Bspa Warning About Live Streaming

[ovalfan 14]

THE BSPA would like to remind all fans that it is illegal to stream any portion of meetings without prior permission from the Association.

 

In recent weeks there has been an increase in the number of occasions when meetings have been shown using the app Periscope.

 

This is a breach of copyright, is against our agreement with BSkyB and GSI, and will be taken very seriously by all clubs within the Sport.

 

Anyone found to be live streaming meetings without prior agreement will be banned from attending matches across the leagues.

 

As a sport it is important we embrace the ever-changing world of social media, but at the same time we also have to protect our product.

Whereas the current belle vue fiasco, sky cancelled meetings weather forecast fiasco, etc etc does nothing to harm the product at all?????!!!!!!!

[Tsunami 10,219]

I'm still coming to terms with the fact that I'm following something I said didn't exist. It may be time for me to go off to a rocking chair and start dribbling.

Thought you already were.

[stevebrum 6,821]

Only if the individual allows them to take his or her photo and or name so it would not be easy.

 

So how do the football authorities and police get on when circulating banned fans around stadiums and countries?

I'm pretty sure they never consented either!

[Aces51 2,778]

So how do the football authorities and police get on when circulating banned fans around stadiums and countries?

I'm pretty sure they never consented either!

Because they are made subject to a legal banning order. I doubt that taking a video on your phone qualifies.

[LagutaRacingFan 1,935]

Speedway isn't in a situation where It can dictate demands towards the supporters.

[stevebrum 6,821]

Because they are made subject to a legal banning order. I doubt that taking a video on your phone qualifies.

I know that it's quite a different thing but there are some parallels.

It's certainly in the programme however that alone would be difficult to even prove.

[westhamboy66 599]

I know that it's quite a different thing but there are some parallels.

It's certainly in the programme however that alone would be difficult to even prove.

But carrying a warning in a speedway programme is of little legal use to the BSPA anyway as it isn't a condition of entry to buy a programme so it is very easy to claim ignorance if any notices re photography etc aren't posted at the entrance

 

http://www.gospeed.co.uk This is the Company who claim their product is being damaged but if they ever got heavy handed in the media rights issues they would be doing even more damage to their product. I for one have been looking to dump Speedway as a pastime after fifty years of watching and heavy handiness in this issue is a poor reflection on those running our sport. The claim in their website that speedway is a growing sport is a joke. Alienating a single speedway fan is a joke

They only have to circulate the persons picture to all other tracks so it would be easy IMHO.

The moment they took a photograph of a person then circulated it to other clubs to post the photo for staff to see they themselves may well find themselves in hot water legally. Equally can you actually envisage a turnstile employee checking a photo or several come to that matter against all that enter?

Speedway isn't in a situation where It can dictate demands towards the supporters.

Exactly but but the BSPA who are clearly numbskulls don't understand that

 

So how do the football authorities and police get on when circulating banned fans around stadiums and countries?

I'm pretty sure they never consented either!

Banning orders at Football are typically due to violence that's how the police get involved. As for taking photos at Football without consent...At West Ham you are not allowed to take in a Professional looking camera. No one searches you but if you are caught using it then they do confiscate equipment or eject those guilt of taking photos. As for banning people yes they do sometimes confiscate season tickets of supporters without compensation but they have zero power to stop someone then going to another ground.

Edited April 13, 2016 by westhamboy66

[mikebv 10,273]

I think that given the way crowd levels are going we cannot be too far away from having a 'register' taken at each match to confirm our attendance, like we had at school..,

 

So yes potentially you could be banned as when you answer to your name with "here Sir" they will send you home knowing you shouldn't be there...

 

Be warned though, anyone who should have attended, and didn't for whatever reason, eg looked at the 48 hour weather forceast and decided to 'wag it', will need a note from their parent or guardian at the next meeting explaining their absence...

 

eg "Dear Sir, Michael didn't attend the match between Leicester and Swindon because......."

 

I'll let you fill the rest in.....😀

Edited April 13, 2016 by mikebv

[A ORLOV 8,628]

I know that it's quite a different thing but there are some parallels.

It's certainly in the programme however that alone would be difficult to even prove.

Football violence is a criminal offence where a court can issue a banning order. Taking pictures is probably a civil offence so a court cannot issue a banning order. Therefore a court, following a criminal case of footy violence, can insist that your photo is taken and distributed, goslow or the bspa cannot legally do it.

 

They may possibly get a banning order if they got an injunction from a court banning periscoping but it is unlikely that they would be given the ok to take and circulate a photo of the individual. There is a big difference between criminal and civil law.

 

As mentioned above a note in the prog cannot be upheld as a rule or reg, any rule or reg has to be available at the point of the taking up of the contract, ie payment by the fan and acceptance of the payment is the point of contract.

Edited April 13, 2016 by A ORLOV

[Skidder1 7,636]

A photo of the offending fan could be taken by a stadium/speedway official on their smartphone and then circulated on all social media platforms, which all clubs utilise to maximum effect!!

 

I think I've got that right, but not entirely sure?! ;-)

Edited April 13, 2016 by Skidder1

[stevebrum 6,821]

But carrying a warning in a speedway programme is of little legal use to the BSPA anyway as it isn't a condition of entry to buy a programme so it is very easy to claim ignorance if any notices re photography etc aren't posted at the entrance

 

http://www.gospeed.co.uk This is the Company who claim their product is being damaged but if they ever got heavy handed in the media rights issues they would be doing even more damage to their product. I for one have been looking to dump Speedway as a pastime after fifty years of watching and heavy handiness in this issue is a poor reflection on those running our sport. The claim in their website that speedway is a growing sport is a joke. Alienating a single speedway fan is a joke

 

The moment they took a photograph of a person then circulated it to other clubs to post the photo for staff to see they themselves may well find themselves in hot water legally. Equally can you actually envisage a turnstile employee checking a photo or several come to that matter against all that enter?

 

Exactly but but the BSPA who are clearly numbskulls don't understand that

 

 

Banning orders at Football are typically due to violence that's how the police get involved. As for taking photos at Football without consent...At West Ham you are not allowed to take in a Professional looking camera. No one searches you but if you are caught using it then they do confiscate equipment or eject those guilt of taking photos. As for banning people yes they do sometimes confiscate season tickets of supporters without compensation but they have zero power to stop someone then going to another ground.

Football violence is a criminal offence where a court can issue a banning order. Taking pictures is probably a civil offence so a court cannot issue a banning order. Therefore a court, following a criminal case of footy violence, can insist that your photo is taken and distributed, goslow or the bspa cannot legally do it.

 

They may possibly get a banning order if they got an injunction from a court banning periscoping but it is unlikely that they would be given the ok to take and circulate a photo of the individual. There is a big difference between criminal and civil law.

 

As mentioned above a note in the prog cannot be upheld as a rule or reg, any rule or reg has to be available at the point of the taking up of the contract, ie payment by the fan and acceptance of the payment is the point of contract.

Taken all those points on board and yes clearly it would be more of a civil matter so not comparable to the instance I gave in reflection.

Surely a simple notice on the turnstiles and throughout the stadium would suffice as official notice that can't be ignored?

[Skidder1 7,636]

Alternatively as the BSPA statement includes the phrase 'without permission', then presumably that means that permission could be requested and granted and permission given. I guess it depends who you know, rather than what you know?!

[BWitcher 12,453]

Such a fuss over fans wanting to leach something for free again, hiding behind the 'guise' of growing the sport.

 

Speedway is simply falling in line with all other forms of entertainment.

 

Do you go to the cinema and broadcast it on periscope? The theatre? Football matches? Cricket matches? Is it allowed in any of these places?

[robert72 845]

A photo of the offending fan could be taken by a stadium/speedway official on their smartphone and then circulated on all social media platforms, which all clubs utilise to maximum effect!!

 

I think I've got that right, but not entirely sure?! ;-)

Not if they were under 18

 

It's just another worthless statement to come from the bspa.

[A ORLOV 8,628]

Not if they were under 18

 

It's just another worthless statement to come from the bspa.

Even over 18 the club who took and distributed it might be open to legal action.