Q&As

Are mirroring and casting regarded as separate rights when it comes to negotiating content agreements with content providers?

read titleRead full title
Published on LexisPSL on 17/06/2015

The following IP Q&A provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Are mirroring and casting regarded as separate rights when it comes to negotiating content agreements with content providers?
  • Mirroring and casting rights
  • Streaming services, ‘communication to the public’ and format-shifting
  • Drafting broad content licence terms
  • Additional considerations

Mirroring and casting rights

Whether or not a content licence grants, reserves restricts or excludes specific rights (such as casting or mirroring rights) will depend on the particular licence terms. Including express terms in the content licence that clearly set out the specific rights that are (and are not being granted) is obviously the best way to be sure that a content licensee can do what it wishes to do with the relevant content.

However, it may be that a content licence has already been entered into or is being negotiated with a content provider, potentially on broad terms (that may make no reference to activities such as mirroring or casting), and you may need to try to ascertain whether such activities would be permitted under the terms of such a licence.

Our basic understanding of mirroring and casting is that it is end-user enabled functionality which can mirror or transmit any content on an end-user's mobile device screen (eg phone, tablet) to that user's television using specific hardware and software. Commercial mirroring/tab casting products include Google Chromecast and Roku. These are set up to stream content from specific agreed providers, eg for Google Chromecast: YouTube, Netflix, BT Sport. Roku, for example, provides its content through ‘channels’—applications that allow you to view streamed audio and video.

We feel that this question requires a high

Popular documents