FA targets pubs showing illegal football

[net1]

WITH less than a fortnight to go before the new Premiership football season kicks off, the League has declared war on pubs that illegally show live matches. And licensees who continue to show the games could face a £5,000 fine or up to six months in jail.
The Premier League has called in the Federation Against Copyright Theft to tackle the growing problem of unauthorised screenings of live Premiership matches on Saturday afternoons.
It is illegal to show live matches between 2.45pm and
5.15pm on Saturdays. Yet pubs across the UK are packing in the punters by showing games beamed in from continental Europe.
'We estimate that more than 1,000 pubs show matches illegally,' says federation director of operations Spencer Mott. 'The trend started off in places such as Manchester, Liverpool and Newcastle, where there is strong support for the local clubs, but the problem is growing all the time.'
Special decoders and smartcards that allow landlords to show matches intended for a continental European audience can be bought for about £1,500 a year. This is cheaper than a subscription to Sky, which currently has the rights to Premier League matches, which can be shown live outside the closed period.
The Football Association has never allowed live broadcasts of Premiership matches in the UK on Saturday afternoons, fearing that smaller clubs would suffer from lower attendances.
But broadcasting companies are now putting together multi-million pound packages to bid for more live matches.
Pubs that have legitimate Sky subscriptions, or those that cannot afford to pay Sky's fees and so show no satellite sports at all, have constantly complained that not enough is done to stop other pubs taking their customers by illegally showing football.
Now, as well as targeting landlords who flout the copyright laws, the FA is going after the companies that are selling the equipment. One is about to be taken to court for conspiracy to defraud, and Mott says a 'significant' number of individuals, companies and directors are facing criminal prosecutions.

[BarMoo]

If there were 1000 Irish/English pubs in Germany, there would be one thing for certain - yep, they would all have Sky!

Seems like a lot doesn't it. Well, not quite, considering its a land of near-on 80 million people and most are, actually, interested in their own football clubs.

So what if pubs want to offer a broader football offering. Sky have control over their (local market) pub subscriptions and any pub interested in investing in a Premiere STB only has to do what we ex-pats have done for a long time with Sky. I do not see a problem. I call it bending the rules, not law-breaking.

Incidentally, why do the FA reckon these boxes are special and why do they think that one of these systems costs GBP 1,500?

Whatever, the usual stuff has happened: Sky secure lower rates for keeping the football (about GBP .4bn less this time round) and the FA go after the punter's.

All football used to be encrypted on satellite. Now its not. Perhaps the FA should approach the BBC for the missing 400 million and leave us to try and enjoy the game - before we all turn off, or, turn our local into a dusty empty room.

Have Fun,

Mark.

[net1]

Quote:
Incidentally, why do the FA reckon these boxes are special and why do they think that one of these systems costs GBP 1,500?



I believe some pubs are being charged this amount by the people who supply the cams and update the cards.
Regards
Net1

[Channel Hopper]

If you really love the sport that much, why not buy a season ticket and support your local club ?

[BarMoo]

I'll be honest CH, beyond national teams - I can't abide football And I wouldn't be seen dead suppin' Berliner Kindl at a Hertha BSC game. So, I guess I've been sussed.

But, I do feel sorry for British pub landlords (mother is one, and I've always felt sorry for her).

If one moment your Sky sub had been GBP 325.00 and then you got a letter informing you it was going to increase to GBP 499.00 - I think even you would be a bit pissed.

To go after landlords because they've used a bit of nout and bought-in a foreign service - sorry, that's just plain greedy and/or plain daft.

Incidentally, my 'local' pays between €60 - €80.00 per month for a business subscription to Premiere; which IMHO is pretty good value for watching Live British, foreign and local footy.

Have Fun,

Mark.

[Channel Hopper]

Incidentally, my 'local' pays between €60 - €80.00 per month for a business subscription to Premiere

It would be interesting to know which law bskyb uses to nail pubs which are legitimately subscribing to another EC provider

[rolfw]

It isn't bskyb, it is the FA and Premiership, I believe they use the standard copyright law.

[Channel Hopper]

But the onlyway to legitimately show it in a UK pub is .......?

[BarMoo]

How exactly can you prevent/threaten a UK pub showing foreign programming from a foreign provider - especially given that that provider is not governed by UK law?

Homework, me thinks .......

Have Fun,

Mark.

[rolfw]

foreign programming from a foreign provider

But it isn't Mark, it is UK copyright football programming and therefor the copyright holder for the UK has the right to go to law for its removal.

I'm not saying that i agree with this closed shop, but it is at present at least, the law.

[jimbo]

But it isn't Mark, it is UK copyright football programming and therefor the copyright holder for the UK has the right to go to law for its removal.

I'm not saying that i agree with this closed shop, but it is at present at least, the law.

Rolf is exactly right but doesn't need me to confirm that. The premiership football watched on a Saturday afternoon on, say, Premier Sport is being transmitted from the ground by bskyb and the foreign commentator is not at the match necessarily. A bit like the old Channel 4 Italian soccer was. The english commentators were watching a large screen in this country.

[Channel Hopper]

With a legitimate subscription I hope

[BarMoo]

Homework so far.

It appears, if anything, that the supposed law that bans the showing of live football on Saturdays - isn't actually law per se: there certainly isn't a Statutory Instrument or an Act of Parliament that covers this (remember, homework so far ).

It appears that the banning 'of games' is all to do with when the football authorities negotiate live television coverage deals with broadcaster's. The upshot being that you pay loads and you'll get more live games; albeit, those with the power have always been paranoid about tv diminishing actual attendance revenues.

However, what is of note is that these 'restrictions' only apply to British Television (and broadcaster's).

As such, Premiere will be showing the Newcastle vs ManU match LIVE from 12.55 on Saturday 23/08/2003 (commentary in English or German).

Anyone with an ounce of nous will head down to the nearest and enjoy the game and a pint or two. Premiere also have the rights to show LIVE Champions League matches too.

Premiere is an encrypted Pay-TV service, supplied to its principal market by cable and satellite.

See this link: Premiere

Have Fun,

Mark.

[workshoppete]

The argument that i have heard used for the showing of foreign channels is that concerning our involvement with europe. As a member of the europeon union we should be able to purchase a product from any country within that union,whether it be a car,washing machine or a tv subscription.the whole point of the europeon union is that it is supposed to be a free marketplace.
They do have a point.

[rolfw]

It appears, if anything, that the supposed law that bans the showing of live football on Saturdays - isn't actually law per se: there certainly isn't a Statutory Instrument or an Act of Parliament that covers this (remember, homework so far ).

This is what I've been trying to explain in a discussion on another forum Mark, it is an arrangement made between the different football governing bodies in the UK, not a law.

we should be able to purchase a product from any country within that union,whether it be a car,washing machine or a tv subscription.

Yes, that is a favourite argument, but has flaws. A washing machine or car are hard products and in theory, it is no better for the manufacturers profit wise, to limit the potential market place. With a film or football match however, there is a distinct advantage to limiting the selling boundaries for different vendors, it generally ensures better prices for the regional copyrights, than it would if they were lumped in one big pool. Also, if Premiere were permitted to transmit the football into the UK, it would diminish the value and saleability of those rights negotiated by the UK broadcasters.

[jimbo]

albeit, those with the power have always been paranoid about tv diminishing actual attendance revenues.

I think they have a point. For example the now and then supporters of a team like Stockport, for example, might go to a Stockport match if there's nothing on TV at 3.00pm on a Saturday. But if Man U were on at that time via, say, Premiere then they would stay home and watch it if they had the wherewithall. So, Stockport lose possible attendance money.

[BarMoo]

The basics on right's, regions and restrictions I think are, for the most part, reasonably understood by most posting here.

However, and IMHO, I still believe that the main point hasn't been addressed.

Ultimately we are talking about a law that isn't a law. Here's what the Publican Magazine said:

The FA does not authorise the broadcasting of live Premiership matches in the UK between 2.45pm and 5.15pm on Saturdays in order to keep up attendance at the grounds.

This 'rule' is specific to UK broadcaster's only - as I have said before; yet:-

it did allow Sky to show on Saturday 16 August FA Premiership – Portsmouth v Aston Villa noon-3.00pm Sky Sports 2 as part of the massively reduced Sky deal.

And it will allow the BBC to show Saturday 23 August Premierleague – Partick Thistle v Celtic 12.30pm BBC1 Scotland - the BBC subsidises Scottish football to the tune of about GBP 12million (so it comes as no surprise that they can show live matches as well).

However, I still cannot understand the copyright argument.

The Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) is working with the FA to tackle the growing problem which now affects most of the country.

Why is it a growing problem? It affects the whole of the country? The whole thing is beavering-up to sound like a fight against piracy - a war against boxes of mass viewing: most definitely a war against choice.

There are over 60,000 pubs in the UK. FACT believes that between 1000 and 2000 of these Johnny Foreigner systems will be in pubs for the new season

as publicans try to dodge rising Sky fees and attract football fans.

Presumably that equates to between 1000 and 2000 pubs then?

Premiere will have paid handsomely for the right to show live football. Their packages are cheaper than Sky's. If a landlord has realised that he/she can bend the rules - well, they should be applauded. This has got everything to do with maxing-up revenues for the football authorities where it couldn't (clearly) do so with Sky.

What's ironic is this:

Licensees who pay the Sky Sports subscription to show games outside that time have also complained that the illegal broadcasts unfairly steal their trade.

I have written to FACT and will post their reply here (for those interested).

Have Fun,

Mark.

[BarMoo]

UPDATE:

Well, I could post FACT's reply here, but, given their purpose I would probably end up in a court somewhere near Glutton Myfield.

Suffice to say, I had a dream and I am sure that in it they said:

"Please supply your telephone number and one of our investigator's will be in touch with you shortly."

Right! a)(2

I have asked them to reply to my questions via e-mail and I wil update you shortly.

Mark.

[BarMoo]

Back again. Quoted (by number only) in a FACT press release to suite their own ends - I trotted off and found the original.

Directive 89/84/EC

Article 1 Scope
The objective of this Directive is to approximate provisions in the Member States concerning measures against illicit devices which give unauthorised access to protected services.

Article 2 Definitions
For the purposes of this Directive:

(e) illicit device shall mean any equipment or software designed or adapted to give access to a protected service in an intelligible form without the authorisation of the service provider;

The above text amends the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 which in its own right forms SI 2000 No.1175 "The Conditional Access (unauthorised Decoders) Regulations 2000" or something like that

Notice how the directive doesn't imply "without the say-so of the FA".

The upshot is that neither FACT nor the FAPL should be terrorising landlords per se (See front page story). The 'LAW' is specific to those that break codes and sell illegal gold cards and pirate constructions that enable anyone (let alone landlords) to watch encrypted tv services.

Bending the rules (like most ex-pats do) is beyond the scope of FACT, the FAPL and UK law; because, in effect - with a legit box, card and sub - it is totally legal within the EU.

Views?

Have Fun,

Mark.

[workshoppete]

Well it's coming up to the footy season again ....Has there been any developments??

[twag42]

the bottom line is "money".SKY are just greedy C..TS and want everyone to pay for their subscription to watch football.Its a bit similar to the owning a cow and paying for milk situation.What about all these pubs in europe that all have Sky,im sure thats a breach of Sky broadcasting regulations.

TWAG