Sky's the limit, but Al Jazeera's cheaper
The IPKat is grateful to Jonathan Mitchell QC for drawing his attention to this feature published by the International Herald Tribune. In essence it reports on the unauthorised transmission by English pubs of Premier League football matches that have been picked up off Qatar-based broadcaster Al Jazeera's sports station. The commentary is in Arabic, but football is a universal language -- it can be appreciated perfectly well even when the sound's turned off. The Premier League has been suing pubs for copyright infringement, claiming that there's a perfectly good licence available to show Premier League games via exclusive licensee Sky. Pub owners say Sky's too expensive, though.
The IPKat is torn in two over this. He deprecates any unlawful siphoning off of broadcasts, particularly by pub-owners who do so for their personal profit rather than for the altruistic pleasure of bringing football games to the impoverished masses. However, he dearly wishes to see more competition for the supply of broadcast football games to the public and dislikes the notion that television viewers have to subscribe to Sky and pay extra for the privilege of watching football games: the extra broadcasting revenue pumped into the game appears to make it more expensive for fans, not cheaper. Merpel says, "Didn't I see you peeping in through the pub window, trying to watch the game for free ..."
See IPKat post of 12 May, "Easy win for UEFA", here
SKY'S THE LIMIT, BUT AL JAZEERA'S CHEAPER
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Rating:
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html