Skip to Content. Skip to Navigation.

Our Say

Optus ruling to hit codes where it hurts

02/02/2012 02:41:18 AM

On the face of it, Lily Allen and David Gallop don't have a great deal in common.

But after Wednesday's landmark Federal Court ruling that Optus was not breaching copyright laws by offering customers (almost) live sports coverage via mobile phones, Gallop may well be humming Ms Allen's tune F..k You and joining her and her ilk in the fight to protect copyright.

The music and entertainment industry has long rallied against piracy or the illegal downloading of songs and movies, with a varying degree of success and assistance from the lawmakers.

Now it is the turn of professional sport in Australia to protect its rights.

But their fight is with the law - not those breaking it - and, at this stage, the law's winning.

With the Federal Court green lighting the free downloading of our biggest sporting codes on mobile platforms - ruling that because the games are recorded by the user they are technically not live despite there being just a short delay - the big money paid by the likes of Telstra for exclusive rights are basically worthless.

And free-to-air television stations will be re-assessing how much they pay for rights to telecast major sporting competitions when Optus can offer the same service at a fraction of the cost.

The AFL's $153m deal with Telstra for exclusive online rights is already in jeopardy and that spells bad news for the NRL as it continues talks over its next broadcast arrangement.

Early estimates had rugby league reaping just as much as the AFL - $1.2bn over five years - if not more when its new deal begins in 2013.

That sort of money promises to lead to a considerable increase in the salary cap and financial security for clubs currently operating on a hand-to-mouth existence.

Now the brakes are on.

Media rights expert Colin Smith spoke to NRL bosses and stakeholders last July, confidently declaring their sport was in a stronger position than AFL to broker a better broadcast rights deal due to superior television audiences.

He's been forced to drastically change his tune since recovering from the shock of the Federal Court announcement.

"This decision is not in the interests of the sports or free-to-air television," he told Sydney radio.

"The whole value of exclusivity, which is the critical driver, is gone."

"It's taking significant money out of the system and the powers that be in Canberra need to look at this very urgently to protect the interests of fans and the sports."

The AFL and NRL will appeal the Federal Court ruling in the hope of having it overturned.

They will argue the copyright laws date back several decades and need to be brought up to date to accommodate the ever-changing media landscape.

The outcome of the appeal will have massive ramifications for every major sport in Australia.

This was a grenade they simply didn't see detonating.

 
Photograph Copyright : Getty Images
Comments
Posted by Geoff at
09/02/2012 10:00 AM
The ruling will NOT hit the codes. I don't think you understand the situation. And I don't think Australian TV channels really get the internet either. The value of the rights to free to air stations actually increases via this ruling. FTA (free to air) stations broadcast the images for 'free', but sell air time to advertisers during the broadcast based on the amount of people they expect to view the images. This ruling now means that the audience to their images has just increased - by a lot, and at no cost to them! There are now all these portable devices (and in places with no access to the free to air broadcast) with access to view the commercials. Telstra has lost out as it bought the 'exclusive online rights'. But I don't think it was ever the AFL's to sell. If you look at the UK model - all the FTA TV stations simulcast ALL of their tv shows (in HD) directly to the internet (have a look at the BBC iPlayer.) The FTA F1 races broadcast righ