A Hartlepool man who sold illegal media player boxes which allowed the free viewing of premium television content has pleaded guilty to breaching the Copyright, Designs & Patents Act 1988.
Malcolm Mayes, sold IPTV boxes, sometimes referred to as ‘Kodi’ boxes or ‘Android’ boxes, which had been modified to allow the users to freely view content that should otherwise be paid for. When a box has been modified in this way it is often described as being ‘fully loaded’.
Mr Mayes targeted pubs and clubs when selling the devices, falsely claiming in national magazine adverts that they were ‘100% legal’. He sold the boxes for around £1,000 each which enabled his customers to stream live ‘pay to view’ content, including live Premier League football, free of charge.
National Trading Standards conducted a test purchase on a device sold by Mr Mayes and found the box had been adapted so as to allow ‘pay to view’ programmes to be viewed free of charge.
Following his guilty plea at Teesside Crown Court, Mr Mayes was sentenced to ten months in prison (suspended for one year) and ordered to pay costs of £170,000. A Proceeds of Crime Act order was also made against him for a further £80,000.
Commenting on the conviction Lord Toby Harris, Chair of National Trading Standards, said:
“Mr Mayes knowingly sold these illegal boxes which breached copyright law, misleading small businesses by falsely claiming that these devices were legal. I hope this conviction sends a clear message that criminal activity doesn’t pay.
“I would also warn any person or business selling or operating such a device that they are in breach of copyright law. National Trading Standards will continue to protect legitimate business and pursue those who breach copyright in this way.”
Ian Harrison, Trading Standards & Licensing Manager for Hartlepool Borough Council said:
“The cost of this case has been significant to Mr Mayes. In pleading guilty he has accepted that it is illegal to sell a device that allows the free viewing of ‘pay to view’ television. This is common sense and should be obvious to anyone.
“Mr Mayes should not be seen as a Robin Hood type character. In selling these devices he was not stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. He was stealing from the rich to make himself richer. Many of the pubs and clubs that bought his devices lost significant amounts of money when the devices failed to operate as promised.
“We will continue to target those traders and individuals who make their living from selling counterfeit goods or in other ways allow intellectual property to be stolen.”