SV: Re: Re: TV ads break copyright law

Again, it is beyond discussion that TV4 had regularly from its very start in the early 1990ies interrupted films shown on that channel. Whether it was in the form of a news break with ads or in other forms is not very interesting. Of legal substance in a droit moral context is that the directors in this case were of course aware of this when they gave their consent to TV4 to show their films and that they made no reservation whatsoever as to how the films could be shown.  

To focus on what should have been the core issue in this case, how and under what circumstances moral rights might be waived, a vital issue in everyday contracting, not least in broadcasting, would have let us uphold actual qualities of moral rights. The courts didn't do that, particularly not the Appeal Court. The outcome of the judgements so far just leaves us with a blurred picture. Authors, filmproducers and TV channels deserve more.  

Jan Rosen

Från: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property genom Karl-Erik Tallmo Skickat: må 2006-04-24 17:45
Till: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property Ämne: [CNI-(C)] Re: [CNI-(C)] Re: TV ads break copyright law

         In addition to Mr Tallmo's remarks, it should thus be noticed, that TV4 had never under its 15 years existence shown a film without interrupting it, normally for a news program foregone and ended with a block of ads (a total break of some 30 minutes).

[...]          

        Jan Rosen            

I don't think this is correct. Channel 4 started broadcasting in 1990 but it was not until 1999 they began interrupting films and serials with what was to be coined "fake programs", short hints on books worth reading, info about coming programs, news items etc - all of that with ads attached. And this stirred up rather massive protests among viewers.

At first this strategy was considered a violation of the agreement with the Government, and Channel 4 had to pay around 6 million SEK in fines for this offence. However, the Government proposed a change in the legislation in 2001 so this method to insert commercials in the middle of programs was to become legal. Critics say that the Government yielded to Channel 4's threat to move abroad with their broadcasting (that is outside of Swedish jurisdiction) and thus they could continue cashing in several hundred million SEK each year for the broadcasting license from Channel 4.

Jan, weren't you, BTW, advisor to Channel 4 during this process?

/Karl-Erik Tallmo

   KARL-ERIK TALLMO, writer, editor   

   ARCHIVE: http://www.nisus.se/archive/artiklar.html    BOOK: http://www.nisus.se/gorgias
   ANOTHER BOOK: http://www.copyrighthistory.com    MAGAZINE: http://art-bin.com

###########################################

This message has been scanned by F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft Exchange.
For more information, connect to http://www.f-secure.com/