Bar Owners In Patong Fined For Showing Euro Matches Via Cable Tv

[britpop]

Yes, this week the police in forced 25,000 baht fines on a lot of bars for showing the euro football matches using Cable TV, they had a representative from the Grammy company so the bar owners seemly had no choice but to get fined.

Crazy thing is, once you've been fined the 25,000 baht you can show all euro matches via cable in the bar.

Seemly you have to buy a Grammy set to box as a bar owner and apply for a licence costing about 4500 baht.

So bar owners please be aware !!!!!!!

[hansgruber]

Sounds like the old music copyright scam.

[evadgib]

Agreed; Surely a wind up or a scam!

[britpop]

Agreed; Surely a wind up or a scam!

Not a wind up, nearly all the bars along Na nai road were hit thur's night, dragged the thai bar staff to the patong police station and then the fine price started at 100,000 baht, all the bar owners ended up handing over 25,000 baht each.

I totally agree, i sounds like the typical music scam but with cable TV, surely they should be fining PA cable for transmitting it in the first place, or as the police said "in house ok to watch, bar need paper licence"

[steelepulse]

I wonder what the split is between the bibs and GMM on this?

[Aachen]

This is like anywhere in the world! So what? Bars and Restaurants have to pay for the right to show to a public audience! Not Thailand related.

[ryancii]

wouldnt it be the same as this ?

This is from the Daily Mail (Feb 2012)

- Pub landlords face jail in major Sky crackdown on illegally broadcast English football matches

• - Premier League and BSkyB use copyright law to retain broadcasting rights
  
• - Hardline campaign comes months after it loses EU ruling over foreign de-coders
  
• - Landlords who illegally screened matches facing huge fines for breaching League's copyright
  

Pub landlords who illegally screen English football matches could face heavy fines or jail under copyright law as the Premier League and BSkyB begin a hardline campaign to retain its exclusive broadcasting rights. Just months after the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that UK bar owners can bypass Sky by using cheap overseas de-coders to access sports services, the industry is now seeking alternative areas of law to halt them. In what will be seen as a retaliatory strike, legislation is now being used to fine landlords for broadcasting logos, national anthems and pre-recorded footage - because it breaches copyright The move appears to circumvent an earlier legal ruling.

Frederick Young, licensee of a pub in Shenfield, was convicted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, of six offences of dishonest reception of a television reception, according to the Independent. He was fined £2,500 for each offence and also ordered to pay £4,522 in court costs.

Portsmouth landlady Karen Murphy is currently fighting an £8,000 fine she received for using a cheaper Greek satellite service to show English football in her pub. She was paying £118 a month to use the foreign de-coder instead of Sky subscription rate of £480. She will go to the High Court next week in a bid to get her case overturned, using October's ECJ ruling.

Edited June 17, 2012 by ryancii

[madmitch]

wouldnt it be the same as this ?

This is from the Daily Mail (Feb 2012)

- Pub landlords face jail in major Sky crackdown on illegally broadcast English football matches

• - Premier League and BSkyB use copyright law to retain broadcasting rights
  
• - Hardline campaign comes months after it loses EU ruling over foreign de-coders
  
• - Landlords who illegally screened matches facing huge fines for breaching League's copyright
  

Pub landlords who illegally screen English football matches could face heavy fines or jail under copyright law as the Premier League and BSkyB begin a hardline campaign to retain its exclusive broadcasting rights. Just months after the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that UK bar owners can bypass Sky by using cheap overseas de-coders to access sports services, the industry is now seeking alternative areas of law to halt them. In what will be seen as a retaliatory strike, legislation is now being used to fine landlords for broadcasting logos, national anthems and pre-recorded footage - because it breaches copyright The move appears to circumvent an earlier legal ruling.

Frederick Young, licensee of a pub in Shenfield, was convicted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, of six offences of dishonest reception of a television reception, according to the Independent. He was fined £2,500 for each offence and also ordered to pay £4,522 in court costs.

Portsmouth landlady Karen Murphy is currently fighting an £8,000 fine she received for using a cheaper Greek satellite service to show English football in her pub. She was paying £118 a month to use the foreign de-coder instead of Sky subscription rate of £480. She will go to the High Court next week in a bid to get her case overturned, using October's ECJ ruling.

I think we are a long way from Thai pubs having to pay 25,000 baht a month for the rights to screen satellite TV. It's very different: the EU has ruled that a public place can show live sports using a foreign decoder.

[w11guy]

In the UK you would face much bigger fines. Nothing at all to do with Thailand. This is all about bars ripping off the owners of Euro 2012. What do they expect, that other people pay all the money and they get to show for free. Maybe I can go to the bar and just drink their beer and not bother paying. I doubt they would like that. But they are happy to rip off other people.

[sportsman69]

Well my take on it is, bearing in mind, I have no interest in the game using a round ball masquerading as football. It is soccer. To the topic.

It's my belief that the cable company's run by that guy who's up on a murder charge, which we've not heard too much about of late, pay nuttin' to nobody for what they hook onto by whatever means and put into the pipe. This is why you don't see any direct feed from the True sat signal. The gun is on the other foot for that one.

I personally believe they're pissing off the wrong people as it is basically a free to air public broadcast.

Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Gotto go Moto G.P. just about to start. Not on cable but True. only way legally to to receive it in Thailand. Different grid to expected eh.

[MrRed]

""Portsmouth landlady Karen Murphy is currently fighting an £8,000 fine she received for using a cheaper Greek satellite service to show English football in her pub. She was paying £118 a month to use the foreign de-coder instead of Sky subscription rate of £480. She will go to the High Court next week in a bid to get her case overturned, using October's ECJ ruling.""

This lady got cleared if i remember correctly.

Could you imagine going to the high court in Thailand for this?? not!

[bartender100]

These bars are very busy bars, why did they not cough up the B9000 for a box and stay legal?

[britpop]

These bars are very busy bars, why did they not cough up the B9000 for a box and stay legal?

Excuse me, when was the last time you where down Na nai road, it's like a grave yard, the lucky bar owner who have anybody in are just there regular expat, that's singular, 1 beer all night boy.

Why didn't they just cough up for a Box???,exactly why didn't they get a box, because they didn't know, no one has ever explain or queried this clause in the bar licencing laws if it really does exist at all, how can you do something if you don't know about it, the bar owners simply had no idea such licensing laws regarding there TV's existed. can you honestly say you think every bar knew about the TV cable laws and ignored it, there all thousands of baht out of pocket, one bar yes, but not so many, Next it'll be something else, but the bar owners will have no idea at this point in time about the upcoming offence.

Your all arguing the point that the bar owners knew about this infringement, if there is any, quite the opposite, they had no idea

all the bar owners wonder where are these licensing law guide lines

You wear a fake designer top out, a 100 baht worth, a policemen stops you and trys to fine you 25,000 baht, 1. you had no idea on the law regarding counterfeits, 2. it was supplied by some one else, 3. do you pay the fine. answers please the clock is ticking

Edited June 17, 2012 by britpop

[surangw]

Were they giving receipts ?

[KarenBravo]

Why didn't they just cough up for a Box???,exactly why didn't they get a box, because they didn't know, no one has ever explain or queried this clause in the bar licencing laws if it really does exist at all, how can you do something if you don't know about it, the bar owners simply had no idea such licensing laws regarding there TV's existed.

Cobblers! The bar owners knew exactly where they stood with regard to cable sports.

The thing is, they didn't have a choice. There simply is no Thai substitute for sport coverage.

If these bars are to survive, they need to show sporting events to draw in the punters.

It means the difference between a bar being a financial disaster and one that will make you a living.

[britpop]

Why didn't they just cough up for a Box???,exactly why didn't they get a box, because they didn't know, no one has ever explain or queried this clause in the bar licencing laws if it really does exist at all, how can you do something if you don't know about it, the bar owners simply had no idea such licensing laws regarding there TV's existed.

Cobblers! The bar owners knew exactly where they stood with regard to cable sports.

The thing is, they didn't have a choice. There simply is no Thai substitute for sport coverage.

If these bars are to survive, they need to show sporting events to draw in the punters.

It means the difference between a bar being a financial disaster and one that will make you a living.

I really don't get you point, you make absolutely not sense as usual, give us your insight to the way the police see it against the cable company and the bar owners, i'm salivating at your response, a know it all that no's nothing, please visit the people you say knew exactly where they stood, 25,000 baht lighter in the pocket, you'd be a welcome customer, how long have you been a bar owner, exactly!!!! never, you cry if they disconnected you UBC for a minute, total nonsense and a unwelcome comment, i find these comments come from the biggest Hippocrates Edited June 17, 2012 by britpop

[bartender100]

These bars are very busy bars, why did they not cough up the B9000 for a box and stay legal?

Excuse me, when was the last time you where down Na nai road, it's like a grave yard, the lucky bar owner who have anybody in are just there regular expat, that's singular, 1 beer all night boy.

Why didn't they just cough up for a Box???,exactly why didn't they get a box, because they didn't know, no one has ever explain or queried this clause in the bar licencing laws if it really does exist at all, how can you do something if you don't know about it, the bar owners simply had no idea such licensing laws regarding there TV's existed. can you honestly say you think every bar knew about the TV cable laws and ignored it, there all thousands of baht out of pocket, one bar yes, but not so many, Next it'll be something else, but the bar owners will have no idea at this point in time about the upcoming offence.

Your all arguing the point that the bar owners knew about this infringement, if there is any, quite the opposite, they had no idea

all the bar owners wonder where are these licensing law guide lines

You wear a fake designer top out, a 100 baht worth, a policemen stops you and trys to fine you 25,000 baht, 1. you had no idea on the law regarding counterfeits, 2. it was supplied by some one else, 3. do you pay the fine. answers please the clock is ticking

Are you trying to tell me none of these bars have True? because all True subscribers were notified about the need to get a box to show the football.

Its the same the world over, to show major sports you need to pay for the right to do so, tough they got caught, but over a month they would have only needed a few extra customers that came in to watch the football a night, to pay for it.

If they did not realize they need a license to show sports in a bar, they should get a new career.

[wjhall]

It's football...NOT soccer. Just because Americans play some strange game with an odd shaped ball they think they have the rights to the name football...wrong again Yanks!!

[huuwi]

It's football...NOT soccer. Just because Americans play some strange game with an odd shaped ball they think they have the rights to the name football...wrong again Yanks!!

101%

huuwi

[virtualtraveller]

It's the usual BS collusion between one crowd trying to enforce a monopoly and the law enforcers allowing themselves to be used. The Euro2012 football is screen on public TV, so how on earth can you fine someone for turning on their TV to the public. As I understand it, public TV is funded by a different model, either taxpayer's money or advertising, the more people gathering in the pub to watch the ads the better for the TV station who has paid Grammy who has paid for the rights. Cable is a different matter because they don't run ads therefore they need to charge subs per viewer, therefore bars and public places need a licence. More evidence that Grammy are just trying to nickel and dime us.

[KarenBravo]

Why didn't they just cough up for a Box???,exactly why didn't they get a box, because they didn't know, no one has ever explain or queried this clause in the bar licencing laws if it really does exist at all, how can you do something if you don't know about it, the bar owners simply had no idea such licensing laws regarding there TV's existed.

Cobblers! The bar owners knew exactly where they stood with regard to cable sports.

The thing is, they didn't have a choice. There simply is no Thai substitute for sport coverage.

If these bars are to survive, they need to show sporting events to draw in the punters.

It means the difference between a bar being a financial disaster and one that will make you a living.

I really don't get you point, you make absolutely not sense as usual, give us your insight to the way the police see it against the cable company and the bar owners, i'm salivating at your response, a know it all that no's nothing, please visit the people you say knew exactly where they stood, 25,000 baht lighter in the pocket, you'd be a welcome customer, how long have you been a bar owner, exactly!!!! never, you cry if they disconnected you UBC for a minute, total nonsense and a unwelcome comment, i find these comments come from the biggest Hippocrates

I'm not discussing "the way the police see it".

For sports like rugby, MotoGP and many others which the bar owners need to put on, they have to use channels from Malaysia and South Africa. It is illegal to do so. Simple innit!

[Jimi007]

It's the usual BS collusion between one crowd trying to enforce a monopoly and the law enforcers allowing themselves to be used. The Euro2012 football is screen on public TV, so how on earth can you fine someone for turning on their TV to the public. As I understand it, public TV is funded by a different model, either taxpayer's money or advertising, the more people gathering in the pub to watch the ads the better for the TV station who has paid Grammy who has paid for the rights. Cable is a different matter because they don't run ads therefore they need to charge subs per viewer, therefore bars and public places need a licence. More evidence that Grammy are just trying to nickel and dime us.

Wasn't it called something else before Grammy? I seem to remember this same thing happening during the World Cup, when True didn't have the rights to the English commentary. But it was some other group that claimed to have the licensing rights. And yes, watching it on cable in your home is legal, airing in it to the public in a bar to attract patrons without a license is not.

[BOBBYTIN]

Why didn't they just cough up for a Box???,exactly why didn't they get a box, because they didn't know, no one has ever explain or queried this clause in the bar licencing laws if it really does exist at all, how can you do something if you don't know about it, the bar owners simply had no idea such licensing laws regarding there TV's existed.

Cobblers! The bar owners knew exactly where they stood with regard to cable sports.

The thing is, they didn't have a choice. There simply is no Thai substitute for sport coverage.

If these bars are to survive, they need to show sporting events to draw in the punters.

It means the difference between a bar being a financial disaster and one that will make you a living.

I really don't get you point, you make absolutely not sense as usual, give us your insight to the way the police see it against the cable company and the bar owners, i'm salivating at your response, a know it all that no's nothing, please visit the people you say knew exactly where they stood, 25,000 baht lighter in the pocket, you'd be a welcome customer, how long have you been a bar owner, exactly!!!! never, you cry if they disconnected you UBC for a minute, total nonsense and a unwelcome comment, i find these comments come from the biggest Hippocrates

I'm not discussing "the way the police see it".

For sports like rugby, MotoGP and many others which the bar owners need to put on, they have to use channels from Malaysia and South Africa. It is illegal to do so. Simple innit!

a phone call today to gmm grammy to clarify this,the person we spoke to had no knowledge of anyone collecting money or fining bars.

[PST]

Don't think this just applys to cable tv,according to GMM/Grammy,if you have a gmm box,and are showing Euros via true dish in a bar/public place you need a licence,4500 baht.

PST.

[britpop]

Why didn't they just cough up for a Box???,exactly why didn't they get a box, because they didn't know, no one has ever explain or queried this clause in the bar licencing laws if it really does exist at all, how can you do something if you don't know about it, the bar owners simply had no idea such licensing laws regarding there TV's existed.

Cobblers! The bar owners knew exactly where they stood with regard to cable sports.

The thing is, they didn't have a choice. There simply is no Thai substitute for sport coverage.

If these bars are to survive, they need to show sporting events to draw in the punters.

It means the difference between a bar being a financial disaster and one that will make you a living.

I really don't get you point, you make absolutely not sense as usual, give us your insight to the way the police see it against the cable company and the bar owners, i'm salivating at your response, a know it all that no's nothing, please visit the people you say knew exactly where they stood, 25,000 baht lighter in the pocket, you'd be a welcome customer, how long have you been a bar owner, exactly!!!! never, you cry if they disconnected you UBC for a minute, total nonsense and a unwelcome comment, i find these comments come from the biggest Hippocrates

I'm not discussing "the way the police see it".

For sports like rugby, MotoGP and many others which the bar owners need to put on, they have to use channels from Malaysia and South Africa. It is illegal to do so. Simple innit!

well now you've all pointed out the situation, the 30-40 bar owners handing over 25,000 baht each, i really don't know what to make of them, i'm scratching my head at how can so many no bar owners know the licencing laws regarding TV right and 40 bar owner didn't and would rather pay 500 pound for there ignorance, please could someone post a copy of the paperwork explaining the licencing laws and TV rights for Bars in Thailand, i've looked everywhere, strange nowt, it would be a nice gesture to hand over to all these bar owners the physical paperwork evidence, not just random rights laws for Europe, but the document written for bars in Thailand and Phuket but as Karen puts it "simple innit", No spell cheque Edited June 18, 2012 by britpop

[NamKangMan]

@ britpop

As recently mentioned in another thread, bar owners pay "tea money" (a corrupt payment) every month to be offered "protection" from police attention for the breaking of the law. Eg. staying open after 2am, playing copy CD music, publicly broadcasting sporting events etc.

The bar owners have been ripped for either the tea money payment, or the fine, or both.

[Peterocket]

@ britpop

As recently mentioned in another thread, bar owners pay "tea money" (a corrupt payment) every month to be offered "protection" from police attention for the breaking of the law. Eg. staying open after 2am, playing copy CD music, publicly broadcasting sporting events etc.

The bar owners have been ripped for either the tea money payment, or the fine, or both.

Paying Tea money does not mean you can oblivious to the law. there may be certain things it allows but there are also things you cannot do. Do you think that tea money means you can sell Nam-Kang from your premises...no it doesn't.

Bar owners knew the rules reference showing the games illegally and that is a risk they chose to take. If they got caught then that's how it goes.

[hansgruber]

Sounds like the old music copyright scam.

As I said in post 1.. scam.

Happened before with music played in bars and now everyone knows that's a scam, use the euro broadcasting farce as leverage on the new scam.

[NamKangMan]

@ britpop

As recently mentioned in another thread, bar owners pay "tea money" (a corrupt payment) every month to be offered "protection" from police attention for the breaking of the law. Eg. staying open after 2am, playing copy CD music, publicly broadcasting sporting events etc.

The bar owners have been ripped for either the tea money payment, or the fine, or both.

Paying Tea money does not mean you can oblivious to the law. there may be certain things it allows but there are also things you cannot do. Do you think that tea money means you can sell Nam-Kang from your premises...no it doesn't.

Bar owners knew the rules reference showing the games illegally and that is a risk they chose to take. If they got caught then that's how it goes.

Obviously, drug dealing is not covered under your "tea money" payment, but for years and years bar owners were "allowed" to show any sport they wanted. Now the greed is targeting that, at 25,000 baht a pop. What's next? Pretty soon, nothing will be covered by your team money payment and you will still be raided, arrested and fined, but still be paying tea money.

The "rules" you talk about change without notice. Once again, I can only see the price of the "fines" being passed onto the consumer. Only going to get worse.

[britpop]

@ britpop

As recently mentioned in another thread, bar owners pay "tea money" (a corrupt payment) every month to be offered "protection" from police attention for the breaking of the law. Eg. staying open after 2am, playing copy CD music, publicly broadcasting sporting events etc.

The bar owners have been ripped for either the tea money payment, or the fine, or both.

Paying Tea money does not mean you can oblivious to the law. there may be certain things it allows but there are also things you cannot do. Do you think that tea money means you can sell Nam-Kang from your premises...no it doesn't.

Bar owners knew the rules reference showing the games illegally and that is a risk they chose to take. If they got caught then that's how it goes.

Obviously, drug dealing is not covered under your "tea money" payment, but for years and years bar owners were "allowed" to show any sport they wanted. Now the greed is targeting that, at 25,000 baht a pop. What's next? Pretty soon, nothing will be covered by your team money payment and you will still be raided, arrested and fined, but still be paying tea money.

The "rules" you talk about change without notice. Once again, I can only see the price of the "fines" being passed onto the consumer. Only going to get worse.

Well said, i always thought the back hander money (tea money) to the police every month was a illegal insurance/ protection payment so bar owner would be left alone