New Website

[SJP 0]

I have a new website for all Norwich City Fans have a look at it at www.ncfc.co.nr or www.freewebs.com/sp11

(im only 14 but have a look)

[Web Team - Celia Sutton 0]

Hi there - You clearly have a great talent - but I think you need to have a think about what you are doing - and what it might cost your parents.
Like it or not, the Premier League is a tightly controlled business. To publish the fixtures for Norwich on the pinkun site costs us nearly £400 - and to publish them without a licence could land you in trouble. I''m not trying to establish a monopoly for the pinkun - this is simply the way it is. We pay for them, you, I suspect, don''t.
And this might be a useful warning for other web editors, who do some great Norwich sites.
There will be a very tight picture licence for live pix, too - I haven''t seen the details, but apparently people do run in to trouble if they breach it. We will be signing up to a deal which allows us to use pix on websites attached to the newspapers - but I gather that if they are used anywhere else, there could be bother.
You have to remember - we''re premier league now. . .
Sorry to be boring, but that''s the way it is . .

Celia

[John Boubepo 0]

Nice one kid!! well laid out and runs twice the speed of the Pinkun site, you need to get rid of those star things from the mouse arrow and add a message board.

Top site - full marks!!

[Canary Boy 0]

Great little site but as Celia says, please watch the content. Keep up the good work.

[aaaaa aaaaa 0]

So just for saying what your teams fixtures are you have to pay 400 quid?, you must be having a laugh. It''s public information and also factual, why should you pay 400 quid?, please show me the law that states so.
Also if Ncfc were to crack down on other sites that promote the club, and aren''t money making it would be an utter disgrace.
The only comment i agree with you is that your not allowed to take pictures that other people have taken, or film live games.

Sorry but i find it very annoying and hard to believe you.

[Cantley 0]

Nice site - but why does it seem to be underwater?

[Cantley 0]

Celia - are you really saying the Premier League will go after a 14 year old who reproduces a club''s fixtures on his home made website? Are there previous examples of such bullying?

[AJ 1,218]

Although the site is "website" guided, you havnt done a bad job.
Coding a website from html takes aaaaaaaagggggggggggeeeeesssssssss, as i know from experiance, just keep it up to date and ill be a regular looker!

[Web Team - Celia Sutton 0]

"Are you really saying the Premier League will go after a 14 year old who reproduces a club''s fixtures on his home made website"

No idea - but if you are getting into designing websites, and promoting them, you ought at least to be aware of things like this, then you can make an informed decision on what to do.

I think the fact that they can charge is to do with the copyright - it takes "skill" or at least effort to draw up the fixture list, so it can be regarded as copyright - but I''m no expert.

Celia

[SJP 0]

Thank You

If any one has any suggestions for my website please post them.
And tell all your friends about it I want that counter to go up

Many Thanks

SJP

[aaaaa aaaaa 0]

If your no expert why make comments assuming that when you don''t know?
I fail to see how public information such as the fixture lists wouldn''t be allowed on a fans webby.

I doubt if ncfc would crack down aswell, as the other sites promote ncfc well and give them a good image. They do ncfc a favour.
It''s the fans that make the club not the people in charge, so i find it hard on the fact that they could prosecute fans of their own club.

[Pedro Pig 0]

The sad state that the F.A. has allowed football to become. Bloated with too much money,
a national team of posing primadonnas, an F.A. cup competion that has become farce, a once fantastic 5 division setup that now acknowledges noone apart from the ''big'' few, and the sad possibility that a game 14 yr old kids parents could be prosecuted for their offsprings enthusiasum for their club and the net.
Greed ruins,

[Pete Raven 276]

Yes there are. A couple of seasons ago someone ran a very successful prediction website which obviously had to have fixtures of most games for it to work. The Football league found out and, because he had fixture lists for more than one team, he was asked to pay over £20,000 or close the website. As you can imagine, that website no longer exists.

Big Brother is watching everyone...

[aaaaa aaaaa 0]

I shall be contacting Ncfc in regards to what the pinkun people have said.

If it''s true i will be absolutely amazed that a 14yr old making a hobby website isn''t even allowed to publish ncfc fixtures.
If this is the case i think we should take some action, and contact the fa about this absolute stupidity.

[Web Team - Celia Sutton 0]

Don''t blame Norwich City - it ''s the Premier League who hold the copyright.

This isn''t something new - there has been a licence for the Div 1 fixtures for as long as I can remember (which these days isn''t very long . . .) The difference is that the Premier League are reported to be more likely to ask someone to take fixtures down if they don''t have a licence. Whether anyone would worry about a 14-year-old with a hobby site is another matter.

We are waiting to see what the photographic licence will mean for the pinkun website - it is all still being discussed.

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,424]

Well Done Sam...this is great. Celia has a good point but this is youthfull enterprise at its best. If the Premier League (Barclays, Barclaycard, Barclay''s High Interest Deposit Account With Free Home Insurance, or whatever it is called this year) come after you we''ll sort them out

P.S. I was scoring freekicks for City before you were born!!!!

[Kent Canary 0]

Sorry for the long post but I hope to have clarified a few things for people. Can I also say good work Sam, nice site.

Ive done some research into the copyright issue and this site http://www.resyk.com/weblog/archives/000031.html explains the frustrations of a Coventry fan who did a similar thing.

I agree though that the data is in the public arena and is factual, however that doesnt appear to stop it being copyright material. The gist of it is that

Quote:

''Fixture Lists
Fixture Lists are owned and licensed by the League. Official Club sites can obviously show fixtures for themselves (but not other clubs) for free - everyone else must apply for and pay to license the data from the League. If you are the officially recognised Fanzine website, and can get the Club to write a letter to that effect - the cost to license Fixtures is just 1 Uk Pound per Season. Each Club can only nominate a single site as such. For whatever reason, virtually no Premiership or First Division Clubs have chosen to nominate an Official Fansite.


If not, the cost is 258 UK Pounds per season - for each team whos fixtures you wish to show. To show the entire 1st Division fixtures it would therefore cost 24 x 258 = 6,192 pounds plus VAT. There are discounts available if you do buy all of them but it is still going to cost you a small fortune.''

However it goes onto say:

Quote:

''The League Table
The League Table itself is considered public domain and can be shown. There may be issues if you wished to show a live updating table (as Sky do on the last day of the season), as this may be considered as ''live data'' and is therefore the property of Sky TV.


A static Table, that is updated after 5.00pm each Saturday is fine.

Match Results are considered to be public domain and can be shown. As with the League Table, you cannot show Live Goal Flashes, as this is ''live data'' and owned by Sky TV.''

For me, that seems to contradict itself when it says that the table is in the public domain but the fixtures arent. Football fixtures arent a secret, as far as I am aware!

In realation to photographs, it states:

Quote:

''All action photography is the property of the League. Only approved websites are allowed to apply for permission to use action shots, and approved sites are those that have agreements in place with the League (such as the Newspaper sites who source through PA News or Ananova in Leeds). Fansites are not allowed to show any action shots.''

Which explains why Archant are having to piggyback off The Press Association etc to get rights to show pictures.

The trick is, is that the Fa or whoever has copyrighted the initial fixtures, and therefore own the rights, even though the information is in the public domain. The relevant legislation is:

The statutory definition of an "infringing copy" of a copyright work is contained in Section 27(2) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. This provides that "an article is an infringing copy if its making constituted an infringement of the copyright in the work in question".

Quote:

''4.2 Offences: Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988


Under Section 107(1) a person commits an offence who, without the licence of the copy­right owner -


(a) makes for sale or hire, or
(b) imports into the United Kingdom otherwise that for his private and domestic use, or
(c) possesses in the course of a business with a view to committing any act infringing the copyright, or
(d) in the course of a business -
(i) sells or lets for hire, or
(ii) offers or exposes for sale or hire, or
(ill) exhibits in public, or
(iv) distributes, or
(e) distributes otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the

[aaaaa aaaaa 0]

Thanks for that, still think it''s an absolute disgrace.

[Kent Canary 0]

No problem, and i agree.

[Bryan Gunn 0]

well researched Kent. How come the Pinkun are paying £400 if the cost is £258?

[Pete Raven 276]

Because the cost is more than £258.

[Kent Canary 0]

Thanks Bryan. I think the price the Coventry fan quoted must be a little out of date, hence the increase in recent years. As if there wasnt enough corporate money making going on already!

[sheded 0]

I just can`t see how publishing a fixture list that is , after all , in the public domain , be regarded as infringing a copyright ......... I believe that the 14 year olds site is nonprofit making ? ,and the same applies to the Pink`un ? .......... so to publish the fixture list for non commercial use should be exempt from having to pay any fees ! ........... its just the FA being its usual greedy self .......... if the fixture list is printed out in the national newspapers , and is then republished by a non profit making concern I just can`t see any case brought about by the FA ever succeeding in court !

[morty 0]

I tell you what SJP, thats a pretty good site, keep up the good work yella fella!!

[SJP 0]

I have now deleted the Fixtures list from my website so I hope the F.A are happy but I have kept the site up to date and got rid of the bubbles and added a Guestbook so feel free to add any comments for improvment to it. ON THE BALL CITY

[Tilt 12]

You might as well keep the fixtures up until you get a warning from them which, I suspect, is not going to happen. To prosecute a 14 year old who clearly loves his club and the sport in general would be incredibly bad public relations and would no doubt have the media descending at full pace. Besides there are hundreds of fan''s websites with fixtures up. I did a search and loads in a few minutes. I suspect they''re only really after those who make money off the fixtures.