CONFIDENTIAL
television material, even if, as Mr. Hobley
records of the mo stated, the Hong Kong Government files/lead-
ing up to the grant of the licence showed
that this was not then the Government's
intention. They consider that paragraph (b)
of the licence gave Rediffusion the
exclusive right to maintain a service
distributed from their stations by wire of
any television programmes and did not
limite the service to their own originated
programmes or to one programme; and they
also consider that it would be difficult to
justify taking away from Rediffusion the
right to distribute by wire broadcast
television programmes (if that was what the
proposed copyright legislation would do) on
the ground only of the intention of the
Government in 1957.
5.
But, in my Legal Advisers' view, the
licence was necessarily subject to the law of Hong Kong, and The fact that Rediffusion
(Hong Kong) Ltd. held an exclusive right to relay television broadcasts would not, ffor
the sole reason that the effect of the
proposed copyright legislation would be
that Rediffusion would have to obtain a
licence from the broadcasting company
concerned before they could exercise their
exclusive right to relay a broadcast and
that the company might not grant it
constitute a legal objection to the proposed
copyright legislation. It is considered
that Rediffusion (Hong Kong) Ltd. could
CONFIDENTIAL
/have
NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN