Madden NFL 11 News Post

Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

09:48 PM - December 22, 2010 by Steve_OS

Gamasutra has some new info on the lawsuit.

Quote:


	"A U.S. district judge has certified a class-action anti-trust lawsuit against Electronic Arts that alleges the company illegally inflated prices for its football titles after attaining exclusive rights to league licenses. In a 67-page complaint [PDF], the legal team specifically cites the 2004 pricing battle between Sega and Take-Two's NFL2K5, which retailed for just $19.95, and EA's Madden NFL 2005, which was lowered from a $49.95 asking price to $29.95 in November of that year. A month after this price decrease, EA signed its exclusive licensing deal with the NFL, following with similar deals for the NCAA and Arena Football leagues in later months. The next year's Madden NFL 2006 faced no competition in the football game market at its usual $49.95 price point."

Gamespot chimes in as well.

Quote:


	"We believe EA forced consumers to pay an artificial premium on Madden NFL video games" Berman continued. "We intend to prove that EA could inflate prices on their sports titles because these exclusive licenses restrained trade and competition for interactive sports software."

What do you think happens, out of all this?

Game: Madden NFL 11Reader Score: 6/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 96 - View All

Madden NFL 11 Videos

Member Comments

# 121 ODogg @ 12/30/10 05:13 PM

The American Needle case wasn't centered on the exclusivity of the deal so much as the deal was brokered under the NFL as a single entity aspect rather than the deal was brokered with all individual 32 teams. There will still be plenty of exclusive deals, they will just be negotiated in a different manner in order to discourage the ability for future lawsuits like this one.

As for your last question "how would the NFL convince a court they're not conspiring to eliminate the competition"...the NFL does not have to ensure competition beyond the initial bidding process for the contract. That is the competition.

# 122 Kaanyr Vhok @ 01/01/11 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khaliib


	I just don't get it. Why try the legal route, when there's another way. A developer makes a football game with full customization (combo of NBA 2k11/Backbreaker) and they don't have to shell out money for a license or player likeness. The first thing people do when they get a game is editing. Whether ratings, sliders or uniforms, it all depends on what editing features are open to them to use. "Focus on the engine (gameplay), provied the body (presentation/franchise/online), give us some paints (full customization) and the gaming community will color it how they like it." If I want NFL, I'll make it. If I want College, I'll do it. Maybe Juco or Highschool, it's on the gamer. The point to this rant, is that there is an easier way around Exclusive Licenses w/out all the drama.

Bingo. Its pretty easy to put NFL rosters in Backbreaker but its not NBA 2k share easy. I'm not sure if this is legal but if it is it would lower the value of the license and thats a good thing

# 123 ODogg @ 01/03/11 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiquorLogic


	The exclusivity and the fact that NFL brokered the deal as one entity, when the NFL isn't one entity, both play a big part in the lawsuit. Remember, in the lower court, the NFL argued that they were a single-entity, so they couldn't conspire with themselves, and it was perfectly legal for them to exclusively go with Reebok. The lower courts agreed and threw the case out, but American Needle Appealed, and the SCOTUS has declared the NFL to be more than one entity. To me, negotiating exclusive deals with every NFL team would obviously be suspect. Again, how would the deal have looked if Reebok had individually secured the exclusive rights to every team, and locking out American Needle in the process. The NFL, up until now, has been able to construct exclusive deals because they were considered a single-entity. Now they aren't, so I don't understand your logic that the NFL just has to alter the way they broker their exclusive deals. If one team brokers a deal with EA, exclusively, that's fine. If all of the teams sign exclusively with EA, there's is a problem.

If they negotiate as separate entities, as they will, then there will be no legal issue.

# 124 SmashMan @ 01/05/11 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiquorLogic


	Any way you slice it, a conspiracy is a conspiracy.

Just because you keep saying that doesn't make it true.

The NFL can't negotiate in the future as a single entity, that's obvious. But there will be nothing legally wrong with teams individually negotiating with EA on their own behalf.

I think we can all agree that competition would be nothing but good; but we're really reaching to define every potential scenario as a conspiracy.

# 125 ODogg @ 01/13/11 01:29 AM

I wonder if guys like Rams and LiquorLogic will be happy if you get your wish and the end result is like back in the 80's when you'd buy a game with the Cowboys, Raiders, Patriots and Colts in it and the rest of the teams are generic ala Midway Grizzlies and the like. Because that's what the end result of what these lawsuits could bring. Careful what you wish for..

# 126 Only1LT @ 01/13/11 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EddieV


	I've been playing football videogames since the 70s...what game from the 80s are you talking about? I've never seen a game that had some NFL teams and not others.

To my recollection, there weren't any Football games that had some real and some fake teams, but I could be mistaken. Games like Tecmo Bowl, only had a handful of NFL teams though.

There were games though that had some real and some fake players. That I remember.

# 127 roadman @ 01/13/11 05:43 PM

NES Play Action Football only had 8 teams and Techmo Bowl had 4 teams.

Before 92, Joe Montana Football was a non-licensed football game.

# 128 splff3000 @ 04/16/13 12:18 AM

Looks like the lawsuit has been modified for increased compensation and extended to allow more gamers time to get their claims in.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/...wsuit-extended

Quote:


	A class action lawsuit filed against EA in 2011 over an alleged monopoly in the football simulation games market has been modified to allow for increased compensation in the case of approval by the court. The claims period has been extended accordingly to May 15th, allowing affected individuals more time to file their claims. The lawsuit alleges that by creating a monopoly, EA has been able to overcharge its customers for football games. You are automatically affected by this lawsuit and entitled to possible compensation if you are in the United States and if you bought a new copy of a Madden NFL, NCAA Football, or Arena Football game for Xbox, Xbox 360, PS2, PS3, GameCube, PC, or Wii, with a release date between January 1, 2005 and June 21, 2012. You are excluded from this settlement class if you purchased a secondhand copy of the game, or if you purchased it directly from EA. If the settlement is approved by the court, you are only eligible to receive compensation if you have submitted a claim. Affected gamers may file a claim at the Pecover v. Electronic Arts Inc. Settlement website ( http://www.easportslitigation.com/ ) before May 15th. If approved, valid claims for the purchase of games from the listed franchises for the Xbox, PS2, PC, and GameCube will be valued at $20.37 each, up to a total of eight games ($162.96). Valid claims for games for the Xbox 360, PS3, and Wii platforms will be valued at $5.85 each, up to a total of eight games ($46.80).

I had never heard of the above mentioned site, but I guess I'll add my name to this list since I bought Madden 7 of the last 8 yrs. Now I guess I need to dig through my emails to find the email that was sent out lol.

# 129 bcruise @ 04/16/13 10:32 AM

How do you go about proving you owned these games if you no longer have the receipts? Madden '08 is easy because I own it digitally (it's even tied to my Origin account and has been for years), but the other last-gen one I bought, '06, I don't own anymore and I don't think there's any way to prove I ever did.

I owned several PS3-gen games too, still have 10, 12, and maybe a couple others, but again, no receipts.

# 130 murph17 @ 04/16/13 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcruise


	I owned several PS3-gen games too, still have 10, 12, and maybe a couple others, but again, no receipts.

unless you put down the max amount (which is like 6 of each title or something like that) they are probably not going to ask you to provide receipts. by completing the form you are legally declaring you actually bought those games.

# 131 bcruise @ 04/16/13 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by murph17


	by completing the form you are legally declaring you actually bought those games.

Exactly, which is why I don't want to do this without being able to prove I bought them new somehow. Like I said, 08 PC is easy because there's a digital record of it. The others....not so much.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2

# 132 Mauer4MVP @ 04/16/13 05:46 PM

As much as dislike EA, I don't think they are at fault here. While I think 60 bucks is ridiculous price for any game, they have the same price as any game.

# 133 splff3000 @ 04/16/13 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcruise


	How do you go about proving you owned these games if you no longer have the receipts? Madden '08 is easy because I own it digitally (it's even tied to my Origin account and has been for years), but the other last-gen one I bought, '06, I don't own anymore and I don't think there's any way to prove I ever did. I owned several PS3-gen games too, still have 10, 12, and maybe a couple others, but again, no receipts.

In every class action lawsuit I've ever been part of, no one actually came to verify anything. I'm assuming because the payouts to each individual are usually so little they don't feel like it's worth it. I don't know if it will be the same in this case, but I'd be willing to bet it will be. Either way, this is all conjecture at this point because it's not a given that EA will lose this case.

# 134 reddogmaddogbul @ 04/16/13 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by splff3000


	In every class action lawsuit I've ever been part of, no one actually came to verify anything. I'm assuming because the payouts to each individual are usually so little they don't feel like it's worth it. I don't know if it will be the same in this case, but I'd be willing to bet it will be. Either way, this is all conjecture at this point because it's not a given that EA will lose this case.

Couldn't of wrote it no better myself

(co-sign) .....I'm assuming because the payouts to each individual are usually so little they don't feel like it's worth it.
Sad

but True

# 135 mestevo @ 04/16/13 07:26 PM

You could have written it better by saying EA has settled, they've already 'lost' the case by paying $27m (perhaps a little more, based on the extension of the claim period) into a fund. That's why we're talking about payouts, that's why there's a 'Settlement website' - http://www.easportslitigation.com/

# 136 gtyjrocks @ 04/16/13 09:12 PM

When do we get a check if we submitted a claim?

# 137 DocHolliday @ 04/16/13 11:55 PM

The best chance of this exclusivity going away won't be through legal action....it will happen if the NFL feels like the negativity is actually affecting their image/brand.

Twitter and a viral campaign would be the only hope.

# 138 howboutdat @ 04/17/13 04:01 PM

to me the lawsuit is just for kids who want to get a few bucks outta EA. i personally cant stand EA and the way they do things, however to me i have no interest in joining this for a key reason. Now it claims the reason for the suit is basically due to the contract EA has with the NFL, basically making a monopoly , and allowing them to raise price. While they do have a monopoly , which is supposed to be illegal, this lawsuit while stating that as the problem, does absolutely NOTHING TO FIX IT. If the lawsuits agenda was to make the contract between EA and NFL be deemed illegal and would make them stop doing it , then id be all for it because that is what needs to happen. But just trying to take a few bucks from them , to me , is just being just like the greedy aholes people are saying they dislike(numer 1 disliked company in the US , 2 YEARS RUNNING). Id rather not stoop to their levels myself. We just need that contract to be stopped from being renwed or ever done again.Sure , if that happened, 2k wouldnt have a great NFL game for a few years, but it would at least open the door for them , so they could get it going . Im sure they would do well with it within a few short years of making one.Problem is, we will never know, as long as lawsuits like this only go for money , instead of going to fight and get rid of the real problem. So have fun with the 5$ people.......

# 139 CM Hooe @ 04/17/13 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by howboutdat


	Now it claims the reason for the suit is basically due to the contract EA has with the NFL, basically making a monopoly , and allowing them to raise price. While they do have a monopoly , which is supposed to be illegal, this lawsuit while stating that as the problem, does absolutely NOTHING TO FIX IT.

The exclusivity agreement between EA and the NFL is not a monopoly situation.

The NFL has the right to sell the right to use of its properties to whomever it chooses. If the NFL is agreeable to an exclusive arrangement, so be it. It isn't obligated to allow other companies to license its properties, just as MGM isn't obligated to license the James Bond franchise to any company but Activision-Blizzard. A court can't dictate how the NFL manages its own intellectual property rights.

Further, the situation is not a monopoly because the agreement doesn't stop other companies from producing video games or even realistic American football video games; the opportunity for direct competition still exists. Indeed, at least four full-scale console releases have been published since the agreement happened (Blitz: The League, Blitz: The League 2, All Pro Football 2K8, Backbreaker). Even without full-scale football video games in the market, EA Sports titles still face competition from other sports games - NBA 2K, The Show, etc. - and also non-sports games - Halo, Call Of Duty, etc. - for consumer attention.

Just because a situation is unfavorable to consumers (which the exclusivity license is, you won't get an argument from me on that point) doesn't make it against the law.

# 140 infemous @ 04/17/13 10:54 PM

they never reduce the price by much any more and with the next generation not going to allow re-sales of games, destroying the rental market and with ZERO competition there is an unfair advantage held by EA.

I'd also like to ask anyone who defends EA here why they would want a game to stay expensive?

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 678 9 10 11 12 Next »

More Links

Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA