artsport.co.uk

 

 

      

 
 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright, Designs and Patents
Act 1988

Revised

Made 27th April 2000
Laid before Parliament 3rd May 2000
Coming into force 28th May 2000


FRAUDULENT RECEPTION OF TRANSMISSIONS

Section 297: Offence of fraudulently receiving programmes

297.-(1) A person who dishonestly receives 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 commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

(2) Where an offence under this section committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body, or a person purporting to act in any such capacity, he as well as the body corporate is guilty of the offence and liable to be proceeded against and published accordingly.

In relation to a body corporate whose affairs are managed by its members "director" means a member of the body corporate.

297A  Unauthorised decoders

(1) A person commits an offence if he - 

(a) makes, imports, distributes, sells or lets for hire or offers or exposes for sale or hire any unauthorised decoder;

(b) has in his possession for commercial purposes any unauthorised decoder;

(c) instals, maintains or replaces for commercial purposes any unauthorised decoder; or

(d) advertises any unauthorised decoder for sale or hire or otherwise promotes any unauthorised decoder by means of commercial communications.

(2) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) is liable - 

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum;

(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine, or to both.

(3) It is a defence to any prosecution for an offence under this section for the defendant to prove that he did not know, and had no reasonable ground for believing, that the decoder was an unauthorised decoder.

(4) In this section - 

"apparatus" includes any device, component or electronic data (including software);

 

    "conditional access technology" means any technical measure or arrangement whereby access to encrypted transmissions in an intelligbile form is made conditional on prior individual authorisation;

    "decoder" means any apparatus which is designed or adapted to enable (whether on its own or with any other apparatus) an encrypted transmission to be decoded;

    "encrypted" includes subjected to scrambling or the operation of cryptographic envelopes, electronic locks, passwords or any other analogous application;

    "transmission" means - 

 

    (a) any programme included in a broadcasting or cable programme service which is provided from a place in the United Kingdom or any other member State; or

    (b) an information society service (within the meaning of Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22nd June 1998, as amended by Directive 98/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20th July 1998) which is provided from a place in the United Kingdom or any other member State; and

     

    "unauthorised", in relation to a decoder, means that the decoder is designed or adapted to enable an encrypted transmission, or any service of which it forms part, to be accessed in an intelligible form without payment of the fee (however imposed) which the person making the transmission, or on whose behalf it is made, charges for accessing the transmission or service (whether by the circumvention of any conditional access technology related to the transmission or service or by any other means)."

    (3) For section 298 there shall be substituted the following section - 

    " Rights and remedies in respect of apparatus, &c. for unauthorised reception of transmissions.

    298.  

    (1) A person who 

    (a) makes charges for the reception of programmes included in a broadcasting or cable programme service provided from a place in the United Kingdom or any other member State,

    (b) sends encrypted tranmissions of any other description from a place in the United Kingdom or any other member State, or

    (c) provides conditional access services from a place in the United Kingdom or any other member State,

    is entitled to the following rights and remedies.

    (2) He has the same rights and remedies against a person - 

      (a) who - 

      (i) makes, imports, distributes, sells or lets for hire, offers or exposes for sale or hire, or advertises for sale or hire,

      (ii) has in his possession for commercial purposes, or

      (iii) instals, maintains or replaces for commercial purposes,

      any apparatus designed or adapted to enable or assist persons to access the programmes or other transmissions or circumvent conditional access technology related to the programmes or other transmissions when they are not entitled to do so, or

      (b) who publishes or otherwise promotes by means of commercial communications any information which is calculated to enable or assist persons to access the programmes or other transmissions or circumvent conditional access technology related to the programmes or other transmissions when they are not entitled to do so,

    as a copyright owner has in respect of an infringement of copyright.

    (3) Further, he has the same rights under section 99 or 100 (delivery up or seizure of certain articles) in relation to any such apparatus as a copyright owner has in relation to an infringing copy.

    (4) Section 72 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, section 15 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1985 and section 94A of the Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978 (withdrawal of privilege against self-incrimination in certain proceedings relating to intellectual property) apply to proceedings under this section as to proceedings under Part I of this Act (copyright).

    (5) In section 97(1) (innocent infringement of copyright) as it applies to proceedings for infringement of the rights conferred by this section, the reference to the defendant not knowing or having reason to believe that copyright subsisted in the work shall be construed as a reference to his not knowing or having reason to believe that his acts infringed the rights conferred by this section.

    (6) Section 114 applies, with the necessary modifications, in relation to the disposal of anything delivered up or seized by virtue of subsection (3) above.

    (7) In this section "apparatus", "conditional access technology" and "encrypted" have the same meanings as in section 297A, "transmission" includes transmissions as defined in that section and "conditional access services" means services comprising the provision of conditional access technology."

     

(*) This text is an extract from http://www.hmso.gov.uk


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16/03/2006 08:2

A second licensee has been acquitted of showing a live Premiership TV match in her pub during the so-called “closed Saturday” period.

Foreign satellite
Enterprise Inns tenant Eileen Flint denied dishonestly showing the match at the Original Bay Horse, Horwich near Bolton using a decoder and foreign subscription card.

She was cleared at Bolton magistrates court after it ruled she had not acted dishonestly and did not avoid paying a fee because justices decided no payment was applicable.

Flint’s solicitor Joe Egan said because the Premier League did not negotiate fees with individual pubs there was no deliberate intent to avoid payment.

Similar result
The case follows an earlier hearing in the same court two weeks ago when pub manager Ian Moss of the Saddle, Farnworth, Greater Manchester, was cleared of a similar charge.

Egan said a second defeat for the Premier League brought the whole issue of screening Saturday foreign TV transmissions into doubt.

“There are now two cases of a court ruling that licensees are not being dishonest by showing these matches.”

Taken from the morning Advertiser

http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=14476

new as of 24/03/2006

http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=14726

 

LATEST NEWS ON THE COURT BATTLES

 

Charges Dropped In the Portsmouth Case and Now Rochdale

12/07/2006 14:53

Written by: Iain O'Neil

Sky and the FA Premier League have dropped charges against three Portsmouth licensees who showed foreign satellite football in their pubs.

Derek Hopper of the Royal Exchange, Sarah Cordell of the Meon Valley and John Nash of the Fifth Hants were in court yesterday to hear that they would no longer face prosecution for showing Premiership football on foreign satellite systems.

The three are part of the Pompey Five - a group of Portsmouth licensees who showed matches on Greek and Arabic TV.

" We now call on MPS, Sky and the FA Premier League to review all of the outstanding prosecutions and discontinue them
Paul Dixon, the Portsmouth licensees' lawyer."

The first two of the group, Karen Murphy and Andy Cornwall, were cleared recently when the judge found they had not acted dishonestly.

Ray Hoskin, managing director of Media Protection Services, which prosecutes on behalf of Sky and the FAPL, told the Morning Advertiser they chose to offer no evidence after the judge refused to give them more time.

He said: "We asked for time to investigate the supply of the cards they used but the judge said no - so on that basis we ran out of time and offered no evidence."

However, speaking after the decision, the licensees' legal representative Paul Dixon called on Sky and the FAPL to drop its outstanding cases.

He said: "Yet again we've established that decent, hard-working licensees have acted with honesty and integrity throughout. "We now call on MPS, Sky and the FA Premier League to review all of the outstanding prosecutions and discontinue them."

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

COPYRIGHT 2005 -artsport.co.uk