It seems someone is upset with the current situation
http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2015/april/copyright-rules-do-not-provide-freedom-to-retransmit-tv-programmes-online-says-uk-government/UK copyright laws do not provide online content providers with freedom to retransmit TV programmes shown by UK public service broadcasters (PSBs) to fixed-line internet users who could otherwise watch the programmes on TV, the UK government has said.
One area where the policy rationale has clearly expired is section 73 (CDPA 1988), which provides that in certain circumstances the retransmission on cable of certain broadcasts is not an infringement of the copyright in the broadcast itself," the DCMS consultation paper said. "Its purpose was to support the development of analogue cable infrastructure in the 1980s and 1990s. Much has changed now with the development of multi-channel and digital TV on satellite, terrestrial and increasingly on IP platforms and the massive increase in capacity supported by the cable networks."
"The government believes the case for having differential arrangements for one platform is no longer relevant, and if not dealt with could affect the future prospects for the commercial PSBs. Indeed, new online providers have sought to rely on the provisions of s73 to permit the streaming of PSB content over the internet without seeking permission (or paying any fees to) either to the broadcast owners or the underlying content copyright owners... The government's view is that section 73 does not apply to content transmitted over the internet."
Removing s73 from the statute book could "result in a flow of payments from cable to PSBs" and would "create freer negotiations between PSBs and cable providers on the terms of carriage".
I think this is a sensible move, many of the catchup type services have attempted to use these rules to avoid paying anything to the content creators, leaving those creators to whine about small level piracy instead, let the commercial sector pay its way and they might not be so upset with the small fry preview style piracy that occurs, we all know you cant beat a decent film well made with good actors or an album with more than one decent track , but asking folks to pay for poor quality offerings with misleading adverts about the contents only serves to rationalise a mindset of mistrust, by putting their houses in order and being honest they may well find the public not just happy but eager to get their materials, to continue churning out a few decent items and a raft of bad material they cant really fault anyone for previewing prior to parting with hard earned cash.
I think I have gotten a bit off topic here but my message is the same whenever the govt looks to change things, business should act responsibly and the mass of the public will follow trusted offerings once they have proved themselves, purchasing anything of unknown quality is not a genuine business model, however : those that make money from such commercial offerings are legally and honour bound to pay the creator/s.
