It still addresses the WTO report and the issues within TRiPS. The Saudis have established a legal framework to enforce copyright infringement under their own legal system. That was one of the issues with the PL - the inability to enforce their IP rights under Saudi law. There was no legal framework to do so. The above is now addressed.
Because one of the stumbling blocks was the lack of legal framework for the PL to enforce IP rights in relation to beoutQ within the KSA legsl system. The Saudi's have created IP legislation and a taskforce to enforce. The Saudi legal system has a process for taking claims to Court. It addresses concerns with copyright infringement and effectively says to the likes of BEin '"if you have a grievance, bring it to us directly." It addresses one of the disqualifying events within Rule F of the PL test - piracy. The state is putting measures in place that are independent of do called state sponsorship.
They can't. Their test is not a moral test. Arbitration and the court case will likely confirm that. The issue is state sponsored piracy. PIF alleged to be complicit because of MBS the de facto ruler of Saudi. State sponsored piracy addressed and a legal framework in place it effectively kills that argument. The complainants can now take their cases to the Saudi legal system. I suspect that the Saudi's and PL may come to a settlement. It may also trigger the withdrawal of BEin's complaint.
An interesting article in the Athletic regarding Ashley's two pronged attack. I'll just post a key sentence within it "Masters is widely perceived to be as strong as he's ever been"
Well, of course he is - but he won't be perceived as such by Nick De Marco, or Amanda Staveley, or Mike Ashley. If you read the Athletic about Ashley, he believes 100% he's going to win this case - but nobody knows for sure until it all comes to pass. The truth is almost certainly somewhere in the middle, hence why there's a legal dispute and hence why I mentioned yesterday that I was concerned as to why the PL haven't simply stood down. Others make the valid point that the PL may well have acted in our interests, they may well have concerns about the funds coming in, there may have been some agenda from Staveley/PIF that wasn't cleared up properly. Eventually, it will all be clear. Takeovers in any walk of life are riddled with uncertainty. I'm absolutely bang in the middle with this - the indications, including Staveley's last interview with Bloomberg, are clearly pointing one way, but they are JUST vague enough to make sure if it doesn't happen, she's not accountable. Ashley's playing a similar game - "well, you can't say I didn't try" will be the line he trots out, much to everyone's dismay, and he'll make sure someone else is the villain in all this, even though I suspect it's him all along. My belief hasn't changed, deep down - I think we'll get taken over by someone else who is either on the periphery (Kenyon, Pallotta) or completely out of leftfield (Ek, Red Bull). There just needs to be a lot less uncertainty in the football market - the recent rollover deal has clearly helped, revenue from TV more or less assured, and the move from KSA in relation to IP rights does present an opportunity. Overseas markets should still be a good sell. The independent body is a cause for some concern, I'd imagine, but it may be that NOW is the time to invest and make the most of future certainties.
Howe was interviewed for it and apparently had an awful interview. So he went back to Celtic with his tail between his legs. Dyche is favourite for it, but I don't see him moving from one mid table club to another. Lampard has been ruled out as they want an experienced manager.
I think Palace will be going for a young interesting manager to be honest, think they'll want a bit of change.