During the first confinement, Canal+ became free for a few days. A gesture of solidarity towards the population, according to the encrypted channel. The competition didn’t like it. Justice has since passed: it was definitely illegal.
Playing Canal+ unencrypted during the first lockdown in France was certainly a welcome gesture for viewers, at the time of the coronavirus pandemic. A moment of solidarity, some will say. In any case, a great communication operation for the encrypted channel. But above all it was an illicit gesture from a legal point of view.
This is what the Paris judicial court recalled in a decision rendered on January 25, 2024, as points out lawyer Alexandre Archambault on X (ex-Twitter). The encrypted channel has just been ordered to compensate the TF1 group, which said it was a victim of this opening of the signal to everyone, beyond the usual clientele.
Overall, the encrypted channel will have to pay a little more than 1.6 million euros to compensate the companies GIE TF1 Acquisition of rights, TF1, TMC, TFX and TF1 Séries films, TF1 Films productions and La Chaîne info-LCI. All belong to the TF1 group. The case could continue on the legal ground in the event of an appeal.
The amounts involved aim to compensate for the “ damage from depreciation of broadcasting rights » of certain films, repair the moral damage suffered by TF1 subsidiaries and cover legal costs. In detail, three feature films are concerned: All inclusive, So far, so good And Avengers: Endgame.
A violation of the media timeline
In this case, Canal+’s fault is to have violated the media chronology by temporarily switching to free at the start of the spread of the virus. This mechanism allocates a time slot for each broadcaster to display a film after its theatrical release. Various criteria exist to define the duration and order of passage.
Canal+ is positioned early in the media timeline — the old framework allowed it to broadcast a film 8 months after the cinema. A channel like TF1 is much further away (30 months). Canal+ is accessible by subscription, not TF1. However, the films broadcast by Canal+ during its operating window are only supposed to be seen by its customers.
With the Canal+ gratuit operation, the encrypted channel de facto left its operating window and at the same time occupied the slot reserved for free channels (TF1, M6, France Télévisions, etc.). Result: they found themselves harmed since any broadcast rights they acquired lost value.
Why, in fact, watch for free on TF1 Avengers: Endgame 30 months after the film’s theatrical release, while Canal+ broadcast it unencrypted 8 months later (the film arrived on the encrypted channel from December 2019)? Viewers naturally gravitated towards the nearest opportunity.
For TF1, there were reasons to fear a shortfall in advertising revenue and a drop in ratings. Especially since the Canal+ initiative, announced on March 16, just at the time of the implementation of the first confinement, was set to last for a short while. The group planned to keep the signal open until April 15, 2020.
Quickly, however, the rules of media chronology appeared in the debate and several competing channels of Canal+ protested. The Superior Audiovisual Council (CSA) – which has since become Arcom – did not initiate disciplinary proceedings at the time, but pleaded for a brief operation.
Faced with increasing pressure from free channels, Canal+ ended up frankly shortening its action. The free Canal+ operation ended two weeks before the initially planned date. The signal was jammed again on March 31, instead of April 15. A return to normal too late in the eyes of the plaintiffs, as evidenced by this trial.
If you liked this article, you will like the following: don’t miss them by subscribing to Numerama on Google News.