Powered by Lexis+®
CASE STUDY

“It's hard to quantify, right now. But at a guess, I'd say it's probably more than 50% faster, at times. It's literally that quick. We've found to be an essential practical tool. We're very satisfied.”

Walsall Council

Access all documents on Premium channels

Premium channels meaning

What does Premium channels mean?
In practice, premium channels are television channels (and, increasingly, on‑demand channel feeds) supplied as optional add‑ons to a basic pay‑TV or platform package for an additional subscription fee. They are typically encrypted and accessed through conditional access/entitlement management, and are marketed and billed separately from the “basic tier”. The term is not defined in UK or Irish legislation or case law; it is a descriptive industry expression used in broadcasting, media and telecoms agreements. In contracts (for example, carriage, distribution and platform agreements) it commonly underpins tiering and pricing, wholesale/retail models, revenue share, bundling, marketing and EPG placement, rights windows, blackouts/exclusivity, and age‑restricted content compliance. Consumer terms must address price transparency, cooling‑off/cancellation and minimum terms. Usage is broadly consistent across England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland. Regulatory overlays are general rather than definition‑driven, including broadcasting/content rules (e.g. Ofcom Broadcasting Code; Coimisiún na Meán codes), conditional access regulation, and consumer protection law (e.g. UK Consumer Rights Act 2015 and Consumer Contracts Regulations 2013; Ireland’s Consumer Rights Act 2022). Examples include premium sports or movie channels offered as bolt‑ons via pay‑TV or OTT apps. Not to be confused with premium rate services (telephony/interactive services).
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Premium channels

NEWS
UK IP exhaustion after Brexit: government confirms UK+ EEA-asymmetric regime with no legislative change; consequences for parallel imports and practical advice for rights holders

What is the background to the consultation? IP rights confer exclusive monopolies on their owners. Ordinarily, those protections stop others from selling, trading in, or importing products that infringe the monopoly. Exhaustion The principle of exhaustion curbs that exclusivity for items already placed on the market with the rights holder’s consent. Once goods are put on the relevant market with permission, the IP proprietor cannot object to their sale, subsequent dealing, or import. A central issue within exhaustion is identifying the relevant market; by placing goods into that market, the proprietor’s rights are exhausted. This matters especially when considering the entitlement to import products covered by IP rights. Many rights holders aim to command premium prices in high-income territories, yet they also wish to supply lower-income markets that cannot bear such premiums. The difficulty arises when those lower-priced goods reach high-income markets, undercutting authorised channels and eroding profit margins. Unauthorised imports—known as parallel imports because they occur alongside authorised imports—therefore create challenges for rights holders. This focus on market...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Premium channels

PRACTICE NOTES
KPN v Commission (T‑370/17): EU General Court dismisses third‑party challenge to VodafoneZiggo JV approval; no manifest error on premium sports channels market definition or vertical foreclosure.

CASE HUB (NOTE—On 3 August 2016, the European Commission approved, with commitments, the creation of a joint venture between Vodafone Group and Liberty Global in the Netherlands (Case M.7978). KPN lodged an appeal against that decision before the General Court in Case T-370/17). ARCHIVED —this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 23 May 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline commentary and related/relevant cases Case facts Outline Third party action before the General Court seeking the annulment of the European Commission decision to approve, with commitments, the joint venture between Vodafone Group and Liberty Global. Latest development On 23 May 2019, the General Court delivered its judgment, dismissing in its entirety a third party action for annulment of the Commission’s decision of 3 August 2016 to authorise, with commitments, a joint venture between Vodafone Group and Liberty Global in the Netherlands (Case M.7978). In particular, the General Court concluded that the Commission had...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
European Commission clears Telia/Bonnier merger subject to behavioural remedies: preventing vertical foreclosure in TV distribution, streaming and advertising markets in Finland and Sweden

CASE HUB ARCHIVED This archived case hub reflects the position as at the decision dated 12 November 2019 and is no longer updated. See further: timeline, related cases. Case facts Outline European Commission merger review of the planned purchase by Telia Company AB of Bonnier Broadcasting Holding AB (Case M.9076). The deal gives rise to vertical overlaps across television and telecoms markets in Finland and Sweden. Latest developments On 12 November 2019, the Commission approved the merger subject to commitments. Under these commitments: Access will be provided to the combined group’s free-to-air and basic pay TV channels, as well as its premium pay TV sports channels Access will be provided to the combined group’s streaming offerings Access will be provided to the combined group’s TV advertising inventory Confidential information relating to competing TV broadcasters, TV distributors and telecom operators will be safeguarded Parties Telia Company AB (publ) (Telia) is a Swedish telecoms operator and...

Read More Right Arrow