Sam Keller sues EA Sports and the NCAA

[Eaglesfan27]

Interesting issue that I'm surprised no one else has tried to sue over earlier:

San Francisco - The Snitch - Jocks Vs. Nerds: Former College QB Sues NCAA, Videogame Company Over Use of Athletes' Names and Likenesses (http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2009/05/jocks_vs_nerds_--_the_final_ba.php)

[Lonnie]

Kinda shocked this hasn't come up before myself. They do model them pretty accurately.

More interesting was the 9th Annual Masturbate-A-Thon link on the right.

[Tigercat]

Yea, EA sports really made a lot of money off of having Sam Keller's wristband accurately portrayed.

What if they scrambled the numbers, skin tone, ect? Would the next QB that can't make money in the NFL sue because NCAA's Throw Power ratings correspond to his arm strength?

[Eaglesfan27]

A PDF of the suit. It makes some compelling points:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/05/06/ElectronicArts.pdf

[Grammaticus]

Kinda shocked this hasn't come up before myself. They do model them pretty accurately.

More interesting was the 9th Annual Masturbate-A-Thon link on the right.

I didn't get that link on my web page. Must be targeted advertising :)

[panerd]

Yea, EA sports really made a lot of money off of having Sam Keller's wristband accurately portrayed.

What if they scrambled the numbers, skin tone, ect? Would the next QB that can't make money in the NFL sue because NCAA's Throw Power ratings correspond to his arm strength?


I see what your’e saying and agree that nobody bought the game specifically for the video version of Keller but I also agree completely with Keller's lawsuit. I buy the game because it portrays current college football pretty accurately and my team's strengths and weaknesses are always the same as the real team. Completely random teams and players don't interest me at all in a video game. A text sim is a different story but I hated the old school video games where the teams were all equal or even worse completely random. So the only reason they make any money is by using the real players which directly contradicts their own mission statement about the sanctity of amateur athletics.

[Tigercat]

I just don't think they can win this. Since all players facial features are built on a VERY limited number of templates, and the body builds are all built on a VERY limited number of sizes available.

How can you ever show that such players are truly representing real life likenesses? Especially when there are no true individual likenesses in the game. Sounds a lot like parody to me, maybe even textbook.

[sooner333]

I don't know what the precident is in courts for "likeness" and I don't really want to learn it at this point because I'm in law finals and the last thing I want to do is look up a point of law I'm not going to be responsible for (taking the night off because of a week break between finals), but it would seem that likeness probably means more than a number in a game and abilities that may or may not reflect actual abilities in real life. But, EA pretty much has to admit that they basically model the player's ability and number after the player, but not their "likeness" in terms of what they look like.

It might depend if it's more like fantasy baseball (won by Yahoo) or pro games (where there's actually a likeness in the facial features, etc.)

[Logan]

Not saying whether this is right or wrong...

But wouldn't any damages received in a victorious lawsuit in essence mean that these guys were compensated for being a college football player, which would make them retroactively ineligible and force their teams to forfeit games and face additional penalties?

[Karlifornia]

More interesting was the 9th Annual Masturbate-A-Thon link on the right.

I thought "Ha, well that's mildly interesting.."then I got to the 3rd and 4th pictures in the slideshow and was like "whoa!"

[Pumpy Tudors]

Not saying whether this is right or wrong...

But wouldn't any damages received in a victorious lawsuit in essence mean that these guys were compensated for being a college football player, which would make them retroactively ineligible and force their teams to forfeit games and face additional penalties?
I was thinking exactly this.

[sterlingice]

I didn't get that link on my web page. Must be targeted advertising :)

This post didn't get enough love :D

SI

[dawgfan]

The "likenesses" part of the suit has merit. The rest of it does not.

[RainMaker]

Didn't Jim Brown sue over this?

[Karlifornia]

Didn't Jim Brown sue over this?

Yeah, but the lawsuit was dropped after "Crack House: The Video Game" was shelved.

[Julio Riddols]

Why the hell wouldn't you want to be in a football video game? I could give a shit if they paid me or not, it would just be fun to hear my last name actually be pronounced by the announcer instead of "Number 3". And seriously... Wtf harm has it done? Why would someone take the time to do this?

I could understand if they were using his likeness as the victim of something in a game.. But a football sim? Seriously?

There are no Dresselhaus family members in pro sports, but if I happened to go to college and miraculously walk-on to the football team, I would want to see me on the roster.

[Groundhog]

Why the hell wouldn't you want to be in a football video game? I could give a shit if they paid me or not, it would just be fun to hear my last name actually be pronounced by the announcer instead of "Number 3". And seriously... Wtf harm has it done? Why would someone take the time to do this?

I could understand if they were using his likeness as the victim of something in a game.. But a football sim? Seriously?

There are no Dresselhaus family members in pro sports, but if I happened to go to college and miraculously walk-on to the football team, I would want to see me on the roster.

$

[Apathetic Lurker]

Why the hell wouldn't you want to be in a football video game? I could give a shit if they paid me or not, it would just be fun to hear my last name actually be pronounced by the announcer instead of "Number 3". And seriously... Wtf harm has it done? Why would someone take the time to do this?

I could understand if they were using his likeness as the victim of something in a game.. But a football sim? Seriously?

There are no Dresselhaus family members in pro sports, but if I happened to go to college and miraculously walk-on to the football team, I would want to see me on the roster.

buy a copy and insert yourself in it..problem solved

[Ajaxab]

A PDF of the suit. It makes some compelling points:

+1

There definitely seem to be some valid points being made here. But couldn't the same arguments be made about television broadcasts where the NCAA is making money off of player likenesses on television? Whether it's commercials or the actual broadcasts themselves, player images are on tv and players receive no direct compensation for their appearance. The same principle would seem to apply here. Keller should be going after the NCAA and not EA.

[Logan]

I would assume that whatever is signed when every player's scholarship is renewed each year has language in it that basically says, "Whatever we can do to make money off you, we can do, and by accepting this scholarship you are allowing us to do so."

Every team uses players in their own promotion materials...they don't get paid for that. And that's pictures, faces, names...not a computer-generated likeness.

The more I think about it, the less chance this has.

[Sgran]

I just enjoy watching the cockroaches scurry every time the light is turned on.

[Rich1033]

Keller was a joke in college that did nothing but cause problems. That has nothing to do with this, just wanted to say it. :p

This will be interesting, but I just cant see this going very far. I would expect this to fully play out as a settlement would seem to just encourage this to happen again in the future.

As for a player being ruled retroactively ineligible, I dont believe there is any rule prohibiting a player from receiving benefits from college after they have used up their eligibility. That would be impossible to enforce.

[gstelmack]

The PDF is definitely an interesting read, pointing out all the prohibitions against using player likenesses by the NCAA, and then that the NCAA has to approve the EA titles before shipping. I think the bigger beef here will be with the NCAA vs EA, in that the argument is the NCAA should have stopped them from matching so much biographical and physical data and not approved the titles, given the NCAA's own stance and paperwork for the players. Should be interesting to follow...

[bignej]

Didn't EA take out the recordings of all the NCAA player names for next year? They may have known this was coming.

[BYU 14]

Keller was a joke in college that did nothing but cause problems. That has nothing to do with this, just wanted to say it. :p


Thanks for saying it. He was an overrated prima donna at ASU and faired no better at Nebraska. Sorry your free education and god knows what other side benefits you received weren't enough for you. Can't see this one playing out in his favor at all.

[Tekneek]

Goes to show how long it has been since I have played a NCAA football arcade style game. Last time I played one, there were no names or likenesses. Just a bunch of seemingly random guys in uniforms of the right colors and numbers.

[RainMaker]

Just to play devil's advocate here, but EA is making money off these guys. Maybe not necessarily Sam Keller, but guys like Tim Tebow. People are buying this game to play as those guys. If each player was randomly generated, it would take a ton of lure out of the game.

I'm not a law guy so I have no clue how these cases go, but lets not fool ourselves into thinking EA isn't making money off these players.

[BYU 14]

Just to play devil's advocate here, but EA is making money off these guys. Maybe not necessarily Sam Keller, but guys like Tim Tebow. People are buying this game to play as those guys. If each player was randomly generated, it would take a ton of lure out of the game.

I'm not a law guy so I have no clue how these cases go, but lets not fool ourselves into thinking EA isn't making money off these players.

They are making money for sure, but again it still all points back to the NCAA. They make money off license rights as well as dozens of other outlets that are more specific (I.E named players) than the game.

I really would like to know how all that money the NCAA makes is dispersed.

[kcchief19]

Just to play devil's advocate here, but EA is making money off these guys. Maybe not necessarily Sam Keller, but guys like Tim Tebow. People are buying this game to play as those guys. If each player was randomly generated, it would take a ton of lure out of the game.
Devil's advocate right back -- ESPN makes a ton of money broadcasting the likeness of Tim Tebow in highlights. If they didn't have Tebow highlights, it would take a lure out of their broadcasts. Where do you draw the line for protecting your likeness?

What's in the game that would intrude upon Sam Keller's likeness? His height, weight, hometown, jersey number. Is your height, weight and hometown intellectual property? At first blush I would say no.

The players have ratings. That's pretty subjective. And again, what's the difference in what EA is doing in rating Sam Keller than say Rivals.com did in rating Sam Keller coming out of high school. Why doesn't Keller sue Rivals.com? Are your rated abilities intellectual property belonging to you? I would say no.

The only area where Keller might have an argument is that there is a graphical 3D representation of him in the game. Does that game character resemble Sam Keller physically? The next player I see in a game who actually resemembles the real person will be the first.

Combining all the elements, maybe Keller does have a case. I think you have to dismiss the name elements of the lawsuit. EA doesn't ship the game with real names, it's only done by fans for free. There's no money to be made there.

Ultimately the question is whether the information incluced in the game belongs to Sam Keller. The precedent of the MLB lawsuit over fantasy baseball would indicate to me now. This is slightly more involved since we're not just talking about names and statistics. But the precedent would seem to favor EA.

Frankly, this lawsuit has the potential to be a complete disaster for the players. If Keller goes through with this and loses, just consider how little control players would have over their likenesses. Without a legal precedent, there's generally a wide respect of the use of players' likenesses. If he loses, katy bar the door.

[Logan]

Seriously, does anyone know what would happen as far as eligibility if Keller or any other player actually won this suit?

[Grammaticus]

The NCAA can argue they by allowing companies like EA to release the game with reasonable models of college teams, it increases interest in the sport and the chance the players will be more marketable to pro teams.

[Young Drachma]

The game actually has all of their names programmed, as well.

[Young Drachma]

The NCAA can argue they by allowing companies like EA to release the game with reasonable models of college teams, it increases interest in the sport and the chance the players will be more marketable to pro teams.

It doesn't matter. The NCAA still makes money off of it and the players don't get a dime. And only a small fraction of kids in the NCAA make the NFL.

[gstelmack]

What's in the game that would intrude upon Sam Keller's likeness? His height, weight, hometown, jersey number. Is your height, weight and hometown intellectual property? At first blush I would say no.

Did you read the PDF? It also includes special apparel (like wrist bands, shoulder pags, visor details, etc), including some very specific player-particular bits of uniform. They also point out that the models used in NCAA match the models that end up in Madden where they DO have the rights and ARE trying to match the players as close as possible. It goes well beyond height, weight, and hometown.

As I said, the PDF is very interesting reading, and a key point the suit makes is that the NCAA makes the players sign all kinds of documents about protecting their likenesses and not using them for profit, then does not protect those same rights when reviewing the NCAA game. It's at the very least an interesting legal claim.

[Eaglesfan27]

The game actually has all of their names programmed, as well.

Yes, an important point in the case against EA. I've heard that this audio will be taken out of future versions starting with 2010.

Did you read the PDF? It also includes special apparel (like wrist bands, shoulder pags, visor details, etc), including some very specific player-particular bits of uniform. They also point out that the models used in NCAA match the models that end up in Madden where they DO have the rights and ARE trying to match the players as close as possible. It goes well beyond height, weight, and hometown.

As I said, the PDF is very interesting reading, and a key point the suit makes is that the NCAA makes the players sign all kinds of documents about protecting their likenesses and not using them for profit, then does not protect those same rights when reviewing the NCAA game. It's at the very least an interesting legal claim.

Absolutely. The PDF is very interesting and makes some good points about how detailed the players are modeled with the apparel/accessories. I could see that being changed in future versions as well. Also, this suit covers multiple sports, not just football.

[Tekneek]

The NCAA is a scam. A massive enterprise bringing in tons of revenue based on the performance of players who have to walk a fine line to prevent losing their eligibility to even participate in these sports. I am curious how much "profit" is made off of each player, after calculating the expenses involved in scholarships, facilities, coaching/training staff, etc.

[Tigercat]

Yes, an important point in the case against EA. I've heard that this audio will be taken out of future versions starting with 2010.


They program in extra names too, there was one year where I know my last name was "in the game" but no college players then (or since for that matter) possessed my last name.

The case may be interesting, but having a multitude of last names and first names stored separately in the game, including those for most college players, isn't enough to pass the litmus test of having an individual's likeness stored and used in the game.

[Drake]

Not saying whether this is right or wrong...

But wouldn't any damages received in a victorious lawsuit in essence mean that these guys were compensated for being a college football player, which would make them retroactively ineligible and force their teams to forfeit games and face additional penalties?

By this logic, couldn't it also be said that players drafted by the NFL and paid to play professional football are being compensated for work they did as college football players (thus, being drafted)? They'd also be ineligible and their teams subsequently forfeit games.

;)

[digamma]

The NCAA is a scam. A massive enterprise bringing in tons of revenue based on the performance of players who have to walk a fine line to prevent losing their eligibility to even participate in these sports. I am curious how much "profit" is made off of each player, after calculating the expenses involved in scholarships, facilities, coaching/training staff, etc.

The NCAA as an organization made just over $20M in 2008 based on revenues of about $633M and expenses of almost $613M. The vast majority (86%) of the NCAA's revenue comes from television and marketing contracts. Distributions to conferences and schools account for most expenses.

[kcchief19]

Did you read the PDF? It also includes special apparel (like wrist bands, shoulder pags, visor details, etc), including some very specific player-particular bits of uniform. They also point out that the models used in NCAA match the models that end up in Madden where they DO have the rights and ARE trying to match the players as close as possible. It goes well beyond height, weight, and hometown.
I did read the PDF. My question is relates to essentially whether or not you have a intellectual property claim to your biographical data. It would seem that most of the "information" included in the game would be public information.

For example, let's say I'm Rivals.com. I already list your stats, your scout ratings and your physical details such as height and weight. I also include personal data such as your birthday and hometown. Maybe I really want to be thorough and I specific your equipment, such as whether you wear a blue Nike wristband. What of that information is information you own that no one else can use? That is generally public information. I can't copyright my birthday or prevent anyone from publishing a description of how I style my hair or what color sunglasses I wear.

I do think it's a separate question of whether a reasonable computer-graphic representation of you is your likeness. That's a fair question for the court to decide. Like I said before, the next time I see a guy in an EA college game that actually looks exactly like the real guy will be the first time. The guy at QB for Missouri may have Chase Daniel's biographical data and number, but he doesn't actually look like Chase Daniel.

It will be interesting to see EA's response. They aren't idiots -- they have to have prepared a response for this for years. I doubt they started using this information in the first place without preparing for the day they would have to defend the practice.

[kcchief19]

The game actually has all of their names programmed, as well.
There are plenty of non-players names programmed as well for the audio. Or are you reference the roster file? The roster file doesn't have their names -- that's a third-party application, which granted EA allows user to download.

[RainMaker]

I did read the PDF. My question is relates to essentially whether or not you have a intellectual property claim to your biographical data. It would seem that most of the "information" included in the game would be public information.

For example, let's say I'm Rivals.com. I already list your stats, your scout ratings and your physical details such as height and weight. I also include personal data such as your birthday and hometown. Maybe I really want to be thorough and I specific your equipment, such as whether you wear a blue Nike wristband. What of that information is information you own that no one else can use? That is generally public information. I can't copyright my birthday or prevent anyone from publishing a description of how I style my hair or what color sunglasses I wear.

I do think it's a separate question of whether a reasonable computer-graphic representation of you is your likeness. That's a fair question for the court to decide. Like I said before, the next time I see a guy in an EA college game that actually looks exactly like the real guy will be the first time. The guy at QB for Missouri may have Chase Daniel's biographical data and number, but he doesn't actually look like Chase Daniel.

It will be interesting to see EA's response. They aren't idiots -- they have to have prepared a response for this for years. I doubt they started using this information in the first place without preparing for the day they would have to defend the practice.

I think it's a real tricky situation. I could honestly see both sides of the argument. Lets say you made a kids game that involved animals. You made the main character look exactly like the crocodile hunter down to everything he wore. You hire a voice actor who can do his voice perfectly. You call him something generic but allow people to edit his name. When does it turn into using their likeness to make a profit?

[gstelmack]

I did read the PDF. My question is relates to essentially whether or not you have a intellectual property claim to your biographical data. It would seem that most of the "information" included in the game would be public information.

Keep in mind that their primary beef is not with EA, it's with the NCAA for approving EA's doing it after the NCAA made the players sign agreements that precludes this sort of use. If this was a straight suit against EA, I think it would get thrown out, but they are going after the NCAA for condoning it.

[Eaglesfan27]

I doubt this is a coincidence. Apparently, NCAA 10 is going to ship with outdated rosters that will be much worse than previous years. There are reports that no freshman are on teams and seniors from last year are still with their teams:

NCAA Football Heading Down Generic Path | pastapadre.com (http://www.pastapadre.com/8858/ncaa-football-taking-heading-down-generic-path)

[WVUFAN]

I think it's a real tricky situation. I could honestly see both sides of the argument. Lets say you made a kids game that involved animals. You made the main character look exactly like the crocodile hunter down to everything he wore. You hire a voice actor who can do his voice perfectly. You call him something generic but allow people to edit his name. When does it turn into using their likeness to make a profit?

They are being compensated, by a) Receiving a free college education, and b) Having the opportunity to play in the NFL, because the NFL required college sports experience, the fact that the NCAA/college is providing you that, free of charge, is compensation enough.

The Croc Hunter analogy doesn't fit at all. Sam Keller didn't have to play sports at ASU or Nebraska, he did so willingly under the idea that he could parley his time into a career in the NFL.

His "likeness" in a video game is no different than his likeness on an ESPN highlight -- ESPN, like EA, is benefiting financially, and Keller is benefiting by hightened exposure and a free education.

[Logan]

I doubt this is a coincidence. Apparently, NCAA 10 is going to ship with outdated rosters that will be much worse than previous years. There are reports that no freshman are on teams and seniors from last year are still with their teams:

NCAA Football Heading Down Generic Path | pastapadre.com (http://www.pastapadre.com/8858/ncaa-football-taking-heading-down-generic-path)

I'm confused...the Rutgers roster was posted with attributes/ratings and it definitely included the top freshmen.

[RomaGoth]

While I realize this is two completely different subjects, I will take this opportunity to slam EA. I gave up on that company a long time ago, when each year's version of Madden or NHL Hockey was just the same game with updated rosters and a few features that nobody wanted. I stopped playing their games years ago.

As for the lawsuit, nobody can convince that this is anything but a money grab by a guy who never made it to the big time.

Too bad, really.

[JonInMiddleGA]

After reading that PastaPadre link in detail, I'm not even sure whether it'll be worth picking up the copy I pre-ordered yesterday.

I mean, no freshmen on many of the teams? I thought that just meant no facsimiles of the new incoming freshman, but after reading the link in full, I gather what it means is that there are teams that simply don't have any freshmen on their roster period. And EA tells him those rosters are considered final. Or that's how I read it anyway.

If that's the case, seems like the game would ship in a pretty broken condition. Since I only play single player dynasty mode it seems like it might be too fubar'ed to be worth the time or cost.

[Atocep]

As for the lawsuit, nobody can convince that this is anything but a money grab by a guy who never made it to the big time.



Pretty much. There's been players speak out against Keller essentially saying everyone they know loves seeing themselves in the games and would rather have it that way than have fictional players in their place.

[Huckleberry]

They are being compensated, by a) Receiving a free college education, and b) Having the opportunity to play in the NFL, because the NFL required college sports experience, the fact that the NCAA/college is providing you that, free of charge, is compensation enough.

The Croc Hunter analogy doesn't fit at all. Sam Keller didn't have to play sports at ASU or Nebraska, he did so willingly under the idea that he could parley his time into a career in the NFL.

His "likeness" in a video game is no different than his likeness on an ESPN highlight -- ESPN, like EA, is benefiting financially, and Keller is benefiting by hightened exposure and a free education.

You're nuts if you think the free education is market value for every college football player. And that's what matters. As stated above, the real target of the suit is the NCAA's rule barring the players from reaching their own endorsement and marketing deals.

Pretty much. There's been players speak out against Keller essentially saying everyone they know loves seeing themselves in the games and would rather have it that way than have fictional players in their place.

Once again, the end goal of the suit is to bar the NCAA from banning players from reaching their own deals. Not to keep the video game companies from being able to use the likenesses. The point is that the NCAA gets the money from EA so that EA can use the NCAA information. But the players get jack even though their likenesses are why the game makes money.

[Atocep]

Once again, the end goal of the suit is to bar the NCAA from banning players from reaching their own deals. Not to keep the video game companies from being able to use the likenesses. The point is that the NCAA gets the money from EA so that EA can use the NCAA information. But the players get jack even though their likenesses are why the game makes money.

And the chances of that happening are zero. EA will end up doing what they appear to be doing with this year's version and just making things different enough to get by without making a deal with the players.

I've bought exactly 1 copy of NCAA football in the last 10 years so I really don't give a shit either way, but Keller knows exactly what the most likely result of this is. It's 100% an attempt to get attention.

[Logan]

The NCAA gets money from ESPN...and CBS...and Fox...and Disney...and every corporate sponsor. As someone said above, it's not even their likeness that they are making money from; it's them directly.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Y But the players get jack even though their likenesses are why the game makes money.

Seen the cost of a 4 year ride lately? That's more than "jack".

And I say that as someone who thinks they ought to blow up the whole scholarship model & simply pay the players (for football & probably basketball) out of the marketing budget and forego the whole going to class thing for a redesigned Division I.

But that doesn't discount that every player currently on a ride is getting paid to play.

[JonInMiddleGA]

enough to get by without making a deal with the players.

I hope so, otherwise we'll be paying $500 per copy just to cover the legal fees of negotiating individual deals with every player in D1 football.

[Huckleberry]

Jack is a relative term. Some of the players are overpaid based on their school's tuition rates and their value as players. The point is that many players are seriously underpaid. What do you think Matt Leinart's value was heading into his senior season compared to his tuition and fees? How about Tim Tebow and this season?

And your concern with negotiating with every player doesn't seem worthwhile. If the NCAA removes the ban then it would seem likely an NCAA Players' Association type organization would be formed fairly quickly and would be the sole negotiating point. The star players would make their money off outside deals, or for their likeness to be on the cover or to appear in commercials for the game.

[Logan]

What do you think Matt Leinart's value was heading into his senior season compared to his tuition and fees?


What do you think Matt Leinart's value is now heading into his fourth NFL season compared to his contract and the amount of money he has already made?

Things tend to balance out.

[Huckleberry]

What do you think Matt Leinart's value is now heading into his fourth NFL season compared to his contract and the amount of money he has already made?

Things tend to balance out.

Your grand argument for the NCAA and its institutions being able to pocket all the money they make off the players while they're in college is that "things tend to balance out"?

[RainMaker]

They are being compensated, by a) Receiving a free college education, and b) Having the opportunity to play in the NFL, because the NFL required college sports experience, the fact that the NCAA/college is providing you that, free of charge, is compensation enough.
That might be enough in your mind, but it doesn't make it right legally. Many people believe that downloading music for free is fine because the singers make their money doing concerts and selling merchandise. Just because they are being given good opportunities doesn't mean that they don't have the same legal rights as others.

The Croc Hunter analogy doesn't fit at all. Sam Keller didn't have to play sports at ASU or Nebraska, he did so willingly under the idea that he could parley his time into a career in the NFL.
I don't see how it doesn't fit. It's the same thing. The old college hoops games had a player on Florida with the same number as Joakim Noah that was the same height, same hair, same complexion, and same facial features. That to me is no different than creating a character who matches every feature of the Crocodile Hunter but under a different name.

His "likeness" in a video game is no different than his likeness on an ESPN highlight -- ESPN, like EA, is benefiting financially, and Keller is benefiting by hightened exposure and a free education.
I believe highlights are not treated the same because a highlight is essentially a news event.

[RainMaker]

I doubt this is a coincidence. Apparently, NCAA 10 is going to ship with outdated rosters that will be much worse than previous years. There are reports that no freshman are on teams and seniors from last year are still with their teams:

NCAA Football Heading Down Generic Path | pastapadre.com (http://www.pastapadre.com/8858/ncaa-football-taking-heading-down-generic-path)
Is that due to the lawsuit? I just wonder if the outdated rosters has more to do with budget cuts at the company and less to do with this lawsuit (which makes a convenient excuse for them).

[JonInMiddleGA]

What do you think Matt Leinart's value was heading into his senior season compared to his tuition and fees? How about Tim Tebow and this season?

Without that, his value would be virtually zero (or whatever the CFL is paying) unless & until the NFL wants to pay for a full minor league system.

And your concern with negotiating with every player doesn't seem worthwhile. If the NCAA removes the ban then it would seem likely an NCAA Players' Association type organization would be formed fairly quickly and would be the sole negotiating point. The star players would make their money off outside deals, or for their likeness to be on the cover or to appear in commercials for the game.

If you think there's a snowball's chance in hell of, what, more than 8000 college players being able to agree on anything remotely approaching a collective marketing agreement then you have far more faith in the organizational ability of teenagers & early 20 somethings than I do.

And I give far less of a damn whether the Leinart's or any handful of star players are in the game than about having the bulk of team rosters being correct. Unlike the NFL, it's the teams that matter in college football, not just the individual star players. Point being, getting a handful of stars together under what amount to an agent's banner isn't going to cut it by a long shot.

And none of this matters one whit, since I can't imagine the NCAA essentially letting players turn pro in football anytime in the foreseeable future.

[dawgfan]

Once again, the end goal of the suit is to bar the NCAA from banning players from reaching their own deals. Not to keep the video game companies from being able to use the likenesses. The point is that the NCAA gets the money from EA so that EA can use the NCAA information. But the players get jack even though their likenesses are why the game makes money.
Going to have to disagree pretty strongly with the bolded part. The game makes money because:

- It has all the college teams (by far the biggest reason it sells)
- It has the real stadiums
- It has other college touches like the fight songs and mascots
- It has rosters with players whose ratings are pretty close approximations of the real thing

I could personally give a rip if the players look much like their real counterparts. I realize I'm a bit unusual in that I don't care so much about having real players - I'm fine creating a fictional player universe, but I doubt too many people care all that much whether the "QB #10" for Washington looks much like Jake Locker or not, so long as the guy is white and solidly built. And that's all stuff that could be easily edited after the fact.

[sabotai]

I, for one, don't care at all about real rosters or if the likeness of the players match the real teams. In fact, I'd like an option to completely generate new rosters from scratch every time I begin a new dynasty.

[digamma]

Your grand argument for the NCAA and its institutions being able to pocket all the money they make off the players while they're in college is that "things tend to balance out"?

To be fair, your Leinart example wasn't the best either. He had every right to forego his senior season and receive every penny of his market value as a professional football player. Instead, he decided to enroll in a ballroom dancing class, play college football and bang a bunch of co-eds.

[Balldog]

I don't buy into this crap that athletes don't get paid, a free education and all the other benefits that go along with getting a full ride is more than most of these could do right out of high school without playing football.

Very few college athletes end up playing professional sports, but they have an opportunity to leave with a college degree and no student loans.

And its not like I watch these sports to watch these specific players, if Pryor wasn't the QB at Ohio State I'd still watch the games.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Looks like the lack of freshman or accuracy of the rosters was a bug in the gold build of the game and not related to the lawsuit in any way. Color me surprised.

Update on NCAA Football 10 Rosters | pastapadre.com (http://www.pastapadre.com/8876/update-on-ncaa-football-10-rosters)

[Logan]

Your grand argument for the NCAA and its institutions being able to pocket all the money they make off the players while they're in college is that "things tend to balance out"?

Actually, it was more of a shot at Matt Leinart.

Without that, his value would be virtually zero (or whatever the CFL is paying) unless & until the NFL wants to pay for a full minor league system.

To be fair, your Leinart example wasn't the best either. He had every right to forego his senior season and receive every penny of his market value as a professional football player. Instead, he decided to enroll in a ballroom dancing class, play college football and bang a bunch of co-eds.

But yeah, what these guys said. It's a tired argument, but no one is forcing these guys to return to school once they've *used the system* in place to begin building up their own value.

Don't like that the NCAA will make money off you? Don't play college football. Worked out pretty well for Antonio Gates.

Looks like the lack of freshman or accuracy of the rosters was a bug in the gold build of the game and not related to the lawsuit in any way. Color me surprised.

Update on NCAA Football 10 Rosters | pastapadre.com (http://www.pastapadre.com/8876/update-on-ncaa-football-10-rosters)

Like I said originally, knew something was wrong since I've seen the entire Rutgers roster and impact freshman and no "super super seniors" are in there.

[RomaGoth]

You're nuts if you think the free education is market value for every college football player.

I guess I am nuts, because I will be paying student loans back for many years, and I didn't even attend a high profile school such as USC. According to this article, tuition went up again, and is now over $37k, not including room/board/books/etc.

Daily Trojan - Tuition expected to rise again in 2009 (http://www.dailytrojan.com/news/tuition-expected-to-rise-again-in-2009-1.900731)

[gstelmack]

The PDF is definitely an interesting read, pointing out all the prohibitions against using player likenesses by the NCAA, and then that the NCAA has to approve the EA titles before shipping. I think the bigger beef here will be with the NCAA vs EA, in that the argument is the NCAA should have stopped them from matching so much biographical and physical data and not approved the titles, given the NCAA's own stance and paperwork for the players. Should be interesting to follow...

Time to remind folks that the lawsuit is not about compensation but about the NCAA's own rules and paperwork they made these kids sign that they then went against in relation to the game...

[Samdari]

Pretty much. There's been players speak out against Keller essentially saying everyone they know loves seeing themselves in the games and would rather have it that way than have fictional players in their place.

Not wanting a cut of someone making money off of you means you're young or stupid or both.

He may or may not have a good legal claim, but what he's doing is just capitalism.

[Logan]

Not wanting a cut of someone making money off of you means you're young or stupid or both.

He may or may not have a good legal claim, but what he's doing is just capitalism.

Capitalism would be if he goes around offering his likeness (or real-ness) to the highest bidder.

Comedy would be when no one pays him a god damn cent because no one out there gives a shit about his likeness.

[Eaglesfan27]

Looks like the lack of freshman or accuracy of the rosters was a bug in the gold build of the game and not related to the lawsuit in any way. Color me surprised.

Update on NCAA Football 10 Rosters | pastapadre.com (http://www.pastapadre.com/8876/update-on-ncaa-football-10-rosters)


Actually, the top producer of the game on OS has said that it isn't even a bug, but an issue of putting the wrong version of the roster on the team builder site and since it has to match up with the disc version, they don't want to change it. They are trying to come up with a solution that wouldn't invalidate all of the work that has gone on with team builder (reportedly well over 50k teams created so far.)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Actually, the top producer of the game on OS has said that it isn't even a bug, but an issue of putting the wrong version of the roster on the team builder site and since it has to match up with the disc version, they don't want to change it. They are trying to come up with a solution that wouldn't invalidate all of the work that has gone on with team builder (reportedly well over 50k teams created so far.)

Alright, a FUBAR moment rather than a bug that could piss off some users. Either way, a horrible start and it hasn't even been released yet.

[Eaglesfan27]

Alright, a FUBAR moment rather than a bug that could piss off some users. Either way, a horrible start and it hasn't even been released yet.

I think you bash EA way too much, but I absolutely agree. Personally, I think putting the wrong version of the rosters out there is much worse than some sort of bug that snuck through. Seems like a lack of basic organizational skills in their development team to put the wrong version of rosters out there.

[Tigercat]

Does anyone remember Mutant League Football? That had players with names similar to their NFL counterparts, like Bones Jackson for Bo Jackson. And, oh my goodness, Bones Jackson is just as good in certain running areas as Bo Jackson was! (Except Bones Jackson had even more fragile "bones," and he was allowed to kill the referee.)

I really think too many are overestimating the merits of this suit. There is no individual stored likeness in NCAA football games. Just like the characters in Mutant League Football were caricatures of real life players, but not illegal because they weren't being passed as real likenesses, so are the players in NCAA football. There are no specific likenesses stored on the game disc, nor are any specific likenesses displayed on the game. Similar or correct height and weight numbers and player equipment with generic game faces and no real names is not enough to say that EA is using real likenesses.

I think EA knows this and that is why they aren't afraid to keep doing what they've been doing with the rosters.

[RomaGoth]

Capitalism would be if he goes around offering his likeness (or real-ness) to the highest bidder.

Comedy would be when no one pays him a god damn cent because no one out there gives a shit about his likeness.

+ 1

I am not sure why he would even WANT people to know there is a likeness to him in the game. Has anyone seen him play???? Ugghhhh....:funkychickendance:

[RainMaker]

Does anyone remember Mutant League Football? That had players with names similar to their NFL counterparts, like Bones Jackson for Bo Jackson. And, oh my goodness, Bones Jackson is just as good in certain running areas as Bo Jackson was! (Except Bones Jackson had even more fragile "bones," and he was allowed to kill the referee.)

I really think too many are overestimating the merits of this suit. There is no individual stored likeness in NCAA football games. Just like the characters in Mutant League Football were caricatures of real life players, but not illegal because they weren't being passed as real likenesses, so are the players in NCAA football. There are no specific likenesses stored on the game disc, nor are any specific likenesses displayed on the game. Similar or correct height and weight numbers and player equipment with generic game faces and no real names is not enough to say that EA is using real likenesses.

I think EA knows this and that is why they aren't afraid to keep doing what they've been doing with the rosters.

The Mutant League players were parodies if anything of the players. Gross overexaggerations. I remember some of the players from the old College Hoops game, and they looked exactly like their real life counterparts.

[Grammaticus]

I think you bash EA way too much, but I absolutely agree. Personally, I think putting the wrong version of the rosters out there is much worse than some sort of bug that snuck through. Seems like a lack of basic organizational skills in their development team to put the wrong version of rosters out there.

I think it is a no brainer. You put the correct roster version on the disc. You wipe the website and put the correct version on team builder and everyone can re-make their teams.

[BYU 14]

I don't buy into this crap that athletes don't get paid, a free education and all the other benefits that go along with getting a full ride is more than most of these could do right out of high school without playing football.

Very few college athletes end up playing professional sports, but they have an opportunity to leave with a college degree and no student loans.

And its not like I watch these sports to watch these specific players, if Pryor wasn't the QB at Ohio State I'd still watch the games.

Totally agree, I emailed a coach I talk to at BYU from time to time and right now, with ancillaries, stipends, travel , meal costs and actual tuition the average Football schollie costs $125,000 to $150,000 over 4 years. With each class averaging around 22 athletes thats well over $3,000,000 per class if they stay and earn a degree. Obviously not all kids stay, but those are lofty figures. Add to the fact that most players are treated very well by any number of people (Girls, Alumni, etc) that but them things, lends them Cars and everything else, not tom mention the extra money his degree will help him earn when he enters the work force. Should anyone really cry for Sam Keller, whose career never fullfilled the hype and who now whats to file a bullshit suit instead of earning an honest living like the rest of us.

In the end if they divied up the profits from Merchandise and Video game sales amoung the players and said "Here, pay your own tuition." I highly doubt the players would come out ahead. Also lets not forget the fact that Football and Basketball are the only two College sports that really make money, so they therefore subsidize things like Lacrosse, swimming, Baseball, etc, helping many more men and women in other sports get a free College education as well.

[kcchief19]

Here's something worth noting from the NCAA's Web site (their underlining, not mine):Athletic scholarships for undergraduate student-athletes at Division I and Division II schools are partially funded through the NCAA membership revenue distribution. About $1 billion in athletic scholarships are awarded each year. Over 126,000 student-athletes receive either a partial or full athletic scholarship. However, these scholarships are awarded and administered directly by each academic institution, not the NCAA.
If you look closely at the game, you'll see that the licenses inside the game are struck by EA with the individual bowl games, conferences and teams. The NCAA does not have any contract for scholarship with the players; it is the universities themselves that have the contract. Why is Sam Keller not suing Nebraska and Arizona State, since they also profited from the use of his likeness in the game? The answer is that Keller's scholarship agreement with those universities provides them with the ability to use his likeness.

The NCAA Constitution does cover how member institutions may use a student athlete's likeness. Check out page 71. http://www.ncaapublications.com/Uploads/PDF/Division_1_Manual_2008-09e9e568a1-c269-4423-9ca5-16d6827c16bc.pdf
Since Keller's lawsuit doesn't specify what the constitution says, let's check it out for ourselves:
Any commercial items with names, likenesses or pictures of multiple student-athletes (other than highlight films or media guides per Bylaw 12.5.1.7) may be sold only at the member institution at which the student-athletes are enrolled, institutionally controlled (owned and operated) outlets or outlets controlled by the charitable or educational organization (e.g., location of the charitable or educational organization, site of charitable event during the event). Items that include an individual student-athlete’s name, picture or likeness (e.g., name on jersey, name or likeness on a bobble-head doll), other than informational items (e.g., media guide, schedule cards, institutional publications), may not be sold; and (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/9/96, 4/27/06 effective 8/1/06)
So, let's say for a moment that Keller's right -- the video games use his likeness. If that is the case, that is not allowed. However, it is not the NCAA that is doing it; rather, it is the university. So in effect the schools are the ones in violation of the NCAA Constitution. Violations of using a player's likeness are considered an institutional violation and the school's could face penalties.

So, in essence Sam Keller is claiming he and every other NCAA athlete is entitled to damages because the NCAA is not putting teams on probation for allowing their student athletes' likenesses to be used in the video games. How is he harmed? Rereading the suit, Keller never actually says the universities used his likeness without authorization. Instead, Keller says the NCAA isn't following its own rules.

How would that be different from me suing the state of Missouri because the guy passing me on the highway was speeding and the highway patrol didn't give him a ticket? Aren't they just encouraging speeding by not enforcing their own rules?

But we are left with a question of whether or not the video games are "informational items." I think it's a very grey line. Strictly speaking, the school may be breaking NCAA rules. However, the school's are violating the player's right to the use of his or her likeness; the school's are violating NCAA rules. The penalty for that is not compensation to the players; it's NCAA sanctions.

I guess the winner in the lawsuit if Keller prevails will be the FCS schools. They aren't in the game so I guess it will be Northern Iowa vs Appalachian State in the Rose Bowl!

[Tigercat]

The Mutant League players were parodies if anything of the players. Gross overexaggerations. I remember some of the players from the old College Hoops game, and they looked exactly like their real life counterparts.

Well I can't speak for the college hoops game, but when there are 3 skin tone types and 10-20 generic face types available, how is it possible for the college football game to show a player's true likeness?

You can't accurately portray anyone's actual likeness using college football's programing. Thus why Keller and his lawyers have to start talking about listed height/weights and equipment used to being a fundamental part of a player's likeness, which won't hold up.

[digamma]

So, let's say for a moment that Keller's right -- the video games use his likeness. If that is the case, that is not allowed. However, it is not the NCAA that is doing it; rather, it is the university. So in effect the schools are the ones in violation of the NCAA Constitution. Violations of using a player's likeness are considered an institutional violation and the school's could face penalties.



The claim is that EA Sports is using his likeness (and that the NCAA and the CLC are conspiring with EA to allow such use when they should be taking steps to stop it).

[RainMaker]

Totally agree, I emailed a coach I talk to at BYU from time to time and right now, with ancillaries, stipends, travel , meal costs and actual tuition the average Football schollie costs $125,000 to $150,000 over 4 years. With each class averaging around 22 athletes thats well over $3,000,000 per class if they stay and earn a degree. Obviously not all kids stay, but those are lofty figures. Add to the fact that most players are treated very well by any number of people (Girls, Alumni, etc) that but them things, lends them Cars and everything else, not tom mention the extra money his degree will help him earn when he enters the work force. Should anyone really cry for Sam Keller, whose career never fullfilled the hype and who now whats to file a bullshit suit instead of earning an honest living like the rest of us.

In the end if they divied up the profits from Merchandise and Video game sales amoung the players and said "Here, pay your own tuition." I highly doubt the players would come out ahead. Also lets not forget the fact that Football and Basketball are the only two College sports that really make money, so they therefore subsidize things like Lacrosse, swimming, Baseball, etc, helping many more men and women in other sports get a free College education as well.

Scholarships are great for the players, but lets not act like this is done by schools out of the greatness of their heart. Those scholarships help schools like BYU reach bowl games and make millions of dollars in profit for the university.

[bhlloy]

The claim is that EA Sports is using his likeness (and that the NCAA and the CLC are conspiring with EA to allow such use when they should be taking steps to stop it).

But if his likeness belongs to the school (or the school is allowed to use it) and the school endorses the product (which I'm assuming they do explicitly to allow the game to use the mascots, stadiums and school names) what's the problem? Is Keller going to sue the publishers of the school's media guide because they didn't ask him whether they can use his photo or not?

[fantom1979]

The NCAA Constitution does cover how member institutions may use a student athlete's likeness. Check out page 71. http://www.ncaapublications.com/Uploads/PDF/Division_1_Manual_2008-09e9e568a1-c269-4423-9ca5-16d6827c16bc.pdf
Since Keller's lawsuit doesn't specify what the constitution says, let's check it out for ourselves:


Any commercial items with names, likenesses or pictures of multiple student-athletes (other than highlight films or media guides per Bylaw 12.5.1.7) may be sold only at the member institution at which the student-athletes are enrolled, institutionally controlled (owned and operated) outlets or outlets controlled by the charitable or educational organization (e.g., location of the charitable or educational organization, site of charitable event during the event). Items that include an individual student-athlete’s name, picture or likeness (e.g., name on jersey, name or likeness on a bobble-head doll), other than informational items (e.g., media guide, schedule cards, institutional publications), may not be sold; and (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/9/96, 4/27/06 effective 8/1/06)


But if his likeness belongs to the school (or the school is allowed to use it) and the school endorses the product (which I'm assuming they do explicitly to allow the game to use the mascots, stadiums and school names) what's the problem? Is Keller going to sue the publishers of the school's media guide because they didn't ask him whether they can use his photo or not?

Looks like media guides are covered by the NCAA constitution

[digamma]

But if his likeness belongs to the school (or the school is allowed to use it) and the school endorses the product (which I'm assuming they do explicitly to allow the game to use the mascots, stadiums and school names) what's the problem? Is Keller going to sue the publishers of the school's media guide because they didn't ask him whether they can use his photo or not?

Can't seem to find a grant in aid example on the web, but I'd be surprised if it signed over full use of a student athlete's likeness to the school.

[BYU 14]

Scholarships are great for the players, but lets not act like this is done by schools out of the greatness of their heart. Those scholarships help schools like BYU reach bowl games and make millions of dollars in profit for the university.

I never insinuated the universities did it as a charity or didn't benefit. Its called a return in your investment and its a win/win.

Players get free education and many other great benefits.

Universities get funding and exposure and the ability to finance other scholarship funds with the profits from the big two sports. You don't think that's fair?

And don't act like the players are taken advantage of either, I can tell you story after story of self entitled players who use their status to milk everything they can out of anyone who will give it to them, just like there are many players who are humble and grateful for the opportunities their abilites afford them and exhibit integrity and class every step of the way.

There is good and bad in every layer of the College athletic experience, but again, it is hardly unfair to the players.

[Logan]

Ex-Rutgers quarterback Hart files suit, alleges unauthorized use of likeness in game | mycentraljersey.com | MyCentralJersey.com (http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20090629/NEWS/906290327/Ex-Rutgers-quarterback-Hart-files-suit--alleges-unauthorized-use-of-likeness-in-game)

The article says that the claims are the same as Keller but I think it's a bit of a different situation. Hart appears as the main background menu image for Rutgers in NCAA 09 despite having graduated in 2007. I thought it was a little weird that they were using graduated players.

[RainMaker]

Saw this on CNBC. Thought it was interesting that he stated he thought they would win.

EA & NCAA Ignoring Lawsuit? - Sports Biz with Darren Rovell - CNBC.com (http://www.cnbc.com/id/31889293/)

[Logan]

Should Keller eventually prevail in this lawsuit, as I believe he will, all the athletes who were infringed on this year will be entitled to get cut in on a piece of the damages.

Can someone PLEASE inform me on how a college athlete could receive monetary compensation for being a college athlete without completely destroying his eligibility status? No one discusses it, and even if it's a simple answer (which I doubt), I would like to know why.

[Samdari]

Can someone PLEASE inform me on how a college athlete could receive monetary compensation for being a college athlete without completely destroying his eligibility status? No one discusses it, and even if it's a simple answer (which I doubt), I would like to know why.


That's why this is such a minefield for the NCAA. They have been adamant about their amateurism rules, but have marketed their sports like professional products. Them losing this lawsuit would seriously impinge on their ability to do so.

[Logan]

I guess my other question is why isn't Keller, et al suing ESPN, CBS, ABC, the BCS, etc as well? As I'm pretty sure someone said earlier, his issue is with the NCAA, not really EA. They are the ones granting the ability for EA and the networks to advertise the players. And I would think that's a much easier case, since we're not talking about a "likeness", but their actual image.

[Huckleberry]

I guess I am nuts, because I will be paying student loans back for many years, and I didn't even attend a high profile school such as USC. According to this article, tuition went up again, and is now over $37k, not including room/board/books/etc.

Daily Trojan - Tuition expected to rise again in 2009 (http://www.dailytrojan.com/news/tuition-expected-to-rise-again-in-2009-1.900731)

Yes, you are definitely nuts if you think USC is not more than $150K richer based on Matt Leinart's efforts during his time there. Or Texas based on Vince Young's work, for example.

Also, I'm not saying the players aren't compensated. I already said some are over-compensated based on value. In fact, most are over-compensated. However, some are vastly under-compensated based on value.

[sterlingice]

Great- we're rehashing the old "should athletes be paid" argument. I have yet to see the answer even in the slightest to the following scenario that *will* play out, guaranteed, within 5 years of paying student athlets.

What do you do when you're a university and a women's lacrosse player sues and wins- and they will win under Title IX- and you have to pay every single athlete? Goodbye college athletics.

SI

[mh2365]

If you noticed this lawsuit caused the rosters to be just slightly off on all the players (hometown, height & weight) and the announcers no longer say the names

[Grammaticus]

Lots of the height and weight data is correct and the announcers say most of the names. I'm pretty sure my game disc is not different from anyone elses.

[mh2365]

I've played about 15 games on the 360 with named players and not once have they said any names. A lot of home towns were off in the EA roster, if the home town wasn't then the height or weight was ....

[Eaglesfan27]

I've played about 15 games on the 360 with named players and not once have they said any names. A lot of home towns were off in the EA roster, if the home town wasn't then the height or weight was ....

Same here. Almost every USC player has either their hometown, height, or weight slightly different than what they are in real life. Lots of wrong hometowns which I never remember being an issue in previous years.

[RainMaker]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/michael_mccann/07/21/ncaa/index.html

Looks like former players and lawyers smell blood.

[Logan]

I hope the Nets turn around and sue Ed O'Bannon.

[bhlloy]

Same here. Almost every USC player has either their hometown, height, or weight slightly different than what they are in real life. Lots of wrong hometowns which I never remember being an issue in previous years.

Hometowns were not correct in 09. States were correct but hometowns were definitely random...

[Logan]

O'Bannon v. NCAA stems from a series of documents Division I student-athletes are required to sign as part of their participation in college sports. Form 08-3a (the "Student-Athlete" statement) is one such document. Among other conditions, it specifies, "You authorize the NCAA . . . to use your name or picture to generally promote NCAA championships or other NCAA events, activities or programs." By signing the statement, student-athletes relinquish in perpetuity all future rights in the NCAA's licensing of their images and likenesses. O'Bannon claims that student-athletes -- some of whom are younger than 18 -- effectively have no choice but to sign, since they would otherwise be deemed ineligible to play and would risk losing their athletic scholarships.



Bold means they have a choice not to sign. I'm sick of this crap already.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Bold means they have a choice not to sign. I'm sick of this crap already.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

There is no constitutional right to playing at an NCAA member school if you don't choose to abide by their rules.

And somebody tries to claim one & actually finds a court stupid enough to go along with it then it's time we tear the fucker up & start over.

[BishopMVP]

Does the fact that many sign the papers under 18 mean it's not an enforceable contract?

[Logan]

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

There is no constitutional right to playing at an NCAA member school if you don't choose to abide by their rules.

And somebody tries to claim one & actually finds a court stupid enough to go along with it then it's time we tear the fucker up & start over.

I'd love the NCAA to come out and sue Ed O'Bannon for that $3.9 million NBA contract he signed, saying how without the services they provided for him he wouldn't have gotten a nickel.

I really think the most likely result that would actually come from any of these lawsuits is exactly what you described.

Does the fact that many sign the papers under 18 mean it's not an enforceable contract?

If you're under 18, you need to sign your National Letter of Intent along with a parent...I'm assuming that part is either included within it, or the same rule would apply for the separate document.

[GoDukes]

Comedy would be when no one pays him a god damn cent because no one out there gives a shit about his likeness.

Really? You mean like people don't want to play as certain people, and would still buy the game if the players on the teams bore no likeness to their real life counterparts? People didn't want to play as Tim Tebow/Percy Harvin/etc?

[CamEdwards]

Really? You mean like people don't want to play as certain people, and would still buy the game if the players on the teams bore no likeness to their real life counterparts? People didn't want to play as Tim Tebow/Percy Harvin/etc?

You just described me. I've had the NCAA game for a week now and haven't touched the dynasty mode. I created a fictional universe in the Road to Glory mode. I may do a dynasty after this, but I'll end up using fake names anyway.

[Logan]

Really? You mean like people don't want to play as certain people, and would still buy the game if the players on the teams bore no likeness to their real life counterparts? People didn't want to play as Tim Tebow/Percy Harvin/etc?

Since you only partially quoted my post from a month and a half ago, I'll put the whole thing out there:

Capitalism would be if he goes around offering his likeness (or real-ness) to the highest bidder.

Comedy would be when no one pays him a god damn cent because no one out there gives a shit about his likeness.

Tim Tebow, Percy Harvin, Sam Keller. Which one sticks out in not really seeing a big market for their likeness? You can be sure the Arizona State and Nebraska fanbases would prefer a randomized QB than being forced to be reminded of Keller.

[Samdari]

I'd love the NCAA to come out and sue Ed O'Bannon for that $3.9 million NBA contract he signed, saying how without the services they provided for him he wouldn't have gotten a nickel.

Except that's not true.

He was the #1 player in his HS class, down to the the low lottery by the time he was drafted. He likely would have been much higher had he not gone to college.

[Logan]

Except that's not true.

He was the #1 player in his HS class, down to the the low lottery by the time he was drafted. He likely would have been much higher had he not gone to college.

So a lawsuit filed without merit? Where have I seen that recently?

[sterlingice]

I hope the Nets turn around and sue Ed O'Bannon.

:D

SI

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

NCAA procedural arguments rejected. O'Bannon case will now head to a hearing of arguments whether players should receive a portion of TV revenue.

Judge rules NCAA athletes can legally pursue television money - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/8895337/judge-rules-ncaa-athletes-legally-pursue-television-money)

[MrBug708]

Except that's not true.

He was the #1 player in his HS class, down to the the low lottery by the time he was drafted. He likely would have been much higher had he not gone to college.

He's knees were destroyed in college

[Logan]

Seeing my posts at the top of this page nearly 4 years later, my views have certainly changed...

But an interesting catch/article here:

EA Sports used Tim Tebow's name in NCAA Football 10 - SBNation.com (http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/5/23/4357530/ed-obannon-case-ncaa-tim-tebow-ncaa-football-10)

[cody8200]

I love college sports but I hope the NCAA and EA get destroyed by this lawsuit.

And in a related note, that the school, conference, NCAA, broadcast networks, etc all make money on the backs of a player that is not permitted to play professionally until they attend one year of college or sit out from mainstream sports for an entire year is unconscionable. It is directly contrary to any other professional endeavor I can think of.

[RainMaker]

I think the NCAA is going to lose the lawsuit. Strausser's testimony was killer, and they keep finding little things like the Tebow bit.

[QuikSand]

I hope the NCAA and EA get destroyed

you had me at hello

[Grammaticus]

What do they (representing players/athletes) want in the end? All athletes get a share? Athletes get a share based on their individual contribution to revenue?

[dawgfan]

What do they (representing players/athletes) want in the end? All athletes get a share? Athletes get a share based on their individual contribution to revenue?
Welcome to the can of worms that these cases open up.

[molson]

What do they (representing players/athletes) want in the end? All athletes get a share? Athletes get a share based on their individual contribution to revenue?

Freedom to negotiate those things. (ultimately)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Current athlete can now join the O’Bannon case | CollegeFootballTalk (http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/06/current-athlete-can-now-join-the-obannon-case/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs)

[bob]

Here's one of the things I don't understand about how the situation could play out. Let's say Notre Dame signs a high profile QB, gives him number 3, and he doesn't pan out. #3 is the highest selling ND jersey (i would guess, but pretty sure) given Montana, Mirer, Powlus (despite the "bust" label, set a ton of records there), and Michael Floyd plus other older stars (pre-Montana) I can't seem to recall off hand. If college players get paid for jersey sales, who gets paid when ND sells #3 under this scenario? Unlikely people are buying the jersey of the hypothetical bust QB, right?

Edit: Typically ND doesn't put last names on the back of their football jerseys. I think they currently only do it for bowl games.

[Izulde]

Here's one of the things I don't understand about how the situation could play out. Let's say Notre Dame signs a high profile QB, gives him number 3, and he doesn't pan out. #3 is the highest selling ND jersey (i would guess, but pretty sure) given Montana, Mirer, Powlus (despite the "bust" label, set a ton of records there), and Michael Floyd plus other older stars (pre-Montana) I can't seem to recall off hand. If college players get paid for jersey sales, who gets paid when ND sells #3 under this scenario? Unlikely people are buying the jersey of the hypothetical bust QB, right?

Edit: Typically ND doesn't put last names on the back of their football jerseys. I think they currently only do it for bowl games.

My thinking is that it goes to whomever of the school wears that number currently. Remember, even when jerseys are sold in the university bookstores, NCAA rules prohibit names on the back of the jersey.

I suspect the ruling, even it allows college players to be paid for jersey sales, only means that they compensate for the sales as long as they're at the school, wearing that number, and that the lawsuit won't specifically change the rule surrounding the sale of jerseys and names on them.

[bob]

My thinking is that it goes to whomever of the school wears that number currently. Remember, even when jerseys are sold in the university bookstores, NCAA rules prohibit names on the back of the jersey.

I suspect the ruling, even it allows college players to be paid for jersey sales, only means that they compensate for the sales as long as they're at the school, wearing that number, and that the lawsuit won't specifically change the rule surrounding the sale of jerseys and names on them.

But isn't part of Ed O'Bannon's lawsuit that they also profited on his likeness after he left? Seems like any number of those other #3's could argue it was their likeness, not the current (hypothetical) underachiever in that jersey.


Follow up question here - what's the guess at what happens if the NCAA loses? Top schools break away under their own system, everything else dies?

[Izulde]

But isn't part of Ed O'Bannon's lawsuit that they also profited on his likeness after he left? Seems like any number of those other #3's could argue it was their likeness, not the current (hypothetical) underachiever in that jersey.

A number isn't a likeness, so that wouldn't work. Retired numbers may be the exception to this rule.


Follow up question here - what's the guess at what happens if the NCAA loses? Top schools break away under their own system, everything else dies?

The immediate effect would be that the gap between the top-tier programs and everyone else would get even wider.

There will also, I think, be an ever more intense debate about the athletics arms race and you may see more mid-tier and below programs cutting way back on the budget. Or you may see an even bigger pouring of resources and an exacerbation of the problem.

Ultimately though, I think the system implodes on itself. When the gap is that wide and the handful of schools in contention each year becomes even smaller, people may watch less and less. This may not be true for basketball - there's enough schools there and the impact of one player is so much greater because of the smaller rosters that the sport's revenues won't be hurt.

But football? Yeah, that's eventually going to kill off that cash cow or at least wound it to the point where the current system dies off and is replaced by something else.

[bhlloy]

A number isn't a likeness, so that wouldn't work. Retired numbers may be the exception to this rule.





yes, and I meant to post this last week when this was brought up. There's a pretty big difference between EA Sports creating Arizona State QB #13 that looks as much as like Sam Keller as possible, with his exact height weight hometown and ratings as close to his scouting report as they can get and saying that anybody who wears #1 at Notre Dame is entitled to a cut of the money from jersey sales from here until eternity. I'm not sure how we got from point #1 to point #2 but I'm far more sympathetic to #1.

[Solecismic]

What is a "likeness", though? If you know who it is, through jersey numbers or scrambled names or faces or statistics, it is who it is.

If that's the standard, EA doesn't win.

The first legal question is whether EA's actions prevent the players from pursuing the sport through denying them economic advantages. That's a non-starter, and the courts have been fairly rigid about that.

The second legal question is whether EA's use of likenesses cause a reasonable customer to assume the players have endorsed the product. With that question, you need to look at the advertising and the representations made in the product itself. That might be a tougher question. Since I don't play these games, I can't make a reasonable guess here. Denard Robinson is on the cover of the current game, right? That implies something. I wouldn't grab a picture of Peyton Manning and stick it on the splash screen of FOF, but I have no problem using jersey numbers and player names and team names (not team nicknames, that's a copyright issue).

I'll add that states might consider this a privacy issue. While federal trumps state, these suits can always get messy. Also, with overseas leagues, it's a different ballgame entirely. In many places, using the names is protected.

[Logan]

Here comes the...

NCAA will not renew EA Sports contract (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2013/july/ncaa+will+not+renew+ea+sports+contract)

[britrock88]

Here comes the...

NCAA will not renew EA Sports contract (http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/ncaa/resources/latest+news/2013/july/ncaa+will+not+renew+ea+sports+contract)

Hmmmmmm...

[Izulde]

Looks like an attempt to cover its backside.

[DaddyTorgo]

Is that not a big deal though?

[Izulde]

Is that not a big deal though?

I'd say it's fairly significant as an indicator that the O'Bannon case is going to go very poorly for the defendants.

[Logan]

Is that not a big deal though?

In reading opinions on Twitter, it likely only means that there will be no technical NCAA license on the game. No NCAA logos. But all the teams/stadiums/bowls are licensed through what's called the CLC, and EA can still pursue a deal with whatever that is.

Doesn't mean they will of course. I think this means much more as it relates to the lawsuits than it does one actual video game.

[Eaglesfan27]

This may also have to do with madden monopoly lawsuit. I am interested to see if 2ksports does an ncaa football game.

[nilodor]

Might be a good year to pick up NCAA 14...

[MacroGuru]

The NCAA has never licensed the use of current student-athlete names, images or likenesses to EA. The NCAA has no involvement in licenses between EA and former student-athletes. Member colleges and universities license their own trademarks and other intellectual property for the video game. They will have to independently decide whether to continue those business arrangements in the future.


This paragraph tells me all I need to know why the NCAA is doing this...it's their way of CYA and they will point this out in court and try to shift all liabilities to the universities...

[Eaglesfan27]

This paragraph tells me all I need to know why the NCAA is doing this...it's their way of CYA and they will point this out in court and try to shift all liabilities to the universities...

Missed that the first time. Agreed, NCAA is CYA.

[Izulde]

Yep.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

@McMurphyESPN: First non-NCAA affiliated EA Sports college football video game will be called "College Football 15" source told @ESPN

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

New plaintiffs being added to the case.

Six current football players join Ed O'Bannon's NCAA lawsuit - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9491249/six-current-football-players-join-ed-obannon-ncaa-lawsuit)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Outside the Lines report on the NCAA/EA situation.

Latest developments in NCAA, Electronic Arts lawsuit significantly change case - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9491666/latest-developments-ncaa-electronic-arts-lawsuit-significantly-change-case)

[molson]

Pretty big 9th circuit court of appeals win for the players. The Court affirmed the district court's denial of the NCAA's motion to strike the complaint. The Court held that the NCAA has no 1st amendment right to create likenesses of players, and that the creation of these likenesses went beyond the "reporting of factual information" that is protected by state law.

Ex-NCAA athletes can sue Electronic Arts over video game likenesses - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-ncaa-electronic-arts-20130731,0,7839092.story)

[Solecismic]

This is shocking to me. It undermines everything I've understood about the law. Lanham hasn't even been mentioned, nor has the rather complete defense of using likenesses in Cardtoons.

Either the EA lawyers are incompetent, trying to lose, or the law is being rewritten by these judges.

EA had the licenses more to try and shut out other publishers than to have anything worth while. I wonder if they're playing a dangerous game of trying to lose (claiming the avatars in the game aren't likenesses is a ludicrous defense) and hoping to settle at a reasonable cost. That would really keep competitors out of the market.

[dacman]

.. 9th circuit court of appeals...

..or the law is being rewritten by these judges...

^
|
This.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Pretty big 9th circuit court of appeals win for the players.

Not a big shock there. Most liberal court in the land.

Not trying to introduce a ton of politics here, just noting that a ruling like this from them isn't a surprise (as it seems to be to some)

[kcchief19]

This is shocking to me. It undermines everything I've understood about the law. Lanham hasn't even been mentioned, nor has the rather complete defense of using likenesses in Cardtoons.

Either the EA lawyers are incompetent, trying to lose, or the law is being rewritten by these judges.

EA had the licenses more to try and shut out other publishers than to have anything worth while. I wonder if they're playing a dangerous game of trying to lose (claiming the avatars in the game aren't likenesses is a ludicrous defense) and hoping to settle at a reasonable cost. That would really keep competitors out of the market.
I can only conclude that EA is using different strategies in Heller and O'Bannon just to see what sticks to the wall. I've been wondering for a while if EA doesn't care about the jury trial because they know they will lose. The plaintiffs will present a very sympathetic case, and the defense is very complex. A jury trial almost seems to be a lost cause, but wining on appeal seems more likely.

I don't understand the Lanham Act enough to know if it applies, but isn't the defining element of Cardtoons the parody element?

I've felt all along that there are two elements to the case -- one is information available to everyone (the MLBAM vs CBC standard) such as height, weight, uniform number that is not protected copyright. Second is the avatar in the game. I'm not sure I've ever seen an in-game avatar that actually looks like the player in real life.

The O'Bannon team seems to be better prepared than the Heller team. The Heller lawyer is talking about exposing the NCAA's hypocrisy in their case. Last time I checked, I don't think you can sue someone for being a hypocrite.

[Logan]

I've felt all along that there are two elements to the case -- one is information available to everyone (the MLBAM vs CBC standard) such as height, weight, uniform number that is not protected copyright. Second is the avatar in the game. I'm not sure I've ever seen an in-game avatar that actually looks like the player in real life.

They also use skin color and while that can be argued as being random (not many colors to choose from), I'm sure they can show a pretty high correlation that white players in real life are depicted as white in the game, and same with black. And then I also remember a couple examples of a black player being portrayed as white in a particular version, and EA going back and fixing it with an update.

I'd assume that would be a pretty telling example to bring up, if it actually happened.

[Logan]

@McMurphyESPN: First non-NCAA affiliated EA Sports college football video game will be called "College Football 15" source told @ESPN

Not so fast...

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>BREAKING: <a href="https://twitter.com/EASPORTS">@EASPORTS</a> will NOT publish new college football game next year. Evaluating future of the franchise in wake of lawsuits <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23sportsbiz&amp;src=hash">#sportsbiz</a></p>&mdash; Scott Soshnick (@soshnick) <a href="https://twitter.com/soshnick/statuses/383324299358007296">September 26, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[CraigSca]

Crap, does this mean they will no longer update my favorite team's socks?

[TRO]

More time to work on dreadlocks.

[Huckleberry]

I see huge market share grab potential for FOF:TCY2

[Kodos]

The bulk of my video game time has gone into the NCAA series over the past five years. This is not good news.

[CraigSca]

The bulk of my video game time has gone into the NCAA series over the past five years. This is not good news.


While I mock the dreads and the updated socks from the fanbase, I agree, this is not good. I use my console as my sports-playing device and NCAA along with The Show were my only must-buys each year.

[wade moore]

No College Football Video Game Next Year, Says EA Sports [Update] (http://kotaku.com/no-college-football-video-game-next-year-says-ea-sport-1404530680/@tcraggs22)

[TroyF]

After lawyer fees, these guys are going to get a small amount and in exchange they kill the joy for thousands of people who play the games. Good for them, they must be very proud of themselves.

At least the last game in the series was good.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Not so fast...

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>BREAKING: <a href="https://twitter.com/EASPORTS">@EASPORTS</a> will NOT publish new college football game next year. Evaluating future of the franchise in wake of lawsuits <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23sportsbiz&amp;src=hash">#sportsbiz</a></p>&mdash; Scott Soshnick (@soshnick) <a href="https://twitter.com/soshnick/statuses/383324299358007296">September 26, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

This is fantastic news if true. Opens the door wide open for other options.

[JonInMiddleGA]

This is fantastic news if true. Opens the door wide open for other options.

Umm ... no.

That's pretty much the death knell for any meaningful/useful college sports game for the foreseeable future.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Umm ... no.

That's pretty much the death knell for any meaningful/useful college sports game for the foreseeable future.

No. You're just not going to see a licensed game, which is fine by me. These games are easily modded and you'll see fan packs where you can update the game. I've been hoping for this for several years. There's a huge void and you can be assured that someone will fill it.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

So Denard will be the last cover?

[chadritt]

unless the NCAA ever comes to an agreement with the players about licensing, once they do im sure the games will be back.

[RainMaker]

After lawyer fees, these guys are going to get a small amount and in exchange they kill the joy for thousands of people who play the games. Good for them, they must be very proud of themselves.


How is it their fault? EA was the company profiting off their likeness. Shouldn't people be allowed to be compensated for their likeness being used to sell something?

[JonInMiddleGA]

There's a huge void and you can be assured that someone will fill it.

I disagree.

I don't believe any significant void exists for an unlicensed game.

[Neon_Chaos]

I think the fact that they wont ship a college game next year highlights how dependent their profits were on utilizing other people's likenesses to sell their product.

[Izulde]

I think the fact that they wont ship a college game next year highlights how dependent their profits were on utilizing other people's likenesses to sell their product.

I don't think it was entirely that, thought it was a large part of it. I think it was also the fact that the NCAA, SEC, and Pac-12 I think it was, pulled out of the licensing agreement. While 150 schools did agree to continue the agreement with EA, including SEC schools, essentially this would have meant, at best, having a generic NCAA, SEC and Pac-12 logos, championship games, etc.

My guess is as part of this settlement, EA Sports would be required to come up with complete generic rosters, which, while doable, would be a massive timesink, both in terms of creating these guys, and in making sure that said created players don't run afoul of likenesses.

[Izulde]

This is fantastic news if true. Opens the door wide open for other options.

Not really. You can talk about fanpacks and that all you like, but the quality, especially on the next-gen consoles, will not be the same as a licensed game, and most players will complain about it.

[Huckleberry]

I don't think it was entirely that, thought it was a large part of it. I think it was also the fact that the NCAA, SEC, and Pac-12 I think it was, pulled out of the licensing agreement. While 150 schools did agree to continue the agreement with EA, including SEC schools, essentially this would have meant, at best, having a generic NCAA, SEC and Pac-12 logos, championship games, etc.

My guess is as part of this settlement, EA Sports would be required to come up with complete generic rosters, which, while doable, would be a massive timesink, both in terms of creating these guys, and in making sure that said created players don't run afoul of likenesses.

Make every roster identical out of the box, with every player 7'6" tall, 100 pounds, and with green skin and a 70 OVR rating.

Then make roster modification a simple CSV import via the USB hub. The community will take care of the roster situation.

[gstelmack]

My guess is as part of this settlement, EA Sports would be required to come up with complete generic rosters, which, while doable, would be a massive timesink, both in terms of creating these guys, and in making sure that said created players don't run afoul of likenesses.

It's actually CHEAPER to create generic, random rosters than to go through and make everyone match their real-life counterparts.

To avoid running afoul of likenesses, yes you might still create a database of player numbers, heights, and weights, and as you generate players you just check for a conflict and adjust one of those (or all of them).

[BillJasper]

I think two things will stop any publisher/developer from putting out a game in the near future:

1. Development costs. That is going to be a huge hurdle.

2. People simply aren't willing to buy the generic games anymore. Look how badly All-Pro Football 2K8 crashed and burned. That was with everyone clamoring for something to play other than Madden.

[RainMaker]

Make every roster identical out of the box, with every player 7'6" tall, 100 pounds, and with green skin and a 70 OVR rating.

Then make roster modification a simple CSV import via the USB hub. The community will take care of the roster situation.

It's kind of crazy that they didn't just go with randomized players years ago when they realized lawsuits were on the horizon. Just make it easy to download community rosters and someone would have had them up within a week of launch. Making the players identical with the exception of their name (which was built-in to

[RainMaker]

Not a big shock there. Most liberal court in the land.

Not trying to introduce a ton of politics here, just noting that a ruling like this from them isn't a surprise (as it seems to be to some)

This is awhile back, but I'm not sure how that's a liberal decision. I really think if it went all the way up to the Supreme Court, there'd be a good chance of unanimous decisions.

Politics has entered it, although it seems like both sides are willing to jump ship if they have a vested interest in the decision. It is kind of funny seeing those on the right all of a sudden hating the free market.

[Eaglesfan27]

I think two things will stop any publisher/developer from putting out a game in the near future:

1. Development costs. That is going to be a huge hurdle.

2. People simply aren't willing to buy the generic games anymore. Look how badly All-Pro Football 2K8 crashed and burned. That was with everyone clamoring for something to play other than Madden.

Agreed. This is the end of college sports on consoles. :(

[Kodos]

I swear that The Ladder willl go on until they shut down the servers!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

It is kind of funny seeing those on the right all of a sudden hating the free market.

Only thing funnier than that is someone on a message board lumping everyone with conservative beliefs under the beliefs of JimGa in regards to video game licensing.

[Eaglesfan27]

I swear that The Ladder willl go on until they shut down the servers!

:thumbsup:

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

2. People simply aren't willing to buy the generic games anymore. Look how badly All-Pro Football 2K8 crashed and burned. That was with everyone over 30 clamoring for something to play other than Madden.

Fixed.

Licenses are king with the under 30 crowd. They'll buy a half-ass game with team names and players over a good generic game. But if there's no licensed game, those people could be persuaded if there's a mod engine that allows them to get those things into their game.

Now, I haven't seen anything in the ruling related to modding by the community. As long as modding is allowed, I see a one year hiatus (no way to start a new game now) followed by a game in summer of 2015.

Some of the comments regarding development cost are also very short-sighted. There's going to be a change in the near future where athletes get paid at some level. One of the concessions in that will have to be that likenesses can be used. It's worth it right now for a game developer to become the only guy on the block for a year or two with generic rosters/leagues knowing that when that tide turns, they'll be in position to take advantage of it.

EA is too lazy to create a generic game. Their management has always been short sighted in this regard and this decision to can the game even though it's not court-ordered is no different. They know that licenses sell games even if the gameplay is average at best. They're known for cutting corners and re-skinning games just to keep the cash cow running. They don't have a clue that a well produced game will sell just as well.

And I don't want to hear comparisons to All-Pro Football either. That was a disaster from the start. Pushing all those legends in the game rather than just producing a good generic football game was just as stupid as EA's decision to rely on licensing rather than good gameplay.

[nilodor]

Fixed.

Licenses are king with the under 30 crowd. They'll buy a half-ass game with team names and players over a good generic game. But if there's no licensed game, those people could be persuaded if there's a mod engine that allows them to get those things into their game.

Now, I haven't seen anything in the ruling related to modding by the community. As long as modding is allowed, I see a one year hiatus (no way to start a new game now) followed by a game in summer of 2015.

Some of the comments regarding development cost are also very short-sighted. There's going to be a change in the near future where athletes get paid at some level. One of the concessions in that will have to be that likenesses can be used. It's worth it right now for a game developer to become the only guy on the block for a year or two with generic rosters/leagues knowing that when that tide turns, they'll be in position to take advantage of it.

EA is too lazy to create a generic game. Their management has always been short sighted in this regard and this decision to can the game even though it's not court-ordered is no different. They know that licenses sell games even if the gameplay is average at best. They're known for cutting corners and re-skinning games just to keep the cash cow running. They don't have a clue that a well produced game will sell just as well.

And I don't want to hear comparisons to All-Pro Football either. That was a disaster from the start. Pushing all those legends in the game rather than just producing a good generic football game was just as stupid as EA's decision to rely on licensing rather than good gameplay.

The problem with a generic game is that I don't think they will allow it to be customizable enough so that people could recreate the Div 1. I would imagine that if they make it too easy (like have team builder, imported graphics, etc) they would be accepting a big risk. I would think that the most they would allow would be allowing a few created players, some generic team names and maybe the ability to customize the team type (spread, power running, etc.). If they really open it up I would think they're opening themselves up to more legal action.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

The problem with a generic game is that I don't think they will allow it to be customizable enough so that people could recreate the Div 1. I would imagine that if they make it too easy (like have team builder, imported graphics, etc) they would be accepting a big risk. I would think that the most they would allow would be allowing a few created players, some generic team names and maybe the ability to customize the team type (spread, power running, etc.). If they really open it up I would think they're opening themselves up to more legal action.

Like I said, we really haven't seen what the ruling was to know how far this goes. I can't imagine that creating a similarly structured league would be covered in any way under this ruling to be honest. This is about likenesses. If you do the NCAA structure with randomly generated players, I find it hard to believe that it would be restricted by this ruling.

[cartman]

Like I said, we really haven't seen what the ruling was to know how far this goes. I can't imagine that creating a similarly structured league would be covered in any way under this ruling to be honest. This is about likenesses. If you do the NCAA structure with randomly generated players, I find it hard to believe that it would be restricted by this ruling.

Maybe you should check out Maximum Football.

[CU Tiger]

I swear that The Ladder willl go on until they shut down the servers!

Sweet...I do wonder if we should all make sure we have NCAA 14 though...as I suspect in time it will get scarce...and thenthye may shut down server support for NCAA 13...

Then again, I wonder if a work around may be paid for "updates" that revamp portions of the game each year.

Will not publish "NEW" game..doesn't say wont update current...

[BillJasper]

How do you even promote a generic football game now when the expectations have been so raised by Madden and NCAA Football that you are getting an authentic experience?

"Kind-sorta like College Football 2016"!

[RainMaker]

Players are eventually going to be able to make money in the future. When that happens, EA or whoever will just license a group that all the players sign on to (just as they license the schools and conferences). I really don't think this is the end of college sports on consoles at all. Just waiting on the NCAA to catch up with the times.

[Huckleberry]

How do you even promote a generic football game now when the expectations have been so raised by Madden and NCAA Football that you are getting an authentic experience?

"Kind-sorta like College Football 2016"!

You call it college football and market the customization aspect.

The biggest problem and hardest to replicate thing if you can't even get the schools to sign on is getting an accurate stadium for each team. Which is a huge part of the college experience. If you can get those in the game then everything else is easily handled by crowd-sourced customization.

[BillJasper]

Players are eventually going to be able to make money in the future. When that happens, EA or whoever will just license a group that all the players sign on to (just as they license the schools and conferences). I really don't think this is the end of college sports on consoles at all. Just waiting on the NCAA to catch up with the times.

Question is: how long will it take for the NCAA to catch up with the times? Does the various NCAA series generate so much cash for them that they will turn the tide?

[BillJasper]

The biggest problem and hardest to replicate thing if you can't even get the schools to sign on is getting an accurate stadium for each team. Which is a huge part of the college experience. If you can get those in the game then everything else is easily handled by crowd-sourced customization.

Which is great for those of us that like customization. But what about the casual buyers who likely outnumber the people like us 20-1? Are they even going to give "Kinda-sorta College Football 2016" a second glance?

[RainMaker]

Question is: how long will it take for the NCAA to catch up with the times? Does the various NCAA series generate so much cash for them that they will turn the tide?

Lawsuits will speed it along. Only so long you can profit off someone's likeness without getting caught. As those revenue streams fold up, they'll realize it's either partner with the players and get something or don't and get nothing.

[RainMaker]

You call it college football and market the customization aspect.

The biggest problem and hardest to replicate thing if you can't even get the schools to sign on is getting an accurate stadium for each team. Which is a huge part of the college experience. If you can get those in the game then everything else is easily handled by crowd-sourced customization.

I don't understand why they can't go back to the old model with licensed schools, stadiums, etc and just make all the players actual generic models that don't share likeness with the real ones. I'm sure people who care about that will be able to find a download somewhere.

[Huckleberry]

Which is great for those of us that like customization. But what about the casual buyers who likely outnumber the people like us 20-1? Are they even going to give "Kinda-sorta College Football 2016" a second glance?

Sure, it would sell fewer copies. But it would still sell enough, but that's obviously just my opinion.

[nilodor]

Do you think that they will be able to allow the level of customization that would allow a replica league to be created? Wouldn't that get them in a mess if by the time the game ships people have created a defacto NCAA with full rosters that look like the players, have the ncaa logos, etc? I would think that there would be come complications there.

[A-Husker-4-Life]

Guess it's time for TCY2

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Do you think that they will be able to allow the level of customization that would allow a replica league to be created? Wouldn't that get them in a mess if by the time the game ships people have created a defacto NCAA with full rosters that look like the players, have the ncaa logos, etc? I would think that there would be come complications there.

There's nothing that keeps them from creating a mod engine where people can create whatever structure they like. It's no different that what you used to see with generic NCAA or NFL games. They can create the structure and the NCAA or the courts aren't going to have any issues with that. They can also create an import feature where they can create teams/players to import into a game. If you were to do that and import that into the generic game (assuming you weren't charging anyone for that import), then you're not out of line. No one is profiting from a likeness in that situation. If you create a mod file with likenesses/licensed logos and you sell it, then you have the same problem EA has right now and would face the same issues.

[dawgfan]

Do you think that they will be able to allow the level of customization that would allow a replica league to be created? Wouldn't that get them in a mess if by the time the game ships people have created a defacto NCAA with full rosters that look like the players, have the ncaa logos, etc? I would think that there would be come complications there.
Disclaimer - I'm not a lawyer.

That said, I really don't see how this would be a problem. The players can't make a valid argument against allowing EA (or others) to provide a way for the buyer to customize/create their own players. And if the buyers decide they're going to try to replicate real players, well, that's their prerogative.

It's what EA should have been doing from the start. Mod communities would have sprung up to provide "real" rosters and ratings, and EA (and the NCAA) would have been off the hook for any potential liabilities.

[TroyF]

How is it their fault? EA was the company profiting off their likeness. Shouldn't people be allowed to be compensated for their likeness being used to sell something?

The sites I looked at today stated each player will get about $200.00 Unlike jerseys or other types of school related flair, every player in the NCAA game gets a cut. How are you going to differentiate between who bought the game because of wanting to play with Johnny Manziel vs. the guy who bought the game because his son was the third TE on North Texas?

While these games are goldmines, they aren't enough of it to make every DI player get thousands of dollars a year off of them. So these guys killed a game that I can assure you many of their peers played while at school and still play to this day because they wanted their little cut.

They have the right to do it. Good for them. I truly mean that. If getting $200 - taxes is a win for them, they got it. They didn't change anything. The players are not going to get money anytime soon. For starters, every school doesn't have money to give. Beyond that, the schools are not giving up their cut. They simply aren't.

Everyone is comparing this to Curt Flood. . . sorry, that's wrong. This will not change anything other than NCAA football not being produced and maybe players names not being printed on the back of jerseys at the team store.

If that's what they were going for, they got the W. Congrats to Ed on his $200.00 check. Yippee.

[Izulde]

This will not change anything other than NCAA football not being produced and maybe players names not being printed on the back of jerseys at the team store.
.

I'm pretty sure the names not on back of the jerseys is already in place as a preservation of amateurism.

And it will change things if the suit itself is successful against the NCAA. Granted, to make this a complete slam dunk (pun intended), they'll need to get some current basketball players to join in order to really be able to go after the true source of revenue.

[TroyF]

I'm pretty sure the names not on back of the jerseys is already in place as a preservation of amateurism.

And it will change things if the suit itself is successful against the NCAA. Granted, to make this a complete slam dunk (pun intended), they'll need to get some current basketball players to join in order to really be able to go after the true source of revenue.


Yeah, sorry, I'm not buying it. The NCAA is not going to be giving any part of their pie of basketball money to the players. Not in this lifetime. This was EA using their likeness for financial gain. The NCAA using a kid on a game cover or in a commercial for the NCAA tourney? Yeah, good luck with that.

[Izulde]

Yeah, sorry, I'm not buying it. The NCAA is not going to be giving any part of their pie of basketball money to the players. Not in this lifetime. This was EA using their likeness for financial gain. The NCAA using a kid on a game cover or in a commercial for the NCAA tourney? Yeah, good luck with that.

If they don't settle, then the courts decide. It'll be interesting to see if EA and CLC do anything further after this settlement, or if they just stay out of it.

I still think O'Bannon and co have a very strong chance of winning here.

[Danny]

Do these players suing have Harvey Spector on their side?

[TroyF]

If they don't settle, then the courts decide. It'll be interesting to see if EA and CLC do anything further after this settlement, or if they just stay out of it.

I still think O'Bannon and co have a very strong chance of winning here.

I think it is zilch. I can see the NCAA and teams selling to commercial vendors to use their likeness.

If they do win, it will be a clinical disaster for college sports. It will end any "small" sport from being on TV. Really, ESPN is going to air the soccer championships. What, is the NCAA going to pay ESPN to air them? Please.

[Izulde]

I think it is zilch. I can see the NCAA and teams selling to commercial vendors to use their likeness.

If they do win, it will be a clinical disaster for college sports. It will end any "small" sport from being on TV. Really, ESPN is going to air the soccer championships. What, is the NCAA going to pay ESPN to air them? Please.

That would depend on how far-reaching the ruling is. I could see where they limit any win by the plantiffs to the revenue sports of football and men's basketball.

[TroyF]

That would depend on how far-reaching the ruling is. I could see where they limit any win by the plantiffs to the revenue sports of football and men's basketball.

I can't. How would you regulate that? If suddenly the swim meets become huge because of Missy Franklin at Cal and the ratings blow up, Missy gets nothing out of it because at one time swimming wasn't a revenue sport?

[Izulde]

I can't. How would you regulate that? If suddenly the swim meets become huge because of Missy Franklin at Cal and the ratings blow up, Missy gets nothing out of it because at one time swimming wasn't a revenue sport?

You're talking about something that isn't going to happen. The revenue sports are football and men's basketball, period. Perhaps women's basketball and men's ice hockey at some schools, but that's about it.

[RainMaker]

If they do win, it will be a clinical disaster for college sports. It will end any "small" sport from being on TV. Really, ESPN is going to air the soccer championships. What, is the NCAA going to pay ESPN to air them? Please.

No it won't. This lawsuit isn't about every athlete getting paid X amount. Or even about the school's paying the athlete directly. It's about price fixing.

Nothing will change on your television. Players will just be able to earn money off their likeness. You are using baseless scare tactics that has nothing to do with the case.

[RainMaker]

The sites I looked at today stated each player will get about $200.00 Unlike jerseys or other types of school related flair, every player in the NCAA game gets a cut. How are you going to differentiate between who bought the game because of wanting to play with Johnny Manziel vs. the guy who bought the game because his son was the third TE on North Texas?

While these games are goldmines, they aren't enough of it to make every DI player get thousands of dollars a year off of them. So these guys killed a game that I can assure you many of their peers played while at school and still play to this day because they wanted their little cut.

They have the right to do it. Good for them. I truly mean that. If getting $200 - taxes is a win for them, they got it. They didn't change anything. The players are not going to get money anytime soon. For starters, every school doesn't have money to give. Beyond that, the schools are not giving up their cut. They simply aren't.

Everyone is comparing this to Curt Flood. . . sorry, that's wrong. This will not change anything other than NCAA football not being produced and maybe players names not being printed on the back of jerseys at the team store.

If that's what they were going for, they got the W. Congrats to Ed on his $200.00 check. Yippee.

Might come as a shock, but people don't work for free for your personal enjoyment. They should be compensated (even if it's a small amount) for their likeness being used which obviously adds to the game. Just as anyone should be compensated for their likeness being used in a game, movie, TV, ad, or whatever.

As for who gets the money, that'll be up to negotiations. My guess is most college athletes would sign on to a licensing group that would decide how the money is doled out in advance. Maybe it's $200 per player, maybe it's dependent on other factors. And of course players like Johnny Manziel can negotiate his own deal if he feels like it.

This isn't some new territory. Professional sports have done this in licensing for decades. The NCAA can do the same thing, there is enough money at play. Still don't know why people are so jealous of these kids earning their market value.

[Izulde]

I'm actually working on article right now to submit for publication on my own idea of how to fix college sports. We'll see if it gets accepted or not once I submit it, but I figure it's worth a shot.

[Solecismic]

Control over a likeness is a tricky concept. What is a likeness? The First Amendment indicates we can't control use of our names. In fact, you can't even copyright a name and there are limitations to trademarks.

Obama, for example, can't control columnists from using his name, nor can he stop photographs from being printed. As long as the photograph itself was not stolen, those can be used.

The question the courts have apparently considered is that a video game picture is not protected by any free speech argument. Or at least EA feels the courts could go in that direction, hence the settlement.

So, technically now, if someone created a game where Obama ran the country and he didn't like the potential outcomes, he could sue under this interpretation.

Is that a good thing? Sarah Palin wanted to sue because that HBO movie took some liberties with her story line. She was quickly advised that the law allows movie producers to use her likeness in this manner. We have all manner of movies about Lincoln and other dead people, whether he's freeing slaves or hunting vampires.

Is that a good thing? I think so. If someone does something notable, we want to reflect that in art. We have libel and slander laws to protect people, though those protections are rather weak for celebrities.

Can a video game be considered an expression, just like a movie or a painting (see Tiger Woods' attempts to control his likeness in that manner, for reference - Daniel Grant: Sports Artists Battling Big Money, Trademark Lawsuits (and Winning!) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-grant/sports-artists-battling-b_b_1243905.html)?)

The Lanham Act was carefully crafted to walk this line. Why isn't it used here? Lanham states that free speech rights override compensating people for becoming famous. As long as there's no question about endorsement, speech is permitted. As for damages under Lanham, the players would have to show financial damage from EA's work, which they can't. It's all very carefully outlined in Cardtoons v. MLBPA (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/IPCoop/96card1.html) as well as a long and dry, but useful, analysis of the value of celebrity.

But, as was pointed out, Cardtoons was deemed a parody, not a video game. So the question was whether free speech included parody, even though there was no question that Cardtoons was making a commercial product, not reporting the news. Parody beat right to publicity. Are video games art or parody or anything at all?

CDM Sports v. MLBAM allowed fantasy sports games (Major League Baseball Advanced Media) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_Advanced_Media)). Names and statistics are part of the public domain. I don't worry about my product being deemed illegal because I don't claim endorsement (Lanham) and names and numbers alone aren't considered likenesses.

But this worries me a little. I think, as it applies to me, that any attempt to provide player avatars is risky. I also worry that the act of simulation might be risky. Even though a computer simulation is somewhat a bunch of "what ifs" seen through an awful lot of research and the broad brushstrokes of statistical interpretations. It's simply advanced use of names and statistics. I think there's a lot of art to it, but the courts may disagree.

I thought, initially, EA was playing to lose here. To protect the notion that a license is required for this type of product. But they've discontinued the product while seemingly paying a lot of money for this specific license (the players won't get nearly $200 by the time the lawyers are done with their share). I know, from discussions with game publishers, that publishers aren't all that interested in legalities. They love licenses. They worry about lawsuits and competition. Licenses stop lawsuits and prevent competition.

So, in the end, I think EA got caught up in the whirlwind of the O'Bannon notion that the NCAA owes the players compensation. The casualty is this video game series, and, really, any major college football video game project.

[RainMaker]

The Lanham Act was carefully crafted to walk this line. Why isn't it used here? Lanham states that free speech rights override compensating people for becoming famous. As long as there's no question about endorsement, speech is permitted. As for damages under Lanham, the players would have to show financial damage from EA's work, which they can't. It's all very carefully outlined in Cardtoons v. MLBPA (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/IPCoop/96card1.html) as well as a long and dry, but useful, analysis of the value of celebrity.


Keller wasn't suing under Lanham. It was a claim under California's Right to Publicity.

It is definitely tricky territory for what violates and what doesn't. But we do have a lot of precedent and many professional sports games license players likeness in their games. And I don't think EA bailed because of any other reason than they were going to lose. Having a former producer come in and tell the courts exactly what they were doing made it a tough case for them to win.

[Solecismic]

Federal Law trumps State Law. Cardtoons won because the courts said the Constitution trumped Oklahoma's Right to Publicity law (using Lanham as how the free speech/right to publicity line is drawn). So if this were a decision appealed to federal court (and one of the major reasons a federal court will hear a case is a question about state law infringing on a national right), that's the line of logic they'd use.

I don't know if EA would win (Cardtoons won because parody - even for commercial gain - was recognized specifically as protected speech in another case), but one of the reasons they might not pursue taking this out of California courts is a worry that the decision could affect their professional sports video game licenses. EA may feel $40 million is worth not asking that question.

Anyway, what I'm saying is that EA chose a particularly weak defense. Most of the "players" used in their game were not even recognizable, and CDC admitted freely that their use of player names and statistics made the players easily recognized. I've had these discussions with publishers, and a court recognition that video games can use player names, no bones about it, would change the product landscape for professional sports games. EA doesn't want that statement.

[JonInMiddleGA]

CDM Sports v. MLBAM allowed fantasy sports games (Major League Baseball Advanced Media) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_League_Baseball_Advanced_Media)). Names and statistics are part of the public domain. I don't worry about my product being deemed illegal because I don't claim endorsement (Lanham) and names and numbers alone aren't considered likenesses.

But this worries me a little. I think, as it applies to me, that any attempt to provide player avatars is risky. I also worry that the act of simulation might be risky. Even though a computer simulation is somewhat a bunch of "what ifs" seen through an awful lot of research and the broad brushstrokes of statistical interpretations. It's simply advanced use of names and statistics. I think there's a lot of art to it, but the courts may disagree.


This is the line that so many tabletop publishers have to walk, and at this point I suppose also be increasingly concerned about.

[TroyF]

Might come as a shock, but people don't work for free for your personal enjoyment. They should be compensated (even if it's a small amount) for their likeness being used which obviously adds to the game. Just as anyone should be compensated for their likeness being used in a game, movie, TV, ad, or whatever.

As for who gets the money, that'll be up to negotiations. My guess is most college athletes would sign on to a licensing group that would decide how the money is doled out in advance. Maybe it's $200 per player, maybe it's dependent on other factors. And of course players like Johnny Manziel can negotiate his own deal if he feels like it.

This isn't some new territory. Professional sports have done this in licensing for decades. The NCAA can do the same thing, there is enough money at play. Still don't know why people are so jealous of these kids earning their market value.


Might come as a shock to you, but these kids do get paid. 4 years, sometimes 5 of a free college education. As someone who worked my way through college on a graveyard shift and student loans, I kind of have an idea of what that is worth.

There are VERY few kids whose merchandise earns the kind of scratch the NFL guys do. I have been a proponent of the kids getting some sort of small stipend. The NFL has 32 teams to license at 53 players each. There are 120 teamsof 80 players each in the NCAA.

Go take a vote of the current crop of college football players and ask them if they would rather have an NCAA game they will be in for eternity or no game and I can tell you from personal exp, a majority would rather have the game.

These guys all fail to realize that only a few of them win with these lawsuits, the majority see no benefit or could even be hurt by this. Ex: what if the ncaa decided partial scholarships in basketball and football to pay for this?

[sterlingice]

That would depend on how far-reaching the ruling is. I could see where they limit any win by the plantiffs to the revenue sports of football and men's basketball.

If Title IX doesn't apply solely to revenue generating sports then how does this?

SI

[sterlingice]

Might come as a shock to you, but these kids do get paid. 4 years, sometimes 5 of a free college education. As someone who worked my way through college on a graveyard shift and student loans, I kind of have an idea of what that is worth.

There are VERY few kids whose merchandise earns the kind of scratch the NFL guys do. I have been a proponent of the kids getting some sort of small stipend. The NFL has 32 teams to license at 53 players each. There are 120 teamsof 80 players each in the NCAA.

Go take a vote of the current crop of college football players and ask them if they would rather have an NCAA game they will be in for eternity or no game and I can tell you from personal exp, a majority would rather have the game.

These guys all fail to realize that only a few of them win with these lawsuits, the majority see no benefit or could even be hurt by this. Ex: what if the ncaa decided partial scholarships in basketball and football to pay for this?

Don't worry, TroyF, it won't be basketball and football partial scholarships- it will be partial scholarships in non-revenue generating sports, especially for men's sports (because touching the Title IX money is a good way to end you in court).

SI

[General Mike]

Don't worry, TroyF, it won't be basketball and football partial scholarships- it will be partial scholarships in non-revenue generating sports, especially for men's sports (because touching the Title IX money is a good way to end you in court).

SI

Yeah, but those sports already are partial scholarship based. Very few baseball players are getting full rides. Same with wrestling. I don't know enough about lacrosse, but I'm guessing it's the same boat.

[JPhillips]

Don't worry, TroyF, it won't be basketball and football partial scholarships- it will be partial scholarships in non-revenue generating sports, especially for men's sports (because touching the Title IX money is a good way to end you in court).

SI

Roughly half of D1 football programs don't even break even.

[RainMaker]

Might come as a shock to you, but these kids do get paid. 4 years, sometimes 5 of a free college education. As someone who worked my way through college on a graveyard shift and student loans, I kind of have an idea of what that is worth.

Just because you pay someone something doesn't mean you can fix prices in a market. Cartels are illegal in this country, even if they pay their employees something. Your argument is completely irrelevant to the case.

[RainMaker]

If Title IX doesn't apply solely to revenue generating sports then how does this?


I don't know why Title IX would come into play here. It's letting them earn money from external sources. It's not the school paying them licensing fees, it's EA or whatever other company.

And Title IX could be worked on to fix any issues. Aspects of it are outdated as is so it'd a good time to update it.

[molson]

And Title IX could be worked on to fix any issues. Aspects of it are outdated as is so it'd a good time to update it.

And depending on the judge and appellate panels they get, Title IX is ultimately going to be interpreted in a results-oriented manner. This is all new stuff, new issues, so there's no clearly expressed legislative intent with regard to these issues, and not a lot of firm precedent directly on point. I don't think Title IX necessarily precludes very much.

[Young Drachma]

Might come as a shock to you, but these kids do get paid. 4 years, sometimes 5 of a free college education. As someone who worked my way through college on a graveyard shift and student loans, I kind of have an idea of what that is worth.



So do PhD students and students on full scholarship for academics or marching band or cheerleading. The difference is, they all can profit from their likeness or anything else they do while a student at the university. Student-athletes cannot.

[Solecismic]

That's why we're on the verge of a major change in how college football works. Right now, if you divide up the money realistically, you have a handful of Globetrotters (Texas, Ohio State, Michigan, Oklahoma...) and hundreds of Washington Generals.

When it all sorts itself out, there will be a 64-team league with skill sets approximately variant like Major League Baseball. Those players are essentially one step below the pros, and the total compensation package will be roughly equivalent to a AAA baseball player. Given their time commitment and required professionalism, I think that's fair.

We've moved from the Yale/Harvard image of a "student-athlete" to what's really a job. The players should be compensated. Whether college football maintains its popularity after these pretenses are dropped is an exercise for experts far better than I.

[Izulde]

Whether college football maintains its popularity after these pretenses are dropped is an exercise for experts far better than I.

I think there would be something of a decrease in popularity, but not all that large. My guess would be that it'd be a case similar to a lot of current students/alumni at Division 3 schools, where they support the flagship Division 1 program.

What I would find more interesting is how the loss of major college football would affect those other schools in terms of admissions and alumni donations. I also wonder if college basketball then becomes more competitive and popular as a result.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Dismissal motion by the NCAA is thrown out. Now we wait to see if it's certified as a class action lawsuit.

Judge denies motion to dismiss Ed O'Bannon's NCAA lawsuit - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9879455/judge-denies-motion-dismiss-ed-obannon-ncaa-lawsuit)

[molson]

O'Bannon gets past the summary judgment stage and it's now set for trial in June

The judge was very skeptical of the NCAA's arguments generally:

"the NCAA has argued in filings that First Amendment protections regarding the broadcast of newsworthy events -- i.e. a college football game -- preclude schools from having to seek permission from athletes for their appearance in game broadcasts. Wilken questioned why the NCAA can then sell exclusive game rights to a network like CBS while at the same time arguing the events are of public domain.

Wilken also expressed skepticism regarding three of the NCAA's five pro-competitive justifications for why its no-pay rule does not violate antitrust laws. Most notably, she expressed a "problem" with the notion that sharing revenue with the athletes would negatively impact competitive balance within college sports. 'Maybe there's a less restrictive alternative?' she wondered. 'Maybe you could enforce more competitive balance by having coaches' salaries addressed.'

One of the NCAA's other justifications is protecting amateurism. Wilken largely skipped past the topic with a dismissive line: "I don't think amateurism is going to be a useful word here."

Judge allows O'Bannon v. NCAA to proceed to trial - College Football - Stewart Mandel - SI.com (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20140220/ed-obannon-lawsuit-proceeds-to-trial/)

[JonInMiddleGA]

One of the NCAA's other justifications is protecting amateurism. Wilken largely skipped past the topic with a dismissive line: "I don't think amateurism is going to be a useful word here."

Then they've found a worthless idiot of a judge to hear it (gosh, there's a shocker)

Perfect for the villainous plaintiff, bad for the future of college athletics.

O'Bannon is as good an example of a DIAF candidate as I've come across in quite a while.

[Chief Rum]

DIAF?

[chadritt]

Die In A Fire

[JonInMiddleGA]

Die In A Fire

A phrase/acronym which, oddly enough, I learned here at the FOFC.

edit to add: Hence my use of it here, but very rarely anywhere else.

[Solecismic]

Seems like good news for the NCAA. The judge is basically giving them a free appeal on the grounds of bias if they lose. She's saying, without any doubt about it, that she has already decided the case.

[JonInMiddleGA]

She's saying, without any doubt about it, that she has already decided the case.

Dangerous thing ... you & I are pretty much in complete agreement on something ;)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Another lawsuit challenging the current setup/compensation of the NCAA...........

The NCAA-Killing Lawsuit Might Finally Be Here (http://deadspin.com/this-is-how-you-kill-the-ncaa-1538631479/1545583470/+barryap)

[Logan]

This type of stuff doesn't help:

Ohio State AD Gene Smith's $18,000 bonus for Logan Stieber's NCAA wrestling title doesn't seem to go over very well | cleveland.com (http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.ssf/2014/03/ohio_state_ad_gene_smiths_1800.html)

[Logan]

Big news. Appeal coming for sure.

Northwestern players win case with NLRB, college athletes one step closer to union - FanSided - Sports News, Entertainment, Lifestyle & Technology - 240+ Sites (http://fansided.com/2014/03/26/northwestern-players-win-case-nlrb-college-athletes-one-step-closer-union/#!BuXPn)

[molson]

This is starting to seem like something the NCAA and the universities could have nipped in the bud years ago by applying common sense, but now, will completely blow up in their face. Or at least, I hope that happens.

[Logan]

This is starting to seem like something the NCAA and the universities could have nipped in the bud years ago by applying common sense, but now, will completely blow up in their face. Or at least, I hope that happens.

Exactly. That's what Bill Connelly of SB Nation just said on Twitter: "Make no mistake: the unforeseen/unintended consequences of potential college unions will be epic and incredibly annoying...…but the NCAA has had like 117,342 opportunities to avoid something like this and refused."

PDF of the decision:

http://www.espn.go.com/pdf/2014/0326/espn_uniondecision.PDF

[BillJasper]

This is starting to seem like something the NCAA and the universities could have nipped in the bud years ago by applying common sense, but now, will completely blow up in their face. Or at least, I hope that happens.

We see this time and again with business entities. They stick their fingers in their ears and scream "La! La! La! I can't hear you!" until it blows up it their faces.

[Solecismic]

I guess I'm not certain why this is a game-changer. It probably hurts private colleges in that it only applies to them. Maybe this will wind up removing schools like Duke, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Stanford and USC from major conferences. That would be a blow.

So, now these players have the right to strike without losing their scholarships. Strike over what, exactly? The NCAA rules for labor limits are lower than what a union would demand. They have the right to refuse to participate in dangerous drills, and bring in people to investigate the workplace. Well, maybe that's a good thing for everyone. College athletes train hard. Better standards would help.

I guess that leaves money. They could strike to insist upon a salary. But the schools are hamstrung by NCAA rules, so all that amounts to is a refusal to play without losing their scholarships. And that's what would get the school removed from a conference. Colter has said this is about the money.

I think this matters more to lawyers than it does to fans. We all know major college sports are based on hypocrisy. But we still enjoy the pretense.

We've seen unions in sports before - we have them in all of the major sports. What they can't do, and won't do, is change the fact that coaches decide who plays and who doesn't. So I'm not sure what changes here. The issue of whether the NCAA will allow stipends over the value of a scholarship seems entirely separate.

[Logan]

I guess that leaves money. They could strike to insist upon a salary. But the schools are hamstrung by NCAA rules, so all that amounts to is a refusal to play without losing their scholarships. And that's what would get the school removed from a conference. Colter has said this is about the money.

Health benefits and scholarship guarantees in the event of injury are what's being sought primarily, not straight cash.

[Buccaneer]

I am virulently anti-union but I see this as a way to reduce the mockery and charade of student-athletes. Would rather have more seats filled by students there for academics.

[WVUFAN]

Wouldn't it be better for the major conferences to simply split from the NCAA and strike out on their own? It seems the schools are paying for the actions of the NCAA.

[molson]

Wouldn't it be better for the major conferences to simply split from the NCAA and strike out on their own? It seems the schools are paying for the actions of the NCAA.

Eventually maybe, but I think the involvement of the NCAA makes it easier for the universities to pretend that the athletes are students. If that whole system blew up (which I really don't see ever happening, there will be negotiations and a settlement eventually), then maybe it'd make more sense for those schools to just run separate private entities that do sports and hire athletes.

[Solecismic]

Health benefits and scholarship guarantees in the event of injury are what's being sought primarily, not straight cash.

Like any benefit, insurance costs money and has a monetary value. The NCAA isn't going to allow that for private schools and not similar compensation for public school athletes.

The NCAA will have to adjust, regardless, on the health issue - at least to have something in place for long-term debilitating injuries.

I thought schools already honored scholarships in these instances, though I suppose there's some discretion in the matter. I doubt anyone would have too much problem with the NCAA codifying this if it isn't already, though there would have to be some sort of certification that the injury prohibited play.

Colter also mentioned "full" cost of attendance, which is a cash issue. The NCAA has been unable to move on this because it would create a scenario where minor sports would be dropped at many universities and it would also create a divide between the big five conferences and the rest of the NCAA. He also wants the right to negotiate "likenesses" as the O'Bannon suit wants. Problem is, as we've seen, not even EA wants to pay that much for the rights. And, finally, he wants the NCAA's transfer rules scrapped, which has very little value within just the private-school world. Then there's the standard rage against the machine rhetoric you'd expect.

But, yeah, this seems to be mostly a money thing, and some of it is reasonable and some of it isn't. A lot of people want the 0/3 baseball rule in place for football and basketball. Basketball is better able to absorb this, because there's already a D-league and the college game already basically subsists on just the NCAA tournament. The NFL doesn't want to create a D-league because it takes a lot longer to develop great football players at many positions. And it's a lot more expensive to run a minor-league football franchise with no one watching or caring.

[dzilla77]

One of the consequences of unionizing is having to pay union dues. I doubt any organization will represent the players for free. Many athletes already are short on cash and this won't help. I also don't think they can negotiate with the universities or NCAA to pay those dues due to labor laws.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2014/05/23/jdge-denies-ncaa-motions-ed-obannon-trial/9500127/

Regardless of outcome in O'Bannon lawsuit, NCAA has to change - CBSSports.com (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/24451446/regardless-of-outcome-in-obannon-lawsuit-ncaa-has-to-change)

[Kodos]

Proposed $40 million settlement set for players - Yahoo Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/proposed-40-million-settlement-set-195052637--ncaaf.html)

One step closer to getting the NCAA series back?

[DanGarion]

Congratulations on your $400 per person Obannon and Keller.

[BillJasper]

Congratulations on your $400 per person Obannon and Keller.

Now they can buy the next six copies of NCAA Football each. Oh, wait...

[DanGarion]

Now they can buy the next six copies of NCAA Football each. Oh, wait...

Haha.. that was actually the second part to my joke I decided to wait to say. :)

[flounder]

I'm assuming that $40 million is before legal fees and expenses, which the article says are ~ $35 million. So more like $50 per person.

[Blackadar]

Congratulations on your $400 per person Obannon and Keller.

They get $15,000 each per the article.

[Sweed]

One of the consequences of unionizing is having to pay union dues. I doubt any organization will represent the players for free. Many athletes already are short on cash and this won't help. I also don't think they can negotiate with the universities or NCAA to pay those dues due to labor laws.

I'm no lawyer or anything close but are these rulings that make unionizing possible also making the players employees of the university?

Well if they are employees shouldn't they also be paying taxes on the value of their scholarships? They are employees in essence being paid to play so wouldn't that be taxable income?

I would think they have to declare the $15 grand as income why not their scholarship?

Just a thought in the back of my mind, am I way off base?

[NobodyHere]

I'm no lawyer or anything close but are these rulings that make unionizing possible also making the players employees of the university?

Well if they are employees shouldn't they also be paying taxes on the value of their scholarships? They are employees in essence being paid to play so wouldn't that be taxable income?

I would think they have to declare the $15 grand as income why not their scholarship?

Just a thought in the back of my mind, am I way off base?


I'm no lawyer either but I think maybe you got it backwards? I thought the National Labor Relations Board decided that the players were eligible to unionize because they received benefits from the school.

Also I think benefits is key here as opposed to salary. I don't think that scholarships are taxable.

[dawgfan]

I'm no lawyer either but I think maybe you got it backwards? I thought the National Labor Relations Board decided that the players were eligible to unionize because they received benefits from the school.

Also I think benefits is key here as opposed to salary. I don't think that scholarships are taxable.
The ruling was narrow - it involved private schools in Illinois. That ruling may result in private schools in other states from also being subject to unionization, but it would be a bit of a leap for it to apply to public schools.

[cartman]

The NCAA has now settled as well.

NCAA reaches $20M settlement of video game claims - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11055977/ncaa-reaches-20m-settlement-video-game-claims)

[DanGarion]

Well there is another $100 bucks. These guys are rolling in the dough now!