If there is no profit motive, it is possible to share private pay TV in a club

Green light for football matches broadcast inpublic venues with a smart card issued for exclusively domestic use, if there is no profit motive. The Court of Cassation thus annuls a conviction for the violation of the rules on copyright, decided in both levels of judgement, to 'punish' the owner of a pizzeria, who had entertained his patrons with the derby Roma-Lazio, broadcast on no less than three televisions, with a Mediaset Premium card, intended to be strictly used at home. The judges of merit, both at first instance and on appeal, had contested the crime for having offered an encrypted service to several customers with a decoder and a private screen.

But the Supreme Court's ruling cancels, with reference, the territorial court's verdict. The judges of legitimacy emphasise that the fact contested against the owner of the premises cannot be considered an offence without proof that the 'show' was offered to reduce takings. For there to be an infringement, it must be established that there was an intent to bring more customers to the venue, who were also attracted by the advertising of the free service. A circumstance that the Supreme Court considers decisive. Therefore, a conviction based on an alleged and unverified profit motive must be annulled.

There is still no fixed point on the subject, because the jurisprudence oscillates between more or less 'permissive' verdicts. With the 1991/2015 judgment, the judges of the third criminal section of the Supreme Court had clearly distanced themselves from the orientation affirmed today, according to which it would be necessary to ascertain the purpose of profit. On that occasion, the judges of legitimacy, in line with other previous decisions, had specified that the purpose of profit was taken for granted. Together with the violation of contractual agreements, if the decoder card does not remain confined to the family.