Content area
Full text
News media have reported a recent Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) legal decision in Europe - joined cases Football Ass'n Premier League v. QC Leisure and Karen Murphy v. Media Protection Services Ltd. (together, Murphy)1 - as having significant implications for content owners across the European Union (EU), taking away control of content from such owners. However, a close reading of the case shows that these reports are somewhat exaggerated.
The case is about sports broadcasting. In particular, it is about the rights to show broadcasts from the Premier League, the leading soccer (association football) competition in England. The Premier League is run and promoted by the Football Association Premier League (FAPL).
It is important to note that under EU law, soccer matches (and other sporting events) are not capable of direct protection by the law of copyright, i.e., they are not protected "performances." No one can "own" a soccer match in the same way that one can own a film or a play. Accordingly, any copyright protection regarding such broadcasts must be in the actual broadcasts themselves. The broadcasts are protected, but not the soccer matches.
In this way, the effective role of broadcasting rights is always important to the commercial exploitation of soccer, as is true of other sporting events. This differentiates sports broadcasts from many other forms of "content" where the content itself is capable of direct protection.
FAPL markets and licenses the international television broadcasting rights for Premier League matches. The licenses are structured such that...