What happened
On or around 28 August 2026, Argentine courts ordered more than 300 live-sports piracy domains blocked. The case was led by the cybercrime prosecutors' unit (UFEIC) of San Isidro, headed by deputy prosecutor general Patricio Ferrari. It began with a complaint from the Alianza contra la Piratería Audiovisual, with LaLiga collaborating. Señal News reported the blocking was carried out in real time as a Copa Sudamericana match began. The sites named include Fútbol Libre, Pelota Libre, Tarjeta Roja and PirloTV. The report does not mention VPNs, and I found no Argentine measure that targets VPNs themselves.
The VPN question comes from what happened earlier this year. On 10 and 11 February 2026, the Magis TV and Xuper TV services stopped working after an order from Judge Esteban Rossignoli covering more than 70 domains. It required ISPs to block domains and IP addresses, and Google to disable the apps on Android devices in Argentina. TorrentFreak reported that Proton VPN posted a chart on 10 February showing a sharp spike in Argentine connections. The reported figures are a chart, not published usage numbers, so the size of the surge is unverified.
The case for tougher enforcement
The strongest argument for the blocks is a fair one. Live sport is perishable. A match pirated while it is being played costs rights holders their value in real time, and notice-and-takedown does not work when mirror sites reappear within hours. Argentina's basic copyright statute, Ley 11.723, already treats defrauding intellectual property rights as a crime (art. 71, which refers to art. 172 of the Penal Code). Argentina has also made trade commitments. A USTR fact sheet on the November 2025 framework says Argentina "will continue to improve enforcement against counterfeit and pirated goods, including in the online environment." The two countries signed the full agreement on 5 February 2026, days before the Magis TV order. TorrentFreak says its Article 1.10 requires criminal proceedings against operators of Argentina-based piracy sites. Prosecutors are under real pressure to show results.
Why the VPN extension is the wrong move
Domain blocking has a known side effect: it teaches users to route around the block. A user who loses a site through their ISP's DNS can reach it again with a VPN, a changed DNS setting or a mirror. TorrentFreak describes Argentine users doing exactly this, including connecting through a Mexican VPN server and manually changing smart TV DNS settings. If blocking makes workarounds more popular, the pressure will be to widen the order from the pirate site to the tool.
That would be a mistake, for three reasons.
- VPNs are general-purpose privacy infrastructure. Journalists, remote workers, companies and ordinary users on public Wi-Fi use them. Ley 11.723, as I read it, penalises infringement of the work. I found nothing in it that makes the use of a VPN an offence. Crónica calls using a VPN to evade geographic restrictions "totally illegal," but it cites no statute in the text I retrieved. That kind of claim shouldn't harden into policy by repetition.
- It would be ineffective. VPN providers can change IP addresses, protocols and servers faster than a court can issue and ISPs can implement orders. Each round would catch a few commercial VPN domains while pirates move to the next circumvention route. The cost would fall on lawful users.
- Proportionality fails. The demonstrated harm is piracy of live sport. Blocking an entire category of encryption software to reach it is far broader than the harm. The better target is the commercial operators. In the February action, UFEIC conducted raids and seized hundreds of TV boxes, and those identified as responsible face up to six years in prison, according to TorrentFreak. That is a measure aimed at the people who profit.
What a proportionate policy looks like
Argentina does not need to choose between ignoring piracy and attacking circumvention tools. A workable approach has four parts.
- Keep enforcement on operators and paid distribution: the people running the sites, the resellers of pre-loaded boxes and the payment channels.
- Make every blocking order public and reviewable. Domain lists should be published with the order, with a way to challenge overblocking. Real-time blocking of 300+ domains in a single operation makes errors more likely, and these orders need an appeal path.
- Rule out VPN-targeting orders by statute or guidance, so a judge doesn't have to decide ad hoc whether a provider is an accomplice. Providers are neutral carriers of traffic.
- Invest in legal supply. Piracy of football thrives where legal access is expensive or fragmented. Competitive, fairly priced sports streaming does more to reduce piracy than any block.
The bottom line
The August operation has not touched VPNs. It sits in a sequence, though: block sites, see VPN use rise, then face calls to widen the net. Argentina's institutions can break that sequence now, before an order exists. Rights holders have a legitimate interest in stopping commercial pirates, and prosecutors have the tools to do it. Enforcement that stays on the operators protects both creators and the open internet. Enforcement that moves to the tools used by everyone else will not stop piracy and will cost privacy.