Scottish Football Tries To Fine Kid For Filming Amateur Games
from the copyright-madness dept
Peter writes in to alert us to the latest example of copyright madness. It seems that over in Scotland, an amateur football (soccer, to us Americans) club, Buckie Thistle, would get a small group of about 500 fans attending each game, and one of them, a 16-year-old kid named David Smith would sit in the back of the stands and film the action. He would then post 10-minute clips to YouTube so those who missed the games could catch up. It built up a small, but decent, following. And that's when the trouble began. The league's secretary claims that Smith is violating the league's copyright and has issued him a £5,000 fine:"I was made aware that edited footage of games involving Buckie Thistle was being shown on YouTube without the prior approval of the league. Over the last three months, attempts were made to establish who was responsible, but I was advised that the person's name was unknown.Now, there are all sorts of issues here, so let's go through them one by one:
"On meeting Mr Smith at Deveronvale, I asked him if he had permission to video this game, as it was the copyright of the league and no permission had been sought nor given. After brief discussion, he was advised by me that he may have to pay for the royalties for all videos taken and the sum could amount to £5,000."
- The secretary of an amateur sporting league has no authority to issue any kind of fine, let alone a £5,000 one.
- As the article details, the league secretary is very confused if he thinks that the action on the field is copyright to the league. As a media lawyer notes in the article:
THIS is not a question of copyright. The SFA does not own copyright on a football game. Copyright only applies to something such as a book, film, play etc that has been created as an act of labour by an individual or group of individuals. Men running around chasing a ball is not something that has been created.
- If there is any copyright here, it should be owned by David Smith. Again, as noted in the article:
The irony is that David Smith owns the copyright to his own piece of film; he has put the effort into filming and editing it and when he puts it on YouTube, he is tacitly allowing people to watch it and even download it on to their computer. But if those individuals then attempted to sell it for commercial gain then he would be well within his rights to stop them as they would be breaching his copyright.
- This isn't a question of competing with broadcasting rights. No one else is filming the games. It's just the kid. Doing it as a labor of love to help promote the team he loves.
- The club itself is thrilled with Smith filming the games, and is upset that the league is trying to fine him.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: amateur football, copyright, filming, scotland
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The club should be able to control the outcome. The league commissioner is a dufus for not realizing that he cannot arbitrarily fine someone, apparently he doesn't have any in house legal help.
I believe the correct Scottish term is "wanker"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
haha
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Scottish Terrier
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Just like in Pro 'Raslin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If the kid's soccer team had sold the broadcast rights, the kid would be in conflict with the broadcaster, not the league.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There is no such thing as broadcast rights.
The reality is that the broadcaster pays for facilities.
The only rights the sports authority has are to physically prevent non-authorised parties from filming by excluding them from private property or erecting barriers.
See the following extract from the UK copyright office fact sheet.
"Types of work protected
1. Literary
song lyrics, manuscripts, manuals, computer programs, commercial documents, leaflets, newsletters & articles etc.
2. Dramatic
plays, dance, etc.
3. Musical
recordings and score.
4. Artistic
photography, painting, sculptures, architecture, technical drawings/diagrams, maps, logos.
5. Typographical arrangement of published editions
magazines, periodicals, etc.
6. Sound recording
may be recordings of other copyright works, e.g. musical and literary.
7. Films
broadcasts and cable programmes.
The Copyright (Computer Programs) Regulations 1992 extended the rules covering literary works to include computer programs."
See - no sporting action in the list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Copyright issues, but maybe Trademark
BUT it's probably a violation of the Trademark for the league. And publishing it to the Web could be argued as unauthorized use of the Trademark...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Copyright issues, but maybe Trademark
Then again, you're the moron (in a hurry?), so you would be the expert on these matters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Copyright issues, but maybe Trademark
IANAL but it seems that if taking a copy (using a camera) of something that is protected by copyright (the original photo) doesn't breach copyright what's all the hassle around taking a copy (using a computer and the internet) of something else that is protected by copyright (some music)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can sign a petition against the league's action
http://www.petitiononline.com/bjm/petition.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Thinking
And if the league people had any sense in them, they would have just exploited young Smith's work: set up a nice page on a free host, link to the YouTube videos, pepper the page with adverts, and announce the URL during the games.
Why pay for a camera and post-production crew when somebody's already doing the work for free, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not Thinking
Actually it never is - broadcast rights have no legal basis!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Penalty kick awarded to David Smith
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright
Pro leagues (and big-bucks universities) can control recording because there is controlled access to the stadium. As part of your "contract" in getting a ticket, you're not supposed to record. That's the difference v. the parade. The parade was on the street.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So peple do have warped ideas of copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Copyright may be a tricky situation, but the Pars (Dunfermline Athletic) film their games and put them online for fans, and at the start of each of the highlights there is a copyright notice saying the games are copyright the Scottish Football League.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Filming amateur games
http://www.weekendnotes.com/soccer-match-at-aberfeldie-oval/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]