Sir Niall Quinn...have you seen this?

Status
Not open for further replies.


So he got fined when it was illegal but now years later when the law has changed he has had his conviction overturned?

That's like the government raising the speed limit and everyone taking them to court over the 3 points they got 8 years ago for speeding.
 
safc78 said:
So he got fined when it was illegal but now years later when the law has changed he has had his conviction overturned?

That's like the government raising the speed limit and everyone taking them to court over the 3 points they got 8 years ago for speeding.
Click to expand...
because the issue went to the European Court whose ruling had an effect on the legality of the original conviction........
 
safc78 said:
So he got fined when it was illegal but now years later when the law has changed he has had his conviction overturned?

That's like the government raising the speed limit and everyone taking them to court over the 3 points they got 8 years ago for speeding.
Click to expand...

It is strange that. There's all sorts of things that would also qualify for compensation by this rationale.
 
This is the crucial bit.

"Since the European Court decision, it (PREM) is taking landlords to civil courts and suing them using copyright laws, which were not affected by the previous ruling."
 
The Premier League have wanted to have their cake and eat it for far too long. If they are going to sell the rights to foreign TV companies then, in a world growing ever smaller due to technology and with increased mobility of people, they can't restrict where games are watched.
 
SurreyMackem said:
This is the crucial bit.

"Since the European Court decision, it (PREM) is taking landlords to civil courts and suing them using copyright laws, which were not affected by the previous ruling."
Click to expand...
No idea how they get away with that, it's blatant anti-competitive practice.
 
SurreyMackem said:
This is the crucial bit.

"Since the European Court decision, it (PREM) is taking landlords to civil courts and suing them using copyright laws, which were not affected by the previous ruling."
Click to expand...
Sorry Mr Sky but it isn't.............that's just their pathetic attempt to try and use their crappy logos to keep denying pubs to show these games legally and its piss easy to get around it............

Hep said:
No idea how they get away with that, it's blatant anti-competitive practice.
Click to expand...
They are using the fact PL logos are deemed as copyright...........its petty and pathetic and very easy to get around...........the software is all over the place and pubs continue to show the games quite legally...........
 
HebburnMackem said:
Not really. It's not that the laws have changed, it's that the original ruling was illegal as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...

I was just about to post something similar. I'd expect - and I know about some Employment legislation related issues - that appeals that go via the English/UK legal appeals processes all the way to a European Court sometimes DO result in the original conviction/decision/penalty being considered unfair or unlawful under some aspect of legislation or 'purposive construction'. Some people will believe that it's those nasty eurocrats meddling in our British system... and some people will believe that it's useful to have an overarching legal authority to prevent inconsistent interpretation and application of laws across the union. hey ho
 
the streaker said:
Sorry Mr Sky but it isn't.............that's just their pathetic attempt to try and use their crappy logos to keep denying pubs to show these games legally and its piss easy to get around it............


They are using the fact PL logos are deemed as copyright...........its petty and pathetic and very easy to get around...........the software is all over the place and pubs continue to show the games quite legally...........
Click to expand...

I don't understand how that hold's up legally. The Greek TV company are licensed to sell that product, therefore how can it be breach of copyright.
 
Hep said:
I don't understand how that hold's up legally. The Greek TV company are licensed to sell that product, therefore how can it be breach of copyright.
Click to expand...
The last court ruling said the PL logos are the copyright of the PL.............Its therefore breaking the law to show them without their consent so anybody showing the games who hasn't got a subscription from the appropriate source can be pursued............

The software to get around this is freely available and they are basically clutching at straws..............
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top