Landlady vs Skyman.......

A pub landlady, convicted for showing Premier League football through a foreign decoder, has received backing from a top European judge.

Karen Murphy, of Portsmouth, said she was "relieved" at the support after she was convicted of breaching copyright laws by using a Greek service.

An Advocate General at the European Court of Justice says the conviction should be overturned.

Sky TV has exclusive rights to show top flight games in the UK.

Advocate General Julie Kokott said blocking the right to use cheaper Greek decoders to screen matches breached EU single market rules.

'Been through hell'

Ms Murphy used the Nova firm to show matches at the Red, White and Blue pub as it was less expensive than Sky.

Using the Greek service, she paid £118 a month, rather than £480 a month with the official broadcaster.

But she was prosecuted by the Football Association Premier League Limited (FAPL) which represents the broadcasting interests of the 20 English Premier League clubs.

Ms Murphy had to pay almost £8,000 in fines and costs, but took her case to the EU Court.

"It has been five-and-a-half years of hell, that's why it matters," she said.

"We are a part of the European Union, we are a democracy, we have an entitlement for choice.

"We should be able to pick where we buy certain items from, we shouldn't be dictated to about what we pay and where we buy it from."

The opinion still needs to be ratified by the courts.

The Premier League said it was studying the detail of advocate general Kokott's opinion but felt it was not compatible with existing EU case law.

It also said that if the opinion was adopted it "would damage the interests of broadcasters and viewers of Premier League football across the EU".

Personally I'm not sure which side I agree with more. I can see both sides of the argument though.

I guess if the Landlady wins then every broadcaster would have to pay the exact same price for Premier League rights..... But I'm not sure it would stop there as a ruling in favour of the Landlady would also affect Film, Music & a whole host of other things...... Might as well just call each country in the EU "Europe City 1".......

I don't quite understand this really, if sky has exclusivity then how can any other provider legally show it?

Aside from that minor confusion I think it's a good thing, if you allow competition then you encourage a price war and that means better value for the consumer, surely?

The other provider can show it legally as they are broadcasting in Greece, where Sky has No exclusivity or Jurisdiction as far as I know. As it's Greek satellite TV it can be picked up by anyone around the globe with the correct equipment.

Well, yes, it could mean better prices for consumers, but that would be unbalanced. The cost of broadcasting in the UK may be quite a bit higher than in other countries, especially when you take corporate taxes into the equation. Also, would one be required to still hold a valid a TV license if they receive all their TV broadcasts from a foreign provider? & if so should that provider not also get a cut of the TV license fee? If that was the case, though the subscription would be less for the foreign broadcaster would it not push everyone's TV license up??

bloody greedy bastard sky....cant stand the competition ....its supposed to be a free market but its anything but in rip off britain......it sucks ....im with the landlady on this .

Bones wrote:The other provider can show it legally as they are broadcasting in Greece, where Sky has No exclusivity or Jurisdiction as far as I know. As it's Greek satellite TV it can be picked up by anyone around the globe with the correct equipment.

Well, yes, it could mean better prices for consumers, but that would be unbalanced. The cost of broadcasting in the UK may be quite a bit higher than in other countries, especially when you take corporate taxes into the equation. Also, would one be required to still hold a valid a TV license if they receive all their TV broadcasts from a foreign provider? & if so should that provider not also get a cut of the TV license fee? If that was the case, though the subscription would be less for the foreign broadcaster would it not push everyone's TV license up??

I was under the impression that the license just funded the BBC and I've always found it annoying that I pay to receive a TV service yet still have to pay a bloody license fee. I don't think the BBC should have this hold over the people of Britain, if there is a market for channels like BBC one and two then they will be created by a commercial provider, as they should always have been. Privatisation will mean short term problems, service and signal etc but long term gain as the channels that work become established and the ones that don't get replaced instead of just being re-vamped all the time. Seriously can anyone say that they regularly watch a whole program that is broadcast on BBC Four?

I was under that impression also, however, whilst the BBC do recieve the bulk of the TV license fee all other broadcasters in the UK also recieve a portion of it, although this is only a small portion. They wouldn't be able to get away with charging what should amount to an illegal tax otherwise