The Chronicle

WTO stance on football piracy welcomed by FIFA and UEFA

-

FIFA and UEFA have welcomed the World Trade Organisati­on’s (WTO) verdict that Saudi Arabia have not provided ‘criminal procedures and penalties’ to tackle pirate pay broadcaste­r beoutQ.

It is not yet clear how this report will impact on Newcastle United’s prospectiv­e takeover – the Premier League have had to establish whether the piracy issue can be linked to any of the owners or directors nominated – but FIFA and UEFA are among those who have commented on the ruling itself.

“FIFA acknowledg­es the final panel report published by the World Trade Organisati­on (WTO) in relation to the activity of the pirate broadcaste­r known as beoutQ and the active involvemen­t and support that has been provided by Saudi Arabia

(KSA) in the past three years,’ a statement read.

‘FIFA agrees with the WTO panel’s recommenda­tions and demands that KSA takes the necessary steps in order that it conforms to its obligation­s under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectu­al Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement with immediate effect in order to protect legitimate media rights partners, such as beIN, and also football itself.

‘The WTO panel’s recommenda­tions are clear and piracy of football matches is an illegal activity and will not be tolerated on any level.’

There is no formal guidance on how long the Premier League’s owners’ and directors’ test takes, but Newcastle United have been in limbo for several months now as the governing body take their time over the decision.

Richard Masters, the Premier League’s chief executive (pictured), has confirmed Project Restart has not delayed the process and reiterated that the governing body take piracy ‘very seriously’ and ‘we stand by what we said on the record in the past’.

UEFA, meanwhile, have released a statement following the ruling.

“UEFA welcomes the World Trade Organisati­on report and its conclusion­s,’ a statement read. ‘What is clear is that beoutQ’s broadcasts constitute piracy of UEFA’s matches and, as such, are illegal.”

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom