Piracy Shield and Fundamental Rights: The Italian Anti-Piracy System Under Scrutiny by the European Union
In February 2024, Italy introduced a system to combat digital piracy that is unprecedented in the European landscape: Piracy Shield. Designed to block the illicit distribution of sporting events and copyrighted content, Copyright The system is managed by AGCOM and is based on a mechanism for promptly blocking access to suspicious content, with a reaction time of less than 30 minutes.
However, just over a year after its entry into force, the European Commission raised formal doubts about the Italian system's compliance with the Digital Services Act (DSA), particularly with regard to the protection of fundamental rights, including freedom of expression, transparency, and data protection.
What does the Piracy Shield provide?
The system allows rights holders (e.g., television broadcasters) to report violations in real time, obtaining a blocking order from AGCOM for ISPs, DNS resolvers, CDNs, and VPN providers. This is possible without prior judicial approval. The mechanism also applies to dynamic IPs and foreign DNS, thus making content migration to new domains ineffective.
The goal is clear: to prevent the illegal broadcast of live events (especially sporting events), where the effectiveness of protection is measured in hours, not years.
The call of the European Union
On June 13, 2025, the European Commission notified the Italian State of a formal request for clarification, highlighting potential compatibility issues with the DSA, which came into full force in February 2024.
The main findings:
Lack of transparency: there is no provision for adequate adversarial proceedings or public justification for blocking decisions.
Overblocking: There have been numerous reports of legitimate sites being mistakenly blocked, including even Google services.
Lack of prior judicial review, in conflict with Article 8 of the DSA, which requires procedural safeguards when limiting legal content.
Furthermore, requiring providers to execute blocks without independent control could violate the principle of technological neutrality and raise sensitive questions regarding intermediaries' liability.
The practical consequences: between inconveniences and protests
In addition to the regulatory concerns, the system has already caused concrete repercussions:
VPN provider AirVPN has stopped providing services to Italian citizens, deeming it impossible to operate in compliance with its transparency and data protection standards.
Some public DNS resolvers (Cloudflare, OpenDNS) have had to change their policies to avoid indirect liability.
Ordinary users have reported the inability to access completely legal content, pointing to a paralyzing effect on the digital ecosystem.
The balance between protection of the copyright and digital rights
The heart of the debate is legal and constitutional: how far can copyright protection go without compromising fundamental freedoms such as access to information, freedom of enterprise, and the protection of privacy?
The Digital Services Act imposes a transparent and proportionate moderation model, which presupposes:
human evaluation and motivation of the decision,
possibility of appeal by the user,
publication of transparency reports by the authorities.
The Piracy Shield, in its current formulation, seems to sacrifice such guarantees in favor of an efficient but summary protection of the copyright .
The discussions between Italy and the EU Commission are just beginning. If the Italian government fails to provide satisfactory responses, formal infringement proceedings will be initiated, with possible regulatory changes or sanctions.
Meanwhile, the debate is also involving national courts, where appeals have already been filed against AGCOM for violation of constitutional rights, and Parliament, which may need to revise the basic legislation in light of European observations.