Search results : 1507

On 25 January 2012, the Austrian Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Administrative Court - VwGH) rejected a broadcaster’s appeal against a decision of the Bundeskommunikationssenat (Federal Communication Office - BKS) and ruled, inter alia, that an information channel that broadcasts only a sequence of still images that changes approximately every two months (mainly job advertisements and other advertising) is obliged to record its broadcasts under the terms of the Privatfernsehgesetz (Private Television Act - PrTV-G). In a ruling of 9 March 2009, the BKS had stated that the company concerned should be treated...

On 7 May 2012, the European Commission presented its first report on the application of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) (see IRIS 2008-1/3). Article 33 of the Directive invites the European Commission to submit a report on its application every three years. This report covers the period 2009-2010. The document is divided into two parts: the first relates to the application of the Directive (including implementation status) and the second to the influence that recent technological developments has had on the regulatory framework. In its introduction, the report recalls the goal...

On 23 November 2011 the Council for Broadcasting and Retransmission of the Slovak Republic (“Council”) issued a decision concerning a complaint against “Internet TV” run at www.tnitv.weebly.com. The given service was labelled as “Internet TV of the city of Trencin” and provided a list of short (on-demand) videos mostly dealing with topics related to the city of Trencin. After a first assessment of this service the Council gained reasonable suspicion that it may be qualified as on-demand audiovisual media service and its provider thus may have failed to meet the statutory obligation to notify the...

On 7 February 2012, In Smash Communications Limited vs. Broadcasting Authority et, decided by the Civil Court, First Hall, the court concluded that the present system established in the Broadcasting Act regulating the imposition of administrative sanctions by the Broadcasting Authority was in breach of the principle of natural justice nemo iudex in causa propria - no person may be a judge in his/her own cause. In brief, the facts of the case were as follows. The Broadcasting Authority’s Chief Executive Officer had issued a charge against Smash Television alleging that in a particular programme...

A company which sold mattresses made the following claim on one of its websites regarding its products: that they were “as seen on TV”. The sole complainant challenged whether that claim “As seen in” misleadingly implied that the mattress had featured in editorials or product reviews in those media, contrary to rule 3.1 of the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising, Sales Promotion and Direct Marketing (CAP Code) which states, “Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.” The company provided a copy of an email requesting a donation of a mattress for a Channel 4 quiz...