Judge tosses Keller case against EA

[Apathy]

Who's Sam Keller :sarcasm

 

[Saunders]

That's the thing though. You wouldn't be able to do that if Keller wins. The games don't feature names. Only rough statistics. If EA can't use QB#3 because of statistical similaities to Taylor Martinez, then fantasy sports are doomed because they're entirely reliant on real statistics fromt the real world players.

Eh, not so much. MLB tried a lawsuit a while back in MLBAM vs. CDM. Summary judgment went in favor of fantasy sports, with the judge stating:

"...the court finds that the undisputed facts establish that the players do not have a right of publicity in their names and playing records as used in CBC's fantasy games and that CBC has not violated the players' claimed right of publicity. The court finds further that the undisputed facts establish the names and playing records of Major League baseball players as used in CBC's fantasy games are not copyrightable and, therefore, federal copyright law does not preempt the players' claimed right of publicity."

I thought it was included in the licensing package that fantasy leagues (like Yahoo!) get. I guess I was wrong! But in my original comment, I was referring to NCAA fantasy leagues, but this would definitely cover that.

 

[RedDenver]

The lawyers I know are split on this issues, from a legal standpoint. I wouldn't be surprised if this drags out another 5-10 years and ends up with the Supreme Court. It's purely speculation on my part, but I think Keller's case has merit.

 

[corncraze]

this whole thing is really stupid.

 

[redblooded]

True it's not completely over, but it's a gigantic blow. Jim Brown already had a similar case tossed a few years ago, expect this to follow.

Agreed. I see Keller's side of this (as I saw the side of MLB players back in the day), but the bottom line is, these stats are "out there," published by everyone, everywhere who covers sports. There's absolutely no reason you can't use them in fantasy sports.

The games you guys play are even further removed. Fantasy sports take actual factual game-day stats and plugs them directly into fantasy sport results. In EA's games, they extrapolate capabilities of players based on stats and project them into a simulated game environment.

While I see where Keller and his attorneys are coming from, I think they have very little chance in prevailing here. Like, less than a snowball's chance.

I don't know if I'd go all the way to snowballs chance, they definitely had a big press spike around the final four in an attempt to sway public opinion.

I honestly think they have a good point about the licensing images in perpetuity without compensation. Common sense tells me asking an 18 year old kid to sign over the use of their image forever without compensation to play in college for a few years is nasty.

 

[zoogs]

The lawyers I know are split on this issues, from a legal standpoint. I wouldn't be surprised if this drags out another 5-10 years and ends up with the Supreme Court. It's purely speculation on my part, but I think Keller's case has merit.

My (very shallow) opinion on this: EA/NCAA should be able to make money off a college football game featuring the schools. Rosters rated with approximate abilities should be OK too. But the likeness of those players should not be duplicated. Random skin tone and generated ht/wt/numbers and other information would be reasonable.

 

[RedDenver]

The lawyers I know are split on this issues, from a legal standpoint. I wouldn't be surprised if this drags out another 5-10 years and ends up with the Supreme Court. It's purely speculation on my part, but I think Keller's case has merit.

My (very shallow) opinion on this: EA/NCAA should be able to make money off a college football game featuring the schools. Rosters rated with approximate abilities should be OK too. But the likeness of those players should not be duplicated. Random skin tone and generated ht/wt/numbers and other information would be reasonable.

My understanding is that this has gone beyond the likenesses in just the games. The main focus is whether the NCAA is taking advantage of the players and whether it is legal. As someone has mentioned, the NCAA and university get to use the players' likeness (name, number, image, etc.) forever without ever giving compensation to the players. It's a tangled legal debate right now.

 

[Hercules]

He has a better case against the NCAA than he does against EA.

 

[Saunders]

The lawyers I know are split on this issues, from a legal standpoint. I wouldn't be surprised if this drags out another 5-10 years and ends up with the Supreme Court. It's purely speculation on my part, but I think Keller's case has merit.

My (very shallow) opinion on this: EA/NCAA should be able to make money off a college football game featuring the schools. Rosters rated with approximate abilities should be OK too. But the likeness of those players should not be duplicated. Random skin tone and generated ht/wt/numbers and other information would be reasonable.

My understanding is that this has gone beyond the likenesses in just the games. The main focus is whether the NCAA is taking advantage of the players and whether it is legal. As someone has mentioned, the NCAA and university get to use the players' likeness (name, number, image, etc.) forever without ever giving compensation to the players. It's a tangled legal debate right now.

I would have signed it for $80,000+ in free education, room & board, and the best medical treatment on the planet. But hey, it's Sam Keller. He's used to have things given to him, and when he doesn't get his way, he pouts (or files a lawsuit).

 

[RedDenver]

I would have signed it for $80,000+ in free education, room & board, and the best medical treatment on the planet. But hey, it's Sam Keller. He's used to have things given to him, and when he doesn't get his way, he pouts (or files a lawsuit).

I hear what you're saying, but consider that the university and NCAA continue to make money even after the player graduates. NU is still selling Rozier and Gill jerseys. Once the school is no longer paying for tuition, room, and board, should the players be compensated? That's the most interesting part of the debate, to me at least. No one knows where all this will wind up, should be interesting.

 

[Saunders]

I would have signed it for $80,000+ in free education, room & board, and the best medical treatment on the planet. But hey, it's Sam Keller. He's used to have things given to him, and when he doesn't get his way, he pouts (or files a lawsuit).

I hear what you're saying, but consider that the university and NCAA continue to make money even after the player graduates. NU is still selling Rozier and Gill jerseys. Once the school is no longer paying for tuition, room, and board, should the players be compensated? That's the most interesting part of the debate, to me at least. No one knows where all this will wind up, should be interesting.

See, for that, I definitely think it has more merit. But what about replays of games on TV, like ESPN classic? What about the boatloads of NC from the 90's game DVD's that are sold? Do the players get a cut of that? It's an extremely sticky situation.

 

[RedDenver]

I would have signed it for $80,000+ in free education, room & board, and the best medical treatment on the planet. But hey, it's Sam Keller. He's used to have things given to him, and when he doesn't get his way, he pouts (or files a lawsuit).

I hear what you're saying, but consider that the university and NCAA continue to make money even after the player graduates. NU is still selling Rozier and Gill jerseys. Once the school is no longer paying for tuition, room, and board, should the players be compensated? That's the most interesting part of the debate, to me at least. No one knows where all this will wind up, should be interesting.

See, for that, I definitely think it has more merit. But what about replays of games on TV, like ESPN classic? What about the boatloads of NC from the 90's game DVD's that are sold? Do the players get a cut of that? It's an extremely sticky situation.

No question it's extremely sticky. That's one of the reasons I think it'll eventually end up at the Supreme Court.

 

[Blackshirt316]

I would have signed it for $80,000+ in free education, room & board, and the best medical treatment on the planet. But hey, it's Sam Keller. He's used to have things given to him, and when he doesn't get his way, he pouts (or files a lawsuit).

I hear what you're saying, but consider that the university and NCAA continue to make money even after the player graduates. NU is still selling Rozier and Gill jerseys. Once the school is no longer paying for tuition, room, and board, should the players be compensated? That's the most interesting part of the debate, to me at least. No one knows where all this will wind up, should be interesting.

I've never seen the University sell a Rozier or Gill Jersey or any other player. They sell #30 and #12 replica jerseys but they don't have the players names on them.

 

[RedDenver]

I would have signed it for $80,000+ in free education, room & board, and the best medical treatment on the planet. But hey, it's Sam Keller. He's used to have things given to him, and when he doesn't get his way, he pouts (or files a lawsuit).

I hear what you're saying, but consider that the university and NCAA continue to make money even after the player graduates. NU is still selling Rozier and Gill jerseys. Once the school is no longer paying for tuition, room, and board, should the players be compensated? That's the most interesting part of the debate, to me at least. No one knows where all this will wind up, should be interesting.

I've never seen the University sell a Rozier or Gill Jersey or any other player. They sell #30 and #12 replica jerseys but they don't have the players names on them.

I have Gill, and my friend has Rozier. Both purchased in the last 10 years, which is why I picked those jerseys. Neither of us actually bought them at the University, but NU and the NCAA make licensing fees for every one of those jerseys sold. That's what I meant by the University selling the jerseys. The point is that these universities and the NCAA are making money off of players long after they've left school.

 

[HuskersGJ]

I would have signed it for $80,000+ in free education, room & board, and the best medical treatment on the planet. But hey, it's Sam Keller. He's used to have things given to him, and when he doesn't get his way, he pouts (or files a lawsuit).

I hear what you're saying, but consider that the university and NCAA continue to make money even after the player graduates. NU is still selling Rozier and Gill jerseys. Once the school is no longer paying for tuition, room, and board, should the players be compensated? That's the most interesting part of the debate, to me at least. No one knows where all this will wind up, should be interesting.

I've never seen the University sell a Rozier or Gill Jersey or any other player. They sell #30 and #12 replica jerseys but they don't have the players names on them.

agree. The jerseys are a completely different situation. Who is #30 for? Rozier? Green? You still see a lot of #7's around, are those for? I will say there do seem to be a lot of Jared Tomich fans around...

what is the NFL's licensing rules on former players? I've seen Cowboys fans with Staubach jerseys's- who gets those royalties? but again, NFL=very different rules in this case.