Maddens legal battle starts today 09/14/2009!

[dizturbd]

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

The fact remains that companies are still free to make football games. Once again, I'll say, EA has a competitive advantage in the FOOTBALL video game market. They do not have a monopoly.

Bud, I admire the fact that you think you know about economics and business, but...

The term competitive advantage is the ability gained through attributes and resources to perform at a higher level than others in the same industry or market (Christensen and Fahey 1984, Kay 1994, Porter 1980 cited by Chacarbaghi and Lynch 1999, p.45).

Nowhere in that statement do I see "by purchasing exclusive rights to gain a competitive advantage".

[RaiderKtulu]

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

Bud, I admire the fact that you think you know about economics and business, but...

The term competitive advantage is the ability gained through attributes and resources to perform at a higher level than others in the same industry or market (Christensen and Fahey 1984, Kay 1994, Porter 1980 cited by Chacarbaghi and Lynch 1999, p.45).

Nowhere in that statement do I see "by purchasing exclusive rights to gain a competitive advantage".

Yeah, because Madden wasn't already outselling the competition by like a 5-1 margin prior to getting the license handed to them by the NFL.

The NFL gave EA the license, BECAUSE it was the best selling, most popular, etc.

[Tbo24]

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

Quite a different scenario. Microsoft ran into trouble because they controlled the Windows OS and were able to bundle IE with all the computers having Windows(in other words most of them out there). This made competing browsers such as Netscape hard to get. You have to remember that when this case hit you couldn't just download things almost instantly, most people were still on dial up. You went with what you had on your computer for the most part.

One of the main problems in the Google/Yahoo thing is that they would become allies rather than competitors. EA and NFL don't have that type of relationship. It would be akin to Sony and Microsoft teaming up to make one video game console and phasing out Xbox and PS3 and deciding their new console was going to cost $800 and only software that the new venture produced in-house would be sold. That's a monopoly.

The fact remains that companies are still free to make football games. Once again, I'll say, EA has a competitive advantage in the FOOTBALL video game market. They do not have a monopoly.

Read the previous posts. A monopoly is when an individual or company has sufficient control over the market. Yes other companies can make football games..but not with THE NFL LICENSE which means they cant use nfl teams, players, etc. (obviously) and it has been proven that games without the NFL license just dont sell which means EA has sufficient control over the market thus making at a monopoly. I dont know how many times I have to say the same things over and over again. Just read the other posts..

[dizturbd]

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

The NFL gave EA the license, BECAUSE it was the best selling, most popular, etc.

Um, it isn't called giving when money exchanges hands. $500 Million to be exact. I am sure that Take Two was unable to match or beat that offer.

This wouldn't be an issue if EA Sports had been improving Madden, but it took them 5 years to create a game ALMOST as good as NFL 2k5. 5 YEARS!!!

[countryboy]

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

Is the NFL being sued as well? Just curious as imo, the one that made this a "monopoly" was the NFL for offering up the exclusive license. I'm not sure how EA would be the only one sued over this matter, when all they did was be the highest bidder on a license that was offered up.

[odbman]

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

And that's the argument. The plaintiff is saying that since games like APF2k8 doesn't have the NFL license, the game won't sell. You can pull up thousands of threads on this board where people say, I only play madden because it's the only NFL game on the market, or I'm not going to buy APF2k8 or Backbreaker because it don't have the NFL license. You can't deny that.

And I meant to say the lawsuit is about EA having a monopoly on license football video games.

Read your own comment do you realize that you say thousand complaints about only game.It probably is less than that .If you take into account that over 1.5 million copies sell or more you are probably talking about.01% complaints.

[Tbo24]

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

Yeah, because Madden wasn't already outselling the competition by like a 5-1 margin prior to getting the license handed to them by the NFL.

The NFL gave EA the license, BECAUSE it was the best selling, most popular, etc.

The year that 2K5 came out it actually gained popularity over Madden. (look it up if you don't believe me.) The reason why Madden was so popular for so long was because it had been around for 12 years or so when 2K first came out. It's a shame that Madden got the license right when 2K football was starting to break through. Just look at the NBA Live series. Nba Live was more popular because it was around much longer than NBA 2K. Now look...2K basketball is much more popular than NBA live because they were actually given a chance to develop unlike 2K football unfortunately.

[budsticky]

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

In economics, a monopoly exists when a specific individual or an enterprise has sufficient control over a particular product or service to determine significantly the terms on which other individuals shall have access to it.

And here's the kicker...

A monopoly is said to be coercive when the monopoly firm actively prohibits competitors from entering the field.

WHO needs to study? EA definitely created a monopoly by not allowing anybody else to create an NFL videogame or even an NCAA videogame. This wouldn't be an issue, but the CFL and other leagues are not profitable. Therefore, EA has sufficient control over a PARTICULAR product.

And why do you care what is jamming up our court systems? It's not like this is a criminal case keeping justice from being served to rapists and murderers.

Should Pepsi sue because they aren't allowed to put their big blue coolers out near the field next to the big orange Gatorade ones? By the way, I don't know..Pepsi may own Gatorade..but you get my point. There are many other cases where something is the "official drink of the NBA" or whatever else.

I think the key thing that people are missing out on here is that really what we're dealing with is the video game market as a whole. You can't really start separating it out into different sections. EA has a branding and licensing agreement with the NFL to make video games. This doesn't stop other companies from competing in the video game market as a whole. You can't really separate it out into these different sub-genres or you're running into many other issues. For example, why can't Nike make official NFL jerseys? Why can't such and such a product associate itself as the official whatever of the NFL? It's because the NFL has entered into a licensing agreement with said company, and unless it completely destroys the business at large that is in question it is simply not a monopoly and will never get past the beginning stages of a court case. And sorry, but as hardcore as we all are on these forums football video games are not the at-large market. Video games are the at-large market.

[spankdatazz22]

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

I get your point, but I think you are forgetting other areas of restrictive choices that would derail the thread if I went into it.

Your point is well taken and well explained, but EA and the NFL aren't the only entities in the US with restrictive choices.(which is frustrating for me as well)

That wasn't my argument. I was just stating my opinion on why there might not be as much frustration with the baseball situation as there is with the football situation. It seems some are intent on justifying/debunking the EA/NFL situation, which is something I wasn't arguing. My initial response was to the person that asked why people aren't as upset with MLB2K as they are Madden/NCAA (paraphrasing)

[budsticky]

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

Read the previous posts. A monopoly is when an individual or company has sufficient control over the market. Yes other companies can make football games..but not with THE NFL LICENSE which means they cant use nfl teams, players, etc. (obviously) and it has been proven that games without the NFL license just dont sell which means EA has sufficient control over the market thus making at a monopoly. I dont know how many times I have to say the same things over and over again. Just read the other posts..

No, it means they have a competitive advantage which is perfectly fine in a free-market economy. I don't know how many times I have to say the same thing over and over again.

[dizturbd]

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

Is the NFL being sued as well? Just curious as imo, the one that made this a "monopoly" was the NFL for offering up the exclusive license. I'm not sure how EA would be the only one sued over this matter, when all they did was be the highest bidder on a license that was offered up.

To think that this wasn't part of EA's marketing strategy is ridiculous! In no way did the NFL "offer up" the exclusive license. EA offered to buy the rights. Just like they did with the NCAA. 2k Sports just happened to be proactive enough to beat EA to MLB.

EA also tried to buy the rights to the NBA, but the NBA said NO WAY! Thank god, too. Imagine if you had NBA LIVE 2005 for 5 years until they made an almost as good as NBA 2k5 game.

[Cryolemon]

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

If a court rules that an IP holder can't sell their rights to someone, then the court is insane.

Well yeah, but there have been a few odd rulings before.

these guys don't need to win the case what it does is put the nfl on notice that the comunity does not want just one comany to make or represent there sport i am sure no matter how little this case is roger godell now knows that someone is suing because he will have to send represenetives to the trial.

just my 2 cents

That is potentially a good point.

Nah, they just don't think there's a market for an unlicensed football game. Everybody isn't a hardcore football video game junkie like a lot of people on this board. The casual fan is a lot less likely to take an unlicensed football game seriously.

I disagree, I'm sure 2k know there would be a market for an unlicensed game if you had 100% customization.

[countryboy]

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

To think that this wasn't part of EA's marketing strategy is ridiculous! In no way did the NFL "offer up" the exclusive license. EA offered to buy the rights. Just like they did with the NCAA. 2k Sports just happened to be proactive enough to beat EA to MLB.

EA also tried to buy the rights to the NBA, but the NBA said NO WAY! Thank god, too. Imagine if you had NBA LIVE 2005 for 5 years until they made an almost as good as NBA 2k5 game.

In any event, the NFL could've said no, so I would think that they would be part of the lawsuit as well.

[dizturbd]

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

I don't know how many times I have to say the same thing over and over again.

Because you are wrong. If you were right, it would only need to be stated once.

[SoxFan01605]

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

Because you are wrong. If you were right, it would only need to be stated once.

Ironic.