Copyright Dispute Leads To NFL Not Scouting College Juniors

from the copyright-gone-insane dept

Brooks writes "For once it looks like the NFL isn't the bad guy in an intellectual property dispute, and actually are the ones trying to explain some of the issues with copyright maximalism to colleges. The problem is that the company who records scouting tapes for eight major conferences has convinced colleges that the NFL should pay for the right to use those tapes to scout players, in particular juniors who are trying to decide whether to enter the draft.

From the NFL's point of view, the junior scouting program exists to help keep kids in school if they're unlikely to succeed in the draft in their junior year (it's certainly in the NFL's interest to have those kids continue to develop their talent for one more year). The colleges, of course, see the "value" the tapes bring to the NFL and want a piece of that pie. So far, the NFL seems to be sticking to its guns and basically saying "fine, we just won't scout your players." The dispute has escalated to the point where some colleges aren't even letting NFL scouts look at tape on campus.

There's a bit of a sweet good-for-the-gander element to the story, since the NFL has been on the other side of the content value argument pretty much forever. It does kind of suck, though, that some college juniors will be entering the draft based on overoptimistic expectations. And it can't be good for a college's football program if it becomes known that it doesn't allow NFL scouting."

Yes, you read that right. It seems that the in this era of copyright maximalism, a company is trying to claim copyright on scouting tapes that are helpful to everyone (teams get better scouting info to make decisions, players are more accurately ranked, etc.). A friend who follows minor league baseball mentioned this week that Major League Baseball just took down its own scouting videos that had been online, so I'm wondering if baseball is now facing a similar problem as well.

7 Comments | Leave a Comment..

NFL Star Ochocinco Sets Up His Own Twitter-Based News Network

from the good-luck-NFL dept

Earlier this year, in talking about the changing nature of sports reporting, one of the things we mentioned was that you shouldn't count out players themselves as a part of that ecosystem, since they could now go direct to fans themselves, without having to talk through a reporter. Of course, sports leagues are scared to death of this concept, and we also noted that the NFL, among others, was seeking to limit how players were interacting with fans, with some teams even punishing players for being honest with fans.

However, with all those rules and guidelines, it seems the NFL didn't count on outspoken Bengals player Chad Ochocinco from taking things even further. Reader DEF was the first to alert us that Ochocinco has decided to set up his own Twitter-based reporting operation on goings on within the NFL, believing that via other players, he'll be able to get the real scoop and post the information faster and more accurately than any traditional "reporter." He says he's "knocking out the middleman."

And this is exactly the point we were making about how the media landscape is changing. People want relevant news and information in a format they find most useful. They don't care if it comes from a reporter, an athlete or the guy down the block. Yes, there are different levels of trust with who delivers the news, but reporters need to realize that they're not the only gatekeepers any more -- no matter how much they wish they were.

16 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Can A Radio Station Give Away Tickets To A Football Game? The Eagles Say No...

from the right-of-first-sale dept

We've noted the trend of trying to cut down on scalping by using e-tickets to stop the transfer of tickets, but it appears that the Philadelphia Eagles football team also is trying to stop radio stations from doing promotional giveaways. The team has sued the owner of the radio station, saying that the terms on the back of the ticket forbid the use of the tickets for commercial purposes -- such as contests -- and also that the station is violating the Eagles' trademarks in naming them around the ticket giveaway promotion. This raises a bunch of questions about the right of first sale on a ticket. While the stadium may have the right to forbid entry to anyone, it seems like that would be a dumb move on the team's part. My guess is that the team's main concern is that it only wants partner (i.e., those who paid a ton for broadcast rights) radio stations to give away tickets -- but that doesn't mean there's a legal right there. If the tickets were legitimately bought, why shouldn't the station be able to sell them or give them away? And, considering that the radio station was accurately describing the team when using the name, that shouldn't be a trademark violation.

42 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Social Media Allows For Honest Expression... Don't Stifle It

from the don't-tweet-that dept

There's saying that's been making the rounds lately, in talking about journalism, saying that "trust is the new objectivity." The idea is that if you're trustworthy, even if you have a bias, people are more interested in what you have to say. But, of course, that doesn't just apply to journalists. It pretty much applies to everyone, in any business. People are tired of fake connections. They want real connections. That's what connecting with fans is really all about. If you're honest and open, you build trust. And that trust is valuable. So it's difficult to understand why so many organizations work so hard to stifle that kind of openness. We saw it recently with the Washington Post's new social media guidelines, and we've seen it elsewhere as well, such as with sports teams.

For example, JJ sends in the news that the Jets benched a player for a Twitter message, despite the fact that the team is actually more open to having its players use social media to connect with fans. Hearing this, I figured it must be quite a Twitter message -- seeing as there was just a big controversy over a Redskins player who insulted fans via Twitter, calling them "dimwits" and saying they shouldn't give their opinion on the team since they work at McDonalds. But what did the Jets player say that was so troubling?

"1 play in the 1st Half, 4 plays in the 2nd half,.... A bit disappointed about my playing time but very happy and satisfied about the win."

I'm honestly having a hard time seeing how that's a benchable offense. He was entirely honest, and not accusatory. He was happy that the team won, but wished he could have been involved in more plays. He's a professional athlete, and such sentiments are pretty standard. It actually seems nice that he's sharing with fans in that way. He didn't seem to be complaining or disparaging the team or anyone. He just noted that personally he was "a bit disappointed" that he wasn't more involved.

The fact is, the internet lets people connect with others -- either one-to-one or one-to-many in much more direct and personal ways than ever before in the past. Yes, that has some risks and downsides, but on the whole, that openness and connection builds trust and a relationship, and that's important. It makes no sense to try to stifle such communications, whether its a journalist or a professional athlete.

9 Comments | Leave a Comment..

NFL: Refs Banned From Using All Social Media; Press Can't Live Tweet

from the free-speech-ain't-so-free dept

While it doesn't go nearly as far as the ridiculous policies put in place recently by college's Southeastern Conference (SEC) regarding "tweeting" on gameday, Ben alerts us to the news that the NFL has instituted its own social media policy that applies to players, referees and the media. There had been lots of talk about how the NFL was working on such policies, and they seem problematic. They ban players from doing any tweeting or sending any kind of social media message from 90 minutes before the game starts until well after the post-game press conference ends. I'm not sure why it's so troubling that players might want to communicate with fans...

Even odder is that the rules now prohibit NFL referees from using social media, ever. Apparently, some of this is in response to a ref who apologized online for a blown call in the week after it happened. In that case, the ref is an attorney during the week, and apologized via his work email. But that raises all sorts of questions. What if the ref's job during the week requires the use of social media? And, honestly, what's so wrong with letting refs communicate?

Finally, the new rules tell the credentialed media that they can't provide any sort of live "play-by-play" info via social media, though, I can't see how that's enforceable (other than kicking the reporter out of the stadium). Once again, this seems like part of the league's misguided belief that it can control how reporters report on a game. The first link above notes how ridiculous it is that someone sitting in the stands can easily live tweet a play-by-play, while the professional reporters cannot. The whole idea, of course, is that the NFL wants to "protect" its broadcasting contracts, that get sold for a ton. But the idea that a live tweet somehow replaces a TV broadcast is ridiculous. Personally, as someone who follows a bunch of sports reporters on Twitter who do tweet info during sporting events, I find it a useful reminder that I wish I had the time to watch a game...

53 Comments | Leave a Comment..

NFL Doesn't Get It: Blocking Fans Doesn't Make Them Like Teams Any More

from the this-is-still-happening? dept

I knew this was common years ago, but I honestly had no clue that modern sports leagues were so clueless as to think that it made sense to blackout local TV broadcasting if the attendance at the event wasn't a sell-out. Those rules were from a time (apparently still existing for some) where people actually thought that being able to see a game on TV would mean fewer people coming out to the actual game. Of course, as any sports fan knows, there's a massive difference between watching on TV and "being there." But allowing fans to watch their favorite team on TV does seem to encourage fans to care more about their team, making it more likely that they'll go out and see the team live when they can. But... not according to the NFL, who still has such blackout rules in effect, and is suddenly worried that attendance this season is dropping (thanks Carlo) due to the economy, meaning that many more games won't be shown to local fans. It's difficult to see how that makes any sense at all. All it does is piss off the biggest fans, and give them reasons not to pay attention to the team, and to cut out the most compelling local TV for many fans (harming ad revenue). On top of that, you risk a sort of death spiral. Teams that don't get enough fans at the live event piss off their fans who can't watch the games on TV -- and without the games on TV, they're less interested in following the team... leading to less interest in going to the game... leading to more empty seats... leading to even fewer games getting on TV.

46 Comments | Leave a Comment..

NFL Tries To Keep A Lid On Legal Sports Betting

from the -250-to-succeed dept

Moves are afoot in Delaware to open legal sports books there, after the state's Supreme Court ruled that certain types of bets are constitutional. The state, like many others, sees taxes on gambling as a potential financial savior, but the NFL doesn't care. The league is threatening to file suit to try and stop the legalization of sports betting in Delaware, part of its long-running efforts to wipe out betting on its games. The league says that legalized gambling "will inevitably lead those gambling fans to question whether an erroneous officiating call or a dropped pass late in the game resulted from an honest mistake or an intentional act by a corrupt player or referee" -- but to suggest that such speculation won't exist otherwise is erroneous. It's really hard to see why the NFL (like other American sports leagues) thinks that keeping most betting (which is going to carry on anyway, regardless of its feelings on the matter) underground will prevent corruption, or even its mere appearance. It's a similar argument as that surrounding other forms of gambling, like internet poker: bringing the activities into a legal, regulated and monitored environment offers greater protection and far more benefits than keeping it in an unregulated, underground black market where anything goes. To this point, legal bookies can play a significant role in rooting out corrupt behavior by reporting suspicious betting patterns and other information. Illegal bookies aren't too likely to do that sort of thing.

Carlo Longino is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Carlo Longino and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

30 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Yahoo Gets Aggressive: Wants Court To Make It Clear That It Doesn't Need To Pay To Use Player Names/Stats

from the this-again? dept

Recent court rulings have made it clear that sports leagues have overreached (by a long shot) in trying to force online fantasy sports sites to license player info. The courts have pointed out that player names and stats are factual information, not subject to copyright. Now, this has resulted in many fantasy sports sites to skip renewing any licensing deals. The NFL Players Assocation, despite already having lost such a case, still went to Yahoo and threatened it with a lawsuit over this issue. It appears Yahoo decided to be proactive and sued for a declaratory judgment that its uses of player info was not in violation. It's an aggressive move by Yahoo -- but it also shows (reasonably) that the company believes that it's likely to win (and, perhaps, that it was worried about whatever district the NFL PA would have filed its own lawsuit in). Either way, it's yet another chance to remind sports leagues that they don't get to copyright factual information.

21 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Mixed Messages From Sprint On EVDO Bandwidth

from the this-doesn't-quite-make-sense dept

Earlier this year, Sprint followed Verizon in tacking on a 5GB cap on its EVDO wireless broadband offering for computers (for either datacard or phone-as-modem users). Because of that, I find Sprint EVDO a lot less useful, and am actively looking for alternatives. Unfortunately, for now there aren't many, though I hope that will change. Either way, I end up using Sprint a lot less, and would be a lot more open to competitors. One of the reasons I stuck with Sprint for so long was the unlimited nature of the EVDO. Even if I don't use up 5GB, not worrying about reaching a limit used to be a huge benefit. Now, when I use EVDO, I feel like I need to carefully track what's happening -- since Sprint might cut off my service if my usage is deemed abusive.

Now, to make matters even more ridiculous, it appears that Sprint has signed a deal "valued at $500 million" to stream live football games over EVDO to its mobile phones. (Half a billion sounds like a big deal, but it doesn't actually mean $500 million was paid out -- it's likely much of it involves trades of promotion and services.) Now, the tricky part is that the 5GB cap on EVDO does not count towards content viewed just on phones, so Sprint is sending a very mixed message. First Sprint says that there isn't enough bandwidth on its network to support really unlimited usage for PC users, but then it's also coming up with ways to increase the amount of bandwidth its customers are using on phones. Does that mean Sprint doesn't care about PC users on its network -- and datacard users will be further squeezed as Sprint prefers its phone customers to use up the wireless bandwidth? Shouldn't Sprint focus on improving its network so that the bandwidth limits for PC users doesn't get worse rather than buying into deals to increase the bandwidth burden?

22 Comments | Leave a Comment..

CBS Goes To Court To Let The NFL Know That You Can't Copyright Player Stats

from the and-it's-correct dept

Over the past few years, there have been a series of lawsuits concerning whether or not fantasy baseball operators need to license player info from Major League Baseball. Major League Baseball lost at every level and an eventual appeal to the Supreme Court was turned down. However, it appears that the National Football League wanted to ignore these rulings, and has still been trying to get fantasy sports sites to pony up to use stats and player info -- despite the fact that you cannot copyright facts. CBS is now challenging the NFL on this, and has gone to court to get a declaratory judgment that it doesn't need a license. It's difficult to see this case turning out any differently than the MLB cases, considering the facts of the case are almost identical.

24 Comments | Leave a Comment..

If ESPN Can Replay Games With Madden '09, Let Us Do It Too

from the boom-goes-the-dynamite dept

In an effort to become more relevant to a new generation of football fans, this Sunday on "NFL Countdown," ESPN anchors will interact with simulated football players created using EA's video game technology. Using Madden '09, ESPN's football analysts can model different variations of plays to demonstrate possible outcomes. So, instead of just drawing X's and O's on a telestrator, ESPN anchors will be able to interact with the virtual players on camera to illustrate various football strategies and outcomes. ESPN and EA forged a 15-year partnership back in 2005, and this move strengthens both brand's ties with their audiences.

As the video game has improved, using Madden to illustrate plays has been done increasingly over the past few years, but football spectating still has to cross the chasm of interactivity when compared to the video game experience. In the video game, you're able to change camera angles, slow down the cameras, and highlight things like passing routes and defensive coverages -- all at the click of a few buttons. EA's new system, EA Sports Virtual Playbook, loads in actual gameplay data from the previous day's game, with which ESPN's anchors can then replay and modify the simulation to become the ultimate version of a Monday morning quarterback. That's great and all, it would be even better to let fans download that data to their Xboxes, do their own analysis and then share that back with the community. Though, that scenario is most likely a pipe dream, considering that the NFL still freaks out about even sharing more than 45-seconds of game footage.

4 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Sen. Arlen Specter Demands Investigation of Spying... In The NFL

from the priorities dept

Sometimes, no amount of snark can top the real world. Threat Level notes that "Arlen Specter, the Republican leader of the Senate Judiciary Committee, on Wednesday demanded an independent investigation into 'Spygate.'" Not the administration's various warrantless eavesdropping programs, but allegations that the New England Patriots have been secretly recording the signals of opposing teams. Because, of course, Congress has nothing more important to worry about than cheating in football. This is particularly galling when juxtaposed with reports that the administration has unveiled (sort of) a "cyber-security" proposal that includes expanded spying on the Internet. That is something that could use more scrutiny from Congress. Indeed, because the Bush administration has shrouded details of its surveillance programs in secrecy, Congress has a unique role in investigating the proposal and exposing any aspects that could violate civil liberties. And the Ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee would be a big help in those efforts. But unfortunately, the threat of expanded spying in the NFL is such a serious problem that Sen. Specter doesn't seem to have much time to investigate spying programs that affect those of us who don't play football for a living.

Timothy Lee is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Timothy Lee and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

30 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Patriots Still Want 19-0 Trademark; So They Can Pretend They Had A Perfect Season

from the someone-sack-the-lawyer dept

Right before the Super Bowl this year, we noted that the New England Patriots had filed for a trademark on "19 - 0" to be used in merchandise commemorating what the team believed would be the culmination of an undefeated season. This, by itself, was rather ridiculous, as the idea that one team could trademark its won-loss record seems totally unacceptable. It also showed off a bit of hubris, which got knocked back down to earth by Eli Manning and the NY Giants in an unexpected upset of the Patriots in the Super Bowl. However, it appears that the Patriots are still pursuing the trademark despite its final record of 18-1. The Smoking Gun noticed that a lawyer for the team recently updated the trademark application, fixing a typo (changing "toy bans" to "toy banks") which suggests that the team still wants the trademark, despite not having actually won the Super Bowl and not actually having a 19-0 record. Perhaps the team figures that it talked about it enough that people will actually think it was undefeated, allowing the Patriots to cash in on the term. Or maybe the team figures that if it can't own a 19-0 record, no one should be able to. Either way, when the story first broke, the NY Post had jokingly applied for a trademark on 18-1. If the Patriots really do continue to pursue this 19-0 trademark, then hopefully the Post will continue to pursue its trademark as well.

45 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Dallas Cowboys Return Cowboys.com After Thinking The Price Was $275 Instead Of $275,000

from the false-start.--10-yard-penalty dept

The domain name business is hot again, driving up the price of popular domains names, sometimes to ridiculous levels. However, it appears that no one briefed the Dallas Cowboys on what these types of things typically cost. The owner of the domain cowboys.com recently sold it in a domain auction, with the winning bid of $275,000 going to the Cowboys. Apparently, on receiving the invoice, the Dallas Cowboys are claiming that it was a mistake -- they thought the bid had been for $275, not $275,000 -- and therefore, they wish to cancel the sale. Of course, some people are suggesting that this is merely a cop out from a team that has a bit of buyer's remorse. It does seem a bit bizarre that anyone would think they could get such a domain for $275.

13 Comments | Leave a Comment..

New England Patriots Spying On Ticket Resales; Court Forces Stubhub To Hand Over Ticket Seller Names

from the privacy?-schmivacy dept

We've heard plenty of stories about organizations trying to ban the resale of tickets to events. It seems a bit silly to tell someone who bought a ticket to a concert or a sporting event that they're not allowed to resell it, but apparently some event organizers feel differently -- especially when the tickets are sold at greater than face value. The New England Patriots apparently are so adamant that people shouldn't be reselling their tickets for profit that they've convinced a court to force ticket resale marketplace StubHub to hand over the names of everyone who resold Patriots tickets for above face value. This seems like a rather large privacy violation -- and it clearly violates Stubhub's own terms of service (which is why the company fought it in court). You could understand being forced to turn over such information in a criminal lawsuit, but this is the New England Patriots requesting and getting the private info of sellers. For a team that just got into some trouble for spying on opposing teams, spying on their fans' private transactions doesn't seem like a step forward.

42 Comments | Leave a Comment..