Spain’s fight against illegal IPTV streaming has taken another controversial turn, with new research suggesting that more than 500,000 legitimate websites have been unintentionally blocked during efforts to combat football piracy.

According to research published by the Open Observatory of Network Interference (OONI), over 554,000 websites were affected between January and June 2026 as internet providers carried out court-approved blocks aimed at disrupting illegal streams of La Liga football matches.

While tackling piracy remains an important goal for broadcasters and rights holders, critics argue that the methods being used are increasingly affecting ordinary internet users and legitimate businesses that have nothing to do with illegal streaming.

Why Are Legitimate Websites Being Blocked?

The issue centres on how today’s internet is built.

Many websites no longer operate from their own dedicated server or IP address. Instead, they use Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) such as Cloudflare, Amazon CloudFront, Microsoft Azure or Akamai.

These services improve website performance, provide security against cyber attacks and help distribute traffic efficiently around the world.

The downside is that a single IP address can be shared by thousands of completely unrelated websites.

If authorities instruct internet service providers to block that shared IP because it is being used by an illegal IPTV service, every other website using the same address can also become inaccessible.

This phenomenon is known as collateral blocking, and it is becoming an increasing concern as more websites move to shared cloud infrastructure.

More Than Half a Million Sites Affected

OONI’s report found that:

• More than 554,000 domains experienced blocking.
• Over 7,400 IP addresses were affected.
• The blocked addresses were spread across 36 hosting providers.
• The vast majority of affected websites were hosted behind Cloudflare’s network.

Some well-known organisations, including charities and non-profit groups, were reportedly caught up in the blocking despite having no connection whatsoever to illegal streaming.

For affected users, websites may simply fail to load, display connection errors or appear offline, even though the websites themselves are operating normally.

Why Is La Liga Taking This Approach?

Illegal IPTV remains one of the biggest threats to sports broadcasters worldwide.

Pirate streaming services can switch domains quickly, making it difficult to block individual websites.

Instead, La Liga has successfully obtained court approval allowing Spanish internet providers to block IP addresses associated with illegal streaming infrastructure during live football matches.

Supporters of the strategy argue that targeting the underlying infrastructure makes it harder for pirate operators to continue broadcasting matches.

Critics, however, believe the approach is far too broad and causes unnecessary disruption for innocent websites and businesses.

Cloudflare Responds

Cloudflare has repeatedly argued that it does not host illegal content but instead provides security and networking services for millions of websites.

Because thousands of websites can share the same Cloudflare IP address, blocking those addresses can unintentionally remove access to a huge number of perfectly legitimate websites.

The company has challenged aspects of Spain’s blocking measures, arguing that more targeted enforcement should be used against the operators of illegal IPTV services rather than the internet infrastructure shared by legitimate organisations.

Which Websites Were Caught Up in the Blocks?

While the anti-piracy measures were aimed at illegal IPTV services, the use of shared internet infrastructure meant that many unrelated websites were also affected. Researchers reported that organisations including Amnesty International and Greenpeace were among those that became temporarily inaccessible for some users on certain Spanish internet providers. Beyond these high-profile examples, the blocking also impacted thousands of small business websites, personal blogs, online stores, software developers and other legitimate services hosted behind platforms such as Cloudflare. In many cases, the websites themselves had done nothing wrong—they simply happened to share the same IP address as a site targeted during the anti-piracy campaign. The result was that some users encountered connection errors or timeouts during live football matches, even though the affected websites remained fully operational elsewhere.

Privacy Questions Also Raised

The OONI report also highlighted evidence suggesting that one Spanish internet provider may have used TLS interception during some blocking events.

Normally, HTTPS encryption prevents internet providers from viewing or modifying secure web traffic.

If confirmed, TLS interception would represent a much more significant concern than simple website blocking, raising wider questions about internet security and user privacy.

Researchers have called for further investigation into these findings.

What Does This Mean for Website Owners?

For website owners, particularly those using popular cloud hosting platforms or services like Cloudflare, the report highlights an unexpected risk.

A perfectly legitimate website could become temporarily unreachable for visitors in Spain simply because it shares infrastructure with a website targeted during anti-piracy operations.

For users, the result is confusing. Websites appear broken or offline, when in reality they are functioning normally everywhere else.

The Debate Continues

Few people dispute that illegal IPTV piracy costs broadcasters millions and should be tackled effectively.

However, as more websites rely on shared cloud infrastructure, questions are growing over whether large-scale IP blocking remains the right tool for the job.

With more than half a million legitimate websites reportedly affected in just six months, Spain’s anti-piracy campaign is becoming as much a debate about internet infrastructure and digital rights as it is about stopping illegal football streams.

Whether future enforcement becomes more targeted remains to be seen, but the discussion over balancing copyright protection with keeping the wider internet accessible is unlikely to disappear anytime soon.