American Needle Won! NFL Exclusive Deals May Be A Thing Of The Past

[Exonerated]

Quote: Originally Posted by J_Posse512

That idiot Michael Pachter is claiming that this ruling could only effect exclusive contracts with apparel companies. His claim is that video games fall under the same licensing concepts of their television broadcasting deals. Here's a direct quote: He's basically making the same argument and claims as Exonerated was making earlier in the thread. He goes on to claim that the status quo will continue and that EA's exclusive deal isn't in jeopardy. Do his claims have any validity? Here's the full article: http://kotaku.com/5546408/what-the-n...ean-for-madden

lol.

[Jimixiii]

Quote: Originally Posted by J_Posse512

That idiot Michael Pachter is claiming that this ruling could only effect exclusive contracts with apparel companies. His claim is that video games fall under the same licensing concepts of their television broadcasting deals. Here's a direct quote: He's basically making the same argument and claims as Exonerated was making earlier in the thread. He goes on to claim that the status quo will continue and that EA's exclusive deal isn't in jeopardy. Do his claims have any validity? Here's the full article: http://kotaku.com/5546408/what-the-n...ean-for-madden

Hope is a very fragile thing. I'm sure everyone's finally going to realize the American Needle Case had little to nothing to do with gaming. If you actually read the details of the case it seemed very clear to me what it was about & couldn't affect the EA/NFL exclusive deal. To me it was clear as day, but one person starts a thread & the title says it affects the exclusive deal & alot of people don't even bother actually looking at the details.

From day one I never really felt it was a case that was connected to getting rid of the exclusive license. For face value, yeah it seems like this case would help but if you actually read the details it's going to be pretty difficult & expensive if this does affect gaming. The guy in the article is right.

[Exonerated]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jimixiii

Hope is a very fragile thing. I'm sure everyone's finally going to realize the American Needle Case had little to nothing to do with gaming. If you actually read the details of the case it seemed very clear to me what it was about & couldn't affect the EA/NFL exclusive deal. To me it was clear as day, but one person starts a thread & the title says it affects the exclusive deal & alot of people don't even bother actually looking at the details. From day one I never really felt it was a case that was connected to getting rid of the exclusive license. For face value, yeah it seems like this case would help but if you actually read the details it's going to be pretty difficult & expensive if this does affect gaming. The guy in the article is right.

Was I right too lol?

But no seriously. There's no wrong or write in the law, its just who wins.

The matter put before the SC was a matter of ambuguity in the law -- that is, whether the NFL was a single entity.

[Nza]

Quote: Originally Posted by Exonerated

It's merchandise but not in the same family as clothes, hats and lunchboxes. Which this case pertains to.

What family is that?

[Nza]

Quote: Originally Posted by jmood88

All Pro Football was a rushed game that they put out to keep the name out there, if they made a new game I'm sure it would look better(even though at the time it didn't look bad). They said that they limited how much customization people could do because they were hoping that the NFL would let them get the license again so it seems that they just didn't want to make another non-licensed game.

Exactly. The prospects of the game selling well was low, so of course the dev team was going to be limited. I have barely played APF to be honest, it wasn't released in Aus last time I checked (which was around US release date) but to say APF is a sign of 2K on this console generation and an NFL game is silly - they'd obviously put more resources into an NFL game.

[Exonerated]

Quote: Originally Posted by Nza

What family is that?

Apparel and amenties containing trademarks and copyrights of one NFL team sold in official independent retailers of each team.

[Nza]

Quote: Originally Posted by Exonerated

Apparel and amenties containing trademarks and copyrights of one NFL team sold in official independent retailers of each team.

So this case has absolutely no impact on a shirt that has the Saints and Colts on it regarding the Superbowl? (serious Q, not being smart).

[Exonerated]

Quote: Originally Posted by Nza

So this case has absolutely no impact on a shirt that has the Saints and Colts on it regarding the Superbowl? (serious Q, not being smart).

In those cases, each team seeks out the other and applies for a contractual obligation. It's usually a mutual and "common sense" sort of deal.

Before this ruling, these teams had to use Reebok when choosing the supplier of the special product because it was actually an NFL product as all the teams were part of one entity. Now since the NFL is not one entity, the Saints and Colts can choose who to license their jerseys to, be it Nike or Adidas or remain with Reebok, as the NFL cannot enter into a binding contract for all apparel. I'm not well versed in contract law though.

Also, you know how soccer teams have multiple trademarks. They simply enter into contracts.

And I may have mispoke when i said one, I should have said one entity.

That's what I think anyway. I don't pretend to be an expert. People have berating me on this thread saying I'm wrong. This is just what I think.

What I implied from the previous post is that apparel, homeware are all similar. Whilst digital media such as madden is materially different.