The future of VPN services in France has been thrown into uncertainty following a landmark court ruling that compels five major VPN providers to block access to more than 200 websites accused of streaming sports content illegally.
On May 15, the Paris Judicial Court sided with French broadcaster Canal+ and the Ligue de Football Professionnel (LFP), granting their request to force VPN companies to block domain names hosting unauthorized streams of the UEFA Champions League, Premier League, and TOP 14 rugby matches — all of which Canal+ holds exclusive broadcasting rights to in France.
The ruling targets industry leaders NordVPN, Surfshark, ExpressVPN, Proton VPN, and CyberGhost — a group widely recognized for their commitment to user privacy and internet freedom.
A Legal First in France
This case marks the first time that VPN providers have been legally defined as “technical intermediaries” in France — a classification Canal+ hailed as a significant legal precedent.
In a statement following the ruling, Canal+ said the decision “sends a strong message regarding the responsibility of VPN providers” and represents “a major step in the fight against online piracy.”
The move stems from an escalating effort to curb the growing issue of illegal sports streaming, with Canal+ initially launching proceedings in February 2025. A previous DNS-blocking order had already granted the broadcaster some success.
Industry Condemnation
The ruling has sparked sharp criticism from digital rights advocates and the VPN industry.
The Internet Infrastructure Coalition (i2Coalition) and its VPN Trust Initiative (VTI) — a working group of leading VPN providers — issued statements condemning the court’s decision. They argued that the ruling risks undermining digital privacy in France and could set a dangerous precedent.
“The French ruling not only misplaces responsibility: it fundamentally threatens the privacy and security of millions of users in France and beyond,” the i2Coalition said.
“This blocking approach — which has failed in the past — relies on blunt technical instruments instead of precise enforcement tools to address the actual sources of piracy.”
The VTI warned that blocking VPN access could lead to widespread “collateral damage” and open the door for less scrupulous actors to exploit the gap left by reputable providers.
VPN Providers React
VPN companies, which had remained silent throughout the legal process, are now publicly responding.
NordVPN acknowledged the ruling and expressed deep concern about its implications.
“We believe that in general, this decision will have a negative impact on France’s digital security,” a company spokesperson said.
“Our team is currently assessing all possible approaches that align with both legal compliance and our core commitment to our users’ freedom and privacy.”
Other providers are expected to follow suit in the coming days.
A Global Pattern Emerges
The case echoes similar controversies abroad. In 2022, India introduced legislation requiring VPN providers to store user logs — a move that prompted several companies, including NordVPN and ExpressVPN, to exit the market entirely.
Christian Dawson, Executive Director of the i2Coalition, warned in February that such policies could lead to an exodus of VPN services from France — leaving users more vulnerable and with fewer options to protect their privacy.
What’s Next?
The ruling, while focused on combating piracy, raises serious questions about how far governments and courts can go in regulating privacy tools like VPNs. Critics argue that the decision sets a dangerous precedent for infrastructure-level content blocking — a strategy that, according to the VTI, has repeatedly proven ineffective.
“Blocking content-neutral services is an imprecise enforcement strategy that creates outsized harm relative to its intended purpose,” the VTI stated.
While protecting the rights of content holders is a legitimate concern, privacy advocates caution against sacrificing broader principles of an open, secure, and accessible internet.
As VPN providers evaluate their next steps — including the possibility of withdrawing from the French market — the broader debate over online rights, enforcement, and digital sovereignty in Europe continues to intensify.
