The TV rights thread part II

[docbrown]

1. The pollies are trying to stay out of the mess that they created but it won't be long before they get dragged into it.

2. Sporting competitions rely mostly on the money generated from exclusive media rights to fund the development of their games. If those rights become worthless then any government that supports it will be brandished with killing grassroots sport.

3. If Telstra disregard the contract then AFL will sue them for breach. AFL will argue that Telstra knew that the law might change but there's no legal standpoint there. At the time the contract was signed the law is as was written and thus Telstra may exercise its opt out.

4. So not only might the AFL & Telstra go to courts with each other they will also go into the appeal process

5. Player payments in the AFL would be affected. Development plans in Western Sydney & QLD would be affected.

6. If Telstra don't disregard the contract it won't be long before management are questioned by the shareholders - especially when the media constantly questions why they agreed to a deal that had such a large cloud over it.

This was always an outcome and I bet the government is cringing because it knows what's coming up.

The lobbying group will lobby. Lawsuits. A big mess.

The best thing the government can do is to address the issue now. It shouldn't be fought on a tactic of technology, it should be fought on the grounds of intrinsic culpability.

 

[Brutus]

Roy Masters will be talking about this ruling in a couple of minutes on Talkin Sport.

 

[nyx]

1. The pollies are trying to stay out of the mess that they created but it won't be long before they get dragged into it.

2. Sporting competitions rely mostly on the money generated from exclusive media rights to fund the development of their games. If those rights become worthless then any government that supports it will be brandished with killing grassroots sport.

3. If Telstra don't disregard the contract then AFL will sue them for breach. AFL will argue that Telstra knew that the law might change but there's no legal standpoint there. At the time the contract was signed the law is as was written and thus Telstra may exercise its opt out.

4. So not only might the AFL & Telstra go to courts with each other they will also go into the appeal process

5. Player payments in the AFL would be affected. Development plans in Western Sydney & QLD would be affected.

6. If Telstra don't disregard the contract it won't be long before management are questioned by the shareholders - especially when the media constantly questions why they agreed to a deal that had such a large cloud over it.

This was always an outcome and I bet the government is cringing because it knows what's coming up.

The lobbying group will lobby. Lawsuits. A big mess.

The best thing the government can do is to address the issue now. It shouldn't be fought on a tactic of technology, it should be fought on the grounds of intrinsic culpability.

Quality post. Thanks Doc

 

[CC_Roosters]

I dont get how optus can legally allowed to use the NRL's intellectual property without paying for the privilege. Is it a loophole in the law that allows this?

I also dont see how this will affect the value of the FTA rights?

 

[El Diablo]

I dont get how optus can legally allowed to use the NRL's intellectual property without paying for the privilege. Is it a loophole in the law that allows this?

I also dont see how this will affect the value of the FTA rights?

it's only for internet rights and Optus can only show games that are on FTA

seeing the AFL has more games on FTA it would hurt them more

 

[docbrown]

it's only for internet rights and Optus can only show games that are on FTA

seeing the AFL has more games on FTA it would hurt them more

In 10 to 20 years time the boundary lines between FTA, Subscription & the Internet will be so blurred.

Optus are taking a similar line to bit torrent sites - "we just house the content". The difference though is that they get away with it largely due to anonymity. Optus is a company out in the open. Imagine it the other way round and Optus had the exclusive AFL rights and Telstra did this. Optus would be appealing the decision which just goes to show how stupid it is.

This is just a loophole in copyright laws. The technology never existed before to watch a program on such a short delay. Previously you had to wait till the program was finished so you could rewind the tape. The speed of the technology has increased but the laws have failed to address it adequately.

 

[sheepbender]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/mo...eal-under-threat/story-fn7x8me2-1226260041242

Thoughts?? Apparently the deal wont be as good anymore, but could still be better than the AFLs as NRL as one less FTA game per week..

 

[Spot On]

It definitely means the billion or so dollars being tauted for the TV rights and the forward planning clubs have done (forward spending on players) is now in jeopardy. The fact is there will not be any billion dollar deal and the NRL has just lost some "hand" at the bargaining table. It also means Cooper Crock can shove his 850K a season asking price. Welcome back to reality.

 

[El Diablo]

In 10 to 20 years time the boundary lines between FTA, Subscription & the Internet will be so blurred.

Optus are taking a similar line to bit torrent sites - "we just house the content". The difference though is that they get away with it largely due to anonymity. Optus is a company out in the open. Imagine it the other way round and Optus had the exclusive AFL rights and Telstra did this. Optus would be appealing the decision which just goes to show how stupid it is.

This is just a loophole in copyright laws. The technology never existed before to watch a program on such a short delay. Previously you had to wait till the program was finished so you could rewind the tape. The speed of the technology has increased but the laws have failed to address it adequately.

if Optus can do this then what's stopping Fox from doing the same to channel 9 games?

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

EL D.I am sure that it was written into the last rights that Fox could not begin to broadcast a Ch 9 Game until it had finished airing on 9.
Then again Contracts dont seem to mean much these days .

 

[El Diablo]

EL D.I am sure that it was written into the last rights that Fox could not begin to broadcast a Ch 9 Game until it had finished airing on 9.
Then again Contracts dont seem to mean much these days .

if they show it on 5 minute delay then it has aired on 9

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

I think it was until the game had completed .
But with the murkiness surrounding the ruling ,they should have a shot at it..

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

it's only for internet rights and Optus can only show games that are on FTA

seeing the AFL has more games on FTA it would hurt them more

But don't the AFL show different FTA games in different states meaning nearly all games could be shown on Optus?


Bahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahah!

 

[docbrown]

if Optus can do this then what's stopping Fox from doing the same to channel 9 games?

Legally at the moment there's nothing stopping anyone from doing this with this technology.

Could you imagine if Channel 9 started broadcasting Channel 7 on a digital channel on a 1 minute delay? There'd be an uproar.

Yet similar result, different technology, apparently it's legal.

The people involved just haven't understood the ramifications of the technology enough to write a sensible law around it.

 

[madunit]

The NRL should jump in bed with Optus

 

[docbrown]

But don't the AFL show different FTA games in different states meaning nearly all games could be shown on Optus

Yes and the technology doesn't recognise the state borders like the networks have to.

Thus any game on F2A anywhere in Australia is up for grabs.

The question you have to ask is: why is this legal for F2A and illegal for subscription? Should having clients who pay you directly entitle you to some copyright protection?

The reason the laws were changed is because of the understand of fair use. Remember it used to be illegal to videotape a programme mainly because networks wanted you watch when they said so. But people wanted flexibility and were breaking the law so regularly that the law itself became pointless so it was addressed under the concept of fair use.

But this isn't a case of people wanting flexibility. This is a case of a company trying to circumvent the exclusivity rights of other companies.

If the law was that Optus could only broadcast the match after the match had ended then it wouldn't be as big a deal. That technology already exists. This is about stealing viewers away from official exclusive rights holders.

Now ask yourself: is that fair use?

 

[muzby]

now i'm not a lawyer or anything, but it appears that optus have exploited a loophole to stream the game almost live.. All telstra got was exclusive live streaming rights - no stipulation of exact time..

So.. If i was gallop, the first thing i'd do is tighten that loophole.. Put a clause that allows exclusivity for say 1hr, eliminating what optus have done here..

Of course, if i was gallop, the second thing i'd do is give myself an uppercut.. just because..

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

I see people are worried about the NRL deal coming up, but isn't it better that this has happened right now (to the AFL no less :lol before the deal is done so the NRL can actually go into the negotiations with some actual knowledge of what's going on and work a way around it to maximise the $$$$?

 

[docbrown]

now i'm not a lawyer or anything, but it appears that optus have exploited a loophole to stream the game almost live.. All telstra got was exclusive live streaming rights - no stipulation of exact time..

So.. If i was gallop, the first thing i'd do is tighten that loophole.. Put a clause that allows exclusivity for say 1hr, eliminating what optus have done here..

Of course, if i was gallop, the second thing i'd do is give myself an uppercut.. just because..

Unfortunately if it was as simple as the two groups revising their contract then they would have done it by now.

The problem is the fair use stipulations in copyright law. This allows an individual to make a recording for personal use. Traditionally a recording had to be made after the programme had ended. This circumvents that by recording and watching during the programme while it's still airing.

All that needs to be done is for that clause to be added - that a recording technology cannot play during the timeslot of the original programme.

Specific. Simple.

 

[docbrown]

I see people are worried about the NRL deal coming up, but isn't it better that this has happened right now (to the AFL no less :lol before the deal is done so the NRL can actually go into the negotiations with some actual knowledge of what's going on and work a way around it to maximise the $$$$?

Yes.

And what really amuses me is that the journos/papers/idiots online saying that the NRL is going to lose tens of millions of dollars are typically the same ones who were previously claiming that the NRL would struggle to scrape together much of anything.

Which lie is the correct one? :roll: