Farmer ordered to halt multi channel service

A CO Kilkenny farmer was restrained by High Court order yesterday from transmitting or retransmitting multichannel television…

A CO Kilkenny farmer was restrained by High Court order yesterday from transmitting or retransmitting multichannel television programmes without a licence.

The injunction was granted by Mr Justice O'Sullivan to MMDS Television Ltd, Broadford Rise, Ballinteer, Co Dublin, against Mr Thomas Comerford, Gurteenteen, Kilmanagh, Co Kilkenny.

The order was made pending an action to restrain Mr Comerford from operating the transmitter in the area, which is covered by the licence granted to MMDS Television.

Yesterday the judge was told there was no appearance by Mr Comerford.

READ MORE

In an affidavit Mr Jim Cranwell, managing director of MMD Television, said his company had an exclusive licence for the microwave broadcast system (MMDS) in that area. It had invested about £2.5 million, including the £20,000 paid for the licence.

The capital outlay was necessitated by the requirement imposed by the Department that the service should use an MMDS system rather than the less expensive ultra high frequency (UHF) system. This added to the cost of providing the service.

The cost of installing the system came to £230.50 per house in south Co Kilkenny the initial connection fee was £112.50 and the annual rental £121.

Mr Cranwell said Mr Comerford was providing programme retransmission on the UHF band, for which he did not have a licence. As a result of Mr Comerford transmitting, it was now possible for people in north, south and east Co Kilkenny to receive multi channel television simply by erecting a UHF aerial at an approximate cost of £20.

Mr Cranwell claimed that Mr Comerford's continual use of the UHF band would almost certainly cause difficulties in the future for the provision of national television channels, by cluttering the airwaves. He believed that it was intended to provide the forthcoming TV3 on the UHF band.

Mr Cranwell said that Mr Comerford was interfering with his business and with his constitutional rights to earn a livelihood.