In a recent judgment, Canal+ was ordered to compensate TF1 for unfair competition, following the free broadcast of its programs during the March 2020 lockdown.
Several recent cases demonstrate the increasing tension between players in the media and broadcasting sector. For example, Canal+ has already been sanctioned by the CNIL for abusive telephone canvassing, illustrating the regulatory issuess facing media companies. In addition, a previous conflict between Canal+ and TF1 concerning the broadcasting of the channels highlighted the complexities of distribution agreements. In addition, the Molotov platform was penalized for broadcasting content from the main channel without authorization.
These examples reveal the changing dynamics and elegal issues within the media industry, context in which the recent case involving Canal+ and TF1. The latter concerns a fine imposed on the encrypted channel for having broadcast programs in the clear during confinement, which was judged to be a unfair competition by the group of free channels.
Canal+ receives a fine of 1.66 million euros from TF1
During the confinement of March 2020Canal+ had chosen to distribute your content for free, an initiative which was not to the taste of TF1. The latter saw this action as unfair competition. She accuses him of having took advantage of the exceptional situation to capture a larger audience to the detriment of free channels. After four years of proceedings, the courts ruled in favor of TF1 in ordering Canal+ to pay him 1.66 million euros.
Although the fine imposed is significantly lower than the initial request of 12 million eurosthe encrypted channel, assessing the implications of this verdict, could seek to obtain a re-examination of the case. This reflection on the appeal demonstrates the complexity of the legal and economic issues linked to broadcasting rights and competitive strategies in the media sector.
This case demonstrates that it is necessary to clarify the limits of competition in the media sector, especially in times of crisis. The court’s decision highlights the need to respect broadcasting agreements and ownership of content, even in exceptional circumstances. She could thus serve as an example for future similar cases. This could encourage companies to act more cautiously in their promotional and content distribution approaches, in order toavoid disputes linked to unfair competition.
Source: lefilmfrancais