Monday 4 October 2010

Second Bosman Ruling?

The Portsmouth News reports that landlady Ms Murphy, is arguing that being blocked from showing football in her pub on a foreign satellite channel is a restriction of trade; that the Premier League contravenes EU principles of free movement of goods and services between the member states:
A Portsmouth landlady is set to take on Sky in the European Court of Justice tomorrow over her showing Pompey games in her pub. It brings the long-running saga between Karen Murphy, landlady of the Red, White and Blue pub in Fawcett Road, Southsea, and the media giant one step closer to the finish line.

The court battle began when Ms Murphy was twice taken to court by Media Protection Services, which protects the rights of broadcasters, for breaching Sky's copyright in this country.

The first time, she successfully argued that she had been unaware that she was breaching copyright law by using Nova. But the second time she was convicted.
Then confirmation where the real power lies:
She appealed to the High Court over the conviction but judges at the High Court in London said the law was such a grey area that even they couldn't decide.

They passed it to the European Court of Justice for a decision, and tomorrow Ms Murphy and MPS will have 20 minutes each to put their case across.
This has a precedent in the infamous Bosman ruling and should Ms Murphy win then the future value of the Premier League's broadcasting rights could be seriously undermined.

Personally I would have thought it would have been much cheaper and a lot less hassle to Ms Murphy if she had bought a bottle of Tippex and painted the pint glass onto the screen of the pub TV. Not that I suggest any pubs do that of course.

2 comments:

  1. "but judges at the High Court in London said the law was such a grey area that even they couldn't decide. They passed it to the European Court of Justice for a decision"

    Seems a sensible saving of costs - if they had ruled in favour of Murphy, it would have been appealed and gone to the ECJ anyway (after all they are now our supreme court) so they might as well deal with it staight away.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Indeed WfW, cut out the middle man. Have you suggested this to Osbourne to help with the deficit? :-)

    ReplyDelete