Feds Indict Former Online Gambling Billionaire Calvin Ayre

Nathan Vardi, Forbes Staff

Federal prosecutors in Baltimore on Tuesday unsealed an indictment
against Calvin Ayre, the former Canadian billionaire who founded
Bodog, one of the world's biggest online gambling firms. Ayre is
accused of operating an illegal gambling business involving sports
betting and conspiring to commit money laundering.

For years Ayre taunted and dodged U.S. law enforcement, specializing
in offering online sports betting and casino games to U.S. gamblers.
He was the subject of a 2006 Forbes cover story titled Catch Me If You
Can, in which he said "we run a business that can't actually be
described as gambling in each country we operate in. But when you add
it together, it's Internet gambling."

The son of grain and pig farmers in Saskatchewan, Ayre, 50, set up his
company in Costa Rica and handled billions of dollars in online
wagers. He appeared on People magazine's Hottest Bachelor List and
tried to market himself as a kind of Hugh Hefner of online gambling.

Rod Rosenstein, the U.S. Attorney in Baltimore, indicted Ayre and
three other Canadian men, James Philip, David Ferguson and Derrick
Maloney. None of the men are in custody and they are believed to be in
Canada. The company, Bodog Entertainment Group, is also under
indictment and its domain name has been seized by federal prosecutors.

According to the six-page indictment filed by Rosenstein, Ayre worked
with Philip, Ferguson and Maloney to supervise an illegal gambling
business from June 2005 to January 2012 in violation of Maryland law.
The indictment focuses on the movement of funds from accounts outside
the U.S., in Switzerland, England, Malta, and Canada, and the hiring
of media resellers and advertisers to promote Internet gambling.

"Sports betting is illegal in Maryland, and federal law prohibits
bookmakers from flouting that law simply because they are located
outside the country," Rosenstein said in a statement. "Many of the
harms that underlie gambling prohibitions are exacerbated when the
enterprises operate over the Internet without regulation."

The indictment is the latest move by the Department of Justice to
crack down on Internet gambling. In April 2011, federal prosecutors in
Manhattan shut down the U.S. operations of the world's biggest online
poker companies, PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker, indicting their
founders for operating illegal gambling businesses. Federal
prosecutors in Baltimore, led by Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Kay,
have also been conducting several online gambling investigations,
building up to the indictment of Ayre.

Federal prosecutors allege that Ayre conspired to direct at least $100
million in sports gambling winnings by wire and by check to gamblers,
working with payment processors located both in the U.S. and
elsewhere, such as JBL Services, which processed at least $43 million,
and ZipPayments, which processed at least $57 million. In addition,
prosecutors claim that Ayre and Bodog caused an unnamed media broker
to launch a $42 million advertising campaign between 2005 and 2008 to
attract gamblers in the United States to the Bodog.com website.

For his part, Ayre has claimed that he has retired and transferred the
Bodog brand to the Morris Mohawk Gaming Group, which is located on the
Kahnawake territory near Montreal. Bodog itself has changed its
branding in the U.S. to Bovada.

In a defiant statement made to his web site, Ayre said: "These
documents were filed with Forbes magazine before they were filed
anywhere else and were drafted with the consumption of the media as a
primary objective. We will all look at this and discuss the future
with our advisors, but it will not stop my many business interests
globally that are unrelated to anything in the U.S. and it will not
stop my many charity projects through my foundation."

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Trademark dispute looming over who discovered Jeremy Lin

Benjamin Kang Lim

BEIJING (Reuters) - The New York Knicks may have given Jeremy Lin his
break in the NBA, but a sports ball maker in eastern China saw
potential in the Harvard-educated Chinese-American more than a year
and a half ago -- and quietly registered his trademark for $700.

The issue is the latest in a series of China trademark troubles for
Western sports stars and companies that have ensnared American icons
ranging from basketball star Michael Jordan to Apple's iPad in recent
disputes.

Registering is cheap and relatively easy, and since Chinese law favors
those who register trademarks first, squabbles over them can prove
thorny to unravel, legal experts said.

Lin, 23, the son of Taiwanese immigrants who had been cut by two
National Basketball Association teams before getting his chance with
the Knicks, rocketed from obscurity to worldwide celebrity this
season, coming off the bench to spark a team that had been forced to
play without its top players.

But before Lin got hot, in July 2010, Wuxi Risheng Sports Utility Co,
which makes about one million basketballs, volleyballs and soccer
balls a year, registered his name as a trademark.

The company applied to trademark a variation of Lin's name, "Lin
Shuhao (in Chinese characters) Jeremy S.H.L. (initials of Lin's
Chinese name)," according to the website of the trademark office of
China's State Administration of Industry and Commerce.

The application was approved in August, with the company paying just
4,460 yuan ($710) for the rights and creating a headache for Lin and
his corporate partner Nike, with which he signed a three-year contract
in 2010.

Nike and Lin could not be reached for immediate comment.

China's relatively relaxed trademark policies could prove costly for
Lin, whose $800,000 salary this season is modest by NBA standards.
Forbes SportsMoney said on its online edition that he is worth $15
million.

"In China, first-to-register gets the rights. You may have an idea,
and you can register its trademark without ever using it. Unlike in
the U.S., where one must first show actual use or an intention to use
before one can apply for a trademark," Horace Lam, Beijing-based
intellectual property partner of global law firm Jones Day, said in an
interview.

"This trademark will be difficult to take from Risheng because Risheng
applied for these trademarks ... for use in the same products that
Nike sells: a wide array of athletic apparel and sports equipment.

"Nike and Jeremy Lin could buy the trademark from Risheng, which could
potentially cost millions of RMB," Lam said.

Nike Inc started selling Jeremy Lin-themed shoes on its website and
launched its "Linsanity" line of clothes at Foot Locker Inc stores
this month, cashing in on the point guard's fame.

Lin himself is applying for a trademark in the United States to the
term "Linsanity," widely used to describe his meteoric rise, according
to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

EYE FOR TALENT

Risheng's legal representative, Yu Minjie, said Lin caught her eye
when she saw him playing on Chinese television in 2010.

"I'm a Harvard fan ... I like him very much. He gave me a lot of
surprises and inspiration," Yu told Reuters.

Risheng will start selling basketballs under the "Lin Shuhao Jeremy
S.H.L." trademark across China in March.

"Several big companies looked me up to cooperate or buy (the
trademark). I'm willing to sell, but there is no ideal offer now," she
added.

Lin's is the latest in a series of China-related trademark disputes
that have arisen. Last week, basketball legend Michael Jordan filed a
lawsuit in China against Qiaodan Sports Co, accusing the firm of
unauthorized use of his Chinese name and jersey number.

Jordan is known as "Qiaodan" in China, where basketball is one of the
most popular sports with its own superstar, Yao Ming.

In another high-profile case, a unit of Proview International Holdings
has sought to stop Apple Inc from using the iPad name in China, filing
a lawsuit in California.

Last week, a Shanghai court threw out Proview's request to halt iPad
sales in the city. But the outcome hinges on a high court in the
southern province of Guangdong, which earlier ruled in Proview's
favor.

China's trademark system is a minefield of murky rules and
opportunistic squatters that even the world's biggest companies and
their highly-paid lawyers find hard to navigate.

"Trademark hijacking issues are happening every day in China," Lam,
the lawyer, said. "Looking from a pure legal issue, the system allows
this to happen."

"This is a big problem for companies and people trying to protect
their IP in China when they are not familiar with the Chinese system."
($1 = 6.2978 Chinese yuan)

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Fears sports fans will be 'worse off' after copyright changes

Knee-jerk changes to copyright law to appease the major sporting codes
could prevent people from recording live sports and inhibit innovation
in online services, copyright experts say.
The Federal Government has been paving the way for changes to
copyright law after heavy lobbying of the Prime Minister and senior
ministers by the sporting codes. It follows a recent court ruling that
allows Optus to broadcast delayed video of matches to its mobile phone
network.
But copyright experts and Optus have warned the government that
changing copyright laws to suit one interest group could have
disastrous consequences for consumers and the industry.
The landmark Federal Court ruling found that Optus' TV Now service was
simply a form of free-to-air consumer time-shifting that is already
permitted in copyright law. Optus is now free to continue transmitting
TV footage of live football matches on delays of one to two minutes to
Apple mobile devices.
The sporting codes - including the AFL, Cricket Australia, the NRL and
Tennis Australia - want "simple" changes to the Copyright Act to allow
them to continue to sell exclusive rights to their digital content to
broadcasters.
The AFL and Telstra are appealing the Federal Court ruling arguing
that Optus recording shows on behalf of customers is very different to
a consumer recording a show on their home PVR.

Think of the children: govt
But the government appears to already be siding with the sporting
codes, with Sports Minister Mark Arbib on the weekend saying that
children's sport funding depended on the changes to copyright law.
Describing the court ruling as a "big hit for sport", Arbib told Sky
News' Australian Agenda that if the case stands then "their revenues
will take a big hit".
"And as a Sports Minister the reason I am concerned about that is,
when it plays itself out, that the big losers will be those kids out
on the sporting playing fields," he said.
Kimberlee Weatherall, an associate professor in Sydney University's
Faculty of Law, wrote a recent piece for Crikey warning of the risks
of changing the law.
She said if changes were made to the Copyright Act excluding online
services from time-shifting exceptions, it could have "disastrous"
consequences for online innovation in Australia and, depending on the
specific changes adopted, could mean "every cloud operator would need
copyright licenses for any copyright material on their servers".

Football fans left 'worse off'
Weatherall said a second possible change could be to exclude live
sport from the time shifting provisions of the law, which would mean
consumers would infringe copyright law if they recorded live sport at
home.
She said certain changes to the law would be worse than others but
"any change to the time-shifting exception leaves football fans worse
off," she said.
Asked for comment on Arbib's remarks, Weatherall said "of course
they're paving the way for copyright changes".
David Vaile, executive director of the UNSW Cyberspace Law and Policy
Centre, said the government's response to this issue and its meetings
with copyright holders over possible anti-piracy laws showed it was
more concerned with helping corporate interests prop up their aging
business models than protecting users.
"Attempts to ban online systems for time-shifting could easily end up
extending more liability to users," he said.
Peter Black, a senior lecturer in law at the Queensland University of
Technology, said it was "very concerning" that the federal government
was considering changes to copyright laws following the Optus
decision.
"Not only would any amendments before all avenues of appeal have been
exhausted be premature but there is a very real possibly that any
rushed, reactionary amendments could have unintended consequences on
the operation of the Copyright Act, as well as sending the wrong
message to innovators with the technology sector in Australia," he
said.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

CCI understood to have found anti-trust law violations by BCCI

NEW DELHI: Competition watchdog CCI is understood to have found
anti-trust law violations in the way BCCI handed out media rights to
World Sports Group and MSM for its cash-rich India Premier League
(IPL) event.

After carrying out a probe that spanned about eight months, the
Director General (investigations) of the Competition Commission of
India (CCI) concluded that BCCI, the game's governing body in India,
had abused its dominant market position by allowing "single bidding"
of media and television rights for IPL matches.

"The DG has found that there is a contravention of section 4 and 4
(2)(e) in BCCI's handing out of contracts to the two media groups," a
source said.

Section 4(2)(e) in the Competition Act, 2002 pertains to violation
when a party uses its dominant position in one relevant market to
enter into, or protect, other relevant market.

The DG pointed out that the BCCI has used it dominant position in the
national cricket arena to influence the bidding procedure in the IPL,
one of its own Twenty20 leagues.

The investigation by the CCI was launched after preliminary enquiry
showed prima facie evidence of lack of transparency and violation of
the provisions of the Competition Act. The matter was referred to the
CCI by the Ministry of Sports and Youth Affairs last year.

The Commission had also studied documents shared by the Income Tax Department.

Last year, the cricket board had scrapped all its IPL media rights
agreements with Mauritius-based World Sport Group, claiming that MSM
Satellite (Singapore) Pvt Ltd was the rightful owner of all media
rights relating to the Twenty20 event.

The BCCI has invalidated all its deals with WSG following revelations
that the latter received $80 million (Rs 425 crore) as "facilitation
fee" from MSM for getting back the Indian sub-continent media rights
of IPL in March 2009.

The deals with WSG were scrapped by BCCI after MSM agreed to pay it Rs
300 crore plus the remaining amount of Rs 125 crore, which it has
already paid to WSG, after initiating legal action against the
Mauritius firm.

A legal case in this regard is at present pending with the Bombay High Court.

The CCI, which became fully functional in May 2009, is empowered by an
Act of Parliament to take up cases relating to violation of section 3
and 4 of the Competition Act. Sections 3 and 4 pertains to
anti-competitive agreement and abuse of dominant market position,
respectively.

For more information on these matters, please call our offices at 305 548 5020.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Sports bosses want changes to copyright laws

MARK COLVIN: A consumer's group is warning the Federal Government
against letting sports industry leaders rush them into changes to
copyright laws.

The heads of the NRL, the AFL and Tennis and Cricket Australia have
been urging more protection for broadcast rights after a court ruling
opened the way for third parties to transmit the matches without
paying.

The sports bosses are confident that they can get the government to
change the laws quickly.

But, as Simon Lauder reports, there are concerns that any changes may
not be good for consumers.

SIMON LAUDER: Telstra paid $153 million for the right to stream AFL
matches to mobile phones.

As it puts its broadcast rights up for sale, the NRL is hoping its
games will be worth a similar sum of cash.

But now the sports codes have to find a way to stop someone else
putting the matches on mobile devices for free.

The Prime Minister Julia Gillard says she's considering their request
to change the Copyright Act.

JULIA GILLARD: We're all concerned about what this can mean for our
great sporting codes and it was an unexpected development.

SIMON LAUDER: Kim Heitman from the internet users group Electronic
Frontiers Australia is not impressed with the way the major sporting
codes are handling the situation.

KIM HEITMAN: Well, there's two ways in a market economy that someone
who's an incumbent can survive. One is to compete and the other is to
get their mates into government to change the law.

SIMON LAUDER: The sports companies are set to appeal against the
Federal Court's ruling that it's perfectly legal for Optus customers
to record TV online and then play it back on their mobile device
minutes later.

But the head of the Coalition of Major Professional and Participation
Sports, Malcolm Speed, says commercial negotiations can't wait.

MALCOLM SPEED: That might end up in the High Court, it might take a
year or two years but what we have this year is a number of sports
seeking to sell their rights, so sports like NRL and cricket, Football
Federation Australia, they're all selling rights this year and what
they seek is some certainty.

SIMON LAUDER: Malcolm Speed led a delegation which included the chief
executives of the NRL, the AFL and Tennis and Cricket Australia.
Yesterday they met with the Federal Sports Minister, the
Communications Minister, the Attorney General and the Prime Minister.

The CEO of the NRL, David Gallop, says he's confident the Copyright
Act will be amended soon.

DAVID GALLOP: I would be hopeful we can get it done in a matter of weeks.

SIMON LAUDER: Optus hailed its court win last week as a victory for
consumer's rights.

The head of the AFL Andrew Demetriou says that's rubbish.

ANDREW DEMETRIOU: This is a furphy. This is a nonsense that Optus are
peddling, that says that this is a win for the consumer is complete
garbage.

SIMON LAUDER: Mr Demetriou told ABC radio in Melbourne last week's
Federal Court decision could put a lot of sports in jeopardy.

ANDREW DEMETRIOU: It is unacceptable for someone to come along like
Optus and then through their own technology copy off our free to air
broadcast as telecasts without making sure that they contribute to the
content providers which are the AFL.

SIMON LAUDER: No-one from Optus was available to speak to The World
Today but the company has provided a written statement. It says in
2006, the law was amended to allow for greater flexibility in the
recording and consumption of content. It says Optus will continue to
advocate and defend this right for its customers.

The Secretary of Electronic Frontiers Australia, Kim Heitman, says the
rush to change the law may shift rights from consumers to private
companies.

KIM HEITMAN: This is a recognised part of the Copyright Act, which
allows consumers to time-shift recordings, it's a very important fair
usage right and I'd be very disturbed if it was removed because it's
the same right which allows people to use their digital video
recorders on their TV sets.

SIMON LAUDER: The Director of campaigns at Choice, Christopher Zinn,
is urging the Federal Government to consult the public not just the
heavyweights of the sports world.

CHRISTOPHER ZINN: We would be concerned as to what are the unexpected
consequences of that.

SIMON LAUDER: The Communications Minister Stephen Conroy says it's not
a simple matter.

STEPHEN CONROY: We'll be going through a process to ensure that if any
change is to be made that we would consider any adverse consequences
but at this stage we are just getting the legal advice fully explained
to us and we're happy to consider if a solution is available.

MARK COLVIN: The Federal Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy,
ending Simon Lauder's report.

For more information in regards to these matters, please call our
office at 305 548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Wada fears for London 2012 as drug cheats are slipping through the net

By Owen Gibson

The director general of the Wada, David Howman, says that 36 positive
cases of EPO out of 258,000 in 2010 is 'very disappointing'.
Photograph: Jean-Christophe Bott/EPA.

Less than six months before London 2012, the World Anti-Doping Agency
fears that fewer than one in five drug cheats is being caught and
urged against complacency from governments and sporting bodies in
tackling the problem.

David Howman, the Wada director general, said that despite ever more
sophisticated testing, a major research project undertaken by the
global body had indicated more than one in 10 athletes were tempted to
cheat but only between 1% and 2% were caught.

"We think the annual statistics show that maybe between 1 and 2% of
athletes who are tested are cheating. By conducting these research
projects, the results of which will be made known later this year, we
think those numbers are more into double digits," said Howman.

"That's a concern. If more than 10% of the athletes in the world are
being tempted to take a shortcut via taking prohibited substances then
we've got an issue that is not being confronted as well as it should
be."

London 2012 organisers recently unveiled the most comprehensive
testing programme in the history of the Games and warned that cheats
would almost certainly be caught.

But Wada said that while athletes who cheated in major events were
likely to be caught, outside of competition too many tests were being
conducted "selectively" with more expensive blood tests for EPO and
human growth hormone not being carried out often enough.

"You can't test for human growth hormone unless you get a blood
sample. In 2010, of the 258,000 samples collected there were 36
positive tests for EPO," said Howman. "EPO is probably one of the
preferred substances of those athletes taking shortcuts and to have
only 36 positives in one year is very disappointing."

It is feared that of the 258,000 tests conducted, as few as 2% of them
include the blood tests that can catch the use of human growth
hormone.

The scale of the problem is being masked by the fact that in many
cases the contracts between anti-doping organisations (ADOs) and
laboratories are confidential. Too many were testing for a "selected
menu" of drugs rather than the "full menu", said Howman.

"We need ADOs to use the full menu because at the moment there is not
as much testing for some substances as we need," he said.

Wada welcomed this week's court of arbitration for sport judgment in
the Alberto Contador case, in which the Spanish cyclist was banned for
two years and stripped of his 2010 Tour de France title. The decision
backed Wada's "strict liability" stance.

The Wada president, John Fahey, said: "I think it indicates clearly
the robust nature of our code following a comprehensive review of
significant evidence. Our code was upheld in strong terms.

"There is a strong message in that – the onus is on athletes to ensure
that they don't take substances that can lead to an outcome such as
the one we've seen." He added: "Every time a cheat is caught it is a
good day for sport."

But Howman and Fahey, also warned that "anti-doping fatigue" could
impact on the battle to catch "sophisticated" dopers, particularly as
governments and policy makers considered the new scourge of illegal
betting and related corruption.

"In times of economic hardship other issues start to occupy the ground
we try to keep for anti-doping. Anti-doping fatigue can set in," said
Fahey. "We need governments to accept anti-doping is not just an issue
for sport, it is an issue for society. We need champions in government
and sport to stand up for clean competition."

Wada is increasingly working with Interpol, law enforcement and
customs agencies to attempt to infiltrate those who traffic and supply
prohibited substances.

Howman appealed to the sports industry to make a direct contribution
to Wada's £17.8m budget, funded equally by the International Olympic
Committee and national governments but recently frozen in light of the
global economic downturn.

"We are harsh critics of our standards and conscious of the costs
involved in testing. Wada has always been equally part-funded by the
IOC and governments and maybe the time has come for Wada to look
elsewhere for contributions," he said. "The global sports industry is
not short of money – $500bn (£315bn) per annum. Perhaps that global
sports industry should consider making a direct financial
contribution."

Fahey said it was looking into establishing a foundation where high
earning sports stars could contribute to Wada's budget.

In March, the Cas will rule on whether Wada was right to rule the
British Olympic Association non-compliant with its anti-doping code
over its bylaw that bans drug cheats for life. Fahey said Wada had
"conscientiously and rightfully" declined to comment on the facts of
the case until after it had been heard and said it was a "matter of
regret" that the BOA chairman, Lord Moynihan, continued to do so.

The issue has sparked a huge row between the two bodies, with Fahey
again criticising Moynihan's "misinformed and inaccurate tirade"
against his organisation.

Wada also urged US federal prosecutors to hand over evidence collected
during a long-running probe into the American cyclist Lance Armstrong,
which was this week dropped. "The inquiry in the US was about fraud,
but the evidence that has been gathered was about doping. We expect
the evidence will be shared in the same way [as in the Balco case],"
said Howman.

"It is important that happens as quickly as possible, just in case
there might be athletes who are going to London to whom it might
refer."

Howman also called for more to be done to take effective sanctions
against those who surround athletes who cheat, and in some cases
pressure them to do so. "Often the athlete is persuaded and cajoled by
people who should know better. It doesn't take much to realise how
effective an entourage can be," he said.

"How many lawyers have been pulled before a law society disciplinary
committee? How many doctors have gone to medical tribunals? That's the
level we need to look at. It is very easy to catch the dopey doper.
The sophisticated doper is becoming harder to detect and that's a big
challenge for the anti-doping movement."

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Digital copyright law under review after Optus court win

By Dan Harrison and Richard Willingham

A day after the bosses of Australia's biggest sports lobbied the Prime
Minister, Julia Gillard, and senior ministers for urgent changes to
copyright law, the government has announced that it has ordered a
review of the copyright law in the digital environment.
Attorney-General Nicola Roxon this morning said that she had
commissioned the Australian Law Reform Commission to conduct the
review. She said it had been in the planning for some time but its
announcement today was timely.
The review will be conducted by Professor Jill McKeough of the
University of Technology, Sydney.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Ms Roxon said Professor McKeough had expertise in intellectual
property, consumer protection and commercial law which made her
''eminently qualified'' to lead the review.
She said the inquiry would consider whether the exceptions in the
Federal Copyright Act were ''adequate and appropriate in the fast
paced digital environment''.
''In our fast changing, technologically driven world, it's important
to ensure our copyright laws are keeping pace with change,'' she said.
''The Gillard government is determined to get the balance right
between providing incentives for creators and innovators and
encouraging new opportunities within a digital economy including via
the National Broadband Network'', she said.
Ms Roxon said draft terms of reference for the review would be
released for consultation shortly.

Yesterday, the chiefs of Australia's biggest sporting codes used their
considerable clout to push for copyright law changes following a court
ruling allowing Optus to broadcast delayed video of matches on its
mobile phone network.
Last week, Optus won a landmark copyright case in the Federal Court,
when the court ruled the telco could record and transmit free-to-air
television coverage of football and cricket matches over the internet
to its customers.
The AFL, NRL and Telstra were seeking an injunction against Optus's TV
Now service, that allowed Optus to transmit TV footage - such as live
football matches - on delays of one to two minutes to Apple mobile
devices.
The decision infuriated Telstra and sports with exclusive broadcast
rights deals.
The chief executives of the AFL, Cricket Australia, NRL and Tennis
Australia yesterday met the Communications Minister, Senator Stephen
Conroy, the Sports Minister, Mark Arbib, and Ms Roxon, to propose a
''simple'' amendment to the copyright act.
Ms Gillard, ''stopped by the meeting'', her spokesman said, which
included the AFL chief executive, Andrew Demetriou, the Cricket
Australia chief, James Sutherland, and the NRL boss, David Gallop.
At a press conference this morning, Ms Gillard said the government was
considering whether or not there needed to be changes to the copyright
laws.
''We have said to them [sporting bodies] . . . that we will urgently
consider options here. I think we are all concerned what this can mean
for our great sporting codes and it was an unexpected development,''
Ms Gillard said.
Senator Conroy said the government was being briefed by the legal
teams from the sporting groups.
''We will be going through a process to ensure that if any change is
to be made that we would consider any adverse consequences, but at
this stage we are just getting the legal advice fully explained to us
and we are happy to consider if a solution is available,'' Senator
Conroy said.
The sports, with netball, rugby and soccer, form the Coalition of
Major Professional and Participation Sports and it also met Opposition
Leader Tony Abbott's chief-of-staff, Peta Credlin, to seek bi-partisan
support.
Executive director Malcolm Speed said the group wanted to clarify a
provision in the copyright act for sports to maintain the right to
exclusively sell their digital content to broadcasters.
He said lawyers representing the sports and the government would meet
to thrash out details. Mr Gallop said the sports wanted to show they
were united in their need for a ''quick but simple'' amendment to
copyright laws.
''It is clear that the technology has overtaken the law, the previous
changes to the act were already expressed to protect the interest of
copyright-holders and this development and the court decision
supporting it, flies in the face of that,'' he said.
Mr Gallop said the group received a good hearing and the outcome was
constructive, from both sides of politics.
''We are dealing with a situation where an asset on our balance sheet,
being copyright of our content, has been transferred to another
company's balance sheet without our consent, that cannot be right and
needs to be fixed quickly,'' Mr Gallop said.
It is understood the amendments would not remove the right for people
to tape content from their TVs for replay.
The AFL last year signed a five-year rights deal worth $1.25 billion,
including a $153 million deal with Telstra, and the NRL are to
negotiate a new deal soon.
TV rights is the main source of revenue for both codes, something Mr
Gallop said the group made clear during the meetings.
It is understood the government is taking the issue very seriously. Ms
Roxon's spokesman last night said the government had considered both
the rights of consumers and content producers, while also ''working to
maintain a sustainable legal framework that accommodates the
innovative digital environment''.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

No-fees law threatens school programs

Related story: School programs must charge fees
Second of a three-part series

REDLANDS - A two-year-old state law says it is illegal for schools to
charge students and parents mandatory fees for participation in
extracurricular activities, such as art, music, theater and sports.
The Redlands Unified School District may be violating that law,
depending on whom you ask. "This (no fees) has not changed at RUSD,
but the reduction of funding from the state has made providing these
activities much more difficult," said Brian Guggisberg, director of
fiscal services at Redlands Unified School District.

So schools are banking on parent donations and fundraisers to help
defray costs. From selling car-wash tickets to school cards, efforts
like that help, and many parents seem to willing to do that. "Yes,
there is a law that says you can't make fees mandatory, (but the)
problem is, without them, the programs wouldn't survive," a Redlands
East Valley High School parent said on Facebook.

This year, Redlands East Valley's band charged only for actual costs,
but not general band fees, she said.

That meant REV booster or parent-led groups paid for more of the costs.

"I pay the fees without complaint. I pay for whatever fundraising I
can. And I know most of our parents do, too. Without this, our kids
wouldn't have a program," said a parent. Attorney Bryan Reid has a
child in the school district. While he is not an expert on the state
law, he is somewhat familiar with it. "The concept (of this) law is
that it establishes that education in California is mandated and
should be free for all children. And that's a wonderful thing. I don't
disagree with that. "The problem is that the interpretation is going
too far and is having a crushing effect on the extracurricular
activities that are available for kids," he said.

He cited music and athletic programs, adding that the "pendulum is
swinging a bit too far."

"Obviously every kid should have the opportunity to participate in
extracurricular activities, (and) if they can't afford their tuba or
track shoes, I think there should be ways in which the kids can earn
the money for that," he said. "But these programs can't exist without
parent support. "The bottom line is, extracurricular activities are
just that - extracurricular."

The law is the result of a lawsuit students filed in Los Angeles
Superior Court in 2010 alleging that public schools in California were
illegally charging students mandatory fees to participate in
educational activities.

In the lawsuit, Doe v. State of California, the students claimed that
the Los Angeles Unified School District charges "violated their
constitutional duty to provide free and equal education by failing to
ensure that California public school districts do not charge fees for
activities."

Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger sent a letter to urging the district
to examine into its policies to ensure this was not occurring.
Redlands High School Principal Christina Rivera said despite the law
and budget cuts, programs at her school have not been affected. That
may be temporary, however. The district has been working to realign
expenditures and find other funding resources to maintain the same
activities for students, said Guggisberg.

"Parents and guardians are still very generous when it comes to
providing for their children," he said. "The reduced funding from the
state has caused many our schools to place a greater reliance of
financial support from parent organizations and the community.

"This applies to many campus activities."

Locking student accounts

Some parents who have students at Redlands East Valley High claim that
when a fee is not paid on time, a student's account is frozen and more
fees are added.

Principal John Maloney said the only time accounts are locked is when
a student doesn't return unsold fundraising tickets or cards, or if
uniforms are not returned on time.

He said accounts are unlocked when those issues are resolved, and if a
student has a problem, administrators help rectify the situation.

"Parents aren't always aware that their kids have taken these tickets
out," Maloney said.

REV coaches are required to teach athletes that their uniforms must be
returned or their accounts will be locked, he said.

Sometimes, kids can forget this requirement, he said.

Maloney said that money needed for trips to places such as Hawaii or
Europe are strictly activities the district does not pay.

Those are the responsibility of the clubs and organizations that rely
on parents to pay the way for their children and fundraisers to help
cover costs.

If clubs and organization can't do that, there is no trip, he said.

"Some of our kids are so talented that they need to showcase (that
talent on a national or international stage). No question. Our parents
get it that there has to be support from families for these kids to
continue doing these things," he said.

"These are enriching programs - which are good for our kids - but they
cost money," he said. "We want kids to go to high school and have
these full range of experiences. And if we can provide (them) with
like a quality marching band program, and we can get parents who are
willing to support (it), then that's great."

Parent wants to help

Redlands High School parent Mary Anne Forrest has been paying fees for
her daughter's extracurricular activities since elementary school.

They include transportation, materials, music and uniform costs.

In the past, she said, it had been requested that parents pay for
music and other fees.

"The music department at RHS is having a more difficult time
collecting fees from the parents, because they can't ask for them
outright and fundraising has become more difficult because of the poor
economy," she said. "Maybe I'm getting tired of all the fundraisers,
but at the same time I want to support the programs. Without it, some
of these programs won't be able to exist."

Reid agreed, adding that it truly does take community support to keep
the programs going.

"I don't know specifically how the law is being applied, so I don't
know if it is illegal to charge a parent fees for an extracurricular,
transportation or supplies. I don't know the answer to the actual
interpretation of the law, but I think that parents ought to pay them
if they want their kids to be part of them.

"Parents should make a good faith effort to support their kids in that
and fund it or find an alternative solution to (do so)," he said.

"If we can't have these programs because one child can't afford to
participate, then we won't have any extracurricular, but I strongly
think that these programs can be a huge part of a child's experience
in school," he said.

"I would hate to have one child denied an opportunity to participate,
but I don't think the law should mandate that the program can't happen
because (they) couldn't afford it."

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

School programs must charge fees

By, Toni Momberger, Staff Writer

REDLANDS - The law says education must be available for free to
everybody, but without charging for participation, many sports and
arts programs could not exist.
I have a lot of experience with these programs, and I will tell you
all day that they're worth the money.Here's the truth of it. If you do
it the way my family did, public school costs a fortune. My children -
currently a college freshman and a high school junior - joined as much
as their schedules allowed; actually, my daughter joined more than
that. Last year my husband and I had two kids in marching band, one
in choir, two in wind ensemble, one in badminton and one in the school
musical. And we have only two children.Those activities cost more than
$2,000. That does not include the optional trips and banquets.That
does not include the optional expenses of my son's senior year: a
letterman jacket, senior portraits, a class ring, a yearbook page, a
cap and gown, and graduation announcements.This is painful for a
school teacher and a journalist, but we believed it was money well
spent, and we chose to find a way.From my experience, plus an
unofficial poll I conducted on Facebook, I learned that music is much
more expensive than sports, so I will share music numbers.Neither of
my children is in marching band this year, but for the five proud
years I was a high school band mom, here's how it worked. You showed
up for a registration meeting on the first Wednesday in June and wrote
a check for $600 per child, more if you didn't already have the shoes.
A third of that was for band camp - attendance mandatory. The rest
went toward uniform maintenance, music rights, guest instructors,
transportation and competition entrance fees.

Then throughout the year, there are additional expenses: tickets to
car washes, pancake breakfasts, barbecues. If you don't pay for the
tickets by the deadline, they lock your student's account. (Reporter
Kristina Hernandez learned that that's because a student could be
selling the tickets and keeping the money. She was told we could turn
the tickets in to the finance office if we don't sell them.) My kids'
accounts have been chronically locked for six years. With all the
stuff my kids do, there's seems always to be a fee I have not paid.
But here's the reason it's fair: The boosters provide opportunities
for the families to raise the money. Kids can sell scrip, cookie
dough, wrapping paper, movie tickets, program ads, candles, discount
cards, tickets to the California Theatre and car wash tickets to
benefit their personal accounts. And if families still need help,
there are booster scholarships.

There are parent groups working behind most, if not all, of the
activities, raising money for the whole group, supporting every child
that wants to participate, largely because they believe in the value
of the program. And here are just some of the reasons it's important
to do it: The children, the schools, the families and the town. They
all benefit. Our musicians, mock trial teams, athletes and artists go
out into the world and make Redlands look great. The children work
hard together and share the accomplishment.

The parents work behind the scenes, sending the message that their
kids are worth their time and energy. The families of the kids on the
team get to know one another. And the kids learn sportsmanship,
teamwork, discipline or the arts. They make great friends, and get a
sense of belonging. It's hard getting harder as the economy slumps.
We Mombergers turned off our TV service. We sold scrip. We washed
cars. The fees were necessary, the programs accommodate everyone, and
the work is worth it.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"