TELLYTRACK PUTS THE RECORD STRAIGHT

TELLYTRACK PUTS THE RECORD STRAIGHT

On 21st July an article by Wiseman Khuzwayo entitled ‘Hollywoodbets to defend R350m Tellytrack lawsuit’ appeared in a number of online and traditional media publications. The article contained a number of factual inaccuracies which requires both correction and clarification.

The facts are:

The Tellytrack court case against Hollywood is in respect of the flagrant beach of the Tellytrack copyrighted local service by Hollywood and does not, as stated in the article, ”arise out of the desire by Phumelela to ‘level the playing fields’ with bookmakers”.
Tellytrack ascertained that its local service (as broadcast on Multichoice’s DSTV channel 239) was being displayed at the betting outlets of the Hollywood Group.
The agreement between Tellytrack’s partners and MultiChoice permits the display of the Tellytrack local service only in private homes, hotels, hospitals and prisons and NOT in betting outlets. In turn, the subscription agreement between MultiChoice and its subscribers does not permit the display of the Tellytrack channel 239 in betting outlets.
Tellytrack has instituted civil proceedings for breach of its copyright and is claiming unpaid license fees PLUS punitive damages to the amount of R 315 million (not R 350 million as quoted in the article).
Whilst 156 bookmaker betting outlets have been licensed and are legally displaying the Tellytrack local service, the service is being displayed in a number of other bookmakers’ betting outlets without being licensed to do so. Further civil proceedings have been or are in the process of being instituted against all bookmakers who have been or are found doing so.
In addition to the civil proceedings, Tellytrack has lodged and will lodge criminal complaints with the S.A. Police against the contravening bookmakers.

Issued on behalf of John Stuart, CEO Tellytrack, Rivonia on 24th July 2014

For further information please contact

Dean Sawarjith: deans@phumelela.com : 082 044 7749

If this case ever sees a court room it will go on and on for years. 350 mill is a crazy amount to sue which will never be the "fine" paid unless the plaintiff issued the defendant a legally binding letter, signed by the courts not to continue to show their broadcasts after warning them by letter, otherwise in the end the defendant will have to "apologise" to the plaintiff and costs will be shared. that's my opinion. The only people that will win are the lawyers.

its seems cut and dried
pay pay

There we go ........as predicted............licence fees a possibility !!!

I would think they can whistle for punitive damages of that magnitude..................lol

rob faux wrote: There we go ........as predicted............licence fees a possibility !!!

I would think they can whistle for punitive damages of that magnitude..................lol

Now perhaps a legalese member can help - Surely HW have not benefited unduly ON turnover since the license was invoked(they already had a clientele)? All they could be liable is this Liscence fee - How will Teletrack be able to prove that their product was responsible for turnover in the shops?I am not certain of the license agreement but it should only be applicable to bets struck in the rooms - Why should the Bookmakers HOME punters bets be used when they already pay Multichoice for the service. I am certain the vast amount of bets struck will NOT be from the rooms - If I were Hollywood I would just dump Teletrack in Gauteng - Maybe it pays to have it in Durban but really most bookmakers I go to have a ratio of 50-1 Racing vs Sport (some times higher) so why bother to show Racing to 5 regulars when you could rather concentrate on sport and have your Online horse players watch at home as they do already.
I'm obviously not certain of the facts of this agreement so I expect someone will put me right.

The Tellytrack court case against Hollywood is in respect of the flagrant beach of the Tellytrack copyrighted local service by Hollywood and does not,

What beach is that ?

You would think when issuing a press release Phumelela would at least proof read it. It seems like most things they do are done in a hurry and without much thought !

Harris wrote: The Tellytrack court case against Hollywood is in respect of the flagrant beach of the Tellytrack copyrighted local service by Hollywood and does not,

What beach is that ?

You would think when issuing a press release Phumelela would at least proof read it. It seems like most things they do are done in a hurry and without much thought !

Beach Beauty....I hope I don't get sued for that.... :sick:

well spotted Harris....

mmmm I wonder what Multichoice is thinking. Last time they wanted to scrap the show they put on than be dragged into court. Deja vu...

Mac wrote: mmmm I wonder what Multichoice is thinking. Last time they wanted to scrap the show they put on than be dragged into court. Deja vu...

good question... :ohmy:

some clanners have bettor memories than TT...or is that better....

Works out over R5M a shop

some of their backwater shops wont turnover R5m in 10 years

Bob Brogan wrote: Works out over R5M a shop

some of their backwater shops wont turnover R5m in 10 years

Teletrack and Phum have already found that the Courts are not as forgiving as their Board Members so If they think they can convince the Courts of those figures then I predict that the Tabonline site will never Crash again, all Tab branches will run out of tickets because of the flood of new punters and Phumelela will offer to pay ABC for all the good work they've done for the Industry - Amazing - If only these people realize that if Bookmakers decide to dump Racing it will fall in a hole faster than Flat prices in Hillbrow in the 90's!!

The beatings shall continue until morale improves... :whistle: