Bada Bing Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 BeIn sound rattled, publicly airing commercial threats like that is last gasp territory. Decision must be imminent now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ankles Bennett Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Can you doylems bother to at least read the conclusion. It's about 500 words and the histrionics about whether this tweet or that tweet is an accurate summary of the actual fucking summary is embarrassing. 8.1. For the reasons set forth in this Report, the Panel concludes as follows: a. The Panel has no discretion to decline to make any findings or recommendation in the case that has been brought before it; b. With respect to Qatar's claims under Parts I, II and III of the TRIPS Agreement: i. Qatar has established that Saudi Arabia has taken measures that, directly or indirectly, have had the result of preventing beIN from obtaining Saudi legal counsel to enforce its IP rights through civil enforcement procedures before Saudi courts and tribunals, and thus Saudi Arabia has acted in a manner inconsistent with Article 42 and Article 41.1 of the TRIPS Agreement; ii. Qatar has established that Saudi Arabia has not provided for criminal procedures and penalties to be applied to beoutQ despite the evidence establishing prima facie that beoutQ is operated by individuals or entities under the jurisdiction of Saudi Arabia, and thus Saudi Arabia has acted inconsistently with Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement; iii. in the light of these findings, it is unnecessary to make findings on Qatar's additional claims under Parts I and II of the TRIPS Agreement. c. With respect to Saudi Arabia's invocation of the security exception in Article 73(b)(iii) of the TRIPS Agreement: i. the requirements for invoking Article 73(b)(iii) are met in relation to the inconsistency with Article 42 and Article 41.1 of the TRIPS Agreement arising from the measures that, directly or indirectly, have had the result of preventing beIN from obtaining Saudi legal counsel to enforce its IP rights through civil enforcement procedures before Saudi courts and tribunals; and ii. the requirements for invoking Article 73(b)(iii) are not met in relation to the inconsistency with Article 61 of the TRIPS Agreement arising from Saudi Arabia's non-application of criminal procedures and penalties to beoutQ. 8.2. Under Article 3.8 of the DSU, in cases where there is an infringement of the obligations assumed under a covered agreement, the action is considered prima facie to constitute a case of nullification or impairment. The Panel concludes that, to the extent that the measures at issue are inconsistent with the TRIPS Agreement, they have nullified or impaired benefits accruing to Qatar under that Agreement. 8.3. Pursuant to Article 19.1 of the DSU, the Panel recommends that Saudi Arabia bring its measures into conformity with its obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. The Saudi state broke international law, as ruled by the governing body of that piece of international law. Not that this was ever in serious dispute. Given the violation centred on the IP rights of a Premier League broadcaster, it would obviously be wildly inappropriate to allow that state to then purchase a Premier League football club. That's why the takeover will be rejected. This ruling simply states that the KSA breached international law prima facie That means on the face of it. In other words they have stopped short of saying the KSA conclusively breeched international law so I would say it's not particularly damning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Bein "If you don't do what we want you won't have our money anymore" Imagine you ran a TV network, and you bid for and won an exclusive contract to broadcast a particular franchise to, say, 200 million people. Then, after the fact, it turned out that you can actually only broadcast (and sell advertising) to 150 million people. Would that influence the amount of money you'd be willing to pay for those broadcast rights, do you think? That's the principle being invoked here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Holden Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I dunno how Penn has evaded a ban like For what? I haven't seen him post much but he's a man on a mission! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Over 3 posts in one day. What’s that rattled sound? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 He’s Richard Keys Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Bein "If you don't do what we want you won't have our money anymore" Imagine you ran a TV network, and you bid for and won an exclusive contract to broadcast a particular franchise to, say, 200 million people. Then, after the fact, it turned out that you can actually only broadcast (and sell advertising) to 150 million people. Would that influence the amount of money you'd be willing to pay for those broadcast rights, do you think? That's the principle being invoked here. When the deal goes through you’ll still be in denial. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LFEE Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Two forum favourites Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amir_9 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 This takeover. This club. You just couldn't make it up... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I admire his persistence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest awaymag Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 WTO report will be the smoking gun...... Uhm......... Stavely will fail the directors test....... Uhm............ BeIN will throw their toys out of the pram Uhm.......... Someone send another letter in........... 10 weeks later............ Uhm............. Just make a f*ckin decision PL! PS, never seen so many journalist make utter dicks of themselves this morning when fake outcomes of WTO report were circulated- there is no integrity of checking sources any more, its all about being first and getting the clicks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jong24 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 He’s Richard Keys Or a Makem? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pons Alias Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I haven't got a fucking scooby what's going on any more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wormy Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Sooo. Based on the discussions in here I take it this long-awaited report truly clears everything up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I definitely feel that the Qataris have lost this. The tone in their statement is like a petulant child. We should find out in the coming hours, what bearing, if any at all, that this WTO report has had on their decision making. I just dont think the PL will have learned anything new from this. It's possible that the PL are waiting for football to restart, just to take the heat off themselves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Away Toon Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 SA are definitely going to have make public concessions for the takeover to go through, something they are not used to doing. In the balance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miggys First Goal Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Heard it through the grapevine... 6:01 p.m. tomorrow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 SA are definitely going to have make public concessions for the takeover to go through, something they are not used to doing. In the balance. Closed it down last august? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Logic Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 No idea who he's heard that from... Hearing the WTO report condemns Saudi Arabia in the strongest possible terms over piracy... does not bode well, but what do I know, I’m not a lawyer? — Luke Edwards (@LukeEdwardsTele) June 16, 2020 Not much of a journalist either unless contrarian sensationalism was what you studied, then I guess your pretty good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair Pundit Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 So were Bein the only bidders the last time around for the tv rights? If not, why would it matter what they choose to do next time round? Up to them if they bid on it or not. Moreover, what was the criteria for picking them if there was more than them bidding last time? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Not sure how I feel about this at the moment. There's both negative and positive spin to take away from this report, and neither perspective is more accurate than the other. If it's a key factor in the premier league's decision I'd say this takeover is very much on a knife-edge at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised if they told them to go away and come back in a year when they've done more to crack down on piracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-421 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Look North running with the line that the 'WTO report states SA are behind the piracy'. Magedia indeed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest awaymag Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Not sure how I feel about this at the moment. There's both negative and positive spin to take away from this report, and neither perspective is more accurate than the other. If it's a key factor in the premier league's decision I'd say this takeover is very much on a knife-edge at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised if they told them to go away and come back in a year when they've done more to crack down on piracy. LOL, we haven't the balls to make a decision so would you mind awfully, if we ask you to come back this time next year! Aye nah bother Masters, see you in 2021! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest godzilla Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Not sure how I feel about this at the moment. There's both negative and positive spin to take away from this report, and neither perspective is more accurate than the other. If it's a key factor in the premier league's decision I'd say this takeover is very much on a knife-edge at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised if they told them to go away and come back in a year when they've done more to crack down on piracy. How can you knock back a company unless it is legally established as being directly involved in the actual transmission of the piracy (neither has the government for that matter). The WTO report or the French court have not been able to establish this. Don't think PIF would accept the decision you suggest as I think they would be straight into court. You mention piracy and the crack down on it, however the Premier League can't even control that within the UK through IPTV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbers Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Heard it through the grapevine... 6:01 p.m. tomorrow. This stopped being funny after the 10023457th time, no idea why people do this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts