xmlTVNZ take down order from sky

Forums › Home Theatre (including HTPC and EPG Collector) › xmlTVNZ take down order from sky

reven

3748 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 874

Trusted

#58727 17-Mar-2010 22:56

i just receieved a take down order from sky.

was wondering if anyone has any legal expertise?

not sure how much of a case they have, since
- i dont host any epg data
- sky isnt even used as a source for xmltvnz
- xmltvnz doesnt have any sources/channels hard coded, everything is read from an external xml config file.

i think they might have a case for the use of their channel names, eg "Sky Sports" is probably copyrighted and i would have to remove that (the term only). "History Channel" i doubt is copyrighted to them, and should be able to stay.

i may need to get a third party to host the xml config file, to seperate them. seperately the xml config file and the xmltvnz binary would be useless. and only once combined would it be useful.
this could be compared to a language and script file. a script file is just text, its not compiled its fine. a language is independant and doesn't do anything its not instructed to do.
so there shouldnt be any copyright issues with xmltvnz by itself, or the config file by itself. if combined it could break skys copyright (but once again, nothing is coming from sky).

i dont host any channel logos or anything. i may need to remove the command builder as well, which i could just write a small gui app which reads the config file and runs locally, so "sky" doesnt appear on my site at all.

any thoughts?

any lawyers?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 13

4066 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 206

Trusted

Snowflake

#308539 17-Mar-2010 23:08

what is the content of the take down request notification (or is that copyright too ;)?

If it says you are hosting copies of copyrighted material then I would think that it would be fair to ask them for a description of said material before taking any action.

(i'm not a lawyer, so don't rely on my advice)

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

NZCoderGuy

513 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 1

Trusted

Kiwi Dev Studios

#308543 17-Mar-2010 23:10

What is the actual content of the takedown order? does it state what is wrong?

--
Stephen
twitter/ NZCoderGuy / KiwiDevStudios

Regs

4066 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 206

Trusted

Snowflake

#308546 17-Mar-2010 23:12

further to that, your app functions like a browser. it reads data from HTML web pages and outputs it for display. its not like you're reverse engineering any copy protection - the data is there, in plain text, for people to browse to and look at. Just like a browser, it can also save the data it reads.

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

reven

3748 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 874

Trusted

#308561 17-Mar-2010 23:51

yeah the order is "confidential", so not sure if i can post specifics.

basically its just saying i have to take down sky listings, logos and names (i think, need to hear back from their lawyers to clarify it, its in legal speak, which well isnt english).

if that is the case, i could just rename "sky sport 1" to "ssport1" and be safe.... i dont host any logos or anything (was always worried that might cause a take down order :))

it does quote the fair trading act, which is amusing, since if you use xmltvnz to get sky listings, you have sky, and your paying them, and according to them its not fair you know whats on their channels you are paying for, unless you use sky digital/my sky or read the skywatch magazine.....

savag3

188 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 3

#308567 18-Mar-2010 00:23

The consequences could be quite serious if Sky decide to commence proceedings against you. Check out the terms of use on skytv.co.nz then check s37 Copyright Act 1993. I think you need some legal advice.

ObidiahSlope

260 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 66

#308568 18-Mar-2010 00:38

Read the following Australian High Court decision;

IceTV Pty Limited v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited [HCA]2009/14

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2009/14.html

Then tell them to get lost.If they still want to pursue this tell them that you are going to to inform the creditors of Ironbridge Capital, the leveraged buy-out outfit that took over Mediaworks, that TV3 is about to undertake speculative litigation that already been considered unfavorably in a superior court in a closely related jurisdiction. This litigation could hinder the creditors of Ironbridge from making a full recovery from their investment.

Obsequious hypocrite

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

ObidiahSlope

260 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 66

#308572 18-Mar-2010 00:58

Oops!

SKYTV not TV3

My bad.

Oh that bit where it says confidential, cross it out. See it is no longer confidential. Unless it has been ordered by a court or you have agreed. Just because their Lawyer says it is confidential doesn't make it so.

Disclosure: Sky Network Television Shareholder

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer

Obsequious hypocrite

kontonnz

137 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 20

#308573 18-Mar-2010 02:48

the following might be worth a read
http://www.burgess.co.nz/law/aussie-copyright-decision-increases-scope-for-fair-dinkum-dealing

from my understanding as long as you just use the programme name and time/date in your listing its harder for them to substantiate copyright claims on a tv listing.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#308591 18-Mar-2010 08:05

I would certainly love to see one of these C&D orders go to Court - our laws are very similair to Australia so there does exist case law from the Australian decisions.

The problem however is a challenge is likely to cost a significant amount of money which is the problem you have to overcome..

nate

6473 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 458

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#308593 18-Mar-2010 08:09

I would seek professional advice from your lawyer. It may cost you alittle now, but it'll be a lot less than if they sue you.

blur

384 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

#308611 18-Mar-2010 08:49

Reven, I have used your software successfully over the years and it has been fantastic, however I always thought in the back of my mind that this day would come.

Firstly, please be careful about taking advice from non-qualified people. I think it is really easy for geeks to thrash out on a forum some really good technical arguments as to why Sky Network Television Limited is wrong, but the reality is that this could come down to a decision by a judge in the high court.

Now, I'm not sure how passionate and financial you are, but if you rattle their cage and they decide to take a shot at you, then I think you'd be looking down the barrel of 30 - 50k minimum. There will be more QC's than you can poke your legal aid stick at!

These words come from personal experience. About a year ago I gave evidence in a case brought against a chap in the district court. Without going into details, I was absolutely sure that we had a water-tight case based on our "technical" argument. I was dismayed and stunned that the judge took a very non-technical, moral view of the case, and found our man guilty.

Taking a simplistic view, one could draw parallels with your software and bit torrent software. Neither actually hosts the information in question, but it does give a means to distribute it. Perhaps it's this intent that may be your downfall?

These are just my thoughts...

My HTPC - Case Antec Fusion Remote, MOBO Intel DH67BLB3, CPU Intel Core i5-2400S 2.5 GHz, RAM 8GB DDR3 1333, HDD 120Gig Corsair Force Series 3 SSD system | WD Caviar Black 2TB data, Tuners Black Gold BGT3595 dual DVB-S/S2, dual DVB-T, Video nVIDIA GeForce GT 520, 1024MB, Sound Intel® High Definition Audio (onboard), OS Windows 7 x64

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

reven

3748 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 874

Trusted

#308619 18-Mar-2010 09:04

yeah, i definitely dont want this to go to court, and will comply with anything sky has the legal right to request.

but they only have legal right over their channels. so tv1, 2, 3 etc are safe. prime may have to be taken down as well.

but this is all from the xml config file. xmltvnz can stay online, since without the xmltv config file it cant do anything. or with a different config file it could work on any different website, and collate different data.

i have to take the old version of xmltvnz offline, but no one will be using that version since it doesnt actually work anymore.

hellonearthisman

1819 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 52

Trusted

#308622 18-Mar-2010 09:08

I would toss ya $10 to help ya legal fees.

I think it's stupid for TV providers to protect what and when they have shows on.
Why, don't they want as many people to know when they have the shows on.

Also isn't the epg program information freely available in the digital streams?
It's crazy that this info is so protected. Get some legal advice, like the others have said.

Could you in the mean time, why can't you dump the Sky listings and just re-publish the other listings.

blur

384 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

#308627 18-Mar-2010 09:19

Hmmm... as I said, it's really easy for people to give advice from the comfort of a forum, and when they're not getting the legal threats. When push comes to shove it won't be them digging deep.

I think we need to look at why Sky want to protect this information. My money is on the fact that it's this that makes their MySky product valuable. If we can do it on our PC then they stand to lose a huge revenue stream.

reven

3748 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 874

Trusted

#308629 18-Mar-2010 09:24

cant afford the legal advice :)

i have about a week to take it down. so ill probably just do the following
- remove xmltvnz v2.5 (this has hardcode sky stuff, doesnt work, but still its there)
- remove all sky channels from the xmltvnz markers and pull down the auto update service.

pulling down the auto update service will keep everyones existing config file in place. since i rarely actually have to update the config file (the only changes ive made in ages were channel additions), it will still work for all the users (until a source changes their website).

also im only getting about 1 new user per month, so its not that big of a deal really. most people that want it, already have it.

i was in the process of redoing my website anyway, so ill upload a new website with no config file and nothing to do with sky anywhere in the site. that should keep them happy.

not sure if they can do anything about the forums, there are mention of sky etc all over it, but thats just peoples posts about sky, no logos, or any means to get epg data....

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 13