EU advises foreign broadcasters showing premier league not illegal

bamboozling

The case taken by Karen Murphy to the EU regarding her use of a Greek decoder card has been advised that doing this is not illegal.

Basically the long term implications is that people will be able to get football far cheaper using foreign decoders and I think people will leave Sky, Sky will not buy the rights for as much and money within the game will be reduced.

This case could well change football as we know it.

The European Union's highest court was today advised to rule that EU law does not prohibit pubs showing live Premier League matches from foreign broadcasters, potentially sparking a revolution in the way media sports rights are sold across the continent.


Juliane Kokott, one of the eight advocate generals of the European court of justice, gave her view on a landmark case brought by Karen Murphy, landlady of the Red, White and Blue pub in Portsmouth. Murphy uses a Greek decoder card to show live Premier League matches at much cheaper rates than BSkyB charges commercial premises in the UK.


The FA Premier League, which sells TV rights exclusively to broadcasters across Europe on a territory-by-territory basis, is attempting to clamp down on British pubs buying in live coverage from foreign broadcasters.


Kokott today opened the door for the potential dismantling of this country-specific sports rights regime, saying that in her opinion the "exclusivity of the rights in question have the effect of partitioning the internal market into quite separate national markets, something which constitutes a serious impairment of freedom to provide services".


While Kokott's opinion is not binding, the ECJ tends to follow the advice of advocate generals in the majority of cases. The Luxembourg-based court is expected to deliver its verdict on the Murphy case later this year.


Kokott said that the "economic exploitation of the [TV] rights is not 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 UK there is ... no specific right to charge different prices for a work in each member state," she added.


Kokott said that the idea of selling on a territorial exclusivity basis was "tantamount to profiting from the elimination of the internal market".


She dismissed the copyright argument put forward by the Premier League that it held exclusive rights to matches broadcast to the public. "There are no comprehensive rights which protect the communication of a broadcast to the public where no entrance fee is charged," she said.


The Premier League said that it does not believe Kokott's opinion would "damage the interests of broadcasters and viewers of Premier League football across the EU".


A spokesman added that the advocate general's view did not appear to be compatible with the "existing body of EU case law".


"The opinion expressed by Advocate gGeneral Kokott may reflect a particular policy view in relation to the provision of audio-visual services throughout the EU," he said.


"However if her opinion were to be reflected in the ECJ's judgment it would prevent rights holders across Europe from marketing their rights in a way which meets demand from broadcasters whose clear preference is to acquire, and pay for, exclusive rights within their own territory only and to use those rights to create services which satisfy the cultural preferences of their viewers within that territory."


The Premier League said that if the European Commission "wants to create a pan-European licensing model for sports, film and music then it must go through the proper consultative and legislative processes to change the law rather than attempting to force through legislative changes via the courts".


"The ECJ is there to enforce the law, not change it," the spokesman said.


The Premier League will make more than £1.6bn in the UK alone from its current three-year deal with BSkyB and has a separate deal in this country for live match coverage with ESPN.


The Premier League is believed to have made well in excess of £1bn in TV deals outside the UK for rights covering 2010 to 2013, almost double the £625m made under the previous deal period, with the popularity of the top English division booming in territories including the Middle East, North Africa, Hong Kong and Singapore.


No figures are given for Europe, however it is understood that France, Scandinavia and Germany are the most lucrative markets for Premier League rights.



Investment bank Jefferies said that the Premier League may have to look to offer a sweetener, such as the international broadcasting rights, for a nominal amount to BSkyB to keep the value of the deal up.


Jefferies claims BSkyB makes about £200m a year in revenue from selling subscriptions to pubs and other commercial premises in the UK.


However, Jefferies only sees about £60m to £70m "at risk" if landlords were eventually able to buy cheaper Premier League coverage from overseas.


"Not all subscriptions are primarily driven by English Premier League [matches], but it remains a significant attraction for some of Sky's 44,000 pubs, clubs and office subscribers," the investment bank said.


Becket McGrath, a partner in EU and competition at law firm Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge, said: "If followed by the full court, this opinion has serious implications for the Premier League and Sky.


"In the short term, Sky will face more defections from subscribers to foreign sources of Premier League football. In the longer term, the Premier League is likely to receive less money when it next auctions off its TV rights, as no bidder will be prepared to offer as much for UK rights. It may ultimately be forced to abandon territorial licensing all together."


One observer pointed out that while the specifics of the case deal with sports rights, the outcome of the ECJ judgement has ramifications for any audiovisual industry that sells packaged rights in Europe including the film, TV and music sectors.


BSkyB declined to comment.

dreamers75

WOW Sky lost! Didnt see that coming.

Bodhisopha

Brilliant. Can't wait to say goodbye to Sky.

J. Marston

Where do I buy this and how much?

dfx-

"...it would prevent rights holders across Europe from marketing their rights in a way which meets demand from broadcasters whose clear preference is to acquire, and pay for, exclusive rights within their own territory only and to use those rights to create services which satisfy the cultural preferences of their viewers within that territory."

An early competitor for bullsh!t of the year...

Clear preference = only option?

The_B_Man

So will Sky not jsut buy the european rights to the Premier League and block out the rest of Europe, or sublease out the games to mainland european channels? (most of which are Sky TV anyway?)

also, on the flipside, that government legislation that states that sports of national interest must be shown on free to air TV could also be affected. Maybe.

For example, its similar to another TV station having sole rights in that country, only theres no profit made from it. Though isnt that only for home games? so if its not for away games then its only for games in that member state, but this case says that games shouldnt be thought of like that, ie divided by state, they should be "european"! So in saying that, the govt cant make EU wide decisions so then we're back to square one, with Sky owning the rights to all WC/EC championship games for Ire/NI/Eng/Sco/Wales.

lol did any of that make sense?

Dont be at yourself

It will possibly mean that the pan-European rights will have to go to a single bidder - presumably Sky. This will drive down the price they paid overall, as they wouldn't be as much competition.

It could put some clubs who have mortgaged their futures on the prospect of bigger and better TV deals in a tricky situation.

It will also probably mean the end of no televised football at 3pm Saturdays...

kraggy

How does one get a decoder card for European channels that have rights in their own country to show PL games?

Helix

kraggy wrote: »

How does one get a decoder card for European channels that have rights in their own country to show PL games?

you need another dish and another decoder

all can be bought online or from a number of places in ireland

kraggy

Helix wrote: »

you need another dish and another decoder

all can be bought online or from a number of places in ireland

One of those that you pay a once off €200 euro for a decent amount of channels? i.e. no subscription

Oat23

kraggy wrote: »

One of those that you pay a once off €200 euro for a decent amount of channels? i.e. no subscription

That wouldn't be very useful for watching football on foreign sat. Almost every game is only on pay tv these days.

There's a bunch of threads in the foreign satellite forum that will help you out.

Helix

kraggy wrote: »

One of those that you pay a once off €200 euro for a decent amount of channels? i.e. no subscription

no

you could go the "one off payment" approach, but its not particularly legal

otherwise itll be a sub or ppv

PHB

It's been a long time coming, especially with the renewed focus on the single market since Monti's report.

I would wonder though to what extent the ECJ will be willing to back this up without specific legislation on it. There are severe implications for the nature of this, most importantly I think that it disincentives collective rights deals. While the ECJ won't be able to consider that, legislation might consider the importance of collective rights in terms of the fairness of football.

Does anyone know how the Barca/Real Madrid's deals work in practice? Like, do Madrid own the rights of their matches exclusively. Do they need permission from their opponents. Do they way them a fee? Do those opponents negotiate that fee? If so, can they not just force collective rights deals.

Le King

PHB wrote: »

Does anyone know how the Barca/Real Madrid's deals work in practice? Like, do Madrid own the rights of their matches exclusively. Do they need permission from their opponents. Do they way them a fee? Do those opponents negotiate that fee? If so, can they not just force collective rights deals.

Audiovisual Sport owns the TV rights to La Liga, including all broadcast La Liga and Copa del Rey games from Real Madrid and Barcelona. However Real Madrid and Barcelona get 34% of this revenue. Monopoly is what it is.

redout

Le King wrote: »

Audiovisual Sport owns the TV rights to La Liga, including all broadcast La Liga and Copa del Rey games from Real Madrid and Barcelona. However Real Madrid and Barcelona get 34% of this revenue. Monopoly is what it is.

That is incorrect. Mediapro own the exclusive rights to both Barca and Madrid. Both clubs signed deals rumoured to be worth more than €1bn.

TangyZizzle

Bye bye Sky!

Headshot

Alot involved in this satellite stuff

Myself I went down the motorised dish so I can pick up loads of satellites on the arc and that comes with a price

You need 1.2m dish
motor
bracket

someone to install it or can do yourself (very hard to do imo)

Now for the PL the cheap way to go is Tring which for 235 euro you'll get every PL game may not be the greatest pic but for that money its pretty good

La-liga can be found on Al Jazeera which is also very cheap

bookmark this link
http://ondemand.ddns.me/Pay-TV.pdf

Le King

redout wrote: »

That is incorrect. Mediapro own the exclusive rights to both Barca and Madrid. Both clubs signed deals rumoured to be worth more than €1bn.

Correct. Real Madrid got €1.1Bn(7 Seasons) while Barcelona got €600M(5 Seasons).

Or so I just read anyway.

Fr Tod Umptious

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

It will possibly mean that the pan-European rights will have to go to a single bidder - presumably Sky. This will drive down the price they paid overall, as they wouldn't be as much competition.

It could put some clubs who have mortgaged their futures on the prospect of bigger and better TV deals in a tricky situation.

It will also probably mean the end of no televised football at 3pm Saturdays...

That may not work either.

One could just go to a Norwegian or Swiss broadcaster (if one carried games) and take their feed.

Oat23

Helix wrote: »

you could go the "one off payment" approach, but its not particularly legal

I think he meant a one off payment FTA system not anything illegal.