Abstract
This chapter will take a look at the practice of imposing a must-offer obligation on dominant vertically integrated companies in order to foster competition in the pay-television market. The question whether the changing media landscape has had an impact on the way competition authorities have dealt with the public’s access to sports events when imposing a must-offer obligation will be answered by means of the following decisions: the Newscorp/Telepiù case and the BSkyB case. While the Newscorp/Telepiù case and the BSkyB case will serve to illustrate the wholesale must-offer obligation, the Telenet/Canal+ case will illustrate the retail must-offer obligation. Furthermore, the BSkyB case will be used as an example to indicate that a must-offer obligation can also be imposed in order to deal with general competition issues apart from merger situations. Although these different decisions deal with the parties’ market power in the markets of premium sports as well as movies channels, the following sections will only focus on the concerns expressed for the distribution of sports channels and sports broadcasting rights. Although different types of must-offer obligations could be imposed, for example obligations to grant access to infrastructure, networks or technology, this chapter focuses only on the must-offer obligation with regard to access to exclusive sports broadcasting rights and sports channels.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Commission of the European Communities 2007, SEC(2007) 935, 87; Newscorp/Telepiù case, para 180.
- 2.
Nicita and Ramello 2005, 381.
- 3.
Toft 2006, 9
- 4.
Rowe 2009.
- 5.
- 6.
Geey 2004, 9.
- 7.
Evens 2010.
- 8.
Dejonghe et al. 2010, 421.
- 9.
Eufootball.biz 2010.
- 10.
Sportcal.com 2008a..
- 11.
Sportcal.com 2008b.
- 12.
Lefever and Evens 2009, 31.
- 13.
Rapid Press Releases 2003, IP/03/478.
- 14.
Ofcom 2010b.
- 15.
Newscorp/Telepiù case, para 1.
- 16.
Commission of the European Communities 2007, SEC(2007) 935, 87.
- 17.
Newscorp/Telepiù case, para 151.
- 18.
Ibid., para 246.
- 19.
Ibid., para 246.
- 20.
Belgian Competition Council 2003, 77.
- 21.
Ibid. 81–82.
- 22.
Belgian Competition Council 2008.
- 23.
Court of Appeal 2008.
- 24.
Belgian Competition Council 2010, para 116, 120 and 122.
- 25.
Court of Appeal 2011.
- 26.
- 27.
See e.g.: Ofcom 2007, 22
- 28.
Ofcom 2009a, para 5.56.
- 29.
Ibid., para 5.19 and 5.59.
- 30.
Ofcom 2009a, para 5.55.
- 31.
Ibid., para 6.2–6.3; Ofcom 2008, para 1.3.
- 32.
- 33.
Nicita and Rossi 2008, 97–98.
- 34.
Ofcom 2009a, para 7.51.
- 35.
Ibid., para 7.52.
- 36.
Ibid., para 1.43.
- 37.
Weeds 2009, 28–29.
- 38.
Nicita and Ramello 2005, 384.
- 39.
Ibid., 385.
- 40.
Hagiu and Lee 2008, 5.
- 41.
Harbord and Ottaviani 2001, 3.
- 42.
Newscorp/Telepiù case, para 151.
- 43.
Court of Appeal 2008, para 89; Belgian Competition Council 2010, para 119.
- 44.
- 45.
Ofcom 2010a, para 11.63.
- 46.
Ibid., para 11.68.
- 47.
Ofcom 2010b.
- 48.
- 49.
Ofcom 2010b.
- 50.
Sportcal.com 2009.
- 51.
See e.g.: Demetriou 2010.
- 52.
Sportcal.com 2009.
- 53.
- 54.
- 55.
- 56.
See e.g.: Broadband TV News 2010b.
- 57.
- 58.
Newscorp/Telepiù case, para 151.
- 59.
Scheuer and Schweda 2008, 7.
- 60.
Newscorp/Telepiù case, para 221; Rapid Press Releases 2003, IP/03/478.
- 61.
- 62.
Newscorp/Telepiù case, Annex Commitments to the European Commission—Part II—Substantive obligations, para 10.1.
- 63.
Nicita and Rossi 2008, 91.
- 64.
- 65.
- 66.
- 67.
- 68.
Valcke 2004, 650–651.
- 69.
Belgian Competition Council 2003, 83.
- 70.
Valcke 2004, 651.
- 71.
Ibid., 651.
- 72.
Ofcom 2010a, paras 7.89 and 7.92.
- 73.
Ibid., para 7.91.
- 74.
Ibid., para 7.94.
- 75.
Ofcom 2008, para 6.128.
- 76.
Ibid., paras 6.129–6.130.
- 77.
Ofcom 2010a, para 7.90.
- 78.
Ofcom 2009a, para 6.65.
- 79.
Ibid., para 6.66; Ofcom 2010a, para 7.201.
- 80.
Ofcom 2008, para 6.121.
- 81.
Ofcom 2010a, para 7.226.
- 82.
Ofcom 2009b, 13–15.
- 83.
Ofcom 2009a, 13.
References
Legislation and Policy Documents: European Union: Commission Staff Working Document
Commission of the European Communities (2007) Commission Staff working document—The EU and Sport: background and context—accompanying document to the White Paper on Sport. 11 July 2007, SEC(2007) 935
Decisions
Commission decision of 2 April 2003 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M. 2876—Newscorp/Telepiù)
Press Releases
Rapid Press Releases (2003) Commission clears merger between Stream and Telepiù subject to conditions, 2 April 2003, IP/03/478
Speeches
Toft T (2006) Developments in European Law, Congress Sports & Law. 28 April 2006. http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/speeches/text/sp2006_003_en.pdf. Accessed 19 Aug 2010
UK: Consultations
Ofcom (2007) Pay TV market investigation—consultation document. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/market_invest_paytv/summary/pay_tv.pdf. Accessed 21 Aug 2010
Ofcom (2008) Pay TV second consultation—access to premium content. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/second_paytv/summary/condoc.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2010
Ofcom (2009a) Pay TV phase three document: proposed remedies. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/third_paytv/summary/paytv_condoc.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2010
Ofcom (2009b) Wholesale must-offer remedies: international examples—Annex 11 to pay TV phase three document. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/third_paytv/annexes/annex11.pdf. Accessed 18 Aug 2010
Ofcom (2010a) Pay TV statement. http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/third_paytv/statement/paytv_statement.pdf. Accessed 19 Aug 2010
Press Releases
Ofcom (2010b) Delivering consumer benefits in Pay TV, 31 March 2010. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consumer/2010/03/delivering-consumer-benefits-in-pay-tv/. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Case Law: Belgium
Belgian Competition Council (2003) Decision no. 2003-C/C-89 of 12 November 2003. Tijdschrift van Rechtspraak van de Raad voor de Mededinging 4:72–83
Belgian Competition Council (2008) Decision no. 2008-C/C-11 of 25 March 2008. http://economie.fgov.be/fr/binaries/112008cc11_Verzoek_Telenet_herziening_pub_tcm326-35704.pdf. Accessed 19 Aug 2010
Court of Appeal, A.R. no. 2008/MR/7, Belgacom/Telenet and Liga Beroepsvoetbal
Belgian Competition Council (2010) Decision no. 2010-C/C-48 of 29 November 2010. http://economie.fgov.be/nl/binaries/48_2010CC48_Telenet_pub_tcm325-113664.pdf. Accessed 20 Dec 2010
Court of Appeal (2011) A.R. no. 2011/MR/1 and 2011/MR/2, 17 May 2011
UK
Competition Appeal Tribunal (2010). British Sky Broadcasting Limited supported by The Football Association premier League Limired v Office of Communication supported by Top-Up TV Europe Limited, Virgin Media Inc., British telecommunications Plc and Orange Personal Communications Services Limited, Case No: 1152/8/3/10 (IR), 29 April 2010. http://www.catribunal.org.uk/files/1152IR_BSKYB_Order_29.04.10.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Doctrine
BBC News (2010) BT aims to undercut Sky on TV sport viewing packages, 17 January 2010. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8464004.stm. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Broadband TV News (2010a) CAT agreement partially imposes Sky wholesale plan, 29 April 2010. http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2010/04/29/cat-agreement-partially-implements-sky-wholesale-plan/. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Broadband TV News (2010b) BSkyB, BT and FAPL join Ofcom appeal, 11 June 2010. http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2010/06/11/bskyb-bt-and-fapl-join-ofcom-appeal/. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Colomo P (2009) Working paper—Ofcom’s proposal to regulate access to premium television content: some thoughts. http://cadmus.eui.eu/dspace/bitstream/1814/10930/1/LAW_2009_03.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Dejonghe T et al (2010) The Netherlands and Belgium. In: Hamil S, Chadwick S (eds) Managing football: an international perspective. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 409–436
Eufootball.biz (2010) Eredivisie Live to broadcast Jupiler League matches, 11 August 2010. http://www.eufootball.biz/Television/8520-eredivisie_live_broadcast_jupiler_league_matches.html. Accessed 24 Aug 2010
Evens T (2010) Challenging content exclusivity in network industries: the case of digital broadcasting. In: ITS Conference, Copenhagen, 13–15 September 2010
Geey D (2004) Collectivity v Exclusivity: Conflict in the Broadcasting Arena. Entertainment Law Review, vol 15, no. 1, http://www.danielgeey.com/pdf/a-ent-law1.pdf. Accessed 30 Dec 2011
Geey D, Ross V (2008) Ofcom consultation into premium pay-TV content. World Sports L Rep 10:6–8
Hagiu A, Lee R (2008) Exclusivity and control. http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/08-009.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Harbord D, Ottaviani M (2001) Contracts and competition in the pay-TV market. http://129.3.20.41/eps/io/papers/0203/0203005.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Lefever K, Evens T (2009) All sports for free! A difficult match? Right to information in the digital broadcasting era. Int Sports L J 3–4:29–33
Nicita A, Ramello G (2005) Exclusivity and antitrust in media markets: the case of Pay-TV in Europe. Int J Econ Bus 12(3):371–387
Nicita A, Rossi MA (2008) Access to audio-visual contents, exclusivity and anticommons in new media markets. Commun Strateg 71(3):79–101
Rowe D (2009) Submission to the sport on television review. http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/word_doc/0012/121224/Professor_David_Rowe_main_submission.doc. Accessed 21 Aug 2010
Scheuer A, Schweda S (2008) Progress in the must-offer debate? Exclusivity in media and communication, Iris Plus. http://www.obs.coe.int/oea_publ/iris/iris_plus/iplus10_2008.pdf.en. Accessed 18 Aug 2010
Sportbusiness International (2010) Sports bodies slam Ofcom ruling on Sky, 1 April 2010. http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/174426/sports-bodies-slam-ofcom-ruling-on-sky?utm_source=sbinsl&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=apr1. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Sportcal.com (2008a) Eredivisie: new channel will not be another Sport7 Fiasco, 17 March 2008. http://sportcal.com/news/news_article.aspx?previouspage=news_list.aspx&pageno=114&articleID=48375. Accessed 20 Jan 2010
Sportcal.com (2008b) Eredivisie hands control of TV channel pricing to distribution partners, 22 July 2008. http://sportcal.com/news/news_article.aspx?articleid=61327. Accessed 20 Jan 2010
Sportcal.com (2009) Sports bodies get behind BSkyB in channel pricing row with Ofcom, 29 Oct 2009. http://sportcal.com/news/news_article.aspx?previouspage=news_list.aspx&pageno=16&articleID=70114. Accessed 20 Jan 2010
Telegraph (2009) Sky set for legal fight over pay-TV recommendation, 26 June 2009. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/5653774/Sky-set-for-legal-fight-over-pay-TV-recommendation.html. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
The Guardian (2010) Ofcom orders Sky Sports price cut, 31 March 2010. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/mar/31/ofcom-sky-sports-price-cut. Accessed 20 Aug 2010
Valcke P (2004) Digitale Diversiteit. Convergentie van Media-, Telecommunicatie- en Mededingingsrecht. Larcier, Brussels
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lefever, K. (2012). Must-Offer Obligation. In: New Media and Sport. ASSER International Sports Law Series. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-873-6_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-873-6_11
Published:
Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, The Netherlands
Print ISBN: 978-90-6704-872-9
Online ISBN: 978-90-6704-873-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)
