bigtee
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2006
- Messages
- 469
- Reaction score
- 22
- Points
- 18
- Age
- 38
- My Satellite Setup
- Sky; Raven 90 multi-LNB 1W,5E, 7E, 9E, 13E 16E, 19E, 28E; 60cm Triax dish on Moteck SG2100 motor; Various Receivers
- My Location
- Kent, UK
Robbo said:The premier league are not independent though, so whatever they say is biassed.
Posted with Tapatalk
Exactly! Of course the FAPL will continue to threaten and use the fear factor. Again, however, if the FAPL says it is a criminal matter too the question still remains: under what law are they now going to prosecute pubs using European-based provider subs?
Let us clarify the issue a little.
1. Criminal matter: we wait to see under what law the FAPL wants to prosecute/criminalise pubs using EU-based provider subs.
2. Civil matter:
(a) there are ways that pubs can use EU-based provider subs without violating FAPL copyright; if a pub can achieve this, there is llareggub that the FAPL can do about it;
(b) even if a pub violates FAPL copyright, the primary remedy is in an award of damages ---- here we wait the outcome of the Patent court's decision on how much will be awarded against QC Leisure etc; the fact that the matter has been kicked to the Patents court is an indication that the amount will be relatively low; further, the court in the last judgment said already that copyright violation in the case was only to a "limited extent";
(c) what can be an effective remedy is an injunction --- here again the court indicated that it was disposed against an injunction and could be satisfied with an undertaking from QC Leisure etc;
(d) one significant thing to worry about if sued by the FAPL would be legal costs --- but then again that could be covered by appropriate insurance.