menuMENU    UK Free TV logo Freesat

 

 

Click to see updates

Karen Murphy scores against the Premier League and Sky

In the view of Advocate General Kokott, territorial exclusivity agreements relating to the transmission of football matches are contrary to European Union law.

In the view of Advocate General Kokott, territorial exclusivity
published on UK Free TV

European Union law does not make it possible to prohibit the live transmission of Premier League football matches in pubs by means of foreign decoder cards

The Football Association Premier League Ltd (the FAPL) is the marketing organisation for the top English football league. The FAPL essentially grants its licensees the exclusive right to broadcast matches and exploit them economically within their respective broadcasting areas, generally the country in question. In order to safeguard this exclusivity, licensees are obliged to prevent their broadcasts from being able to be viewed outside their respective broadcasting areas. To that end, each licensee is required to encrypt its satellite signal and to transmit it in encrypted form to subscribers within its assigned territory. Subscribers can decrypt the signal using a decoder, which requires a decoder card. The exclusivity agreement also imposes restrictions on the circulation of authorised decoder cards outside the territory of each licensee.

The main proceedings in the present references for preliminary rulings concern attempts to circumvent this exclusivity. Companies import decoder cards from abroad, in the present proceedings from Greece, into the United Kingdom and offer them to pubs at more favourable prices than the broadcaster in that State. This practice makes it possible for pubs in the UK to show the live transmission of Premier League football matches using a Greek decoder card. The FAPL is attempting to stop that practice by means of a judicial ruling. Case C-403/08 concerns civil-law actions brought by the FAPL against the use of foreign decoder cards. Case C-429/08 relates to criminal proceedings which have been brought against the landlady of a pub who used a Greek decoder card to show Premier League matches. The High Court has, in each set of proceedings, referred several questions to the Court of Justice on the interpretation of EU law.

Advocate General Juliane Kokott explains that the exclusivity rights in question have the effect of partitioning the internal market into quite separate national markets, something which constitutes a serious impairment of the freedom to provide services.

With regard to possible justification for the restriction of the freedom to provide services, the Advocate General examines the protection of industrial and commercial property and, in particular, addresses the question whether live satellite transmissions of football matches involve rights the specific subject-matter of which requires a partitioning of the internal market. In this connection she first states that the specific subject-matter of the rights in live football transmissions lies in their commercial exploitation. In the present cases, the live transmission of Premier League football matches is exploited, in particular, through the charge imposed for the decoder cards. Advocate General Kokott takes the view in this connection that the economic exploitation of the rights in question is not undermined by the use of foreign decoder cards, as the corresponding charges have been paid for those cards. Whilst those charges are not as high as the charges imposed in the United Kingdom, there is, according to the Advocate General, no specific right to charge different prices for a work in each Member State. Rather, it forms part of the logic of the internal market that price differences between different Member States should be offset by trade. The marketing of broadcasting rights on the basis of territorial exclusivity is tantamount to profiting from the elimination of the internal market. Consequently, the specific subject-matter of the rights in the transmission of football matches does not justify a partitioning of the internal market, and thus also does not justify the resulting restriction of the freedom to provide services.

Advocate General Kokott further takes the view that the contractual restriction on using decoder cards in the State of origin only for domestic or private use, but not for commercial use – for which a higher subscription charge is payable – also cannot justify a territorial restriction of the freedom to provide services. The Member State concerned may, however, in principle make provision for rights which allow authors to object to the communication of their works in pubs.

So far as concerns the question whether the showing of live transmissions of football matches in pubs infringes the exclusive right of communication to the public of protected works within the terms of the Copyright in the Information Society Directive, the Advocate General explains that, as EU law stands at present, there are no comprehensive rights which protect the communication of a broadcast to the public where no entrance fee is charged.

Advocate General Kokott further expresses the view that the application of the principle of the freedom to provide services is also in line with the Satellite and Cable Directive and with European competition law. Equally, neither does the Conditional Access Directive constitute a barrier to the use of foreign decoder cards.

NOTE: The Advocate General’s Opinion is not binding on the Court of Justice. It is the role of the Advocates General to propose to the Court, in complete independence, a legal solution to the cases for which they are responsible. The Judges of the Court are now beginning their deliberations in the present cases. Judgment will be given at a later date.

NOTE: A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which have been brought before them, to refer questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation of European Union law or the validity of a European Union act. The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself. It is for the national court or tribunal to dispose of the case in accordance with the Court’s decision, which is similarly binding on other national courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised



Help with Free satellite?
What can I do when my Sky Digibox says 'No Signal' or 'Technical fau1
Can I receive UK TV in Ghana?2
What is a CA module?3
My box says "No Satellite signal being received"4
Is there any way I can get free channels via satellite and have the kind of hard5
[][][
In this section
Show me the 55 TV channels have moved to the new Astra 2G satellite 1
Good news for Freesat? Astra 2E satellite launched2
No satellite signal? Check your dish for snow!3
New satellite footprints page4
BBC satellite changes: radio, BBC ONE HD, Red button reduction 12-15 October 2015
Changes to BBC HD transmissions on Astra satellites on 20 September 20126

Comments
Monday, 7 February 2011
Briantist
sentiment_very_satisfiedOwner

4:38 PM

james: I thought I said that this is already there for people with the Inview Freeview EPG.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,844 posts GB
J
james
sentiment_satisfiedBronze

4:50 PM

aying new channel on freeview yet

link to this comment
james's 49 posts GB
S
Steve
sentiment_satisfiedBronze

5:21 PM

James: Is the cat walking on your keyboard?
Briantist: Yes, I agree. As soon as any sport sells out to the highest bidder it's the consumer (us) that ends up either paying more or not seeing it at all eg. football and cricket.
The theory behind the live match restriction is that The Premier League don't want to stop fans going to the stadium on a cold Saturday in February rather than watching the match at home in the warm.

link to this comment
Steve's 59 posts GB
Briantist
sentiment_very_satisfiedOwner

7:09 PM

Steve: I've lived in other countries and, whilst I have no interest in soccer myself, I have noticed they have lots and lots of live football on and people still seem to go to the games.

Sounds like another "excuse" that just happens to make Sky and the rest of those involved lots of cash.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,844 posts GB
Mark Aberfan Aerials
sentiment_satisfiedGold

7:23 PM

Hi all,

Another solution is used in italy to protect the gate, they block the match to any subscriber within a given diastance from ground.

Like brian i dont see this helping the situation, but it does show that the money men are in charge & the fans are just regarded as waling wallets.
I note that the usual plea that football will suffer if the income from tv reduces & I have the same thought as i did the last time they trotted that line out,even more so after the last world cup & that is football has not got better with all the big tv money in fact quite the reverse is true !

Mark Aberfan Aerials

link to this comment
Mark Aberfan Aerials's 1,059 posts GB
J
Jordy
sentiment_satisfiedGold

7:55 PM

Mark - Football will suffer long term harm if these clubs don't put a stop to these stupid investments in players and display a bit of austerity... £35 million spent by Liverpool FC, they may as well have stuck two fingers up to the fans.

link to this comment
Jordy's 1,827 posts GB
Briantist
sentiment_very_satisfiedOwner

9:09 PM

Jordy: Still, that money is only 144,032 annual Sky Sports subscriptions, a drop in the ocean when you've got people by the Direct Debit.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,844 posts GB
Briantist
sentiment_very_satisfiedOwner

9:12 PM

Mark Aberfan Aerials: I suspect there's too many vested interests and noses in troughs for anything to happen. You can buy plenty of influence with an Executive Box or two.

link to this comment
Briantist's 38,844 posts GB
J
james
sentiment_satisfiedBronze

11:40 PM

like more movies channel on freeview

link to this comment
james's 49 posts GB
Tuesday, 8 February 2011
Select more comments
Page 3

Your comment please
Please post a question, answer or commentUK Free TV is here to help people. If you are rude or disrespectful all of your posts will be deleted and you will be banned.







Privacy policy: UK Free Privacy policy.