EMedia and MultiChoice fight it out over sports rights again

eMedia and MultiChoice battled again on Thursday as the eTV owner accuses the DStv operator of anticompetitive behaviour, using its alleged dominant position to dictate restrictive sublicensing agreements with the public broadcaster.

The Competition Tribunal, which has the final say in local competition matters, heard an interim relief application by eMedia and its subsidiary Platco Digital on Thursday against Multichoice, Supersport and the SABC.

eMedia argues that MultiChoice prevents the SABC from including sublicensed major sporting events on relevant SABC channels when they are transmitted to any third-party platform such as eMedia’s Openview platform. The parties have been at odds for years on … the matter. In October, eMedia lost in its bid to broadcast matches from the Rugby World Cup in France after the high court in Johannesburg rejected its case against MultiChoice, SuperSport and the SABC.

eMedia had disputed MultiChoice’s decision not to let the SABC air Rugby World Cup 2023 matches on e.tv’s competing free-to-air satellite platform, Openview, where the SABC already screens some of its programmes. The court ordered eMedia to pay the costs of MultiChoice and SuperSport, including for three counsel.

MultiChoice, which sees Openview as direct competition to its DStv platform, insists that eMedia acquire its own rights to air such sports matches.

While lawyers for the pay TV company argued on Thursday that “the public is not entitled to receive sports broadcasting free of charge”, eMedia said it is helping the SABC to deliver the right to access of information to about a quarter of the public broadcaster’s target audience.

“It’s not free of charge. It’s paid for by the public. Firstly, that 20% to 25% the SABC wants to reach, it’s paid for by them through their payment for an Open View decoder.

“They had to pay for the decoder. And that was something they had to pay for in the context of digital migration, as there’s a shutting down of various channels across the country, and that therefore is the only means by which you can then continue to watch this particular [programming].”

Not only that, “they’ve also paid their TV licences. So it’s not free. It’s not free in two ways. And with respect, it’s not some uppity bunch of viewers with socialist leanings that are insisting on continuing to see things for free, it’s 20% to 25% of the SABC’s readership that the SABC wants to reach but it cannot reach because of this particularly restrictive clause which punishes not just eMedia” but also the millions of people who do not have access.

The state broadcaster finds itself in the middle. Although the SABC opposes certain aspects of eMedia’s case, it aligns itself with other aspects of eMedia’s case.

The tribunal said it will make a final decision about the case “in due course”.

THEY PAID FOR THE DECODER …THEY PAID THEIR TV LICENCES IT’S NOT FREE