‘Communication to the Public’ in FAPL v QC Leisure and Murphy v Media Protection Services (C-403/08 and C-429/08)

Post by Enrico Bonadio On 4 October 2011 the Court of Justice of the European Union released its decision in FAPL v QC Leisure and Murphy v Media Protection Services (Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08). Amongst the many aspects dealt with, the Court gave its interpretation of ‘communication to the public’ under Article 3(1) of … Continue reading

Murphy v Media Protection Services: not a clearcut victory

By Judith Townend (cross-post from Law Justice and Journalism) One view seemed to dominate last night’s  City Law School event: the implications of the ECJ judgment in combined cases FA Premier League & Ors v QC Leisure and Murphy v Media Protection Services were unclear. As Professor Lorna Woods, City Law School, wrote ahead of the event, “The long-awaited Murphy judgment … has been heralded in the … Continue reading

Football, Broadcasting and the Internal Market

Thank you to everyone who participated in the Institute for the Study of European Laws’ legal panel discussion ‘Football, Broadcasting and the Internal Market: Is a new audio-visual space in sight?’ on 11 October 2011. It proved to be a fascinating discussion of various aspects of the ECJ’s judgment in FA Premier League b QC … Continue reading

Live blog: legal discussion panel 11 October 2011

The Institute for the Study of European Laws will be hosting a legal panel discussion tonight, Tuesday 11 October at 18:00 at the City University Northampton Square campus on the ECJ’s decision of 4 October 2011 in joined cases FA Premier League v QC Leisure and Murphy v Media Protection Services. To follow the event … Continue reading

ITV v TV Catchup

Post by Prof. Lorna WoodsThe judgment in ITV Broadcasting Ltd and Ors v TV Catchup Ltd  [2011] EWHC 1874 (Pat) was handed down on 18 July 2011.  TV Catchup Ltd (TVC) operates an internet based live streaming service of broadcast television programmes, including films, in which the claimants own the copyright. The service provided does … Continue reading

Murphy: Can Broadcasting Copyrights Hinder the Internal Market?

There is definitely an apparent conflict between free movement principles and the territorial nature of intellectual property rights. The reason is pretty clear. On one side, the common market project pursues the scope of building an area of free trade without barriers from state to state. On the other side, instead, the protection of intellectual … Continue reading

More commentary on the AG’s Opinion

For further comment on the Advocate General’s Opinion see this post by Hugo from the 1709 blog on the potential implications of the licensing of rights across Europe. Another interesting post can be found on the IPKat blog which includes the English Premier League’s response to the Advocate General’s Opinion. UPDATE: For a detailed commentary … Continue reading

“Communication to the Public” in Murphy

Post by Dr Enrico Bonadio The Opinion released on 3 February 2011 by the Advocate General in Murphy (Joined Cases C-403/08 and C-429/08) also covers the communication to the public right. The AG Professor Juliane Kokott held that the showing of Premier League live matches in pubs does not constitute communication to the public under … Continue reading

Trans-Atlantic Lessons from the EU Challenge to Exclusive Broadcast Territories: Guest Post by Prof. Stephen F. Ross

Stephen F. Ross is Professor of Law and Director of the Institute for Sports Law, Policy and Research at The Pennsylvania State University, and has co-taught sports business courses at the City University London’s Cass Business School. If followed by the ECJ, the Advocate General’s Opinion will bring renewed attention in both Europe and the … Continue reading

Football Economics: Guest Post by Prof. Stefan Szymanski

Stefan Szymanski is Professor of Economics and Director of the Sports Business Network Research Centre at the Cass Business School. Once again football’s “specificity” has taken the field against the EU’s single market, and once again it appears to have lost. Just as with the Bosman ruling, the Advocate General’s opinion makes clear that the … Continue reading