Operation Sports Logo Header
Home
Operation Sports Logo Header
News Post

Lawyers Never Wanted to Sack the EA Sports College Football Series

  10:15 AM - October 5, 2013 by sportznut02

With the EA/CLC settlement completed and many on the EA Sports NCAA team blindsided without a job, the money-grabbing lawyers have finally chimed in with a few things to say.

Quote:
"We would've been happy to have the game go forward. It was never our intent to not have this game [continue]...

"That's not us. We didn't tell them to do that," said Aragon, when asked to comment on EA's cancellation of next year's college football title. "We would be fine if they published a game."

"There's nothing stopping [EA] from making the game, so long as they don't use players' names, images or likenesses. Or [they could] pay the students, which they didn't really agree to..."

Source - Lawyers never intended for EA to stop making NCAA Football games (Polygon)

Member Comments
# 21 xandermole25 @ 10/05/13 10:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkrich83
What IPs?

Actually they do sign a waiver allowing the NCAA to use their likeness unfettered, that's the point of the case as I understand. The case being made against the NCAA is actually an anti-trust argument. Their argument is that the NCAA forcing them to sign away their likeness rights while playing college athletics is a violation of the Sherman Act because it artificially drives down the value of their likeness to $0. At least thats how I read the O'Bannon case.

Not sure what likeness rights have to do with Intellectual Properties.
they don't sign a waiver saying that the ncaa can use their likeness, they sign an agreement that will not use their likeness to make a financial gain. If they did sign a waiver for the NCAA to use their likeness why would this quote exist?
“The simple, straightforward truth is that the NCAA has never licensed student-athlete likeness or interfered with their ability to sell or license their collegiate likenesses. Discovery has revealed what the NCAA has maintained throughout: those claims simply are not true. Plaintiffs themselves have admitted the NCAA has never interfered with former student-athletes’ ability to sell or license their collegiate likenesses.”- Donald Remy (If you don't know who this is he is the vice president of the NCAA)
 
# 22 bkrich83 @ 10/05/13 10:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xandermole25
they don't sign a waiver saying that the ncaa can use their likeness, they sign an agreement that will not use their likeness to make a financial gain. If they did sign a waiver for the NCAA to use their likeness why would this quote exist?
“The simple, straightforward truth is that the NCAA has never licensed student-athlete likeness or interfered with their ability to sell or license their collegiate likenesses. Discovery has revealed what the NCAA has maintained throughout: those claims simply are not true. Plaintiffs themselves have admitted the NCAA has never interfered with former student-athletes’ ability to sell or license their collegiate likenesses.”- Donald Remy (If you don't know who this is he is the vice president of the NCAA)

Prior to playing an Athlete has to sign From 08-3a.

Quote:
NCAA Bylaws

As any college-bound athlete knows, before you can suit up at a Division 1 school, you have to sign a few documents. Most notably among them is the Form 08-3a Student Athlete Statement. By signing, students affirm that they understand that they are prohibited from profiting from the commercial use of their names, pictures or likenesses while in school. In addition, at Part IV of the form, the students expressly authorize the NCAA and the CLC to use the student-athlete’s names or pictures in accordance with Bylaw 12.5, including promoting NCAA championships or other NCAA events, activities or programs. Bylaw 12.5 expressly limits the NCAA’s right to use the names or pictures of enrolled students. However, this bylaw does not place a time limit on the NCAA’s right to use names or pictures. It follows then, that likenesses captured during college are probably subject to NCAA rules, which expressly permit the NCAA to license the use of likenesses to entertainment outlets…like Electronic Arts (among others).


So not sure you're entirely correct.
 
# 23 bkrich83 @ 10/05/13 10:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
Likeness rights are a form of intellectual property.
My understanding is IP's are things that are trademarked or copyrighted or proprietary in nature.
 
# 24 bkrich83 @ 10/05/13 11:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
Those are also forms of IP. I'm not sure why you think your own image would be any different.

Not relevant here, but patents are IP too.
I know patents are.
 
# 25 xandermole25 @ 10/05/13 11:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkrich83
Prior to playing an Athlete has to sign From 08-3a.

[/b]

So not sure you're entirely correct.
you are correct, they are allowed to use the likeness(conferences, the school, and the bowl games, tournaments etc.) for the promotion of the games the NCAA... but obviously the NCAA doesn't feel that they can do that with video games based on those remarks they don't think they have the right so
also upon reading bi-law 12.5 the likeness is allowed for educational or other purposes considered critical to their participation as student athletes... which I don't think video games fall under... again the remarks by Remy
 
# 26 bkrich83 @ 10/05/13 11:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xandermole25
you are correct, they are allowed to use the likeness(conferences, the school, and the bowl games, tournaments etc.) for the promotion of the games the NCAA... but obviously the NCAA doesn't feel that they can do that with video games based on those remarks they don't think they have the right so
also upon reading bi-law 12.5 the likeness is allowed for educational or other purposes considered critical to their participation as student athletes... which I don't think video games fall under... again the remarks by Remy
Yeah I see the remarks by Remy. I don't think it's quite as black and white as some think. Maybe it's just me.

I am also not sure what's being accomplished by all this other than making attorneys wealthier.
 
# 27 prowler @ 10/05/13 11:16 PM
Why are we going back and fourth on an issue that's already been decided?

There's nothing the law offices of Operation and Sports could argue that EA's actual legal team didn't think of.

EA lost. Old news. That's not what the OP is about.
 
# 28 bkrich83 @ 10/05/13 11:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by prowler
Why are we going back and fourth on an issue that's already been decided?

There's nothing the law offices of Operation and Sports could argue that EA's actual legal team didn't think of.

EA lost. Old news. That's not what the OP is about.
I thought they settled?

At least O'Bannon got his $300 though.
 
# 29 xandermole25 @ 10/05/13 11:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkrich83
Yeah I see the remarks by Remy. I don't think it's quite as black and white as some think. Maybe it's just me.

I am also not sure what's being accomplished by all this other than making attorneys wealthier.
i understand that it's not real black and white but here is another bi-law
if you read bi-law 12.5.2.1 it states that no student athlete should allow their number, name, or image to be used to promote a commercial product (it can be argued that their likeness being used in a video game counts as promoting)
12.5.2.1.2 states that member institutions cannot use the students image in the above manner without their consent or that it would be considered an institutional offense
and other parts of 12.5 go into more detail about students needing to give permission before an item is sold with their likeness
 
# 30 bkrich83 @ 10/05/13 11:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxFox7
What's accomplished is putting a stop to the NCAA ignoring their own bylaws and violating IP law (at a minimum). What may further be accomplished, if the antitrust part of this goes anywhere, are changes to the amateurism rules. The end game being players being able to be compensated for their use of their likeness.
Yeah I thought about that. I don't think amateurism rules as they apply to NCAA athletes will change. It appears though there's merit to the Anti-Trust portion.

Once we start allowing players to start marketing themselves, might as well kill college football and basketball. The agents, gamblers, etc, will now be impossible to keep from influencing players.
 
# 31 bkrich83 @ 10/05/13 11:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xandermole25
i understand that it's not real black and white but here is another bi-law
if you read bi-law 12.5.2.1 it states that no student athlete should allow their number, name, or image to be used to promote a commercial product (it can be argued that their likeness being used in a video game counts as promoting)
12.5.2.1.2 states that member institutions cannot use the students image in the above manner without their consent or that it would be considered an institutional offense
and other parts of 12.5 go into more detail about students needing to give permission before an item is sold with their likeness
I guess maybe I should have actually read the forms I was signing when i was an NCAA athlete.
 
# 32 La Verite @ 10/06/13 01:09 AM
A video game tho
 
# 33 sactown_13 @ 10/06/13 03:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Awesome2103
What are the chances that another college video game, weather it be football, basketball, etc. be made in the future? Maybe even by another company such as 2K Sports.
Slim to none. At least not until this lawsuit with the players and ncaa is solved.
 
# 34 da ThRONe @ 10/06/13 09:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseySuave4
If you don't think EA was using player's likenesses then you are clueless. When DE #7 on South Carolina is the same height, weight, position, race as Clowney, it's pretty blatant that it's his likeness. Just because they don't use his name doesn't mean it's not his likeness.

And those calling this a money grab are just pissed that EA isn't making the game anymore. This is not just about EA or video games, this issue is not over. This is about college kids getting suspended because they sign their own name on something while the school bookstore sells t-shirts with their picture and number all over it. It's about the fact that college football is a billion dollar industry but the players aren't seeing a dime unless they do so illegally. And yes MOST (not all) receive scholarships to pay for books, tuition, etc. but unlike other students who can go have a job to have some spending cash, these players are required to attend meetings and weight lifting, film study, etc. so they aren't able to work like others can.

If EA didn't feel they did something wrong then they wouldn't have thought settling and ultimately ending the series would be the best decision.
This is excluding home state and all #7 similar physical abilities as Clowney.
 
# 35 Forestman @ 10/06/13 11:56 AM
NCAA will continue making millions and I'm sure someone will step in to make money off a video game.

Too much money to be had. This lawsuit is just a blimp in time that will eventually fade away. College players won't ever get paid because it just simply won't work IMO. Too many schools out there who depend on money generated from their sport programs that paying out to the players just doesn't make financial sense. Some schools already loose money on their programs so having to pay players would mean they'd have to cancel their sports programs. NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

If anything the NCAA will wordsmith their legal docs and that will be that.
 
# 36 da ThRONe @ 10/06/13 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forestman
NCAA will continue making millions and I'm sure someone will step in to make money off a video game.

Too much money to be had. This lawsuit is just a blimp in time that will eventually fade away. College players won't ever get paid because it just simply won't work IMO. Too many schools out there who depend on money generated from their sport programs that paying out to the players just doesn't make financial sense. Some schools already loose money on their programs so having to pay players would mean they'd have to cancel their sports programs. NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

If anything the NCAA will wordsmith their legal docs and that will be that.
Clearly you missed the debate about allowing student athletes to profit off of their on intellectual property from 3rd parties. Which in theory cost each school nothing.
 
# 37 Forestman @ 10/06/13 01:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by da ThRONe
Clearly you missed the debate about allowing student athletes to profit off of their on intellectual property from 3rd parties. Which in theory cost each school nothing.
Oh, so payouts to the athletes wouldn't affect the profits schools make off of their sport programs?

Do you have any sources that document who would be responsible to payout?
 
# 38 Scribe1980 @ 10/06/13 02:28 PM
Hollow words. Exactly what in the hell did the lawyers think would happen?

Go away.
 
# 39 kingsofthevalley @ 10/06/13 04:19 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't they have just made sure the game randomly generated numbers and skin tones? That already happens after your first year in dynasty mode anyway.
 
# 40 Jimbo614 @ 10/06/13 04:58 PM
JerseySuave is exactly correct.
However, this statement (From the Lawyers) comes AFTER the fact that EA has dropped the game.
To say that EA had to stop manufacturing the game would have been an over-reach and would have resulted in the case being thrown out of court due to the Constitutional Rights that says that anybody has the Right to manufacture anything they want. But doesn't say at what price or for what consequences.
Of Course they would have preferred the game to continue.. That would have been more on the settlement and it would have meant the payout would have continued indefinitely so long as the game was manufactured.
The point that many of you are missing is that ANYBODY who manufactures ANY game based on Amateur Athletes is going to have to reward those Athletes from now on. This isn't limited to EA NCAA Football, it applies across the board.
 


Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.