French court backs LFP and orders top VPNs to block illegal football streams

• France issues another blocking order to five top VPNs
• The VPNs must block access to 13 illegal football stream sites
• That's the third such ruling against VPNs since May 2025

A court in Paris has ordered five well-known VPN providers to block access to illegal sports streaming sites.

The order, dated December 18, compels NordVPN, Surfshark, Proton VPN, ExpressVPN, and CyberGhost to restrict access to 13 piracy sites, ruling in favor of the Ligue de Football Professionnel (LFP).

The ruling, as first reported by TorrentFreak this week, echoes a similar order issued against the same VPN companies last May, which required these services to block access to 203 domains linked to illegal sports streaming. At the time, the VPN industry warned the move set "a dangerous precedent," warning of a chilling effect on online privacy and security.

Those concerns appear well-founded. Since the landmark May ruling, more VPN-blocking orders followed in June and July at the request of French broadcasters beIN Sports and Canal+.

What does the blocking order say?

Under the most recent ruling, the five VPN providers are required to introduce "any effective means" to prevent access to the 13 domains from within France within three days of the decision.

The measures apply for the duration of the 2025/2026 football season, which is set to end on May 24, 2026.

The list of sites affected can be extended throughout the season at the LFP's request, via the regulatory authority ARCOM.

Judge reject VPN defence

VPN providers raised several legal and technical arguments against the blocking order, which the judge rejected.

NordVPN and Surfshark argued that their no-logs infrastructure prevents them from identifying users based in France. The companies warned that collecting real user geolocation data would violate their contractual obligations.

The court responded that blocking access to illegal domains does not imply that the service needs to permanently store user information.

The VPN providers also challenged the definition of "technical intermediaries" under Article L. 333-10 of the Sports Code. The judge rejected this argument, identifying VPNs as key intermediaries in online piracy and deeming them legally liable.

According to the VPN companies, the blocking measures are also ineffective and easy to circumvent, as users could turn to another VPN or DNS service.

What's next?

We have contacted the affected VPN providers to understand how they plan to comply with the order and to clarify the implications for their users in France.

A NordVPN spokesperson confirmed to TechRadar that the company has already initiated an appeal, arguing that blocking does not eliminate the content itself or reduce the incentives for piracy.

"Effective piracy control should focus on eliminating the source of the content, targeting hosting providers, cutting off financing for illegal operations, and increasing the availability of legitimate content," said NordVPN.

The provider also warned that these orders unfairly target established, paid VPN services while leaving free alternatives largely untouched. "Free VPNs are often harder to regulate and, since users who seek to avoid paying for content are unlikely to pay for a VPN either, these services remain a loophole for pirates to bypass restrictions," NordVPN added.

Surfshark previously told TechRadar it intended to appeal the earlier May ruling. We anticipate the provider will likely file a similar challenge against this latest order.

Follow TechRadar on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button!