Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

[pimpmonsta]

Re: Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

EA will win. How did this thread get so long? I guess people want their "football" back though it wont happen. People need to realize that it isn't a Monopoly, its a lincencing agreement giving EA the right to used the NFL brand exclusively. I though people where smart on these boards.

[Cryolemon]

Re: Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

I thought people where smart on these boards.

That could be argued at times.

Anyway, This Jim Brown ruling is pretty irrelevant to this thread, and as has been stated, may be a case of winning the battle but losing the war. If a judge (female, male, whatever) ruled that what EA did in the Brown case was ok, then it means that any company can make a game with generic but "nfl type" players (i.e a game with an Indianapolis team that has a hall of fame QB, etc.).

[SLOYAROLE]

Re: Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

I haven't purchased a Madden game since the one with V7ck on the cover so I'm not really as attached to this debate as most are. However, a win for EA shouldn't be put in the books just yet. Nothing is guaranteed or a sure thing.

This thread is so long because it is a healthy discussion, despite the fact that people are happy with EA and their Madden game.

While I do agree that this isn't a "monopoly" in the term it's most commonly used, this is a matter of a company (the NFL) thinking it's a single entity with 32 products; when in actuality it's just the sanctioning body of 32 independent entities.

Which means...

The NFL shouldn't be the final say in a decision on whether or not a t-shirt company can make Detroit Lions hats. W.C. Ford should be able to say, "hey, I want to also give a contract to a local mom & pop business in my city to make Lions hats and whatnots. It would bring a few jobs to the city, and put a few dollars back in the community". But because of the "sheild", WCF can't do that. The leagues has to get it's money first then the teams get theirs. The NFL is not a "single" product. It's the sanctioning body of a sport played by 32 independent teams in 32 different cities.

That's why this case is a big deal. What if the NFL decided to make it's games (all of them) exclusive to Direct TV's NFL package? In order to watch ANY NFL game, you had to: a) Subscribe to Direct TV; and b) Spend an additional $300 on the NFL Ticket. The NFL could do that you know. Just because people are happy playing Madden football and don't care about anything else doesn't mean this is not a significant matter that should be addressed.

I'm not saying the NFL should be forced to let other companies make NFL football games, I'm just saying the EA deal is bad for gamers. At least with the MLB, Sony can make a baseball game to compete with 2k Sports (and Microsoft could to if they wanted). But with the NFL, Madden is the only game in town (and it's sad that 2010 from 2009 is the biggest single year improvement the franchise has seen in years).

EA will win. How did this thread get so long? I guess people want their "football" back though it wont happen. People need to realize that it isn't a Monopoly, its a lincencing agreement giving EA the right to used the NFL brand exclusively. I though people where smart on these boards.

[SmashMan]

Re: Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

I'm not saying the NFL should be forced to let other companies make NFL football games, I'm just saying the EA deal is bad for gamers.

One in the same to some people, isn't it?

At least with the MLB, Sony can make a baseball game to compete with 2k Sports (and Microsoft could to if they wanted). But with the NFL, Madden is the only game in town (and it's sad that 2010 from 2009 is the biggest single year improvement the franchise has seen in years).

That just comes down to the types of deals both companies have. Had 2K negotiated total exclusivity instead of just third-party, we'd all be stuck with 2K Baseball. ::shudder::

[Favre4]

Re: Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

i tell you what. if the 2k guys made a football game similar to 'the show' i would jump ship real fast. the inside is sure to be the best NBA game in less than 2 years.

[SLOYAROLE]

Re: Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

One in the same to some people, isn't it?

You're misunderstanding that quote. What I'm saying is, if EA hadn't made an exclusive deal with the NFL, then the NFL still shouldn't be forced to license their logo to 2K Sports or anyone else. There didn't need to be an "exclusive" deal in place to prevent 2K from making an NFL game. The NFL could have simply not allowed 2K to use it's logo. No contract need to be in place for Madden to be the only game in town. The reason it's bad for gamers is the fact that if you want to play NFL football, you have to play Madden. I don't buy EA products but I love NFL footbal games. I'm SOL on that front. Madden doesn't have a foot in their *** from another developer pushing them to bring their A-game. Which...is bad for gamers.



That just comes down to the types of deals both companies have. Had 2K negotiated total exclusivity instead of just third-party, we'd all be stuck with 2K Baseball. ::shudder::

Even though 2K has the third-party deal with MLB, first-party developers can still put out MLB games. The MLB and 2K didn't take away other alternatives that gave gamers that 2nd option to 2K baseball. Most would say that Sony puts out the superior product even though PS3 owners are the only ones who can take advantage of it. If Microsoft didn't stink at making sports games (read: take a break from Halo already!), then Xbox owners would also have an alternative to 2K baseball as well. Sony has gone all-out with MLB The Show is making 2K earn sell of 2K baseball. Sony pushes them every year because Sony wants PS3 owners to buy The Show.

In the end, I think EA and the NFL did a disservice to the gaming community with their deal but I don't think the NFL should be forced to let 2K Sports make an NFL game. I have plenty of Maddenholic friends so I have access to the game any time I want but I will NEVER buy a copy as long as this deal is in place. I choose to put my money where my mouth is (unlike my friends who repeatedly buy the game every August, complain about how it's the same as the previous year, then repeat the process the next August).

[StevenSeagalsLipitor]

Re: Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

The fact of the matter is, EA has 30 attorney's on staff, ranging from Stanford Law to NYU and a ton of other great law schools and are going to win the lawsuit.

The plaintiff's attorney Stuart Paynter (who went to Cornell undergrad and Stanford law) is a young guy (admitted to the bar in 2003) and is just trying to get big cases. I don't blame this guy, look at it from his stand point, he's got a case published, which is a big thing and if he wins, that's just an added bonus on his resume.

[ODogg]

I hope you're right StevenSeagalsLipitor