I read the article about the satellite abuse with interest. The following paragraph caught my attention:

"The government was also concerned because the situation was creating an image of Malta as a country where piracy still prevailed."

It does not take extensive detective work to figure out that piracy still prevails here since pirated CDs are sold right next to parliament. This was evident as I walked through Valletta, and it had not changed since I first came to Malta two years ago. So this sounds a little bit hypocritical to me.

I agree, though, that proper encryption is a task of the content provider. If it only takes a simple chipcard to decode the signal, the encryption used is insufficient.

However, over the years we have seen organisations like the RIAA and MPAA use their deep pockets to lobby for questionable legislation in the US, only to protect their weak and pathetic encryption schemes, thus levying the burden of enforcement onto the government, instead of taking the required action themselves.

As for unfair competition to Melita Cable, I have my doubts whether they could face even fair competition. Compared to other countries, you get a rather poor selection of channels for the amount of money you pay for, and monophonic, distorted sound. If I were to invest in a satellite dish, I would get DVD-like quality image and sound on my wide-screen TV, regardless of what the actual cost per month would be.

I think piracy indeed poses a threat to established businesses, but those business should not evade their own responsibilities, both in protecting their products and offering good value for money. I think the government has better things to do than protect businesses from their own incompetence.