OfferUp’s “Anti-Piracy” Policy Makes No Sense — Unless You Pay for It
OfferUp recently banned standard users from listing streaming devices, allegedly due to concerns around piracy and unauthorized streaming services.
At face value, that sounds reasonable.
But here’s the contradiction:
Verified OfferUp Business accounts — reportedly paying $500+ per month for premium/business plans — are still openly allowed to sell devices like SuperBox and VSee/V-Box style systems that are widely marketed around free live TV, premium sports, PPV access, and subscription-free streaming.
Let’s be honest about what these products are known for.
These aren’t ordinary retail streaming devices like an Amazon Fire TV Stick being used for Netflix and YouTube. Their entire market positioning revolves around bypassing traditional paid content ecosystems.
So the policy raises a serious question:
If streaming devices are truly banned because of piracy concerns…
why are the most piracy-associated devices still allowed — as long as the seller is paying for a high-tier business account?
Because from the outside, it doesn’t look like anti-piracy enforcement.
It looks like selective enforcement based on revenue.
Either:
Ban all devices associated with piracy equally, or
Allow legal streaming hardware sales equally.
But targeting small sellers while allowing large paying accounts to continue operating creates the appearance that policy enforcement is financially motivated rather than principle-based.
Curious if others have noticed this too.