Oh My God - Stupidest Lawsuit Ever

Fubar said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
no it's not. It's against the law when it's a business and you don't have a license.

I have to say that engadget have been soo slow to find out about this one. It's been reported three days ago here , here and here

The reason it's in so many legal blogs is because it's dubious as to whether kwik fit will win or lose. Official Kwik-Fit policy is that you're not allowed to bring radios in - although that policy doesn't seem to be being enforced. That gives rise to implied consent on the part of the company. Even so, they're not the company's radios and, even if they were, a recent case on the continent, where no extra profit etc is gained from having radio, makes the decision, suddenly very unclear. This is still a very important decision for the PRS to win, because if they lose, potentially the licenses could be worthless - and that's all the PRS do.
 
Last edited:
playing your radio loud enough in your own house so that guests can here it is not classified as a broadcast though - which is what was being asked
 
fini said:
playing your radio loud enough in your own house so that guests can here it is not classified as a broadcast though - which is what was being asked
Click to expand...
I guess the definition of 'broadcast' will factor highly in this case and could have repercussions either way. The PRS would be better off squeezing people that pay such as radio stations than pursuing factory outlets playing radios. It's an impractical law to enforce and would be effectively worthless to them.
 
if the prosecution succeeds, can we then report everyone who listens to loud music on their phone whilst walking down the street, or all the eejits who turn their headphones up so loud everyone in the county can hear what they're listening to?
i hope so
 
I'm not sure why we're talking about broadcast particularly anyway - this is not a broadcast it is a public performance subject to s19(3) CDPA 1988

The playing or showing of the work in public is an act restricted by the copyright in a sound recording, film, broadcast or cable programme.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you say it's an impractical law to enforce and would be worthless. This is what their main business is - they have a network of people whose job it is to go to unlicensed workplaces to make sure they're not playing music. If you go on their website you'll see that they make an awful lot of money out of charging an awful lot for these licenses.
 
goldilocks said:
if the prosecution succeeds, can we then report everyone who listens to loud music on their phone whilst walking down the street, or all the eejits who turn their headphones up so loud everyone in the county can hear what they're listening to?
i hope so
Click to expand...
This is a technical point, but yes you're right it is against the law - however it is not worth their while going after people like this. Just like they don't go after people who copy music from CD onto their ipod - which, as we don't have any fair use legislation, is technically illegal aswell.

I'm not sure people understand the law behind this case - most the examples given have and are against the law since 1988. Read some of the links I posted higher up for some people, far more intelligent than me, giving far better explanations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom