The main French streaming supplier Canal + seeks to block VPN access in a major climbing of anti-piration measures in the country.
After a successful legal action against the DNS services last year, Canal + has now joined the agency of the Professional Football League, Football Professionl League (LFP), Take legal orders for some of the best VPN suppliers on the market.
Needless to say, VPN companies are furious, warning that undermining people’s freedom and privacy is not the online hacking solution.
One of the targeted companies, Proton VPN told Techradar: “DNS blocking is a common strategy that authoritarian governments use to censor the web and control company. A red line.”
VPN blocking: ineffective and dangerous
A virtual private network (VPN) is security software that costs user’s internet connection to stimulate online confidentiality while usurping their real IP address.
Although this last jurisdiction is crucial to bypass strict internet restrictions imposed by the government, it can also be used as a bypass solution for current anti-piracy tactics which involve blocking access to hacking sites according to the user navigation location. This is exactly what French rights want to stop.
As reported by the French publication for the first time, Proton VPN is the target of the legal action of Canal + alongside NordVPN and Cyberghost. The country’s streaming giant has also listed Expressvpn and Surfshark as respondents.
However, according to Proton VPN, “the trial is illogical and addresses the bad problem,” a company spokesman told Techradar. Ask French right -handers, explains the supplier, Proton VPN and other VPN services to block more than 200 websites. VPN suppliers would also be required to update this list of blocks on a rolling basis.
“This injunction is undoubtedly a door open to other abuses in the future and would undermine the very nature of VPNs, which are intended to provide private and secure navigation,” said Proton VPN spokesman, indicating how the business is unprecedented in Western societies.
The VPN Trust (VTI) initiative, whose members include ExpressVPN, NordVPN, Surfshark and other suppliers, also warns that the blocking of VPNs would have “radical consequences” which could endanger the security and privacy of citizens French.
“By demanding that this group of Safety and Confidentiality VPN providers adhere to the principles of restricting access, this measure is not only unjustified, but also exposes French residents to new risks of cybersecurity, undermining their safety in Line, “wrote the coalition in a public press release.
With the most secure VPN applications blocked, experts explain that French VPN users will be pushed to alternative and less secure services, making VPN blocking an ineffective anti-piracy measure.
Not only, however. The French affair could create a precedent in the world in the fight against the use of VPNs – whose main offenders today are authoritarian countries such as China, Russia, Myanmar and Iran – opening the Like greater censorship, more broadly around the world.
“This case represents much more than a localized legal dispute,” wrote the VPN coalition. “Imposing the blocking of VPNs in France risks overacting a significant overcoming, where the legitimate and uninfilled content can be summarily cut. This triggers alarms on the unjust limitation of the rights of individuals to the freedom of information and expression. “”
What is the next step?
With the first legal audience scheduled for March 11, 2025 – as Torrentfreak reported – it is early to predict what could happen next.
A victory for the Canal + would surely send shock waves in the rehologizing industry, however, with music, the film and other copyright realities, in France and outside France, potentially follow the plunge.
However, VPN suppliers are not willing to abandon the Internet freedoms of their users so easily.
Commenting this, Proton VPN told Techradar: “These companies carry out a visible raid on the online freedom of users for their own commercial interests. Proton is determined to fight this trial at the Court of Justice.”
