If 2k did create a new football game

[wwharton]

ea's deal isn't any more a monopoly than tt's deal with mlb b/c neither is preventing others from making a game for the sport. the nfl and mlb are preventing companies from using their likenesses.

ea's deal is much more exclusive though. and the fact that they got all the other deals shows their malicious intent, but the word monopoly should never even be mentioned with either of these companies.

[baa7]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

the word monopoly should never even be mentioned with either of these companies.

EA has a monopoly as far as creating NFL-licensed video football games. They're the only company that's able to do that which = monopoly.

[wwharton]

the nfl as a company has decided who will make their jerseys, who will make their shoes, who will air their games, and who will be able to use their player names, likenesses and stadiums in video games. if it were an open market and ea locked it down and wasn't sharing, then maybe you could call it a monopoly, but ea is not preventing anyone from making another nfl game... the nfl is.

i'm not saying what ea did was any more right than what everyone else here thinks. but the bottom line its not a monopoly.

i'm not one that points the finger at the nfl like some. i believe ea set the price before it was even open for bidding and knew very well that they had a price that no one else would match. but the reality is the nfl made the decision to limit their earning potential with this deal and ea just took advantage of the opportunity.

[mercalnd]

Quote: Originally Posted by baa7

EA has a monopoly as far as creating NFL-licensed video football games. They're the only company that's able to do that which = monopoly.

When it comes to licensing, there is no such thing as a monopoly because the decision as to who may or may not make a game using a certain league rests on the league itself. The NFL can choose to sell its license to anybody it wants to and in whatever form, exclusive or not, it wants to. Heck, they could even choose that they don't sell the license anymore so there would be no NFL game at all. While EA's license-acquiring clearly shows an intent to undercut competition, there is no legal basis to call it a monopoly because EA is not stopping anyone from making an NFL game, the NFL is.

[baa7]

Quote: Originally Posted by wwharton

the nfl as a company has decided who will make their jerseys, who will make their shoes, who will air their games, and who will be able to use their player names, likenesses and stadiums in video games. if it were an open market and ea locked it down and wasn't sharing, then maybe you could call it a monopoly, but ea is not preventing anyone from making another nfl game... the nfl is.

mojopin (who started this) wasn’t necessarily singling out EA. He said:

Quote: Originally Posted by mojopin

Oh, without a doubt. It’s offensive to me, as a consumer and as a sports video-game fan, that any developing house is allowed to buy any sort of monopoly on a sport… I hate it when corporations take away our choices.

The NFL is the corporation that gave EA the exclusive rights to produce an NFL-licensed video game. No other company is allowed to create an NFL-licensed game. That’s a monopoly. One could blame the NFL for that, sure. But it’s still a monopoly and an example of a corporation taking away our choices. And gamers don’t really care who’s responsible. All they know is when they walk into EB or any game store, they have but one choice as far as buying an NFL-licensed video football game. And that’s the bottom line here.

Quote: Originally Posted by baa7

mojopin (who started this) wasn’t necessarily singling out EA. He said: The NFL is the corporation that gave EA the exclusive rights to produce an NFL-licensed video game. No other company is allowed to create an NFL-licensed game. That’s a monopoly. One could blame the NFL for that, sure. But it’s still a monopoly and an example of a corporation taking away our choices. And gamers don’t really care who’s responsible. All they know is when they walk into EB or any game store, they have but one choice as far as buying an NFL-licensed video football game. And that’s the bottom line here.

It's still not a monopoly. The NFL is it's own entity, and a copyrighted one nontheless. As such, it can choose who is and isn't allowed to use it's name. The NFL CHOSE EA Sports as the sole company with the rights to bear its logo, namesake, etc. EA didn't buy out the market, the NFL sold itself to the highest bidder (which again, it has the right to do).

[LIGHTNING]

I think we need to reform the copyright laws and place on a limit on its duration like ten years. This way it would not create monopolys.

[baa7]

Quote: Originally Posted by LIGHTNING

I think we need to reform the copyright laws and place on a limit on its duration like ten years. This way it would not create monopolys.

When you say monopoly, you must mean:

1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market.

2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service.

3. the exclusive possession or control of something.

...as in the monopoly that was created when EA was given exclusive rights by the NFL to produce an NFL-licensed video game.