TNAG-0265-FCO40-301-Legislation-for-copyright-in-Hong-Kong-1970 — Page 125

CONFIDENTIAL

was then said, "they have not come to an agreement

(and apparently refuse even to discuss the matter)."

This describes the situation almost two years ago,

since when it appears to me that two things have

happened:

3.

(a) TVB now has two years or more of experience

behind it and has become a very healthy

youngster, competing successfully with RTV.

(b) There have been changes, at least in the

management of RTV, which might result in

the two parties speaking now.

As regards (a), I have been wondering on what basis

the Hong Kong Government saw the "public interest".

Was it that having decided that there ought to be

competition and thus that a second service had to be

started, it was essential that Government should see

that TVB was able to get off the ground? Nowhere in

the papers that I have read is the Government attitude

described except in pretty general terms, though there

appear emotive phrases like "pirating TVB's output and

(from the FCO!) "clipping Rediffusion's wings".

What

I would like to know is whether the fact that TVB has

made its own way and is now doing very well, makes no

longer necessary the legislation which was undoubtedly aimed at RTV.? Would it in fact be possible to get the

two sides together now to sort out the facts for them-

selves, in which case the most contentious part of the

legislation might be unnecessary? An important factor

in this is whether Mr Oldridge's successor may be more

amenable to reason than was Mr Oldridge himself.

stile

is presumably in Mr H. W. Lee's hands.

TVB

CONFIDENTIAL

14.

NOTHING TO BE WRITTEN IN THIS MARGIN