services and exist only to facilitate the reception of those services in people's homes. As noted in paragraph 3 of our departmental letter of 22 May, these would appear to be the reasons why the broadcasting services in this country sought no copyright protection vis-a-vis wired rediffusion services.
10.
modified
Furthermore the terms of Rediffusion's licence, as they are construed by our legal advisers, give the Company the exclusive right to maintain a wired rediffusion service;/< Unless this exclusive right is extinguished, The Company will be able to the Company will be able to maintain a
This monopoly of all such services, Their right' extends to all community antenna and aerial distribution systems, and prevents Television Broadcasts Limited and members of the public from setting up any communal aerials for the
broadcout better reception of signals in e.g., large multi-story residential buildings. This is contrary to the public interest in that it i nhibit the development of an important new public service.
11.
To sum up.
this
With the advent of broadcast
television in Hong Kong and in a situation (not paralleled in the U.K.) where the wired rediffusion television service can compete as an originator of programmes with the broadcast television service, there is a strong case in the public interest for affording copyright protection to broadcast television and/ extending to the public the right to establish
relay from certain types of communal aerial for the
direct and better reception of broadcast
television programmes.
This is the case,
as seen here, for "clipping Rediffusion's wings" and on which it would be necessary to rely when defending it in public. It would be appreciated if you would confirm that, as set out in paragraphs, 9-10 above, it is a
and accurate f
A
comprehensive statement of the arguments
Any amendments or expansion you can suggest would be helpful.
12.
To turn now to the question of a possible claim by Rediffusion of inequitable
treatment. On the extension of copyright
/protection.
this right extends to wired distribution sopotamos froms community anternan and
aerials
If the Company ref
unwilling to karry out this development or refosis from doing so it would of contrary to the public interent that the it should be able to
bu a
there wayze for
strong confe for
and state whether it
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN
is a fact that Rediffusion (Hong Kay) Itd will not adequally develop relay services
from commutal aerials.