A can of worms was opened last week by a European judge who expressed the opinion that the Premier League should be banned from selling off exclusive rights to screen their matches in particular countries.
It was a long-heralded statement, and the culmination so far of a legal case that seems to have been dragging on for an interminable length of time.
Portsmouth publican Karen Murphy, who is being prosecuted in a test case to decide whether she can legally show Premier League matches via a foreign satellite system, has become the poster girl for the anti-Sky lobby. And this latest pronouncement was greeted by her fans as a clear sign the systems will be ruled legal when the case returns to the UK High Court.
But what is the truth - and what would such a ruling mean for pubs in practice? Now I'm no lawyer - but having looked into the ins and outs of the case it is very far from clear cut.
Firstly, the latest announcement is merely an opinion. It carries no weight in law, and even if the European Courts uphold it, the final ruling will sit with the UK High Court - all of which means the case will roll on for at least another year.
It also means that until there is a final judgment licensees continue to risk prosecution if they use foreign satellite systems - something well worth bearing in mind as the Premier League says it has 100 cases in the pipeline all ready to go if the UK court rules in their favour.
But let's just say, hypothetically, that the UK court, in 12 to 18 months' time say, decides in favour of Murphy and the Premier League loses its right to sell Sky exclusive football rights for the UK. The decision will be based on European competition law, so what will it mean for your average sports-loving licensee? Here is where opinions are divided.
Some say it will stop Sky's monopoly over pub sports coverage and other providers will flood the market offering cheaper deals - and with the possible removal of the closed period for key matches pubs could even be able to compete with the football clubs themselves offering a warmer, and more beer-filled, environment in which to take in live games.
Others say Sky will simply extend its own reach into the rest of Europe and, being the financial behemoth it is, will still be able to outbid all the other providers for most key matches. This might leave pubs in something of a predicament. If the matches are split over any number of providers there is a danger pubs might have to sign up with more than one to get the coverage their customers demand - which could prove just as expensive.
Alternatively a Murphy-friendly decision might open the market to other providers offering smaller pick-and-mix packages which would enable pubs to choose the matches they want without paying a huge subscription charge for all the rubbish they don't want. And who in this trade wouldn't like to see pubs get a fairer deal?
But as I said at the top, it's a real can of worms. And one not likely to be unravelled any time soon.