UK police raid Blackburn pubs and seize satellite equipment

**Analoguesat** · 01-11-2006

Police in Blackburn, NW England, have raided four public houses and seized satellite equipment that was being used to show English football matches to customers using overseas satellite channels. In England and Scotland, it is illegal to screen live matches at 3 pm on Saturdays, the traditional time for live football, but the FA Premier League provides a picture feed from one of the games to TV stations outside the UK. It is easy for pubs to obtain the satellite equipment and viewing cards required. The Premier League is becoming increasingly proactive in chasing the offenders.

This morning, police and trading standards officers accompanied by Media Protection Services (MPS), the company that operates on behalf of UK rights-holder B SkyB, raided 4 Blackburn pubs and seized foreign satellite cards and decoders. MPS had previously visited these pubs and warned licensees they were breaking the law.

Dan Johnson, chief spokesman for the FA Premier League, said that along with MPS it would now look to prosecute the offending licensees. “This sends a clear message to the licensed trade that the use of foreign satellite systems is illegal and will not be tolerated,” he said. “We hope that other licensees will take heed and stop using these illegal systems, so it’s not necessary to pursue the prosecution of other publicans. We will also be using this evidence to target suppliers in the coming months.”

A number of licensees have continued to show football via foreign satellite systems after prosecutions against licensees recently failed on the basis they did not know they were acting dishonestly. Suppliers of foreign satellite systems to the pub trade continue to claim they are operating within the law

(Source: The Publican via Media network weblog)

***wod*** · 01-11-2006

hmm not surprised with the amount sky charge for the subscription that landlords are taking the chance

**gameboy** · 01-11-2006

Wonder if S*y will be pushing for the same thing to happen in Spanish pubs showing S*y?

***Skip Channel*** · 01-11-2006

Shame the police haven't got anything better to do. Around my way there has been a steady increase in violent crimes (usually random and often for no apparent reason) and yet some forces can find the time to raid commercial premises that are showing the wrong kind of telly!

Now, if I "catch" a publican showing ART should I call 101 or 999? Reporting crack dealing outside a school is 101 - so I'm guessing 999 is for foreign pay TV in a drinking establishment showing sport that is unlicenced for UK broadcast at 3pm on a match day?

**rolfw** · 01-11-2006

Well playing the devil's advocate here.

The pubs have had enough warnings over the last 12 months or so that it will not be tolerated, it is copyright infringement and it doesn't matter what the barrack room lawyers say, it is illegal. They are retransmitting/showing programmes to an audience without the relevant copyright, the broadcasters would of course have a real problem pursuing private subscribers as they have bought legitimate subscriptions and are not showing the programmes to an audience.

With regard to Premiership football in Spain, it is down to the Spanish rights holders as to whether they wish to pursue the bars who show Premiership football, not Sky, it is not Sky's local copyright being infringed, but the local providers.

***BarMoo*** · 02-11-2006

Playing a different angle to my usual rant on this subject, vís-a-vís: in favour of landlords.

SKY will happily take money for subs in out-of-territory places; whether it be in Bradford, Paris or Berlin - but, the Irish Pub I want to rid of SKY still has it (here in Berlin). I have phoned a number of times to jolly 'ol Scotland without success.

Actually, that's the same rant. The fact is, is that this is being driven by the PL - not SKY - AFAIK.

It was only a few months back that I thought this had been resolved (i.e., regarding uk landlords).

The Premier League said (after another court defeat earlier this year) that they would re-group in the new year (2007) and find another legal angle. Fine, but its - er, just turned November?

Which footy player wanted more of an increase this season then??

.

**stuzeeuk** · 02-11-2006

Lets face it, the global copyright laws need overhauld!.

I live in Pakistan and would happily pay for Scottish footie. However there is no provider ! therefore I subscribe to ART, thus breaking copyright because of the lack of service.

People want FA 3pm kick offs ..... what are the FA going to do about it ? evidence tells us where there is demand, we should supply, or people will alternative methods.

The fault is that of the FA's (and SFA) ! until they understand the nature of demand and supply then they will continue to loose out on revenue.

I WOULD PAY AND STAY LEGAL IF THAT WAS AN OPTION ! I have called Setanta and they said they dont cover Pakistan !!!! Therefore I now have an oversized dish and subsrcibe to ART

The FA recently tried to carve up live football in a fairly ad hoc manner (based on kick of times). The market demands it to be carved up by team.

NOT BY KICK OFF TIMES

Until the FA live in the real world, we are stuck with sitations like this .......... when will the FA wake up and realise the potential of the most entertaining league in the world (and that comes form a Scot!!!!)

Sad....... very sad ..... I have no sympathy ........i will continue to find alternative methods until they can supply.............

**stuzeeuk** · 02-11-2006

Barmoo ....... no hindi, urdu, english arguments please !!!!!

I live in Pakistan, im scottish !!!!! I work for the british embassy here.........

No agendas !!!!

;o)

**rolfw** · 02-11-2006

Oh FFS, the same old red herrings, this has bugger all to do with Sky being watched in Spain, Germany, Cyprus, Russia, Bulgaria, Tunisia, Madeira, Bechuanland or the UAE on a 4 metre dish, it has to do with UK landlords buying a cheap subscription card for residential viewing in another country and showing the programmes commercially to an audience. They have not paid the copyright to do this.

Forget domestic viewing stuzeeuk, not relevant to this discussion.

**Topper** · 02-11-2006

Well not having commented so far todays events being somewhat close to home I would just like to say that IMHO the FA appear top be the biggest culprits in this whole sorry affair. They wish to create revenue by selling the rights to air Premiership games to foreign broadcasters but because they know didly squat about transmission by satellite they end up with this situation. I find it absolutely laughable that the might of SKY cannot transmit live games at 3.00pm but someone like Art Sports can despite the transmission footprint covering the UK. Thus Art then latch on to the fact that there are thousands of footie fans not getting their fix on a Sat afternoon from Sky so they start selling cards in the UK.

Whilst I understand the realities of breaking the law in the manner of these pubs, where is the limit? If I had a card and invited all my neighbours would I be as guilty as the pubs despite there being no commercial advantage gained by me? So if it is legal for me to buy one of these cards at what point does it become illegal, how many people?

**gauch21** · 02-11-2006

may i know the reason, why is the telecast of live football matches illegal at 3pm on saturdays?

just being curious.......

**Analoguesat** · 02-11-2006

Originally Posted by gauch21

may i know the reason, why is the telecast of live football matches illegal at 3pm on saturdays?

just being curious.......

The football authorities have imposed a transmission blackout period between 3pm and 5pm in the uk. (Or something like that - the exact times arent important) to protect gate attendances at the smaller clubs.

Whats driving the uptake of ART cards for pubs here in the UK is the huge chasrges Sky make landlords pay for the right to show Sky Sports . Theres not a fixed subscription as there is for domestic subscriptions - the amount the pub has to pay is determined by the rateable value of the premises, and it can run into hundreds of pounds a month.

**rolfw** · 02-11-2006

Originally Posted by Topper

Well not having commented so far todays events being somewhat close to home I would just like to say that IMHO the FA appear top be the biggest culprits in this whole sorry affair. They wish to create revenue by selling the rights to air Premiership games to foreign broadcasters but because they know didly squat about transmission by satellite they end up with this situation. I find it absolutely laughable that the might of SKY cannot transmit live games at 3.00pm but someone like Art Sports can despite the transmission footprint covering the UK. Thus Art then latch on to the fact that there are thousands of footie fans not getting their fix on a Sat afternoon from Sky so they start selling cards in the UK.

Whilst I understand the realities of breaking the law in the manner of these pubs, where is the limit? If I had a card and invited all my neighbours would I be as guilty as the pubs despite there being no commercial advantage gained by me? So if it is legal for me to buy one of these cards at what point does it become illegal, how many people?

You have to consider that ART do not sell directly into the UK market, the same as Sky do not sell directly to markets outside of the UK, it is all done by independent companies who see a niche market.

If millions started dropping Sky completely and moving to ART for their satellite football (can't see it happening though), then I,m pretty sure that they would act against the sale of domestic cards from abroad, or perhaps even cut off the supply of football to ART for breaking their T&Cs. Unless the mass sales scenario happens, I can't see them (Sky and the FA) bothering with the domestic cards down to individual level, but they may of course find something in law to target the retailers.

At the end of the day, they are always going to go after the in your face card users, like pubs and clubs, but the "invited all my neighbours" scenario is just another red herring, as how would Sky or the FA find out in the first place?

PS. Got an ART sports card myself, bought it to cover the matches which were being shown on Prem+, as I'm normally out working at 3 pm on Saturdays and was possibly going to drop Sky Sports. I have however decided to keep the Sky sports package, as the quality of the ART transmissions, (over compressed) leave something to be desired.

linsladeboy · 02-11-2006

So where does that leave the home suscriber? Is Rupert Murdoch and his cronies' next move to prosecute Art Sport channel and ensure cards cannot be supplied in the uk !!

linsladeboy · 02-11-2006

Apologies!
Forget my last post. Rolfw answered my question.

**jimbo** · 02-11-2006

Most of the footy lovers I know with ART cards also have Sky Sports. Shouldn't forget SS is not JUST about footy. Loads of other sports which are not available anywhere else.

My main gripe with Sky, even though I'm a subscriber, is that they charge the equivilent of the UK licence fee AND they have loads of advertising. With the BBC and ITV you have one or the other but Sky have both.

**rolfw** · 02-11-2006

I'm sure that's right Jimbo, because come to think of it, everyone I know who has one, still subscribes to Sky Sports.

The way for Publicans to reduce the rate of charges by Sky to pubs, is for them to talk to each other. They can do it via their trade organisations, trade press and websites, a coordinated nationwide boycott of the Pub package would soon focus the minds of the Sky executives onto fair pricing.

**Salty25** · 02-11-2006

As far as I can see, the only reason why Saturday 3pm are not shown in the UK are:

a) They [the FA] think people will stay at home and not go to lower league (Football League) games
b) They [the Premier League] think people would rather pay for television then to actually go to the games.

Well, for starters I think proper fans would still prefer to go to the games than watch them on TV, and if that weren't the case why then in Spain are La Liga games still able to have high attendences when all the games are broadcast live?

And if its a thing of cost, surely you would spread the cost in of the service that is in a way comparable to going to the match.*

Also, what is there to prevent the PL 3pm games from being moved to Sunday midday, so that people/fans can still go to see the lower league games & watch the PL games the next day?

* I've posted somewhere before about what I'd do, I'll try and find it if I can!

EDIT - found that old post...

Saturday:
12.45pm - Live Premiership game
3.00pm - Football League (Championship, League 1, League 2) and Conference games - NON LIVE
5.15pm - Live Premiership game

Sunday:
12pm/Midday - Premiership games - EVERY GAME LIVE, PremPlus 'SuperLive'
2pm - Live Premiership or Football League (Super Sunday)
4.30pm - Live Premiership game (Super Sunday)

The 'SuperLive' package could be purchased in three ways:

One Game 'Gate' ticket - access to one game of your choice - £5.99
Club 'SuperSeason' ticket - access to all games, both home and away, to your favourite club shown on 'SuperLive' - £100
Premiership 'VIP Box' ticket - access to ALL GAMES on 'SuperLive' - £200

The 'SuperLive' package would be SEPERATE from Sky Sports, like PremPlus is now, so if you team was on SS and you only had SL you couldn't watch it.

You could also have 'blackouts' like they do in the US for games with low attendence, and clubs that are playing in the Champions League in the week before could have their SL games played on the Saturday night.

**gameboy** · 02-11-2006

I agree that it's not up to S*y to complain about the use of their cards in Spain etc.

I'm sure they make a lot of money from the supply. They could find out who was distributing these cards and stop the business if they wanted. Just as they could use a tight footprint to make it almost impossible to receive their signal from areas outside their copyright.

They choose not to do this.

I think that pubs that show the games for financial gain deserve to be punished. You couldn't go into a pub and watch the latest DVD for the same copyright reasons.

Just think that S*Y could do more to control their copyright rights restrictions if the wanted.

The pubs that have had their satellite equipment removed could potentially effect S*y subscriptions at these establishments almost certainly would have both.

**rolfw** · 02-11-2006

Strangely enough, I don't think that they should be entitled to remove the satellite equipment, as it is only the card which constitutes a breach of the law, the receiver, unless patched with illegal keys, is perfectly legal.

**gameboy** · 02-11-2006

Originally Posted by rolfw

Strangely enough, I don't think that they should be entitled to remove the satellite equipment, as it is only the card which constitutes a breach of the law, the receiver, unless patched with illegal keys, is perfectly legal.

They probably don't understand how it all works -

**rolfw** · 02-11-2006

Yes, that is almost certainly the truth.

***BarMoo*** · 02-11-2006

Slightly different spin from the Publican website (in the the flesh as it were) ...

The FA Premier League (FAPL) refused to be specific on the type of equipment that was seized, but chief spokesman Dan Johnson confirmed it was “illegally imported decoder cards and boxes”.

Ray Hoskin, managing director of Media Protection Services - which has been prosecuting licensees on behalf of FAPL - warned that it would also be “turning the spotlight” on the suppliers.

A number of pubs have continued to show football via foreign satellite systems after prosecutions recently failed on the basis that licensees did not know they were acting dishonestly.

A spokesman for the FAPL said: "We are in a position to take action against the suppliers in the next month. The suppliers are all over the country."

Suppliers of foreign satellite equipment continue to claim the systems are legal.
Joe Ibrahim, managing director of Digital Sales, which supplies digital satellite receivers and decoders, said: “I have paperwork from the government saying that what we are doing is not illegal. But it should be decided by the High Court - there should be legislation on the matter.”

Anyone see the Secret Policemans Ball on Channel 4 the other day - with eddy Izzard doing a great gag on 'The fly that didn't know a window was a window' ??

They'll be getting the Womens Institute in on the act next.

.

.

**stuzeeuk** · 02-11-2006

I still think it comes down to archaic copyright laws, the FA not understanding the demand / suppply issues and the government failing the consumer (whether that be business consumer or home consumer).

The first point is that there is demand to watch 3pm kick offs and the only supplier able to meet the demand are the foreign suppliers. Therefore the market is acting dishonestly inorder to supply.

Im not saying its legal or not, as Im not a lawyer. What I am saying, is, if it is illegal ..... then I think it should not be!

The whole system of auctioning the premiership rights stinks !

If you auction the right of monopoly for a product then you effectively eliminate pricing competition. Thus allowing the monopoly supplier to dictate price.

Because S'ky can DICTATE the price, they have decided to overcharge for business and pub subscriptions.

Im afraid I have no sympathy for S'KY, as they overcharge at a rediculous rate. They would not do this to home consumers as there would be a public outcry.

At worst a separate competition should be run for commercial and pub subscriptions, however in reality, as I stated before, the whole system is wrong and needs overhauled ........

Why doesn't the competition commission look at the system and take into account such clear and distinct market failures

PUBLICAN LANDSLORDS in the main, are not criminals, and if there was a more affordable way to provide a service i think most of them would take it ........

The failure lies with S'ky, the FA, the bidding process and the outdated copyright laws .... (not to mention the complete failure of the competition commission)

**rolfw** · 02-11-2006

Of course the FA understand the demand and supply issues, but what is at issue regarding the 3pm proscribed period is the protection of the lower and amateur leagues as covered by UEFA guidelines.
uefa closed period.gif

What you fail to realise, is that if copyright laws were amended so that anyone could sell into any marketplace, then the prices the different bidders would be prepared and have to pay would change and so would the subscription prices to reflect what they had to pay. It would probably also affect the overall figures received by the Premiership in revenue adversly, as nobody would pay top prices for a free for all, you cannot sell the same rights for the same item twice.

ART for example will have paid a relatively small amount for their rights, as it is for selling into a far less affluent market place, where average incomes are probably less than a 10th of what they are in the UK. If they were to pay for full International rights, particularly with regard to the UK, then their local market would not be able to afford the subscription prices, they couldn't have differing country rates, as people would simply get around the system.

But again, this is not really the issue here, the issue is about businesses who are rebroadcasting/showing the matches to an audience, matches for which they haven't paid the appropriate commercial rights.

If they can't afford it, then like most of the rest of us, they don't have it, that is not a legal defence.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)