Documents: EA Sports designed games to replicate existing NCAA athletes

[loccdogg26]

For those not old enough to remember player editing was not always in this franchise. I've been playing since 1994 (my freshman year @ WVU) so it doesn't bother me one way or the other.

[Art01]

I have not read any of the documents, but I believe that the NCAA would be the primary defendant in any legal action. The NCAA controls college athletics at the major college level and has licensed all manner of items for decades.

EA has operated under the terms of a license agreement with the NCAA, which I am sure spells out exactly what EA could and could not do when depicting players in the game. Names have not been used, but player numbers, positions, statictics, team association, etc. have been used, with the results that no one could claim that players in the game were ever anonymous.

At most, EA would be a secondary defendant. I suspect that, if any such lawsuit by a player against the NCAA is ever successful, the entire licensing system will crumble. Before this could ever happen, not only would the NCAA tie the thing up in appeals, but every college and university in America operating their athletics programs under the auspices of the NCAA would become involved, because they would all stand to lose money from an inability to protect their respective identies in the marketplace.

An athlete accepting a scholarship at an NCAA institution has entered into a contract for his or her services. That contractual relationship no doubt contains certain provisions which govern the use of the athlete's personna for promotional purposes.

We'll see...

[N51_rob]

Quote: Originally Posted by loccdogg26

For those not old enough to remember player editing was not always in this franchise. I've been playing since 1994 (my freshman year @ WVU) so it doesn't bother me one way or the other.

I agree, with this. But that was also with player likeness in the game. UF QB #7 we all knew was Danny Weurfel. So if this lawsuit is won by the plantifs, you could see a game with generic numbers, heights, weights and no way to make TX A&M QB #19 who is black 6'4 225 lbs into Jonny Manziel.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by N51_rob

I agree, with this. But that was also with player likeness in the game. UF QB #7 we all knew was Danny Weurfel. So if this lawsuit is won by the plantifs, you could see a game with generic numbers, heights, weights and no way to make TX A&M QB #19 who is black 6'4 225 lbs into Jonny Manziel.

They could still include a player editor. The # and characteristics of each player are the things that matter. For example, for years Barry Bonds refused to sell his likeness but baseball games still allowed you to create a player like him. Bonds had no standing to prevent that and neither does O'Bannon.

[cparrish]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

They could still include a player editor. The # and characteristics of each player are the things that matter. For example, for years Barry Bonds refused to sell his likeness but baseball games still allowed you to create a player like him. Bonds had no standing to prevent that and neither does O'Bannon.

This is all I care about anyways as the base roster is never very good anyways.

[StayPlation82]

I agree with Art01, EA opporated under the licensing contract. It's amazing to me that they have had to spend the money to fight this but hey, welcome to America. This is a NCAA situation and no one else.

[Scribe1980]

Quote: Originally Posted by N51_rob

The way this reads NCAA 14 could be one of the last game they make.

Yep. Buy NCAA 14 and hold onto it (or spin it on EBay in a couple years). O'Bannon's complaint gains steam.

Whether he is right or wrong -- many struggling families would argue a scholarship worth up to 200K for four years at a D-I school is comp enough -- is not at issue here.

[spanky911]

Quote: Originally Posted by carvis#15

From reading both documents, it still seems like a grey area. It is not a straight forward, black and white case. This article just took a quote from the other article and when you read the other one in a flow, it doesn't make this one seem that serious. For now it's just talking about their arguments. Possibilities really don't even stand out to me.

This. They skirted a line, as it is described. There were strict actions that were prohibited by NCAA (names and pictures) that EA avoided using. However, there was intention to get "likeness" (height, weight, race, position, home state) that were used. It will be up to the courts to determine if these actions "crossed a line", since there was no violation of explicitly prohibited actions. Even if found guilty, it wont be then end of virtual college football. It's far too profitable. EA might lose exclusivity of licensing (or lose all licensing), but it will be an opportunity for another company to make a better game. The sky isnt falling. This actually might be fortuitous for gamers.