Search results : 806
Refine your searchIRIS 2013-1:1/23 [GB] Competition Appeal Tribunal Decision on Pay TV | |
---|---|
The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, a specialist court hearing appeals from the decisions of the competition authorities, has published its judgment relating to the decision of the communications regulator, Ofcom, to impose a wholesale must-carry remedy on Sky. This required Sky to offer wholesale its Sky Sports 1 and 2 channels to rival pay TV retailers at a price set by Ofcom (see IRIS 2010-5/26). Appeals were entered against the decision by Sky, Virgin Media, BT and the Premier League. Sky appealed on three grounds. First, that Ofcom had no power to intervene in the Pay-TV market as it was concerned... |
|
IRIS 2012-10:1/15 [GB] ASA Adjudication on Channel Four Television Corporation’s Posters Advertising a Documentary | |
On 3 October 2012, the UK’s Advertising Standard Authority (ASA) ruled against Channel Four Television for its posters advertising its documentary based on the film My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding. The posters featured the words "Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier" over an image of a young boy looking directly at the camera and others of two teenagers wearing low-cut bra tops and three young girls dressed for their first Holy Communion standing in front of a caravan. The ASA, on advice from the Equality and Human Rights Commission reviewed the matter in light of the provisions of the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising,... |
|
IRIS 2012-9:1/26 [GB] Co-Regulatory Approach to Television on Demand Services to Continue | |
Ofcom, the UK communications regulator, has decided after consultation to continue the arrangements by which the Authority for Television on Demand (ATVOD) is the co-regulatory authority for television on demand services under the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and the Communications Act 2003. ATVOD had asked to assume this role, and was designated to do so under the Act in 2010. The designation authorised ATVOD to carry out a range of functions, including those to administer procedures relating to notification of on-demand services, to determine whether providers had notified their services... |
|
IRIS 2012-9:1/25 [GB] Ofcom Continues to Regard Sky as a Fit and Proper Person to Hold Broadcast Licences | |
Ofcom, the UK Regulator, has a duty, under the Broadcasting Acts 1990 and 1996, Section 3(3), to be satisfied that any person holding a broadcasting licence (i.e., the licencee) is (and remains) ‘fit and proper’ to hold that licence. When considering whether a licence holder is fit and proper, Ofcom will take into account ‘any relevant misconduct of those who manage and control the licensee.’ As part of its on-going duty under Section 3(3) of the Acts, Ofcom has recently considered whether the broadcaster Sky remains fit and proper to hold broadcast licences in the light of information that has... |
|
IRIS 2012-9:1/24 [GB] Regulator Clarifies Meaning of Editorial Responsibility for On-Demand Programme Services | |
The UK communications regulator (Ofcom) has asked the co-regulatory Authority for Television on Demand (ATVOD) to reconsider a decision relating to editorial responsibility for on-demand programme services. The Communications Act 2003, as amended to implement the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, requires that there be a person with editorial responsibility for such services, who must notify ATVOD and pay a fee. Editorial responsibility is defined in terms of ‘general control’ over what programmes are included in the service and over the manner in which such programmes are organised, although... |