The recent decision of a Spanish court to impose economic sanctions on bars that broadcast games from LaLiga without having the rights of transmission has attracted the attention of the whole country in recent days, becoming a viral news both in the sport and in the legal sphere as of today, March 25, 2025. This ruling not only reinforces the protection of intellectual property in sport, but also highlights LaLiga’s efforts to combat audiovisual piracy. However, it has generated intense debate on its economic and social repercussions, especially for small hospitality businesses that are trying to recover after the pandemic and face an increase in operating costs.
Details of the court ruling
The most recent case originated in a court of Cambados, Pontevedra, where on March 18, 2025, two bar owners were convicted of illegally broadcasting LaLiga football matches. According to the information reported, both admitted to using unauthorized signals to show the parties in their premises. The judgement included fines of 90 euros for each, in addition to compensation to LaLiga of 255,73 euros and 705,89 euros, respectively, for damages due to the misuse of audiovisual rights. These figures reflect the economic impact estimated by the unauthorized exploitation of transmissions, calculated on the basis of what the bars would have paid legally.
This case is not isolated. The same court has ten other similar procedures under way, suggesting a coordinated anti-piracy offensive in the region. In addition, at the national level, LaLiga has intensified its inspections, with more than 1,700 bars sanctioned in the 2023-2024 season and another 15,000 establishments identified for possible complaints, according to official data of the organization. In economic terms, sanctions often vary: minor criminal fines may range from €720 to €2,000, while civil compensation, such as Cambados, depends on the extent of the offence and the estimated loss of profits.
Legal context and background
The judgement is aligned with the doctrine of the Spanish Supreme Court, which has been established in sentences such as that of 2 June 2022 (546/2022). In this sentence, it was determined that issuing parties without proper authorization is a slight offence against the market and consumers (article 286.4 of the Criminal Code), which carries fines, but it is not considered a crime against intellectual property that involves prison sentences, since sporting events are not classified as “literary, artistic or scientific works”. This distinction has allowed LaLiga to act against offenders through economic sanctions and civil lawsuits, thus avoiding more complicated criminal proceedings, but ensuring compensation for damage to their exclusive rights.
LaLiga, which manages the audiovisual rights of the First and Second Division, estimates that piracy costs Spanish professional football between 600 and 700 million euros a year. To address this problem, it has a team of 60 verifiers spread across the country and uses advanced technologies such as tracking illicit signals and mobile applications to detect fraudulent emissions in bars. This practice was endorsed in 2024 by the Supreme Court, which annulled a pre-LaLiga sanction for data protection issues.
Analysis: Reactions and consequences
The failure has caused mixed reactions. On the one hand, LaLiga and the legal operators, such as Telefónica (Movistar+) and DAZN, who invest millions in the rights of transmission (1,290 million euros to 2027 only by Telefónica), see this measure as a step towards the protection of an audiovisual market worth billions. Javier Tebas, president of LaLiga, has defended these actions by saying that “86 per cent of judicial proceedings end in convictions,” which reinforces his strategy against piracy.
However, criticisms have not taken long, especially from the hospitality sector. The small bars, which face monthly quotas of between 200 and 400 euros to legally issue the parties (depending on the size and location of the venue), consider the sanctions disproportionate. In places like Medina del Campo or in neighborhoods of medium-sized cities, where influx does not always justify spending, many hostelers opt for pirate signals as a viable alternative. “To be compensated, 30 people have to come to see the parties, and that only happens to the big ones,” said an entrepreneur in an Infobae report in 2024, reflecting a reality that clashes with the legal requirements.
Economists and autonomous associations, such as the Bureau of Tourism, have warned that these sanctions could worsen the situation of a sector already hit by inflation and competition for digital platforms. On the other hand, legal experts argue that protecting intellectual property is crucial to maintaining the football economy, which has an impact of 1.44% on Spanish GDP (about 18,000 million euros in the 2021-2022 season, according to Msanchez.es).
Economic and social impact
Economic sanctions, although moderate in cases such as Cambados (with a total of 345.73 and 795.89 euros per bar), can be accumulated along with recurrent fines and legal expenses, which puts at risk the viability of small businesses. In more severe sanctions situations, such as those imposed on fraudulent decoder sellers in 2024 (which can reach up to 20,000 euros and prison sentences from six months to one year), the deterrent message is quite clear, but its impact on the hospitality sector generates tensions. For LaLiga, each bar sanctioned is a symbolic victory, but the challenge remains great: in 2017, 48% of the 105,000 bars broadcasting football did it illegally; today, that figure has decreased to 33% (between 25,000 and 30,000), but it remains a considerable number.
Future perspectives
This ruling could mark a before and after how inspections and sanctions are handled from 2025, especially with the arrival of new audiovisual rights contracts that Telefónica has achieved since January 2025 until the 2026-2027 season. However, it also opens the door to debate on other options: some suggest more affordable rates for small hostelers or awareness campaigns rather than impose sanctions. Meanwhile, the division between those who see football as a business that must be protected and those who consider it a cultural good that everyone should have access will remain a burning theme in Spain.
In short, although fines may seem small in individual cases (90 euros of fine plus compensation that can reach hundreds of euros), they represent a broader struggle for the control of sports rights, with consequences that go beyond the economic and touch the social essence of a country where football is part of daily life.
