Nine are such a bunch of corporate thugs and bullies.. Go ICE I am behind you all the way....


Nine sues IceTV over guide
Jane Schulze
MAY 25, 2006

JAMES Packer's Nine Network has cast doubt on a $4 million capital-raising by electronic program guide group IceTV, by taking legal action alleging IceTV had infringed its copyright.

IceTV has about 1500 subscribers paying an average of $3 per week for the service, which provides listings of all TV network's programs to digital video recorders and TV-enabled computers.
Its offer was due to close today, but the company's website said it had now been extended to June 8. IceTV yesterday issued a second supplementary prospectus in which it says Nine started action in the Federal Court on May 15.
"Nine is seeking certain declarations and orders from the Federal Court relating to an alleged infringement of copyright relating to its program schedules, together with damages, interest and costs," the prospectus said.
IceTV chairman Rod Sutherland said the company denied all the allegations but estimated legal costs at $100,000.
"The company reiterates that IceGuide is independently compiled by the company from a suite of sources in the public domain," he wrote.
"The company has invited Nine's solicitors to attend the Company's office to observe the independent methods of compilation of the IceGuide in order to allay their client's concerns but they have declined this invitation."
Mr Sutherland said anyone who had applied for IceTV shares based on the first or second prospectus could seek a refund if they contacted IceTV within a month.
The Australian

We'll at least it should resolve the question of 'Is ICE legal?' once and for all. (If its not simply withdrawn in a few months after the damage is done)

IMO Nine have waited to throw this into the mix just as ICE are attempting to raise funds to secure its future. My understanding is that ICE is on very solid ground WRT copyright issues. But to a small startup company a few $100,000 legal bills will likely not be welcome.

I can only hope that the media take on this raises awareness of the product and company generally .

Oh, but that's right, channel 9 is the media and I can't say any of the other networks will be rushing to place balanced reports (if any) on their news...

Disclosure: I grabbed some ICE shares in the first prospectus.

Nine probably tried to buy ICE and they said no, so now they are sueing.

Maybe a tip-off to Today Tonight.

Channel Nine sues another small Aussie battler business trying to provide a service to Australians. They'll probably start to investigate and then realise what's happening and try and sue too.

This is a real bugger. I'm one of the 1500 iceTV subscribers.

This is really dirty play by Nein, there'd be very few large investors who would risk their money when the fundamental business premise is being challenged in the courts. Win or lose the court case, ICE now have little hope of raising the money in the float with this cloud over their head.

Yeah I'm sure they waited till Ice needed the money before they decided to sue.

ICE is doing what they are supposed to be in any case! I wish the the government had included the requirement of transmitting the EPG as part of the broadcasting licence.

Disclosure: I have no shares or subscriptions with ICE

I thought ICE mentioned a previous similiar issue in their prospectus?

Conundrum!

I hate ICE, yet who love Nine and its tactics!?

BigBobOz makes the best point!

The bloody Howard Regime should have mandated the networks broadcast accurate, full EPGs.


Disclaimer: I wouldn't touch ice shares with a barge-pole!

I think they simly refered to the fact that they had extensive legal advice supporting them (re: copyright issues)

Regards

Peter Gillespie

It is interesting to see that ICE are offerring money back to all requesters (for both Prospectus 1 purchasers AND 2 purchasers?). I must admit that given the legal action was launched a few weeks ago ICE we're a bit tardy providing a heads up on their site.

Didn't see it as a good sign that the prospectus was extended almost a month (although possibly that's just to give both ICE and investors the chance to see where they stand after this news filters out.)

So, hands up who isn't surprised to see this happen. 9 will just kill them in legal bills and that will be the end of it.
As for other media coverage, well, its much like watermarks, etc, we have all seen how 'balanced' any (what little there ever has been) reporting on that has been.

As said, as part of getting a digital TV license (for nothing), a full and accurate EPG (min 3 days) should have been required. Would have stop this all together and, shock horror, actually given ppl a bit extra service that was useful with DTV take-up.

I wonder if this as the same reason on Austext not showing Nine on their TV guide?

I feel Channel 9 are just plain silly and this serves nothing.

I don't have anything to do with James Packer's Channel and I would like to remove Nine out of the favourites on my Topfield PVR.

How can the Nine network claim copyright over 7 day EPG data when it barely does Now and Next? They are unfairly limiting competition. How about the ACCC getting involved?
Surely other countries have sorted this out before, or are we the digital backwater of the world?

Dang. I had only last night talked the wife/financial controller into getting ICE/WIFI for the Toppy. I suppose it would be prudent now to hold off until the dust settles. What other options are there besides 'harvesting' the data?

I think this is highly likely. This reads a lot like the action of a corporate heavyweight that hasn't got what it wanted first up. Or been capable of coming up with the idea themselves so they'll just try and steal from a smaller company trying to find its feet

Does anyone truly believe that NINE just suddenly without warning decided to take them to court.

Not a chance !!!

Any judge would dismiss the case if they learned there was not some discussion about the issue before going to the courts.

I'll bet they were warned on more than one occasion and even offered a deal wish they obviously didn't feel was fair.

I say "All the best to them". I hope they make the media industry wake up to themselves and perhaps public interest in this matter can make the government make changes to the EPG issue.

I'm sure they knew this situation would happen and no doubt that's why they were raising funds.

They are a "BOLD" company. Remember they did post messages on every HPTC forum in the world advertising their product knowing full well it was against some forums rules regarding advertising.

"GO ICETV"

Disclaimer :- I don't use their service - I can read the TV Guide and can program the settop box quite well thankyou.

I'm interested in learning what sources are in the public domain for this data...

The main issue visa vie copyright is not the scheduling but rather the extended information. So the fact that Lost (Ep5) is on this thursday between 8:30 and 9:30 is not copyrightable and for that matter 'public domain'.

Where ICE have to do a lot of their work is in writing extended descriptions. These are sourced from things like published movie guides, etc. ICE also write copy from scratch (say to describe the nine news, which is why they can do irreverent things like rate the various 6 o'clock news shows against each other )

This is my understanding anyway

Peter Gillespie

Damn right they are. One word. Foxtel.

The arsehole tactics employed by PBL over the EPG issue is the main reason I do not - and never, ever will - subscribe to Foxtel. I shun Telstra for similar reasons. Nobody is going to convince me to pay money to access something I should be getting for free.



Thanks to Packer, Howard et al, yes, we are the digital TV backwater of the world, and we're likely to remin there for some time to come.



Lobbying non-Packer stations - especially the ABC - to provide a full EPG. Whoever does it first will shame the others into copying their move, as that's always the way FTA TV works in this country.

As for this "copyright" thing... Does Nine realise just how much they're hated by people with an IQ above room temperature? They're the RIAA of television.

Actually why doesn't the ABC or SBS broadcast the EPG?

What possible reason do they have???

As all programs are available in print daily/weekly how can CH Nine sue just because EPG is electronic?.

This would be part of ICE's 'public domain' arguement. However I believe, printed (and online) copies of the weekly guide are licenced via a few companies that compile and distribute the information on behalf of the networks. ICE have not been granted permission to use this source. To be honest its still early days in digital TV. Heck most of the networks are still trying to get reliable broadcasts of the time down pat. As digital ownership is only just nudging above 15% Oz wide, I'd suggest the whole EPG thing hasn't been a priorty for any network. It would take expertise and time and money to set up correctly.

I believe the ABC is in fact trialing an EPG though. Of course they can only provide an EPG for their own shows. Here's hoping people will see it in action on ABC and start asking why the commercial channels sren't providing it.

Regards

Peter Gillespie

As Peter G and Neon said, surely if the ABC and SBS show EPGs can be done here without risking the ozone layer, baby seals and wollemi pines, then the others will surely follow. Of course things like the CH9 Xmas party might suffer.

We do have permission from SBS and ABC, but not 7,9,10. However we do not copy their guides, so there is no breach of copyright.

We have just posted some more details of the case on our website:

http://www.icetv.com.au/corporate.php

Peter Vogel
CTO IceTV

The above link needs to have a .php appended to it ( ie http://www.icetv.com.au/corporate.php).

This isn't really about "Breach of Copyright" - more a "Breach of Process"

If someone repackaged the ICETV guide and sold it as their own without permission from ICETV is that a Breach of Copyright.

Can you copyright something you don't own or have permission to use

Can NINE win - I hope not.

Cheers

For certain reasons, Networks appear to be a little paranoid about their TV guide information.

Many years ago I had one of the first "internet" accounts in the station I worked at. I used it for accessing industry forums.
One of the publicity folk (who was not particularly au fait with computers) was worried that the programming schedule was accessible via my dial up connection on a stand alone computer, despite my assurances that there was no way that anyone could use it to access the scheduling computer.

Some time ago only the BBC TV schedule would be published in the Radio Times, and only the ITV schedule in another magazine (TV Times?).

Networks quite understandably wish to keep their scheduling close to their chests until absolutely the last minute. If one was to publish early then the competitors would use that to schedule against the big ticket or special items.

I do wish ICETV well and I think the "copyright" charge is ridiculous, but I also feel ICE is susceptible to any future 7 day EPG implementation by the networks. This probably won't happen until they trust each other (which will be never) or someone bites the bullet and it turns into a winner.

JB

I spent a lifetime in sububan newspapers and the TV guides were sent to us from the TV stations no licence etc at all and for free, maybe its not the same anymore?.

More like 8.35 to 9.38 going by channel 7's standard adherence to starting and finishing times

Likewise with the magazine I was editor of in 1999/2000. Every week, every network sent bulky photocopied books containing a full two weeks' worth of upcoming program schedule with descriptions.

Mark my words, this whole saga is NOT about "copyright". The whole "copyright" ruse is simply a legal club they've made their weapon of choice to achieve their REAL goal - to make sure PVR owners NEVER get a full, working EPG. No, for one of those, they'd have to go to the waste of time and money that is Foxtel Digital.

It's so transparent I can't believe that media commentators haven't picked up on it yet...

Of course, but the irony is Nine already provides a full EPG and PVR service through their 25% share of Foxtel, which of course also carries advertising which can be skipped.

What like all those savvy reporters at channel 9? I'm also guessing the other 'media commentators' are being told its to take a back seat. Wonder if the networks will tag team it?

October 9 2006: Channel Nine announce that they are withdrawing there claims of breach of copyright

October 10 2006: Channel 7 annonces they have start legal proceedings for breach of copyright

Regards

Peter Gillespie

I was wondering why yourtv.com.au could publish the listing for 7 days without any problems, and then I saw that they were owned by HWW, and on the HWW web site there's a media statement, dated 3 April 2006, saying


See http://www.hww.com.au/corporate/news/index.cfm?i=83916 for the full statement.

It's all starting to make sense now.

Well that can't be a good thing. I hope Nein doesn't try to fubar yourtv.

except that they haven't taken over ebroadcast.com.au (or sued them) yet!

ebroadcast.com.au isn't competing (in their coke-addled minds, anyway) with Fo$tel.

I despise Nine for this. And as a result, I will never, ever watch an ad on their network again (not that I did much anyway, but regardless...!)

Neon Kitten.....I reckon you might just have hit the nail.

People in "country" locations that recieve (Satellite) Pay TV services have no 9,7,10 reception or commercial FTA guide through their service.

BUT.....persons living in the "metropolitan" locations recieve their Pay services through Cable which does include FTA reception and the Guide.

So firstly the powers that be screw up FTA multi-channeling for the commercial broadcasters, NOW channel 9 wish to remove any hope of a Guide for our STB's (beyond now &next...sheesh!) in the hope of hooking all those affluent city slickers.......Hmmm.

So if we want program choices (multi-channeling) or a guide we have to live in an area serviced by Cable and subscribe to Foxtel.....easy isn't it.....GRRRRR!.

Who are the whingers saying the takeup of DTV is a little slow?.....

Didn't they originally auction the Pay TV licenses in Australia to avoid a monopoly in services?.

Who makes these executive decisions anyway?.....it's not Eddie Maquire is it?.

Gotta love this - from the APC Magazine web site, a quote about channel Nine from an article about "TV Piracy":

"They’re also one of the only TV stations in Australia to make a free electronic program guide available online… if other TV stations would stop being obstinate, Windows Media Center wouldn’t have been such a dismal failure in Australia and people could easily watch TV when it suited them without having to subscribe to a third party EPG like IceTV."

Not only is that ironic, it's downright false. But hey, I guess since APC is owned by the same mob that owns Nine...

http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/0...-pirates-survey

Has any one read their backgrounder pdf at all? VERY enlightening.

From it I would be extremely surprised if nine won.

In a nut shell it comes down to the fact that ICE are independently gathering their info. Seems pretty clear cut to me. Hopefully the Judge seems it the same way and throws nine out.

Now what IS curious is that the same legal company ice used to make sure they were not infringing copyright are the SAME company nine have employed to fight them! Sounds a bit doubious to me. Maybe its a case of they KNOW they don't have a leg to stand on but will take the case anyway (Ed's got a big(ger) wallet now I suppose).

It might just infrequently be true of Ch9 in some cities. I know Ch9 in Adelaide does without any warning show EPG programs about a day ahead, but as that time rolls by it isn't updated to the extent that eventually even Now/Next doesn't work for quite a while thereafter. Sort of like the guy tasked with the Now/Next stuff wants the weekend off so he sets up a full EPG for a a couple of days ahead.

I knew a weatherman like that

How do you explain that their schedules for the coming week are widely available then? After all, this is the info that is in dispute, not longer term scheduling.

What a joke that excuse is. All the networks can get fairly easy access to up to two, maybe three weeks of their competitor's schedule.

Aside from the existing magical mystery tour scheduling, do we see any evidence that this advance preview of the competition's schedule results in huge scheduling changes? No. 99.9% of the time what the schedule from two - three weeks forward says is accurate. What is said would be shown is shown.

For major events such as 'the' games, which is hardly a hidden scheduling secret, it seems that the competition just stops running their 'prime time' shows. So called big ticket items like that aren't exactly a secret, are they?

How quickly can a network change its programming? Hmm, if you cast your mind back to a certain screening of Funniest Home Video, I'd say it takes no more than 60 seconds after the late KP calls up and says 'get that crap off my screen'. If the keeping guard of the secret scheduling was true, you'd reasonably expect the schedule to jump up and down and round and round in reaction to the competition's schedule changes with data from 2-3 weeks forward being completely totally and utterly useless. Its not.

Myth busted.

What I don't get is why anyone would buy shares in ICETV? I mean, sure, it's a great service now, for the few people who have STBs that can accept the info... but when the channels finally decide that they might want to have 7 day EPGs, then doesn't the whole business model of IceTV kinda just go 'poof' in smoke? Who would pay for it once it's free?

Because they are merely using the Guide as a launch pad to enable services like web based remote scheduling of your PVR etc. (I would by shares if I had a spare $2k).