Sky and the Premier League v. Pub Landlords

This article looks at two recent key decisions in relation to the offence of fraudulently receiving programmes under sub-section 297(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (“CDPA”). Interestingly the Courts took quite different approaches and arrived at very different conclusions. The earlier case is Gannon v. F.A.C.T. [Gannon v. F.A.C.T. [2006] Bolton Crown Court A 20050128] which was heard before the Bolton Crown Court where the Court found in the publican's favour. The most recent case is a High Court case, Karen Murphy v. Media Protection Services Limited [Karen Murphy v. Media Protection Services Limited [2007] EWHC 3091 (Admin)]. In this case the Court found the publican's activities to be illegal and is thus is a victory for the Premier League and a major blow for publicans, but is the legal foundation of the decision sound? We look at how the Court interpreted section 297 CDPA and how it has seemingly broadened the scope of the section beyond the original intention behind the provision: protecting encrypted broadcasts from pirates.