Why the ‘Driverless’ Narrative Is Failing the Freight Industry

27 January 2026

Toby Patrick

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

To many people, the thought of stepping into a driverless vehicle or being surrounded by them would seem risky. Yet despite this, according to many, the future of freight is driverless. But if we are moving towards a driverless future, we’re doing so more slowly than was expected. Is this an us problem, or is it a technology problem?

Modern silver train on tracks in an urban area, with mountains in the background. Visible power lines and a sign in the foreground.

Fear Before Function

There’s a lot of talk about driverless technology, but the action doesn’t match the talk. If we were to go back to the start of the millennium, I think most opinion leaders would agree that we’d be surrounded by driverless cars, trains, trucks and planes. Even in today’s current state of affairs, driverless vehicles seem to make the news regularly, but how many businesses are actually using the technology? How many people have stepped into a driverless vehicle? The numbers are pretty low, and there still appears to be a massive gap between marketing and adoption.

The Skill Shortage

The industry also appears to be at somewhat of a crossroads. Fewer people are undergoing transport training out of fear of a driverless future, but driverless technology isn’t at the point where it can replace traditional transport.

Not only does this contribute towards a driver shortage, but it has also contributed to a skill shortage in terms of developing driverless tech. While some are wary of entering the industry as a driver, others are viewing it from the opposite side, hesitant to step into technology-based roles in case the industry doesn’t come into fruition.

This is leaving the industry with an all-around shortage, and it may explain why the vision of a driverless future hasn’t taken off. In short, the industry is in desperate need of a recruitment-driven rebrand that attracts skilled drivers, engineers and startups to help transition us from one era to the next.

The Reality

We often fall into the trap of assuming that automation and robotics replace human jobs. The reality is that advances in technology often create new jobs and opportunities. If we are to achieve a driverless future, we’ll still need humans for quality assurance, legislation, maintenance and decision making.

Who Can Actually Build ‘Driverless’?

To bring the vision of driverless freight to life, it will require a first mover to prove that the vision is actually achievable. Often, this responsibility falls to a billion-dollar company to fund the research & development, infrastructure and marketing. Until we reach that point, driverless freight is likely to be beyond the reach of small businesses, which ultimately delays driverless freight from becoming the new normal.

Signs of Progress

On the subject of driverless becoming the new normal, it is positive to see signs of progress. Visible progress includes the driverless cabs that are becoming increasingly normal in places like Las Vegas. Obviously, driverless freight comes with far more complexity, but it does at least stress that society’s confidence in driverless vehicles is on the up.

Final Thoughts

It doesn’t seem to be a question of if we will adopt driverless transport, but more a question of when. And we are certainly moving towards this, albeit slowly. With the likes of Tesla ploughing millions into driverless cars and driverless trains becoming increasingly common in some parts of the world, surely it’s only a matter of time until driverless freight becomes the new norm.

Current Most Read

Two Reasons Why Businesses Are Losing Their Leads

Why Self-Care Is a Non-Negotiable Skill for Entrepreneurs

Online piracy is rising again: why it happened and what it means

Paul Francis
Oct 23, 2025
5 min read

After a decade in which legal streaming cut piracy rates, recent data suggest online piracy is on the rise again. The causes are complex: rising subscription costs, fragmentation of content across multiple services, the explosion of easy live streams for sport, and more sophisticated pirate tools. This article explains what changed, who is affected, which piracy formats are growing, and what rights holders and regulators are doing in response.

Computer screens display a pirate-themed website with neon graphics. A person types on a keyboard at a wooden desk, phone nearby.

How streaming briefly won the battle against piracy

In the 2010s and early 2020s, the growth of affordable, convenient streaming services helped reduce piracy. A single subscription gave users safe, high-quality access to large catalogues of film, TV and music, and the model undercut the old incentives to download or torrent. Music piracy fell particularly sharply after Spotify and similar services reached scale. The relative convenience and low friction of legal services made piracy less attractive for many users.

Why piracy is rising again

There is no single cause. Several trends converged to make piracy attractive once more.

1. Rising subscription costs and stacked services:

Streaming prices have climbed in recent years, and many households now subscribe to several platforms to watch everything they want. That perceived loss of value has nudged some viewers back to illegal sources, especially in a tighter economic climate. Industry commentators and analysts have explicitly linked price rises and subscription complexity to growing piracy traffic.

2. Fragmentation and exclusive rights:

Producers increasingly sell shows and sports rights to different platforms. A single season may be split across services or geo-locked to particular markets. For viewers, that means multiple subscriptions to follow a single show or live event. When the content you want appears behind an additional paywall, some viewers turn to pirate feeds instead. Research and reporting identify limited legal access as a key driver of piracy in several markets.

3. Live sports and real-time streaming:

Live sport is especially vulnerable. Rights holders spend billions to secure live broadcast deals, but analysts now describe pirated sports streams as being of “industrial scale”, with illegal feeds drawing tens of thousands of viewers each for major fixtures. That problem is acute because live streams provide a near-perfect substitution for the authorised broadcast and are very hard to police in real time. Reports by media analysts and industry bodies have highlighted the huge scale and financial impact.

4. New distribution methods and cheap tools:

Pirates are not limited to P2P torrents. A shift towards instant streaming, rebuilt indexing sites, “stream-host” platforms, pirate apps and modified streaming devices now enables easy, low-latency access to new releases and live events. These methods tend to lower the technical barrier for casual users who would once have avoided torrents. Monitoring firms report that while classic torrent downloads fell in some categories, streaming-centric piracy has grown.

What the numbers say

Industry tracking firms show a mixed picture but a worrying trend overall. MUSO, a large piracy monitoring firm, recorded hundreds of billions of visits to piracy sites in recent years and noted that while some year-to-year figures fluctuate, the long-term trend is upwards for certain formats and regions.

Independent analysis and consultancy reports that track user behaviour have also linked the recent upward movement in piracy traffic to consumer frustration around cost and access. One recent industry summary concluded that price rises at major streaming services have contributed materially to renewed piracy growth.

For live sports specifically, Enders Analysis and reporting in the Financial Times have shown that pirated feeds are now a significant share of consumption for some high-profile events. The industry talks in terms of “industrial scale theft” when describing these one-to-many illegal streams.

Popular piracy hubs and formats

For context, piracy today is enabled by a variety of sites and platforms. Reporting and monitoring outlets list a mixture of legacy torrent sites, new indexers, stream-hosting portals and modified app ecosystems. Examples frequently cited in industry and trade reporting include established torrent indexes and trackers such as YTS, 1337x, The Pirate Bay, and NYAA; streaming and link-aggregation sites that host or index illegal live and on-demand streams; and apps or “add-ons” for open platforms that facilitate access on cheap set-top devices. These names appear in regular lists of the most trafficked piracy services, though exact rankings change frequently.

Note: this piece names popular services where they are already widely reported, but it does not offer instructions on how to access them or advice that would facilitate infringement.

Who is harmed and how

Rights holders such as studios, broadcasters and sports leagues see direct financial impact from piracy, particularly when live audiences and subscription sales are lost. Broadcasters arguing for higher rights fees are concerned that widespread unauthorised viewing reduces the commercial case for expensive exclusive deals. Advertisers and platforms also argue that piracy undermines the incentives that fund original production.

Consumers face risks too. Many pirate feeds carry malware, poor-quality streams, or surprise charges. Modified devices and unofficial apps often expose users to security and privacy threats, and they can breach the terms of service of legitimate platform providers. Reports from industry bodies emphasise the security danger to users of jailbroken set-top boxes and pirating apps.

What rights holders and governments are doing

The response has multiple strands:

Enforcement and takedowns. Industry coalitions and enforcement groups continue to pursue legal action, takedowns and domain seizures. The International Broadcaster Coalition Against Piracy (IBCAP) and other organisations publish regular reports and action lists showing recent lawsuits and takedowns.
Technical countermeasures. Rights holders employ watermarking, automated detection, and “war rooms” to identify and terminate pirate feeds in real time, particularly for high-value live events.
Industry pressure on platforms. Broadcasters have urged platform providers and marketplaces to do more to block the distribution of pirating apps and to remove listings for illicit devices. Some calls have focused on vendors of popular streaming hardware where jailbroken apps are distributed.
Policy and legislation. In some jurisdictions, courts and regulators are enabling faster blocking and takedown orders, and some governments have strengthened penalties for commercial piracy operations. Efforts to increase platform accountability are under discussion in multiple markets, though progress varies.

Why enforcement alone will not solve it

Experience shows enforcement is necessary but not sufficient. Pirates adapt quickly, and takedowns often produce short-term disruption only for new mirrors, indexes or hosting arrangements to appear. Industry bodies increasingly argue that platform design, supply chains for illicit devices, and the economics of access must be addressed alongside enforcement. In some markets, La Liga’s technical and legal measures to block IPs in real time have reduced particular forms of piracy, suggesting that a mix of legal and technical responses can work when applied at scale. Still, these measures can be controversial when they risk collateral blocking of legitimate services.

What might reduce piracy again?

The evidence points to an integrated approach:

Make lawful access easier and more valuable. When content is simple to find and affordable to access, piracy falls. Bundling, fair regional licensing and more consumer-friendly pricing models will help.
Improve platform and marketplace controls. Tech platforms and device retailers can do more to stop the sale and distribution of modified devices and unauthorised apps.
Rapid technical detection for live streams. Investing in real-time detection and disruption for live event piracy reduces the immediate incentive to watch illegal feeds.
Public information and safer alternatives. Educating consumers about the security risks of pirate streams and offering attractive, legal short-duration passes for premium events would reduce demand.

Piracy has not returned to its early 2000s peak, but recent trends show it is adapting and, in some areas, growing again. The reasons are economic and structural: higher and fragmented subscription costs, stronger incentives to pirate live sports, new distribution channels and persistent regional access barriers. Rights holders, platforms and policymakers face a moving target. Reducing piracy sustainably will require pragmatic pricing, better legal access, technical measures and more cooperation between industry and tech platforms. The alternative is an escalation in enforcement action that risks being expensive, inconsistent and ultimately only partially effective.