Premiership Games Via Euro Sat?

[gonzorock]

Can anyone help!!

I have been looking into having the European Satellite installed in my pub to show the football as *ky prices are way too high. So many different views on the law I understand about the Saturday 2.45 to 5.15 blackout period but I just found out some information about it not being applicable in Wales (Where I live) and N Ireland.

Is this True?

Also is it just totally Illegal anyway?

Thanks

[Robbie34]

If you mean Premiership games then you will fall foul of the Premier League who will prosecute you. A friend of mine who supplied foreign cards to a number of pubs was taken to court and heavily fined. The landlords were also fined and had their equipment confiscated.

[a.v.sat]

@Robbie
He was fined for supplying cards?
The pubs was they using pirate cams and cards to receive?

[Robbie34]

They were legitimate subscriptions to a foreign provider but someone tipped off Sky, who informed FACT, who took action on behalf of the Premier League.

You don't commit an offence if you have these for private use, but when you have public performances, as in a pub, you are open to prosecution.

[a.v.sat]

this must have been for the closed period(2.45-5.15)then as theres yet to be a prosicution for other games.Do you have any proof of the cases?

[Robbie34]

I can only repeat what my friend told me of his conviction and the report in the local press. He is a reputable satellite and elecrical dealer and I'm not prepared to name names.

I'm not sure about the legal aspects but I understand the Premier League sell the rights to various operators across the World and they are only allowed to show the games in that country. It has nothing to do with Sky who are obviously miffed if they are losing out to foreign competition. FACT operate on behalf of the Premier League and will prosecute any unauthorised showing of Premiership games.

http://www.fact-uk.org.uk/

[Stoelen]

Originally Posted by Robbie34

I can only repeat what my friend told me of his conviction and the report in the local press. He is a reputable satellite and elecrical dealer and I'm not prepared to name names.

I'm not sure about the legal aspects but I understand the Premier League sell the rights to various operators across the World and they are only allowed to show the games in that country. It has nothing to do with Sky who are obviously miffed if they are losing out to foreign competition. FACT operate on behalf of the Premier League and will prosecute any unauthorised showing of Premiership games.

http://www.fact-uk.org.uk/

I back you up on this.In Norway PL is showed on Canal Digital.They are showing even more games then Sky, BUT-we have the same cardsystem as Sky and the prices are nearly the same. Canal Digital have the same system all over Scandinavia.I am sure the there is nothing to do about this.
Stoelen

[Robbie34]

I was mistaken about FACT being the organisation which prosecuted my friend, it was Media Protection Services. The prosecution was taken under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

If you are interested to see the latest document that MPS are circulating you can download the Adobe file from here. http://z13.zupload.com/download.php?...&filepath=2047

[Cupart]

I guess this is in a bit of a grey zone.

The fundamental rights identified by the European Court of Justice will not hinder any of the four cornerstones which include the freedom of information legislation. There was a case in Greece (1991) where a second broadcaster, took up the competition with EKR (I think) even though this later broadcaster had certain rights to broadcast in the region, something the new broadcaster didn't. The outcome from the ECJ (European Court of Justice) rulled in favour of the newcomer based on the fact that the freedom of information was used as an argument.

It's also worth mentioning that EU legislation and directives over rule national legislations.

[Robbie34]

Sorry, I don't understand your reply.

The issue here is not about freedom of information, but the copyright of intellectual rights. The EC brought in legislation some years ago that protected companies against individuals infringing copyright. There was a well publicised case in the satellite world of a Scandinavian who was fined very heavily, and had to close his website, for publishing d2mac files that enabled people to view Canal +.

[Chris Muriel]

That D2MAC case was different in that people using his codes were avoidig paying a subscription .
(So the poor website owner now just plays with his cats I suppose, for those that remember him).
This is not the same as somebody purchasing a subscription from the provider (even if the subs were ordered by someone in e.g. Norway on behalf of a pub owner in UK) .
The reason the pub can still face prosecution is that they are making it available to a mass audience - their clients.
If the pub landlord simply used it to watch soccer in his own lounge , not visible to the public, there would be no prosecution.

Chris Muriel, Manchester

[Robbie34]

It was still regarded as copyright theft of intellectual property, so the principle remains the same. Indeed, as Sky is the sole body authorised to show Premiership games, the purchase of cheap subscriptions from overseas operators is depriving Sky of its legitimate income.

The last time I visited his site was devoted to cats.