The legality of geo-blocking: could Sky’s recent commitments in the “Pay-TV” case impact European sports broadcasting?
Published 01 August 2019 By: Ciaran Fitzgerald-Morgan
On 7 March 2019 the European Commission (EC) accepted commitments1 offered by certain Hollywood studios (Studios)2 and Sky UK (Sky) not to block pay-TV access to films for consumers in the European Economic Area (EEA) located outside of the UK and Ireland, bringing to a close an antitrust investigation that had been running since 2014 (Pay-TV).
The EC's investigation in Pay-TV had focused on the impact of clauses (Blocking Clauses) requiring Sky to block access to the Studios' films through its online OTT pay-TV services (by "geo-blocking") and/or through its satellite pay-TV services to consumers outside its licensed territory (by "encryption"). The EC’s concern was that the Blocking Clauses amounted to "absolute territorial exclusivity" in breach of EU antitrust law.
While the Pay TV investigation concerned film licensing rather than sport, the EC’s approach and the binding commitments could have implications for sports property rights owners (SROs) and broadcasters as provisions similar to the Blocking Clauses are often adopted in their sports broadcasting agreements.
The implications of the decision are not however straightforward, and conclusions can only be reached by considering the nature of the broadcast technology adopted in each case, and complex areas of EU copyright, broadcast and antitrust law.
This article will consider:
What geo-blocking is, and why it is of importance to the sports broadcasting industry;
The Pay-TV investigation, and conclusions to be drawn from it in relation to the EC's stance on geo-blocking;
The importance of the symbiotic relationship of EU antitrust law and copyright law in relation to geo-blocking;
EU legislative reform and its impact on geo-blocking; and
The landscape for SROs and OTT broadcasters in relation to geo-blocking going forward.
Get access to this article and all of the expert analysis and commentary at LawInSport
Already a member?
Articles, webinars, conference videos and podcast transcripts
This work was written for and first published on LawInSport.com (unless otherwise stated) and the copyright is owned by LawInSport Ltd. Permission is granted to make digital or hard copies of this work (or part, or abstracts, of it) for personal use provided copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage, and provided that all copies bear this notice and full citation on the first page (which should include the URL, company name (LawInSport), article title, author name, date of the publication and date of use) of any copies made. Copyright for components of this work owned by parties other than LawInSport must be honoured.
- Tags: Anti-Trust | Broadcasting | Competition | European Commission (EC) | European Union | Geo-Blocking | Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
- Can a sports sanction constitute an illegal work restriction? A review of NCAA v. Coach Todd McNair
- A further anti-trust challenge to the NCAA’s athlete compensation cap (In Re: NCAA Athletic Grant-in-Aid Cap..)
- FINA’s decision to allow market access to rival competitions - a turn of the tide in professional swimming
- Sailing into choppy waters? World Sailing under the competition law microscope
Lawyer, T.E.A.M. Marketing AG
Ciaran is a football media rights lawyer at T.E.A.M. Marketing AG, an international sports marketing agency.
T.E.A.M. Marketing is UEFA’s exclusive marketing agency for the exploitation of certain media and commercial rights relating to UEFA’s club competitions including the UEFA Champions League, UEFA Europa League and UEFA Super Cup.