Sam Keller v. EA Sports

[Saunders]

Legally speaking, it is different. Painting a picture of someone and publishing it is different than taking their picture and publishing it. Those issues will come up at trial. I don't think I am fully qualified to explain the intricacies of electronic property law. You'd be more than welcome to sit in on lectures at the law school if you are interested. What I do know is that a California ruling on a single type of "likeness" will not result in a snowballing effect that kills college football.

 

People need not run around expecting the sky to fall. College Football, for good or bad, will look largely the same next year, the year after, and the year after...

You don't think it will set a dangerous precedent? Really?

Dangerous for EA's bottom line? Possibly.

 

Dangerous to the availability of football video games? No.

 

Dangerous to the future of college football? Absolutely not.

 

If EA ends up having to pay all this money, and they have to pay extra every year, do you think they're gonna keep making something that is no longer profitable?

 

Also, I never said it was dangerous to College football. I said it will affect the way we enjoy the sport through television.

You're making a large assumption that it would no longer be profitable. Less profitable doesn't necessarily equal not profitable.

 

You said this: "This better fail as bad as he did, or CFB is screwed." That seems to be a broader statement than the way we enjoy CFB through television, doesn't it? My apologies if I am misinterpreting it.

 

College football itself will continue, but if the way we enjoy it (through television) is affected, it will certainly have a negative effect on the sport. While I was a bit hyperbolic in my original statement, the premis remains.

 

Also, while I'm making a large assumption, I've been following the video game industry for years. Nobody is taking chances anymore, and if it's not largely profitable, it's not getting made anymore (see Guitar Hero).

[Fuzzy]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

 

Actually from what i heard, he is trying to setup a trust fund that would be made available for all college players. So its not just about him. Plus there is a good 30 - 60 athletes who have backed him up in this case.

[carlfense]

Legally speaking, it is different. Painting a picture of someone and publishing it is different than taking their picture and publishing it. Those issues will come up at trial. I don't think I am fully qualified to explain the intricacies of electronic property law. You'd be more than welcome to sit in on lectures at the law school if you are interested. What I do know is that a California ruling on a single type of "likeness" will not result in a snowballing effect that kills college football.

 

People need not run around expecting the sky to fall. College Football, for good or bad, will look largely the same next year, the year after, and the year after...

You don't think it will set a dangerous precedent? Really?

Dangerous for EA's bottom line? Possibly.

 

Dangerous to the availability of football video games? No.

 

Dangerous to the future of college football? Absolutely not.

 

If EA ends up having to pay all this money, and they have to pay extra every year, do you think they're gonna keep making something that is no longer profitable?

 

Also, I never said it was dangerous to College football. I said it will affect the way we enjoy the sport through television.

You're making a large assumption that it would no longer be profitable. Less profitable doesn't necessarily equal not profitable.

 

You said this: "This better fail as bad as he did, or CFB is screwed." That seems to be a broader statement than the way we enjoy CFB through television, doesn't it? My apologies if I am misinterpreting it.

 

College football itself will continue, but if the way we enjoy it (through television) is affected, it will certainly have a negative effect on the sport. While I was a bit hyperbolic in my original statement, the premis remains.

 

Also, while I'm making a large assumption, I've been following the video game industry for years. Nobody is taking chances anymore, and if it's not largely profitable, it's not getting made anymore (see Guitar Hero).

Guitar Hero isn't entirely analogous. The problem with Guitar Hero was largely that a slew of imitators saturated the market and each required an expensive proprietary controller.

 

I'm not a huge gamer, but I'm not aware of any other college football games other than EA/NCAA line.

[Saunders]

Legally speaking, it is different. Painting a picture of someone and publishing it is different than taking their picture and publishing it. Those issues will come up at trial. I don't think I am fully qualified to explain the intricacies of electronic property law. You'd be more than welcome to sit in on lectures at the law school if you are interested. What I do know is that a California ruling on a single type of "likeness" will not result in a snowballing effect that kills college football.

 

People need not run around expecting the sky to fall. College Football, for good or bad, will look largely the same next year, the year after, and the year after...

You don't think it will set a dangerous precedent? Really?

Dangerous for EA's bottom line? Possibly.

 

Dangerous to the availability of football video games? No.

 

Dangerous to the future of college football? Absolutely not.

 

If EA ends up having to pay all this money, and they have to pay extra every year, do you think they're gonna keep making something that is no longer profitable?

 

Also, I never said it was dangerous to College football. I said it will affect the way we enjoy the sport through television.

You're making a large assumption that it would no longer be profitable. Less profitable doesn't necessarily equal not profitable.

 

You said this: "This better fail as bad as he did, or CFB is screwed." That seems to be a broader statement than the way we enjoy CFB through television, doesn't it? My apologies if I am misinterpreting it.

 

College football itself will continue, but if the way we enjoy it (through television) is affected, it will certainly have a negative effect on the sport. While I was a bit hyperbolic in my original statement, the premis remains.

 

Also, while I'm making a large assumption, I've been following the video game industry for years. Nobody is taking chances anymore, and if it's not largely profitable, it's not getting made anymore (see Guitar Hero).

Guitar Hero isn't entirely analogous. The problem with Guitar Hero was largely that a slew of imitators saturated the market and each required an expensive proprietary controller.

 

I'm not a huge gamer, but I'm not aware of any other college football games other than EA/NCAA line.

 

It's analogous in that Activision was no longer making gobs of cash. It happens all the time. When the publishers are no longer raking it in, the series gets the axe. It's happened dozens of times.

 

Right now, there is no other CFB game other than EA. 5-6 years ago, there was the 2K series (which in many ways, was better).

 

One other interesting note is that at that time, there were also 3 different NCAA basketball games, and I believe there were 2 NCAA baseball games. So, you had 6-7 games dedicated to college athletics. What happened? They were no longer as profitable, and got the axe. Only NCAA Football by EA survived. If it's no longer deemed profitable enough, it too, will die.

[Saunders]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

 

Actually from what i heard, he is trying to setup a trust fund that would be made available for all college players. So its not just about him. Plus there is a good 30 - 60 athletes who have backed him up in this case.

 

Correct, and each person is gonna make about $100 if they are lucky.

[Hercules]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

 

Actually from what i heard, he is trying to setup a trust fund that would be made available for all college players. So its not just about him. Plus there is a good 30 - 60 athletes who have backed him up in this case.

 

Right. They're basically trying to force the NCAA to use the money they make on these games to help the student-athletes that make these games profitable... which in my opinion at least, is what the NCAA should be doing in the first place. Isn't their role to oversee college athletics, and to protect the student athlete? Isn't the reason we don't have a playoff because they think it would exploit student-athletes too much? Isn't this the same NCAA that looked the other way with the Cam Newton controversy because they didn't want TV ratings to plummet and they didn't want TCU threatening the very foundation of their BC$ system?

 

It's ridiculous how much hypocrisy is at play within this case.

 

I still haven't had anyone explain to me how EA's video games are works of art, either, and since that seems to be their main argument right now, I'm looking forward to hearing it.

[Saunders]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

 

Actually from what i heard, he is trying to setup a trust fund that would be made available for all college players. So its not just about him. Plus there is a good 30 - 60 athletes who have backed him up in this case.

 

Right. They're basically trying to force the NCAA to use the money they make on these games to help the student-athletes that make these games profitable... which in my opinion at least, is what the NCAA should be doing in the first place. Isn't their role to oversee college athletics, and to protect the student athlete? Isn't the reason we don't have a playoff because they think it would exploit student-athletes too much? Isn't this the same NCAA that looked the other way with the Cam Newton controversy because they didn't want TV ratings to plummet and they didn't want TCU threatening the very foundation of their BC$ system?

 

It's ridiculous how much hypocrisy is at play within this case.

 

I still haven't had anyone explain to me how EA's video games are works of art, either, and since that seems to be their main argument right now, I'm looking forward to hearing it.

 

It depends, do you consider movies art?

[Hercules]

 

One other interesting note is that at that time, there were also 3 different NCAA basketball games, and I believe there were 2 NCAA baseball games. So, you had 6-7 games dedicated to college athletics. What happened? They were no longer as profitable, and got the axe. Only NCAA Football by EA survived. If it's no longer deemed profitable enough, it too, will die.

 

NCAA football was the only one to survive because the NCAA has an exclusive licensing agreement with EA. No other company can use the NCAA logo, or the logos of any of the teams in the league. They can't use conferences, schools, bowls, nothing. They could create some alternate universe, but nobody wants to play the game without the real teams, just like nobody wants to play the game without the real players, whether their name is there or not.

 

Trust me, if EA was forced to completely randomize their rosters, there would be no reason to buy a new game. I've played their games, and they don't change in any significant way year to year. It's basically the same scam as the college professor who requires students to buy his textbook, and barely rewrites that textbook every year so that the students always have to buy the new edition. It's a scam.

[Hercules]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

 

Actually from what i heard, he is trying to setup a trust fund that would be made available for all college players. So its not just about him. Plus there is a good 30 - 60 athletes who have backed him up in this case.

 

Right. They're basically trying to force the NCAA to use the money they make on these games to help the student-athletes that make these games profitable... which in my opinion at least, is what the NCAA should be doing in the first place. Isn't their role to oversee college athletics, and to protect the student athlete? Isn't the reason we don't have a playoff because they think it would exploit student-athletes too much? Isn't this the same NCAA that looked the other way with the Cam Newton controversy because they didn't want TV ratings to plummet and they didn't want TCU threatening the very foundation of their BC$ system?

 

It's ridiculous how much hypocrisy is at play within this case.

 

I still haven't had anyone explain to me how EA's video games are works of art, either, and since that seems to be their main argument right now, I'm looking forward to hearing it.

 

It depends, do you consider movies art?

 

I consider "Forrest Gump" to be a work of art. I don't consider NCAA Football 11 to be a work of art, much like I don't consider a video recap of Nebraska's 1995 National Championship season to be a work of art.

[Saunders]

 

One other interesting note is that at that time, there were also 3 different NCAA basketball games, and I believe there were 2 NCAA baseball games. So, you had 6-7 games dedicated to college athletics. What happened? They were no longer as profitable, and got the axe. Only NCAA Football by EA survived. If it's no longer deemed profitable enough, it too, will die.

 

NCAA football was the only one to survive because the NCAA has an exclusive licensing agreement with EA. No other company can use the NCAA logo, or the logos of any of the teams in the league. They can't use conferences, schools, bowls, nothing. They could create some alternate universe, but nobody wants to play the game without the real teams, just like nobody wants to play the game without the real players, whether their name is there or not.

 

Trust me, if EA was forced to completely randomize their rosters, there would be no reason to buy a new game. I've played their games, and they don't change in any significant way year to year. It's basically the same scam as the college professor who requires students to buy his textbook, and barely rewrites that textbook every year so that the students always have to buy the new edition. It's a scam.

 

The exclusivity deal was signed before the demise of the basketball series and baseball series. The reason those stopped being made, is because they weren't making money. As for the NCAA football series, it's not perfect, but I enjoy playing it, especially the last 2 versions with Online Dynasty.

[Saunders]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

 

Actually from what i heard, he is trying to setup a trust fund that would be made available for all college players. So its not just about him. Plus there is a good 30 - 60 athletes who have backed him up in this case.

 

Right. They're basically trying to force the NCAA to use the money they make on these games to help the student-athletes that make these games profitable... which in my opinion at least, is what the NCAA should be doing in the first place. Isn't their role to oversee college athletics, and to protect the student athlete? Isn't the reason we don't have a playoff because they think it would exploit student-athletes too much? Isn't this the same NCAA that looked the other way with the Cam Newton controversy because they didn't want TV ratings to plummet and they didn't want TCU threatening the very foundation of their BC$ system?

 

It's ridiculous how much hypocrisy is at play within this case.

 

I still haven't had anyone explain to me how EA's video games are works of art, either, and since that seems to be their main argument right now, I'm looking forward to hearing it.

 

It depends, do you consider movies art?

 

I consider "Forrest Gump" to be a work of art. I don't consider NCAA Football 11 to be a work of art, much like I don't consider a video recap of Nebraska's 1995 National Championship season to be a work of art.

 

art1    

[ahrt] Show IPA

–noun

 

Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance) in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses, emotions, and intellect.

 

According the the definition, it is. Whether or not you ar I agree is if it is "good" art or not is irrelevant.

[huskerscott]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

Sam's cut would amount to several hundred dollars, at best. He's not doing this to get rich.

I wonder what his lawyers will make if they win this case????? im guessing its more than few hundred dollars. They are just taking Sam along for the ride.

 

Regardless though they are not gonna win this case. Like myself and others have stated, the digital Sam Keller and the real Sam Keller dont match up. Since he is the one of the faces in this case, then I think the jury/judge should start off first by comparing the "real" Sam Keller and the "digital" Sam Keller.

 

When this case is overruled those lawyers will go after somebody else, something like this will never end.

[Saunders]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

Sam's cut would amount to several hundred dollars, at best. He's not doing this to get rich.

I wonder what his lawyers will make if they win this case????? im guessing its more than few hundred dollars. They are just taking Sam along for the ride.

 

Regardless though they are not gonna win this case. Like myself and others have stated, the digital Sam Keller and the real Sam Keller dont match up. Since he is the one of the faces in this case, then I think the jury/judge should start off first by comparing the "real" Sam Keller and the "digital" Sam Keller.

 

When this case is overruled those lawyers will go after somebody else, something like this will never end.

 

They stand to make a boatload... but then again, they are ambulance chasers.

 

http://www.hbsslaw.com/cases-and-investigations/settled-cases

[carlfense]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

Sam's cut would amount to several hundred dollars, at best. He's not doing this to get rich.

I wonder what his lawyers will make if they win this case????? im guessing its more than few hundred dollars. They are just taking Sam along for the ride.

 

Regardless though they are not gonna win this case. Like myself and others have stated, the digital Sam Keller and the real Sam Keller dont match up. Since he is the one of the faces in this case, then I think the jury/judge should start off first by comparing the "real" Sam Keller and the "digital" Sam Keller.

 

When this case is overruled those lawyers will go after somebody else, something like this will never end.

They already did win the case. It's probably more likely to stand than to be overruled.

[huskerscott]

the guy is a idiot...he's just trying to get millions out of a lawsuit since he couldnt make it in the nfl. Well let alone make a team.

Sam's cut would amount to several hundred dollars, at best. He's not doing this to get rich.

I wonder what his lawyers will make if they win this case????? im guessing its more than few hundred dollars. They are just taking Sam along for the ride.

 

Regardless though they are not gonna win this case. Like myself and others have stated, the digital Sam Keller and the real Sam Keller dont match up. Since he is the one of the faces in this case, then I think the jury/judge should start off first by comparing the "real" Sam Keller and the "digital" Sam Keller.

 

When this case is overruled those lawyers will go after somebody else, something like this will never end.

They already did win the case. It's probably more likely to stand than to be overruled.

 

Im far from a legal expert, but I think their is gonna be appeals after appeals on both sides this thing is gonna go on for awhile.