy ecosystem, but it does not, in itself, prove that all the reported cases of identity theft were directly caused by visiting a piracy website.

Illegal streaming can also lead to compromised user accounts

In addition to direct financial losses, users may also face compromised online accounts and loss of control over their personal data.

The study describes, for example, the experience of a woman named Amelia, who began using unofficial streaming services and a modified Amazon Fire Stick to access a wider range of content at a lower price. After purchasing the device and subsequently using unofficial streaming websites, she experienced attempted fraudulent payments, compromised user accounts and a hack of her Facebook profile. Her experience illustrates that using illegal streaming sources can be associated not only with financial scams but also with threats to personal information and online accounts. Piracy services can therefore expose users to risks whose financial and other consequences may far outweigh the savings that originally led them to choose illegal content.

UK consumers are estimated to spend £1.2 billion a year on pirated content

Illegal streaming certainly does not always mean that viewers access content for free. According to the WPI Economics survey, more than a quarter of active illegal streaming viewers pay to access pirated content — 28%, to be precise. The authors estimate that UK users spend approximately £1.2 billion annually in this way.

According to the authors, this spending also has serious wider social consequences. The study warns that piracy services can be a source of funding for organised criminal groups involved in the illegal distribution of content. Viewers' payments may therefore indirectly support other criminal activity. However, the estimate does not mean that the entire £1.2 billion automatically goes to organised crime.

Links to organised crime may extend beyond payments for illegal services. Citing other specialist sources, the authors warn that malware installed in connection with pirated content can allow criminal groups to exploit users' internet connections. Their IP addresses may then be used to conceal other illegal activities, including cyberattacks and financial fraud.

The possibility of indirectly financing organised crime also surprised Amelia, whose experience is described in detail in the study. She said she had never associated paying for illegal streaming with supporting criminal activities. Had she known about this connection earlier, she said, she would not have watched content illegally. Her reaction suggests that awareness of the wider consequences of piracy may be an important motivation for some viewers to change their behaviour.

More than half of illegal streaming viewers expect to continue pirating content

Despite the numerous risks associated with illegal streaming services, reducing their use may not be straightforward. According to the survey, 52% of active illegal streaming viewers expect to continue accessing pirated content. The study's authors therefore stress that existing efforts to curb the illegal distribution of content need to be complemented by measures aimed at users themselves and at improving their awareness.

Rights holders and other stakeholders already spend tens of millions of pounds each year on anti-piracy measures. The study also refers to existing UK legislation, particularly the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 and the Digital Economy Act 2017. According to the authors, the powers provided by these laws focus primarily on restricting the supply of pirated content and prosecuting those who distribute it illegally. However, limited consumer awareness of the security risks of illegal streaming remains a problem.

The research also suggests that change is possible. If a strategy were implemented that made illegal content harder to access and emphasised the associated risks, 34% of active illegal streaming viewers said they would be likely to stop using pirated sources. However, this is a stated intention among respondents, not an observed reduction in piracy following the introduction of specific measures.

How can piracy be reduced? Public awareness and cooperation with technology platforms are essential

The study's authors propose two main approaches. The first is reducing demand for illegal services by improving consumer awareness. The second is limiting the availability and visibility of pirated content. According to the authors, both approaches should form part of coordinated cooperation among public authorities, broadcasters, rights holders, technology platforms and internet service providers.

In terms of public awareness, they recommend greater involvement by the UK government in information campaigns highlighting financial scams, data theft and other cyber risks. One specific option they mention is supporting the existing BeStreamWise initiative, which focuses on the dangers of illegal streaming. According to the study, its focus is also consistent with the aims of the UK government's Stop! Think Fraud campaign, which is dedicated to fraud prevention. The authors argue that using official government communication channels could help reach a broader range of consumers.

The second area is cooperation among organisations that can influence the spread of illegal content. The authors recommend establishing a voluntary cross-industry framework setting out shared principles for technology platforms, internet service providers and content services. Such a framework should recognise the differing capabilities and responsibilities of individual stakeholders and enable coordinated, proportionate anti-piracy measures.

The study also identifies three specific areas for potential cooperation. The first is more effective action against repeat infringers, particularly those who continue illegally distributing content after previous interventions. The second concerns using existing technologies to detect pirated content and restrict access to it. The third is greater transparency and responsible sharing of aggregated data on how illegal services are used and on emerging trends. The aim is to better understand how piracy is evolving and coordinate more effective responses.

Warnings about copyright infringement alone may not be enough

The UK study's findings show that illegal streaming is not solely a problem for television companies, film producers or sports organisations. Viewers themselves also face risks, potentially losing money, personal information or control over their online accounts. Some of the money spent on piracy services may also support organised crime.

According to the authors, this personal dimension could be an important argument in efforts to reduce piracy. Highlighting financial and cybersecurity risks while making illegal content harder to access could help change viewing behaviour. The study therefore suggests that protecting consumers themselves may play a significant role alongside protecting copyright.

About the study: The report The Price of Piracy: Hidden Costs of Illegal Streaming to the UK Economy was prepared by UK consultancy WPI Economics in association with the BeStreamWise initiative. It examines the scale and nature of illegal streaming of films, TV shows and sports broadcasts in the United Kingdom, its economic impact, the risks to viewers and possible ways to curb digital piracy. Among other sources, the study draws on a survey of 2,501 respondents conducted by JL Partners between 3 and 11 February 2026. In addition to the survey findings, it uses other statistical and specialist sources, as well as its own economic models, to estimate the financial and wider economic impacts of piracy.

Source: The Price of Piracy – WPI Economics, 2026