Clear rules for TV broadcast rights on the horizon

Finally, Thai viewers can feel content that they’ll be able to watch the broadcasts of the 2012 Olympic Games from London. Sports fans should now have cause to celebrate, since they will not have to face another round of blank screens after the controversy over broadcasting rights during football’s European Championship last month.

Officials are trying to ensure there will be no repeat of the Euro Cup blackout. The Television Pool of Thailand and National Broadcasting Television (formerly Channel 11) own the rights to broadcast this global sports event via terrestrial stations only. 

The National Broadcasting Telecommunications Commission’s broadcasting committee recently approved “must-carry” rules that oblige all TV operators – cable, satellite, pay-per-view, terrestrial and future digital TV stations – to ensure the Olympic Games will be available to everyone on their networks. 

The must-carry rules came after viewers and consumer groups cried foul when it turned out that subscribers to TrueVisions would not be able to watch the Euro 2012 matches due to prohibitions in the re-broadcasting rights of GMM Grammy.

The consumer groups and the authorities have paid attention to broadcasting rights for the Olympics because they consider the matter of national interest. The prevailing viewpoint now is that people should be able to watch international sports events to inspire youngsters to reach their potential and try to excel in whatever they feel passionate about, particularly sports.

It’s only fair that all Thai viewers should be able to watch our national heroes and heroines showcase their talent after months and years of hard training for the big event. 

At the London games, Thai athletes will take part in what is the world’s biggest sporting event. The national team will compete in boxing, weightlifting, taekwondo, skeet and trap, and badminton. The occasion should bring us happiness as our representatives take to the arena and fly the flag.

The success of the consumer groups in convincing the authorities to set new broadcasting standards, to prevent a similar incident as occurred during Euro 2012, should be good news for consumers, who are becoming increasingly aware of their rights. And they are not afraid to fight for those rights. 

It remains unclear to what extent the popularity of the Euro 2012 tournament might help local football leagues, but the momentum in regard to consumer awareness about rights is welcome and should continue. Parties involved should also leverage this public attention to the issue in order to raise concerns about intellectual property rights. 

Attention should not focus merely on the right to watch international sports events. Last month’s episode should help the public understand the damage caused to those who felt their rights were violated. The debate over the Euro 2012 fiasco should illustrate the fact that rights are subject to protection because they can be translated into business opportunities. For instance, the re-broadcasting rights of sports events can translate into compensation for athletes and tournament organisers. Athletes would be encouraged to raise their game if they believed they’d be better rewarded for their performance.

People on the receiving end portray themselves as the victims when their rights have been violated. But attention should also be focused on the providers of content to encourage excellence in performance. Otherwise, performers and athletes may be content to put in only a mediocre effort because nobody has put sufficient effort into protecting their rights.

Rights need to be protected for both producers and consumers. The widespread availability of fake goods and the illegal broadcasting of copyrighted works and content reflects society’s ignorance on the issue.