PROBLEMS ON ENFORCEMENT OF BROADCASTING RIGHT UNDER THAI COPYRIGHT LAW: THE CASE STUDY OF WORLD CUP FINAL 2014
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The main aims of this research are to (1) analyze problems regarding copyright enforcement between RS International Broadcasting and Sport Management (RS) and the National Broadcasting and Telecommunication Commission (NBTC) (2) assess effects of problems occurring to those two organizations by using an intrinsic case study. Sources of information are primary and secondary documents. Research tool used in this study is matrix table. Data was processed by content analysis. The results showed that (1) RS has exclusive license in the finalworld cup 2014 broadcasting in Thailand authorized by FIFA. Thus, the company is certifiedto exercise their rights under Thai Copyright Law while NBTC is the legal authority under Act on Organization to assign Radio Frequency to regulate the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Services B.E. 2553 (2010) (NBTC Act 2010) and other two subordinated legislations which are Must Have Rules and Must Carry Rules. According to these rules, NBTC informed RS to broadcast all 64 matches of the Final World Cup 2014 only through Free TV in order to defend rights of customers to equally and fairly reach information. Abided by the rules, RS’ broadcasting and economic rights were limited. Consequently, the company did not manage its rights as planned. (2) the effects of problems between RS and NBTC were as follows (2.1) RS assessed its loss which cost around 719 million baht and (2.2) Effects on NBTC (a) according to supreme administrative court decision, Must Have Rules of NBTC was the result of unlawful discretion; and (b) NBTC compensated 427 million baht to RS which were criticized by RS and other organizations in aspect of good governance.
Article Details
I and co-author(s) certify that articles of this proposal had not yet been published and is not in the process of publication in journals or other published sources. I and co-author accept the rules of the manuscript consideration. Both agree that the editors have the right to consider and make recommendations to the appropriate source. With this rights offering articles that have been published to Panyapiwat Institute of Management. If there is a claim of copyright infringement on the part of the text or graphics that appear in the article. I and co-author(s) agree on sole responsibility.
References
ASTV Manageronline. (2014). “RS” said 427 Millions not worthy Disagreed to Must Have Rule. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from https://www.manager.co.th/Local/ViewNews.aspx?NewsID=9570000066585 [in Thai]
Fiscal Policy Offce. (n.d.). Good Governance. Retrieved April 20, 2015, from https://www.fpo.go.th/FPO/c_fpo/item6/c6_2.htm [in Thai]
Jumpa, M. (2011). Administrative Law in Context Volume 3 on Act on Administration and Act of Administration Control EP.1 (3rd ed.). Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University. [in Thai]
Matichonweekly. (2017). Imagination Reality: The ‘Must Have’ Copyright of World Cup 2018 under Section 44. Retrieved December 25, 2017, from https://www.matichonweekly.com/column/article_67149 [in Thai]
Neawna. (2013). NBTC persisted to broadcast 64 Matches of Final World Cup on Free TV. Retrieved March 15, 2015, from https://www.naewna.com/sport/95500 [in Thai]
Nerut, C. (n.d.). Administrative Discretion. Retrieved May 19, 2015, from www.law.moi.go.th/2551/article007.doc [in Thai]
Ombusman Western Australia. (2009). Guidelines: Exercise of discretion in administrative decisionmaking. Retrieved May 21, 2014, from https://www.ombudsman.wa.gov.au/Publications/Documents/guidelines/Exercise-of-discretion-in-admin-decision-making.pdf
Prachachartoonline. (2016). NBTC. Relieved! Administrative Court “Dismissed” World Cup Compensation for RS. Retrieved October 31, 2016, from https://www.prachachat.net/news_detail.php?newsid=1475143260 [in Thai]
Project on Tracking of Communication and Telecommunication Policy. (2014). NBTC Policy Watch Project’s Commentary on BTFP Fund Usage for Final World Cup. Retrieved July 13, 2014, from https://nbtcpolicywatch.org/press_detail.php?i=1227&t=1 [in Thai]
Ravitej Rao, M. (n.d.). Control of Abuse of Administrative Discretion: Judicial Trends. Retrieved July 20, 2014, from https://www.manupatra.co.in/newsline/articles/Upload/2F200227-E95A-408DB1EA-77CFE9702C36.pdf
Saweangsak, C. (2003). Administrative Law in Context (7th ed.). Bangkok: Winyochon. [in Thai]
Simaporn, S. (2013). RS estimated 700 M. for broadcast Final World Cup 2014. Retrieved July 7, 2015, from https://www.ryt9.com/s/iq05/1690266 [in Thai]
Smith, P., Evens, T. & Iosifdis, P. (2015). The Regulation of Television Sports Broadcasting: A Comparative Analysis. Retrieved December 25, 2016, from https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.828.917&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Thai National News. (2014). NBTC agreed to compensate RS for 472 M. Retrieved July 15, 2015, from https://www.mcot.net/site/content?id=53996509be0470a1078b4572#.Vcag7PmqpBc [in Thai]
Thairath Online. (2014). 18 thousands for WorldCup Box return. Retrieved June 20, 2015, from https://www.thairath.co.th/content/433012 [in Thai]
Thairath Online. (2018). “Pravit” confrmed World Cup Broadcasting by 7 companies joining the deal. Retrieved February 13, 2018, from https://www.thairath.co.th/content/1202840 [in Thai]
