The Football Association Premier League ("FAPL") has succeeded in forcing ISPs to block access to a website which allowed its users to stream live Premier League football matches.In the latest of a
The Football Association Premier League ("FAPL") has succeeded in forcing ISPs to block access to a website which allowed its users to stream live Premier League football matches.
In the latest of a series of website blocking injunctions (see previous reports here and here), the High Court has ordered the six main ISPs to block access to FirstRow Sports ("FirstRow").
Whilst obtaining such an injunction is not unusual, this is the first time that one has been granted against a website which 'only' provided links and framed streamed broadcasts to allow users to access material emanating from third party websites - previous cases have all involved peer-to-peer websites (where users share content). Because of its intervention in the process, FirstRow was responsible for an infringing communication to the public. Following the recent CJEU judgment in TV Catchup, there was also no need to show a communication to a "new public" because of the retransmission of the broadcast over the Internet.
FirstRow indexed streams provided by third party streamers who captured broadcasts (via a legitimate subscription or illegally) allowing its users to access a multitude of sporting events. Indeed, while FAPL was the applicant in this case, its application was supported by evidence from other sporting rights holders including World Snooker Ltd, the PGA European Tour and the Rugby Football Union.
Handing down the judgment, the Judge commented on the large scale profit being made by FirstRow (estimated as being between £5m and £9.5m annually) and its popularity – in April 2013 alone, it was visited by nearly 10 million unique users worldwide.
A spokesman for the FAPL stated that they were "extremely pleased" and that the judgment recognised "the parasitic nature of the enterprise … which gave nothing back to the sport". It is not only the FAPL that will be delighted with this outcome, rights holders will be buoyed that the Court has yet again made a wide ranging order to protect copyright works and broadly applied the remedy to encompass any party involved in providing the public with the means to unlawfully access copyright works.
In the latest of a series of website blocking injunctions (see previous reports here and here), the High Court has ordered the six main ISPs to block access to FirstRow Sports ("FirstRow").
Whilst obtaining such an injunction is not unusual, this is the first time that one has been granted against a website which 'only' provided links and framed streamed broadcasts to allow users to access material emanating from third party websites - previous cases have all involved peer-to-peer websites (where users share content). Because of its intervention in the process, FirstRow was responsible for an infringing communication to the public. Following the recent CJEU judgment in TV Catchup, there was also no need to show a communication to a "new public" because of the retransmission of the broadcast over the Internet.
FirstRow indexed streams provided by third party streamers who captured broadcasts (via a legitimate subscription or illegally) allowing its users to access a multitude of sporting events. Indeed, while FAPL was the applicant in this case, its application was supported by evidence from other sporting rights holders including World Snooker Ltd, the PGA European Tour and the Rugby Football Union.
Handing down the judgment, the Judge commented on the large scale profit being made by FirstRow (estimated as being between £5m and £9.5m annually) and its popularity – in April 2013 alone, it was visited by nearly 10 million unique users worldwide.
A spokesman for the FAPL stated that they were "extremely pleased" and that the judgment recognised "the parasitic nature of the enterprise … which gave nothing back to the sport". It is not only the FAPL that will be delighted with this outcome, rights holders will be buoyed that the Court has yet again made a wide ranging order to protect copyright works and broadly applied the remedy to encompass any party involved in providing the public with the means to unlawfully access copyright works.