Search results : 1402

In a recently published decision of 9 March 2015 (case no. 7 B 14/1605), the Bayerische Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Bavarian Administrative Court - BayVGH) ruled that the repeated appearance of a logo during a television programme constituted illegal surreptitious advertising. The case concerned the broadcast of the programme ‘Learn from the Pros’ by TV channel Sport1, in which professional poker players give tips and tricks for the card game. As well as a standard sponsor reference at the start of the programme, the logo of the provider Fulltiltpoker.net was visible in virtually every shot, including...

In the dispute over the cable feed-in fee between the public service broadcasters and a cable network operator, the BGH (Federal Supreme Court) referred two pending cases back to the appeal courts on 16 June 2015 (case nos. KZR 83/13 and KZR 3/14). The public service channels are subject to the so-called must-carry rule of Article 52 of the Rundfunkstaatsvertrag (Inter-State Broadcasting Agreement - RStV), under which all cable network operators are obliged to carry the programme signals of the public service broadcasters. However, the RStV does not contain any rules on the fees that cable network...

According to media reports, the Verwaltungsgericht Hamburg (Hamburg Administrative Court - VG Hamburg) decided on 29 April 2015, in case no. 17 K 1672/13, that the “must-carry” obligation of cable network operators under Articles 50 et seq. of the Rundfunkstaatsvertrag (Inter-State Broadcasting Agreement) does not mean that programmes must be carried free of charge. It therefore granted an auxiliary request brought by the cable network operators. The dispute concerns the cost of carrying public service channels via the cable networks. Under the so-called “must-carry” rules laid down by the relevant...

In a ruling of 7 May 2015 - 8 A 254/14 - the Verwaltungsgerichtshof Kassel (Kassel Administrative Court) decided that the supervisory measure imposed by the Hessische Landesanstalt für privaten Rundfunk und neue Medien (Hessian Private Broadcasting and New Media Office - LPR Hessen) against the broadcast of an episode of the “Big Brother” programme was unlawful. The LPR Hessen had classified a “Big Brother” daily highlights show as harmful for the development of children and young people and therefore ordered the broadcaster RTL 2 not to broadcast future episodes of the programme between 7pm and...

On 30 April 2015, the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Supreme Court - BGH) ruled that the Tagesschau app may be unlawful if, when viewed as a whole, it is categorised as a press-like service (case no. I ZR 13/14). The case has now been referred back to the Oberlandesgericht Köln (Cologne Appeal Court - OLG Köln), which will decide whether the app breaches the ban on press-like services that are not related to a specific programme, enshrined in Article 11d(2)(1)(3) of the Rundfunkstaatsvertrag (Inter-State Broadcasting Agreement - RStV). Since the end of 2010, ARD and NDR have provided the Tagesschau...