gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
I expect it will be licensed by the broadcaster to the watchalong entity, directly or indirectly. It will probably work like the PRS/PPL fee in nightclubs with the fee being linked to numbers attending, or in this case, watching. Sky’s fees are based on the rateable value of the pub but this definitely won’t apply here because most of these businesses are operated from home and this model is much easier to evaluate and monitor the numbers - and will doubtless be expressly provided for in the written contract between the parties.Something I have been meaning to ask. These watchalongs cannot be done legally on a normal paid stream. Like pubs, they would need a business stream. However, unlike a pub licence where the Sky stream is not the business, with watchalongs it is the business. In a pub, the stream is an additional perk for the punter, these grifters are making their money on the back of the stream. Do you or anyone else know the reason they can do it?
Sports broadcasters have proven very adept at monetising their products and it’s inconceivable they won’t have been alive to this (absurd) development in the game a long time ago and sought to exploit it.
Given the potential criminal sanctions involved (maximum sentence under section 92 of the Trade Mark Act 1994 is ten years imprisonment) di Cesare would be nuts to not stream through the authorised channels, given how high profile he is, especially as he operates his business through a limited company. I suspect some of the other actors in the field carry on their businesses via a much less formal corporate structure and so will operate much more in the grey zone, but dI Cesare is too high profile and has too much to lose - especially as any conviction would be followed by proceeds of crime proceedings.