Litigators get in her explain this judges ruling

[backbreaker]

Can Visual Concepts used this as a way to get back in football, since it has always been about likeness as to why they didn't want to infringe on the NFL. Now that this judge has issued his ruling against Jim Brown can they move forward since its now protected as art.


http://kotaku.com/5369702/federal-ju...pressive-works

On Wednesday, a federal district court in Los Angeles dismissed Brown's claim against Electronic Arts for the use of his image in its Madden NFL series. Judge Florence Marie-Cooper essentially found that video games are "expressive works, akin to an expressive painting that depicts celebrity athletes of past and present in a realistic sporting environment." Such works are protected by the First Amendment.

[baa7]

Re: Litigators get in her explain this judges ruling

I think it means 2K/VC can create a football game using clones of Jim Brown as RB, QB, TE, WR, DE, LB, CB, SS, etc. But it's only his image they can use and not his name, so they'd probably have to get around that by calling the game Jack Black Football 2K11. But that's if the real Jack Black doesn't file a Cease and Desist order preventing 2K/VC from using his name. However, it seems to me that as long as there aren't any short, fat, white players represented in the game, Jack wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

But I'm not a lawyer so don't take that as gospel.