IECL Seminar Series
Prof. Stephen Weatherill
Re-Shaping Football in Europe (and beyond): From litigation to legislation
Governing bodies in sport typically enjoy a high level of autonomy from legal regulation. Good thing or a bad thing? The obligation to comply with EU internal market law, asserted periodically in litigation which reaches the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, is one of the few demonstrated means to generate change in governance practice. Good thing or a bad thing? Question - has the time come to subject governing bodies in sport to a more systematic legislative regime introduced by the EU, designed to improve governance in sport ... Good thing or a bad thing?
Sarath Ninan Mathew
Do Unauthorised E-sports Broadcasts Infringe EU Copyright Law
E-Sports is the competitive playing of videogames in league based tournaments. The tournaments are broadcast over the internet to millions of ardent fans. For 2025, the global industry is estimated to have an annual viewership of 640.8 million and revenues of $1.87 Billion (Statistia).
Videogames, as opposed to normal sports games, are copyright protected works. Therefore, the broadcast of E-Sports inherently includes dealing with copyright protected works. Presently, most major E-Sports tournaments are organised either by the videogame publisher themselves or by third parties who obtain authorisation form the publisher. However, smaller tournaments are often organised without publishers’ knowledge or consent. Qualitative interviews, I undertook for my DPhil, suggest that many top E-Sports broadcast producers are worried that their careers could be immediately terminated if videogame companies decide to pull the plug on the industry.
This presentation seeks to address how harmonised EU copyright law deals with that worry. I consider whether unauthorised E-Sports broadcasts violate EU copyright laws. I look at violations of reproduction right and communication to public right; and consider the application of temporary copying, pastiche, and quotation exceptions.
My conclusions are as follows. The broadcasts violate the videogame’s reproduction right. The broadcasts do not violate the videogame’s communication to public right. Most of the temporary copies produced as part of the technical process in playing and viewing E-Sports broadcasts are exempt under Article 5(1). However, archived copies retained by tournament hosts for making available to the public are not exempt under Article 5(1). It is within the discretion allotted to member states for them to choose whether to exempt or penalise E-Sports broadcasts under the quotation exception in Article 5(3)(d). We do not have enough case law yet from the CJEU to see whether E-Sports broadcasts can fall under the pastiche exception in Article 5(3)(k).