Legal Notice from U.S. District Court: EA Sports Class Action (e-mail)

[Trevytrev11]

My whole point on the Beatles, is that they are a brand and that, during the time they (or their label) actually owned their own music, it was their decision (or that of their label) of who could and could not use their music. People couldn't just use it and then pay them, they had to have permission to do so.

Same with any band now days. You have to have permission to use their music and they have final say over who does and does not get to use it. Same with the NFL. As a brand, why shouldn't they get to choose who does and doesn't get to use their product?

[skydog71]

I agree with those that say the free market has a way of sorting these things out. The NFL made a decision to give exclusive rights to EA, and as result, received a huge amount of money. This agreement had the side effect of forcing EA's competitors to shut down their football game studios. As a result, EA will face less competition when trying to renew their exclusive deal, which means less money for the NFL. Similarly, the EA is going to be less willing to pay big bucks for the NFL license as Madden sales have been in decline since 2005.

So in the end, while the NFL got a lot of money up front for the license, the deal might not work out all that well over the long term.

[PatriotJames]

From a legal standpoint, I understand the arguments everyone is making.

From a fan standpoint, this is ridiculous as we all know.

Call me dumb or whatever you wish and argue all you want that EA will get off but I don't think they will. If you want the Beatles music, you can get the Beatles music. There is 1 Beatles. The NFL is a group just like the Beatles are, yes. But they have no right to EXCLUSIVELY sell the rights over to 1 company. Beatles are on Rhapsody as well just to let you know. The whole argument with the music is the illegal downloading/stealing of the songs. Nobody is stealing except the NFL & EA from our rights to have another NFL video game. If the NFL wants to sell a license for a large amount of money, that's fine with me. But, in no way should it be exclusive.

[coogrfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by PatriotJames

From a legal standpoint, I understand the arguments everyone is making. From a fan standpoint, this is ridiculous as we all know. Call me dumb or whatever you wish and argue all you want that EA will get off but I don't think they will. If you want the Beatles music, you can get the Beatles music. There is 1 Beatles. The NFL is a group just like the Beatles are, yes. But they have no right to EXCLUSIVELY sell the rights over to 1 company. Beatles are on Rhapsody as well just to let you know. The whole argument with the music is the illegal downloading/stealing of the songs. Nobody is stealing except the NFL & EA from our rights to have another NFL video game. If the NFL wants to sell a license for a large amount of money, that's fine with me. But, in no way should it be exclusive.

Your fundamental premise is flawed--the NFL has every right to market it's IP as it sees fit. You do not have a "right" to the NFL game of your choice. It's that simple.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by PatriotJames

From a legal standpoint, I understand the arguments everyone is making. From a fan standpoint, this is ridiculous as we all know. Call me dumb or whatever you wish and argue all you want that EA will get off but I don't think they will. If you want the Beatles music, you can get the Beatles music. There is 1 Beatles. The NFL is a group just like the Beatles are, yes. But they have no right to EXCLUSIVELY sell the rights over to 1 company. Beatles are on Rhapsody as well just to let you know. The whole argument with the music is the illegal downloading/stealing of the songs. Nobody is stealing except the NFL & EA from our rights to have another NFL video game. If the NFL wants to sell a license for a large amount of money, that's fine with me. But, in no way should it be exclusive.

Throw the attachment to video gaming out the door for now.

So, you feel that the NFL shouldn't have the right to have one brand of beer, one brand of shirts or shoes or one brand of satellite service.

It's exclusive because intellectual properties allow it to be exclusive.

I get it that you feel it shouldn't be exclusive and you have many others on your side, including me, but it is what it is.

[kjcheezhead]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Throw the attachment to video gaming out the door for now. So, you feel that the NFL shouldn't have the right to have one brand of beer, one brand of shirts or shoes or one brand of satellite service. It's exclusive because intellectual properties allow it to be exclusive. I get it that you feel it shouldn't be exclusive and you have many others on your side, including me, but it is what it is.

This is how I think a lot people feel. If you throw out video gaming, I still don't like it because it essentially allows these companies to price gouge consumers which I believe should be illegal.

No more American Needle selling hats at $20, it's the Reebok one for $40 or nothing. Same with competitive pricing on shirts, NFL satellite services, etc. What do fans get for a reward in paying extra for this NFL stuff? Watching the NFL and players fight over who gets the $9 billion while we wait and see if they even play ball this year.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by kjcheezhead

This is how I think a lot people feel. If you throw out video gaming, I still don't like it because it essentially allows these companies to price gouge consumers which I believe should be illegal. No more American Needle selling hats at $20, it's the Reebok one for $40 or nothing. Same with competitive pricing on shirts, NFL satellite services, etc. What do fans get for a reward in paying extra for this NFL stuff? Watching the NFL and players fight over who gets the $9 billion while we wait and see if they even play ball this year.

Well, if you hate the IP law that bad, time to contact your federal reps and tell them you want them to rewrite the IP laws.

Until the laws are re-written, I don't see another option unless a person boycotts those above products.

I understand the frustration.

[kjcheezhead]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

Well, if you hate the IP law that bad, time to contact your federal reps and tell them you want them to rewrite the IP laws. Until the laws are re-written, I don't see another option unless a person boycotts those above products. I understand the frustration.

I don't believe rewriting laws is the answer either. Fans need to pressure the NFL to change its business practices, that would be the most effective way. I no longer purchase Madden new because I don't like the deal, and if the NFL can't decide how to distribute the money before the season starts I'll make it a little easier by cancelling my NFL ticket subscription and stop buying NFL products.

Fans do have a voice, they just don't use it enough.