<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories about &quot;ncaa&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 17:33:41 PST</pubDate>
<title>Prison Sponsor Tries To Delete Wikipedia Information After Sponsoring NCAA Football Stadium</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130221/10072122058/prison-sponser-tries-to-delete-wikipedia-information-after-sponsoring-ncaa-football-stadium.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130221/10072122058/prison-sponser-tries-to-delete-wikipedia-information-after-sponsoring-ncaa-football-stadium.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Wikipedia gets, what I think is, a bad rap by the general public due to users being able to edit its pages. This isn't to say that there aren't ever problems, but I tend to think that the community does a pretty decent job of policing itself and much of the false-information-hand-wringing is much to do about nothing. Additionally, the benefits, both of all the good information on the site and the <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110407/01474013809/professor-gets-tenure-with-help-his-wikipedia-contributions.shtml">potential benefits</a> of being a great Wiki editor, are far beyond any negative effects of false information. And, for anyone who does attempt to game the information on the site, the consequences can be awful.
<br /><br />
Take, for instance, what has happened now that Geo Group, a company that runs for-profit prisons, has a spokesman running around <a href="http://deadspin.com/5985916/fau-stadiums-new-prison-sponsor-is-frantically-trying-to-wipe-abuse-allegations-from-wikipedia">trying to delete negative information about them</a> from their Wikipedia page. This began shortly after Geo Group inked a deal with Florida Atlantic University for the naming rights to their football stadium, because nothing says irony quite like a prison name for college football, where the athletes are grossly exploited for the profit of the NCAA.
<blockquote><i>
If you want a full litany of abuse, read <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEO_Group#Controversies">the "controversies" section of Geo Group's Wikipedia page</a>. But read it fast: Geo Group is desperately trying to wipe it before you see it. As their naming rights deal became national news, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-lava/geo-group-edit-wikipedia-page_b_2729057.html">a Wikipedia user named Abraham Cohen attacking the page, clearing the entire "controversies" section</a> and replacing it with, essentially, a PR packet. As first noted by the Huffington Post, Abraham Cohen is a spokesperson for Geo Group, and the new material contained multiple instances of the pronouns "we" and "our."
</i></blockquote>
This, obviously, is seen as bad form on Wikipedia and editors almost immediately began fighting back, both restoring the deleted section and calling out Cohen. But Abe wasn't done. After the page was restored, an anonymous IP address which leads back to Geo Group's servers showed up on the page claiming that the PR information Abe had added wasn't PR information at all, but was an accurate reflection of the company's history. 
<br /><br />
The result of all this nonsense? Well, none of it is good for Geo Group. Deadspin picked up the story and there&#39;s little doubt their massive audience is now exponentially more aware of some of the company's more controversial moments, which include mistreatment of prisoners, withholding prisoner medication, withholding medical care for prisoners resulting in their deaths, and guards engaging in sexual intercourse with prisoners. Like me, it's likely that as of last week, most people didn't even know a company called Geo Group existed. But now, because they want to get into the football sponsorship business, and also because they think they can just remove negative information off of the internet, a whole lot of people are more informed about that negative information.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130221/10072122058/prison-sponser-tries-to-delete-wikipedia-information-after-sponsoring-ncaa-football-stadium.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130221/10072122058/prison-sponser-tries-to-delete-wikipedia-information-after-sponsoring-ncaa-football-stadium.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130221/10072122058/prison-sponser-tries-to-delete-wikipedia-information-after-sponsoring-ncaa-football-stadium.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>ain't-gonna-work</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130221/10072122058</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 8 Feb 2013 14:00:17 PST</pubDate>
<title>Lawsuit Over Video Game Rights Might Kill The NCAA But Not The System</title>
<dc:creator>Above The Law</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130207/15002421913/lawsuit-over-video-game-rights-might-kill-ncaa-not-system.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130207/15002421913/lawsuit-over-video-game-rights-might-kill-ncaa-not-system.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <div style="text-align:center;padding:8px;margin:0 0 7px 15px;border:2px solid #bbb;float:right;line-height:1.2;">
<i style="font-weight:bold;color:#666;font-size:90%;">Cross-posted from</i><br />
<a href="http://abovethelaw.com/" target="_blank"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/RvpZD0T.jpg" width="110" title="Above The Law" style="margin:6px 0 0 0;" /></a>
</div>
I don't particularly like the NCAA and <a href="http://abovethelaw.com/2013/01/pennsylvania-governor-and-ncaa-go-to-court-to-cover-their-own-asses/">I enjoy their legal difficulties</a> as much as the next guy. As a devout college sports fan, the usually arbitrary and always backward business side of the NCAA (including the affiliated schools and "non-profit" bowl associations) causes me great consternation.
<p>Apparently, the incomparable Charles P. Pierce <a href="http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8914700/ed-obannon-vs-ncaa">shares my disdain</a> for the lumbering excuse for a fair and credible sanctioning body that currently governs collegiate athletics.</p>
<p>In a sharp Grantland piece, Pierce revisits the Ed O'Bannon-led class-action case against the NCAA and video game manufacturer EA over their combined efforts to profit in perpetuity from the likenesses of unpaid "student ath-o-letes." (Take it away <a href="http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/387407/stu-dent-ath-o-leets">Eric Cartman</a>!) But I think Pierce is overselling the extent to which a possible O'Bannon victory would really change the college sports landscape....</p>

<p>By way of background, Ed O'Bannon is a former UCLA and pre-Brooklyn Nets basketball player who had retired from the game. It came to his attention that the NCAA had licensed his likeness to EA to make approximately a gajillion dollars selling video games featuring "classic" teams like O'Bannon's 1996 UCLA Bruins. O'Bannon felt -- and he was later joined by basketball legends like Bill Russell and Oscar Robertson, who were stunned to learn a) that they were in a video game and b) what a video game was -- that this seemed a little far afield of putting his likeness on a calendar in 1995, which is what he reasonably assumed he was authorizing the NCAA to do when he signed away his rights to profit from the marketing of his collegiate career when he was all of 18 years old.</p>
<p>O'Bannon filed suit in 2009, alleging that the NCAA violated the Sherman Antitrust Act when they forced him to sign a waiver giving up his rights to profit from representations of his collegiate career. As <a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/1/31/3934886/ncaa-lawsuit-ed-obannon">Robert Wheel</a> of SBNation explains:</p>
<blockquote><i><p>O'Bannon is alleging that if the NCAA didn't force him to sign this contract, then he could have gotten money from someone else (say, an EA competitor) to use his likeness. Thus, it essentially fixed the price of using his image at zero. Even if you consider players' scholarships adequate payment for their services, this still artificially depresses how much they're paid. If a judge agrees, the waiver would be considered an illegal restraint of trade under the act.</p></i></blockquote>
<p>And now O'Bannon and his lawyers are seeking to certify a class of all former athletes used in this way for a trial next year (courts have held that maintaining the amateur status of current student athletes is a laudable enough goal <a href="http://winthropintelligence.com/2012/05/06/student-athlete-licensing-program-how-could-it-happen-and-what-are-the-elements/#note-442-11">to justify the NCAA robbing current athletes</a> of the fruits of their potentially debilitating labor, so this case only deals with former athletes).</p>
<p>Which brings us to Charles Pierce's piece. You see, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_Ann_Wilken">Judge Claudia Wilken</a> of the Northern District of California just denied the defendants' motion to end the class certification process on the grounds that the plaintiffs have changed their legal strategy. Judge Wilken basically asked, "So?" and the defendants had no response. Pierce contends that this legal setback for the NCAA, along with recent NCAA retreats on the issue of stipends for players, portends an extinction-level event for college sports.</p>
<blockquote><i><p>By and large, the people charged with running our various sports conglomerates have proven through history to be as incapable of taking the long view of their own survival as the average brachiosaurus was. They blunder around, eating whatever comes under their noses, trampling the scenery and hooting loudly into the wind. They never see the meteor coming. &#8230;</p>
<p>For the NCAA to survive in its current form, it has to win this lawsuit or get the lawsuit dismissed. There&#8217;s no third alternative. The NCAA can&#8217;t settle and then go back to the <em>status quo ante</em>. It can&#8217;t pay off O'Bannon and Russell and Robertson and all the rest of them, and then start business as usual again as regards Cody Zeller or Kenny Boynton. If it loses the lawsuit, the effect on the NCAA's financial structure would be profound. About which, at this point, the device has not yet been invented capable of measuring how little I care. Instead, I stand aside and listen to the stomping and the hooting from the thick Cretaceous rain forest, which is just loud enough to drown out the high whistling sound of something coming down from the sky.</p></i></blockquote>

<p>I'm not sure comparing the NCAA to the dinosaurs makes much sense. The dinosaurs were wiped out entirely and a new world order replaced their presence. The elimination of the NCAA is more akin to the extinction of the Dodo bird: the weakest, most ineffectual player on the evolutionary stage will saunter off while the crazy dudes with guns and hunting dogs remain on top.</p>
<p>Or maybe Pierce is right about the extent of the mass extinction... but he forgets that the elite athletic departments and conferences aren't the dinosaurs, they&#8217;re the cockroaches. I just don't trust these folks to go quietly into the night. They'll let the NCAA take this hit regarding past licensing of "classic team" likenesses and then come up with some new regime where the individual schools capture all the revenue from licensing their own classic teams through bi-lateral agreements with manufacturers to create some semblance of a competitive market for these likenesses and go on exploiting the next generation of future former athletes.</p>
<p>Would that survive legal scrutiny? Maybe not, but the big power players in the sport will happily drag out the issue as long as possible to capture as much profit as possible, even at the expense of the weaker sports schools who would lose out without the NCAA dividing the licensing pot. But for a major athletic department, this is no time for communism! There's <a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/02/16/conference-realignment/index.html">already a roadmap</a> out there to ditch the NCAA and kill off the weaker sports schools leaching off the strong.</p>
<p>So the NCAA might die, but for the players themselves, the motto would be "meet the new boss, same as the old boss."</p>
<p><a href="http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8914700/ed-obannon-vs-ncaa">The O&#8217;Bannon Decision</a> [Grantland]<br />
<a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/1/31/3934886/ncaa-lawsuit-ed-obannon">Ed O&#8217;Bannon vs. the NCAA: The antitrust lawsuit explained</a> [SBNation]<br />
<a href="http://winthropintelligence.com/2012/05/06/student-athlete-licensing-program-how-could-it-happen-and-what-are-the-elements/">NCAA Student-Athlete Licensing Program &#8212; How Could It Happen and What Are the Elements?</a> [Winthrop Intelligence]
<br /><br />
<b>More stories from <a href="http://abovethelaw.com/" target="_blank">Above The Law</a>:</b>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://abovethelaw.com/2013/02/when-luddites-handle-cyber-security-you-end-up-with-american-law-firms/" target="_blank">When Luddites Handle Cyber Security, You End Up With American Law Firms</a>
</li><li><a href="http://abovethelaw.com/2013/02/the-practice-blogging-and-other-social-media-like-a-search-engine-whore/" target="_blank">The Practice: Blogging And Other Social Media, Like A Search Engine Whore</a>
</li><li><a href="http://abovethelaw.com/2013/02/quote-of-the-day-trumps-lawyers-may-be-fired-over-this/" target="_blank">Quote of the Day: Trump&#8217;s Lawyers May Be &#8216;FIRED!&#8217; Over This</a>
</li></ul>
</p><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130207/15002421913/lawsuit-over-video-game-rights-might-kill-ncaa-not-system.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130207/15002421913/lawsuit-over-video-game-rights-might-kill-ncaa-not-system.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130207/15002421913/lawsuit-over-video-game-rights-might-kill-ncaa-not-system.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>the-system-always-lives-on</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130207/15002421913</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2012 05:43:51 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Honey Badger Don't Care... Unless You're Cheering On A College Player With That Nickname</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120813/07425420005/honey-badger-dont-care-unless-youre-cheering-college-player-with-that-nickname.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120813/07425420005/honey-badger-dont-care-unless-youre-cheering-college-player-with-that-nickname.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Not too long ago, we wrote about how lots of fans of (then) Kentucky basketball player Anthony Davis were creating and buying <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120626/23325219499/sports-stars-rushing-to-trademark-office-fear-brow-thats-clown-question-bro.shtml">bootleg</a> merchandise based on the phrase "fear the brow!" which is associated with him because of his prominent unibrow.  Of course, after graduating and turning pro, Davis immediately sought the trademark on the phrase, so that only he could profit from it.  But now, Stephan Kinsella <a href="http://c4sif.org/2011/12/lsu-football-trademark-and-honey-badger/" target="_blank">points us to another college athlete</a> for whom "bootleg" apparel is apparently an issue.   LSU football player <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrann_Mathieu" target="_blank">Tyrann Mathieu</a>  has been nicknamed "Honey Badger" after <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg" target="_blank">this famous memetastic YouTube video</a> about how "Honey Badger don't care."
<center>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4r7wHMg5Yjg?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</center>
Not surprisingly, fans of Mathieu want to support him, and have created various apparel and signs and the like, making use of the Honey Badger name, as well as statements from the video.  All of this resulted in LSU warning that <a href="http://compliance.lsu.edu/Pages/HoneyBadger.aspx" target="_blank">Honey Badger Does Care</a> and that its "Compliance Office" was sending out cease &#038; desist letters to any products that have the name or likeness of Mathieu, including the phrase "honey badger" accompanied by Mathieu's uniform number (7), his name, image or anything that associates it with LSU.
<br /><br />
Now, much of this is because of <a href="https://web1.ncaa.org/LSDBi/exec/bylawSearch?bylawSearchSubmit=viewHtml&#038;division=1&#038;textTerms=&#038;titleTerms=&#038;keyValue=269&#038;reportType=NotMain&#038;adopted=0" target="_blank">completely asinine NCAA rules</a> against selling products that advertise student athletes (even without their knowledge or permission).  But, the overall concept seems even more ridiculous when you realize that the whole Honey Badger meme comes from somewhere else entirely.  Is it really that wrong that fans of Mathieu want to celebrate a player they like?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120813/07425420005/honey-badger-dont-care-unless-youre-cheering-college-player-with-that-nickname.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120813/07425420005/honey-badger-dont-care-unless-youre-cheering-college-player-with-that-nickname.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120813/07425420005/honey-badger-dont-care-unless-youre-cheering-college-player-with-that-nickname.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>intellectual-property-gone-mad</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120813/07425420005</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:15:45 PDT</pubDate>
<title>NCAA Goes Backwards On Streaming The Basketball Tournament</title>
<dc:creator>Timothy Geigner</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120316/06110318128/ncaa-goes-backwards-streaming-basketball-tournament.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120316/06110318128/ncaa-goes-backwards-streaming-basketball-tournament.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ If anyone has gotten the streaming sports thing right in the past, it's been NCAA Basketball. I've actually pointed to them as an example in the past of how the rest of the sporting world should embrace streaming their games and advertise the hell out of the experience. Rather than locking down access to viewership, like <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120104/06070417275/dear-pro-sports-leagues-can-i-watch-game-please.shtml">the MLB, NBA, NFL, and NHL</a>, the NCAA Basektball Tournament got it right, partnering with broadcasters to stream the games to their sites free of charge, with all the advertising one would expect on television. It was a wonderful method for ensuring that one of my monitors at work had their games on. It made it certain that I'd be that weird guy staring at images on his phone while taking the train home from work. It confused my neighbors as to how I could somehow simultaneously grill steaks on my deck while announcers went ballistic over last second hail mary shots as time ran out on the clock. I was <i>engaged </i>(sorry Mom and Dad, I mean engaged to the game).
<br /><br />
And now they've taken that all away from me. To be fair, they're still streaming the games. And they promise that the streams will work across multiple platforms (computer, iPad, iPhone, Android devices, etc.). And it only costs $4.99 for the entire tournament.
<br /><br />
But that's where the lie in all this is. It's not just $4.99 to watch the tournament on every device other than my television (where it's FREE!). There are serious mental transactions to consider here. Like most red-blooded Americans, I'm in an NCAA office bracket. Something like half the games in the tournament take place during work hours across the country. Most of us don't have televisions at our desks, in our cubicles, wherever. Watching at work is kind of the whole point here, with all the ducking and dodging from our bosses we have to do as a result. Now, we can argue all we want whether watching the tourney at work is productive or a good idea, but from the NCAA's standpoint, they shouldn't care at all. They should <i>want</i> people to watch. Asking them to pay $4.99 to do all of this is a massive fail, particularly since all of those same advertisements that were in place remain. 
<br /><br />
So...they're charging for something that used to be free...without adding any benefit. I watched the games on their feeds the past couple of years. This year, not so much. The obvious question is does the money they're making from the $4.99/subscriber outweigh the eyeballs that are no longer watching the advertising because of that cost. Maybe those in the comments can change my mind, but I'm fairly certain there's more folks like me out there than people buying the "package".<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120316/06110318128/ncaa-goes-backwards-streaming-basketball-tournament.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120316/06110318128/ncaa-goes-backwards-streaming-basketball-tournament.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120316/06110318128/ncaa-goes-backwards-streaming-basketball-tournament.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>same-service,-now-for-a-fee!</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120316/06110318128</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 14:24:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>The First Rule Of NCAA March Madness Is You Can't Mention NCAA March Madness</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100323/1029358675.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100323/1029358675.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ What is it with sports leagues that think they have the right to deny anyone from making factual statements?  We've seen it (repeatedly) with <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070305/092327.shtml">the Olympics</a> and we've seen it with <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100322/0020568651.shtml">the World Cup</a>... and now we're seeing it with the NCAA men's basketball tournament, better known as March Madness.  This week, of course, some of the games will be played in Syracuse (including, I feel the urgent need to mention, the surprise of the tournament, my alma mater Cornell), and <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=jsl4980">jsl4980</a> was the first of a few of you to send in the news that <a href="http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2010/03/post_188.html" target="_blank">local businesses are being told they cannot mention the fact that the tournament is being held there</a>.  No local businesses are allowed to "welcome" fans or players for the event.  They can't mention the NCAA event is happening, or that we're at the "Sweet Sixteen" level.
<br /><br />
Of course, that's all according to the NCAA, which is basically lying.  They're abusing the rights that trademark law gives them to try to restrict free speech on factual information, in a misguided effort to squeeze more money out of sponsors, by pretending that only sponsors can mention the event.  But trademark law does not give you blanket control over the trademarked terms -- and presenting factual information, or welcoming people to a city by mentioning an event that is absolutely happening there should not be considered trademark infringement in the slightest.
<br /><br />
Apparently, in the past the NCAA wasn't as abusive of trademarks, but it's learned a thing or two by watching how other sporting events abuse trademark law, and now everyone seems to be bending over backwards assuming that just because the NCAA forbids something that they have the legal right to do so.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100323/1029358675.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100323/1029358675.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100323/1029358675.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>where's-that-happening?-shhhhhh!</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100323/1029358675</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:55:00 PST</pubDate>
<title>NCAA Tries To Bully Fan Discussion Site Into Handing Over Its Domain Name</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091214/0113347336.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091214/0113347336.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ Reader Eileen writes in to alert us that the NCAA -- known for its <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071220/010939.shtml">overly restrictive views</a> at times -- is trying to <a href="http://ncaabbs.com/announcements.php?aid=182" target="_blank">bully the owner of the discussion website NCAAbbs.com</a> into handing over its domain names.  The NCAA is, not surprisingly, complaining that any domain name that includes NCAA automatically should belong to the NCAA.  Of course, it's not so simple.  While the NCAA does have a trademark on its name, that doesn't mean it gets automatic control over any site that uses NCAA in its domain name.  The NCAAbbs site is clearly not associated with the NCAA and is pretty clearly just a fan discussion site.  The owner of the site says that he's planning to fight the demand, and hopefully he can succeed.  While the domain dispute process can be a bit arbitrary, the courts have often realized that a trademark holder does not get full control over every domain that mentions them.  Hopefully, that will be the case here as well.  Of course, the one area where it's pretty clear that you can keep such a domain name is in cases of "sucks sites."  So perhaps if the NCAA wins this, the owner can simple relocate to NCAAreallysucks.com.
<br /><br />
More to the point, however, you have to wonder what the NCAA thinks it's doing here.  You have a site that has been set up to promote the NCAA and all of the various sports teams within the NCAA.  This is an incredibly useful promotional tool that the NCAA should be celebrating and <i>helping</i> rather than attacking.  Why do so many organizations think it's smart to threaten, attack or sue their biggest fans?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091214/0113347336.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091214/0113347336.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091214/0113347336.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>how-about-ncaasucks.com?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091214/0113347336</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:47:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Copyright Dispute Leads To NFL Not Scouting College Juniors</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091026/0411426676.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091026/0411426676.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/profile.php?u=brooks">Brooks</a> writes <i>"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 <a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/football/nfl/10/23/xos.nfl/index.html" target="_blank">has convinced colleges that the NFL should pay for the right to use those tapes to scout players</a>, in particular juniors who are trying to decide whether to enter the draft.<br />
<br />
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.<br />
<br />
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."</i>
<br /><br />
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.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091026/0411426676.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091026/0411426676.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091026/0411426676.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>copyright-gone-insane</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20091026/0411426676</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>