Broadcaster emedia has filed an urgent application with the competition appeal court, alleging that the SABC and SuperSport, a subsidiary of MultiChoice Group, entered into a “contemptuous” sports sublicensing agreement in contravention of an April ruling by the Competition Tribunal.
In separate statements at the weekend, the SABC and MultiChoice announced that last Saturday’s T20 Cricket World Cup final, as well as two upcoming rugby test matches between the Springboks and Ireland on 6 and 13 July, would be broadcast on SABC platforms.
However, the agreement restricts the SABC from airing the matches on its channels that are carried on eMedia’s platforms – notably free-to-air satellite platform Openview. The SABC is also restricted from streaming the matches on SABC+, its rapidly growing streaming platform. But an April ruling by the Competition Tribunal out such agreements between the two broadcasters for a period of six months (or until the Competition Commission makes a determination over an earlier complaint by eMedia in this matter).
“The relevant facts establish beyond doubt that MultiChoice and SuperSport have deliberately engaged in a course of conduct to breach and subvert the order of the tribunal. This is a very serious state of affairs,” said Antonio Lee, chief financial officer of eMedia, in a founding affidavit to the court seen by TechCentral.
“As far as my attorneys are aware, this is the first time that a dominant firm that is the subject of an interim relief order has acted in contempt of – and intentionally disobeyed – an order of the tribunal,” Lee said.
On 15 April, the Competition Tribunal handed down interim relief in favour of eMedia, saying: “MultiChoice, including its subsidiary SuperSport, and the SABC are interdicted from including restrictions which prohibit the SABC from transmitting or making available sublicensed broadcasts on platforms owned or operated by eMedia (through Openview) in sublicensing agreements concluded between them relating to the broadcasting of sporting events.”
Michael Markovitz, head of the Gibs Media Leadership Think Tank and a former executive board member of the SABC, took to X over the weekend: “I just have 1 question: How come SABC has been restricted from streaming #T20WorldCup2024 final on @SABCPlus or via satellite on its Openview channels in apparent breach of @comptrib interim ruling? Asking for over 3m households who have been prevented from seeing #ProteaFire.”
In his founding affidavit to the appeal court, Lee said that following the Competition Tribunal’s ruling, MultiChoice had “commenced a practice of informing eMedia of the fact that it held free-to-air rights to certain ‘listed sporting events’”. But he described this as a “sham tender process”, alleging that that MultiChoice withheld crucial information such as its intention to split the rights between terrestrial and non-terrestrial broadcasts or that the bidding process was competitive.
eMedia said the SABC and MultiChoice were “deliberate” in disobeying the interim relief order and asked the competition appeal court to grant it relief by either nullifying the contract between the two contravening parties – meaning that the SABC would be stopped from broadcasting the upcoming rugby test matches between the Springboks and Ireland – or by enforcing the April interim relief order and extending the sublicensing rights so that the matches are broadcast on Openview as well.
The battle between the broadcasters began when eMedia filed complaints with the Competition Commission and the Competition Tribunal in October 2023 following MultiChoice’s refusal to allow rugby and cricket games sublicensed to the SABC to be carried on Openview.
In its October filing, eMedia said MultiChoice has a dominant market position and secures exclusive rights, including free-to-air rights, due to its financial strength. It also accused MultiChoice of anticompetitive behaviour in sublicensing agreements, exemplified by the restriction that prevented Openview from carrying the Cricket World Cup and Rugby World Cup games last year. MultiChoice used its market power to compel the SABC to accept this, eMedia said.
MultiChoice opposed eMedia’s interim relief application, arguing that “none of eMedia’s complaints had any basis in competition law or fact”, it said at the time.
