With the broadcasting, communications and competition watchdogs insisting it is not within their remit to look into content, allegations that Go and Melita transmitted Living TV and Comedy Central channels illegally have still to be investigated by a competent authority.
A recently-concluded eight-month investigation by the Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority did not delve into whether the two channels had been transmitted illegally. When contacted, a spokesman for the MCCAA said it was not within the authority’s remit to investigate such matters.
Even the Malta Communications Authority had the same reply, insisting that it did not regulate content or copyright matters and, therefore, had “no remit to investigate such cases”.
The Broadcasting Authority too cannot do anything about it. A spokesman said it was not within the regulator’s legal remit to investigate whether a service provider was broadcasting channels legally or not. Their transmission, he explained, was the result of a commercial agreement between the service provider and the specific channel.
Living TV and Comedy Central were dropped from both providers’ channel line-ups last January following a request by the Living TV Group to do so in December.
At the time, a spokesman for Living TV Group said: “We have asked Melita and Go to stop offering our channel illegally to customers in Malta.
“Living is a channel licensed in the UK, exclusively for audiences in the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
“We do not have the rights to broadcast our programming to other territories and would not be able to offer the channel to paying Maltese audiences even if we wanted to.”
Parliamentary Secretary Chris Said subsequently asked the Consumer and Competition Department to investigate. Although a decision was promised within a few days, the inquiry stretched to eight months.
In its decision last week, the MCCA did not deal with the illegal transmission aspect but ordered the two service providers to amend their respective television contract terms and conditions to provide an opt-out in case of a substantial change to their line-up.
The decision lays down that if either provider changes more than 15 per cent of its channel line-up – a minimum of five channels – in any 12-month period, customers must be informed of the changes and given a 30-day notice period during which they can opt out of their contract without being penalised.
The decision does not make any reference to compensation for customers who lost Living and Comedy Central.
Asked to clarify this, a spokesman for the MCCA said that customers would have 30 days, before the changes come into force, to opt out of the contract they would have signed. However, at least five channels would have to be changed.
On this specific case, consumers have no choice but to accept what had happened.
“The situation which arose from the removal of Living TV and Comedy Channel was relatively new. The most important thing is that it has now been addressed and the decisions meted out have to be adhered to by the TV providers whenever changes to their channel line-ups take place. The obligations imposed are in the interests of consumers. Providers have no other option but to adhere to them,” the spokesman said.
The spokesman insisted that the MCCAA was not the competent authority to investigate the alleged illegal transmission of the two channels for so many years even when it was pointed out that consumers had been paying for something that was allegedly being provided illegally.
Sources close to the police said they would only investigate if the injured party had to file a report. This was a matter on which the police could not proceed ex-officio, the sources said.