KEY POINTS:
TV3 taking Sky to court over use of Rugby World Cup comes just days after a 24-hour suspension of coverage by Reuters, Agence France-Presse, Associated Press and Getty Images.
The media agencies said they were concerned about internet picture rights, television access and accreditation terms and had been frustrated after failing to reach an agreement with the event's organisers - the International Rugby Board (IRB).
Initially the IRB had agreed that one photo per second could be transmitted by the news-wires during games, with a maximum of 6000 should there be extra time.
That deal was roughly in line with agreements about coverage of the Olympic Games and the soccer World Cup.
At the last minute, however, the IRB cut this down to just 40 photos per half and five for each half of extra time.
At the heart of the matter was the interpretation of the term "fair use".
Within the media industry, this is the practice which allows television networks who did not buy official rights to the live broadcast of an event to carry limited coverage on their news bulletins - provided they agree to only screen a small portion and present it as a news item.
The crunch came when the IRB announced it would not accept the fair use principle in relation to coverage of the world cup on the internet.
This edict applied not only to match footage but also to press conferences after the games and during the week, training sessions and other "World Cup-related events".
In other words, if media organisations wanted the internet "rights", they would have to pay the IRB for them.
Media agencies cried foul. Such measures, they argued, were a threat to the freedom of the press.
Internet coverage of the Rugby World Cup was supplementary to print or television coverage for many media organisations and should therefore be allowed as part of normal news coverage, they said.
The IRB said the move was a just and fair one to make sure the expensive television rights secured by broadcasters were not undermined.
- REUTERS, NZ HERALD STAFF
