Interesting. 2010/1/26 Mo McRoberts <m...@nevali.net>
> > I did do some digging, though IANAL and it was only a cursory > high-level search (and it was a while ago) > > From memory, though, and this is just my skim-understanding: primary > legislation covers EPG services as well as TV channels themselves and > in much the same way to one another. Ofcom issues licenses for both, > and both are bound by similar (and in many cases identical) rules. So, > even if you accept that "the programmes will be broadcast in the > clear", this doesn't change the fact that EPG data isn't unregulated. > The Ofcom document states: 5.9.2 A commitment to establishing an “appeals” process whereby viewers who believe their lawful usage is being impinged by the BBC’s use of content management can raise their concerns to the BBC, rather than having to write to the Secretary of State, which is the current legal requirement; 10.1 .... These raised a number of potentially significant questions regarding compliance with copyright law and competition issues that were not addressed in our original letter. 3.16.1 An undertaking to respect current user protections enshrined in copyright law and any future extension of these protections, such as those recommended by the Gower’s Review of Intellectual Property; 5.9.1 An undertaking that the BBC will respect current usage protections under copyright law and any future extension of these protections, such as thoserecommended by the Gower’s Review of Intellectual Property18 and A.2.3 The signalling of content management states by broadcasters in respect of any programme does not indicate any form of entitlement to copy or distribute this content. The responsibility resides with citizens and consumers to respect all rights associated with video and audio works. It should be noted that the content management approach implemented for Freeview HD will frequently enable far more extensive copying and distribution of broadcast content than is likely to be considered acceptable to the majority of rights-holders or is legitimate under current UK law. > Now, what I don't know is: > > a) whether the fact that the EPG data is broadcast by a wholly-owned > subsidiary rather than the Corporation makes any difference > I'm quite sure that's not the case as the company is wholly owned by the BBC. > b) whether the PSB obligation applies to the EPG data in the first > place (I'd guess yes, but would prefer confirmation of this) > Both the BBC and Ofcom would think so, because they would not have had to consult. The BBC could have just done it if the corporation's lawyers had said it was "just OK". > c) whether you'd need to mount a legal challenge in court to prove any > of it if it turned out that Ofcom didn't, in fact, have the authority > I'm sure at the very least you would need a proper solicitor's letter, rather than the word of a blogger. But the BBC seems to be arguing that the BBC *must* have the ability to protect the output of Freeview HD devices to comply with the law. I have a Rumpole voice in my head asking the Director General "...but you have run the Freeview service for over a decade without this protection, are you telling the court that you were not complying with the law then, sir?" > > M. > > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ > -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
