19 replies to this topic

[logifuse]

Hopefully what comes out of this is that the idea that the internet should attract specific rights for parallel broadcasts is ridiculous. It's not like the difference between TV & radio, it's still television, but it's delivered via IP instead of a wireless broadcast.

Content suppliers have built up a model that allows them to sell the same thing to the same people numerous times, & it needs to be stopped.

If these big sporting bodies are smart (& I know the AFL have a unit working towards this), they'll be thinking about their next rights deal in 5 years time with the idea that they'll broadcast their games over the net (NBN) directly themselves & cut out Foxtel completely by offering PPV or season pass access. I can't see how the Foxtel model can survive as they rely on you paying for the rubbish that's cheap for them to supply, to pay for the infrastructure & broadcast rights. Take away the item that's the big hook & their subscriber base will collapse.

The NRL needs to realise that when they negotiate their upcoming contract. They need to have the balls to call Foxtel's bluff if they won't pay up. If Foxtel lose the NRL, they pretty much go out of business in NSW & Qld, & the NRL needs to use that leverage.

Justin

[davidgol]

The crux of the argument is that Optus are not making the recording. They are providing the infrastructure for someone to make a recording.

Thanks for explaining dgaust - it all makes sense now

I find it amusing though that the "we're not doing anything illegal, we're just supplying the tools" excuse works here, yet the courts are still trying to get ISPs to take the hit for their customers BT downloads.

[logifuse]

If these big sporting bodies are smart (& I know the AFL have a unit working towards this), they'll be thinking about their next rights deal in 5 years time with the idea that they'll broadcast their games over the net (NBN) directly themselves & cut out Foxtel completely by offering PPV or season pass access. I can't see how the Foxtel model can survive as they rely on you paying for the rubbish that's cheap for them to supply, to pay for the infrastructure & broadcast rights. Take away the item that's the big hook & their subscriber base will collapse.

The NRL needs to realise that when they negotiate their upcoming contract. They need to have the balls to call Foxtel's bluff if they won't pay up. If Foxtel lose the NRL, they pretty much go out of business in NSW & Qld, & the NRL needs to use that leverage.

This article highlights my point about protecting the Foxtel model: http://www.smh.com.a...0216-1tapm.html

Also, channel 10 supposedly chasing the NRL rights, even all 8 games FTA is very interesting. Foxtel simply can't afford to lose the NRL, so if 10 are serious, the NRL should get their deserved cash. 10 could even over-spend & know that they will be able to on-sell on to Foxtel at an inflated rate.

Justin

[dgaust]

Seems like the Federal Court felt differently and overturned the previous decision

http://www.smh.com.a...0427-1xoth.html

[logifuse]

So what if Optus supplied you with an Internet connected PVR in your home as part of your bundled broadband/mobile package that enabled you to do the same thing, but the stream comes from your home instead of Optus' data centre? You can effectively do that now without Optus' involvement, so would them supplying the ability be the trigger to make it bad?

Justin