Dear All,
I would also be very grateful if you could make available the judgment.
David, am I correct to understand from your e-mail that the criminal offence deducted from section 297 CDP Act 1988 is not clear? Sorry if I misunderstood you.
Paragraph 55.(iii).c) of the Judgment of the European Court of Justice refers the question submitted: “Do Articles 28, 30 and/or 49 EC preclude enforcement of a national law (such as section 297 of the [Copyright, Designs and Patents Act]) which makes it a criminal offence dishonestly to receive a programme included in a broadcasting service provided from a place in the United Kingdom with intent to avoid payment of any charge applicable to the reception of the programme, in any of the following circumstances: […]”.
Allegedly the delimitation of the paragraph 1 of the section 297 CDP Act 1988, i.e. “provided from a place in the United Kingdom” may lead to confusion in the case, but the broadcasting is indeed from the UK in this case.
Plus, the protection of the copyrighted materials will still be available, since the Premier League has not received a fee from those who make the communication to the public of their IP.
Many thanks,
Alfonso Valero.
Alfonso ValeroThanks Simon.
I'm still at a loss to understand the relationship between the issues raised in the preliminary reference and the criminal legal issues arising in Murphy (beyond a probably ill-informed concern about the possibility of somebody being convicted of a criminal offence when the applicable law is so manifestly unclear that a PR on IP and the free movement of services is deemed necessary to help make sense of a criminal law provision); so I too would appreciate seeing the judgment - or failing that, the thoughts of finer brains than mine as to what on earth is going on here.
Cheers
Confused of Stirling
Dr David McArdle
Stirling Law School
@davemcardle
01786 467285
www.law.stir.ac.uk/staff/d.mcardle.php
-----Original Message-----
From: Sport and the European Union [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Boyes, Simon
Sent: 24 February 2012 11:24
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Karen Murphy case
Dear all,
It may be of interest to know that the BBC is reporting that Karen Murphy has 'won' her case in respect of broadcasting Greek coverage of English Premier League football matches. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17150054
If anyone happens to have a link to the judgment I'd appreciate a tip off.
Simon
__________________________
Simon Boyes
Senior Lecturer,
Nottingham Law School,
Nottingham Trent University,
Nottingham NG1 4BU
Email: [log in to unmask]
Tel: +44 0115 8486528
DISCLAIMER: This email is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain private and confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee, please take no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone. In this case, please reply to this email to highlight the error. Opinions and information in this email that do not relate to the official business of Nottingham Trent University shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by the University. Nottingham Trent University has taken steps to ensure that this email and any attachments are virus-free, but we do advise that the recipient should check that the email and its attachments are actually virus free. This is in keeping with good computing practice.
Sport&EU, The Association for the Study of Sport and the European Union can be found at http://www.sportandeu.com
--
The Sunday Times Scottish University of the Year 2009/2010
The University of Stirling is a charity registered in Scotland,
number SC 011159.
Sport&EU, The Association for the Study of Sport and the European Union can be found at
http://www.sportandeu.com