Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

[tlc12576]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

tlc - you cannot have a monopoly on a privately held copyright. No one is stopping football video games from being made here (APF2K8 anyone??). Why is that so hard for people to understand??

I think you are misunderstanding my point. I'm not trying to rehash that old discussion about is the exclusive deal a monopoly or not, I am talking about this class-action suit having merit.

If they can show that the EA and the NFL conspired to eliminate the competition for whatever reason and this allowed EA to sell Madden at its' original higher price, then the case could win.

What is so hard to understand about that? You don't have to agree with it but I think what I am saying is pretty clear, even if it turns out to be complete BS. LOL

[RaychelSnr]

EA approached the NFL for years for exclusivity. It wasn't until the price war that the NFL agreed go exclusive.

EA doesn't have to be 32 separate companies. They made a deal with 32 separate companies to freeze out the competition. The NFL did that with the American Needle, and now the NFL is currently being sued. The NFL can sell the use of their brand to whomever the want, but they can't exclude whomever they want.

The NFL wasn't strong-armed into the deal like you are insinuating. They decided it was in their best business interest to award the exclusive license to a single company to develop NFL video games. That's perfectly legal so long as they gave everyone a chance -- which they did. They contacted companies and asked them to submit bids to get the license to themselves exclusively. EA's bid won and that was that. Unless you know something no one else does, that's where you'd have to start on any anti-trust case and unless the bidding process was fixed so that EA would win, there is no possible way the process was illegal if companies were given the option to submit a bid for the license.

Is that policy from the NFL good for sports gamers? No. But it's far from illegal. So unless something nefarious is uncovered, it's going to be awful hard to prove a monopoly and customer harm in this regard. It also fits within the American Needle ruling in the sense that the NFL gave companies the chance to get the license to develop NFL games -- they simply didn't take advantage of it. If the NFL isn't allowed to negotiate exclusive deals with companies, then TV rights would become a gigantic mess because no one network would be able to not broadcast NFL games, among other things.

[RaychelSnr]

I think you are misunderstanding my point. I'm not trying to rehash that old discussion about is the exclusive deal a monopoly or not, I am talking about this class-action suit having merit.

If they can show that the EA and the NFL conspired to eliminate the competition for whatever reason and this allowed EA to sell Madden at its' original higher price, then the case could win.

What is so hard to understand about that? You don't have to agree with it but I think what I am saying is pretty clear, even if it turns out to be complete BS. LOL

What you just said is true. HOWEVER, to prove that requires you to have evidence which no one currently has or knows about. So you'd basically be uncovering massive fraud and collusion to the nth degree -- which would be a HUGE story all to itself.

And I'm not saying it's not possible EA and the NFL didn't collude, I'm just saying in the context of a court of law that unless the evidence is clear, you can't go forward with speculation and no facts and from what we know there is no evidence that took place. Always subject to revision of course

[tlc12576]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

This stuff is relevant because it's THE CASE at hand. The case argues that EA violated anti-trust laws and that consumers are entitled to damages from those violations. So the Plantiffs have to establish that EA violated anti-trust laws with Madden, which will be next to impossible to do -- THEN they have to establish that consumers are entitled to damages -- which I haven't even discussed that aspect of the case because the first part will be so hard to prove it's difficult to see the case reaching that point to begin with.

If you can't see how everything I've said in this thread relates to this case, then you don't have a firm enough grasp on Anti-Trust law and this case to do more than speculate. That's fine, message boards are here for speculation -- and I appreciate your civility. I just assume (falsely) anyone arguing for this case is a Madden *****. For the most part that's true, but it's not completely true.

Anyways, just read my points again and then think about what I just said. You have to prove EA broke anti-trust laws...which since the NFL is NOT named, you have to have some smoking gun proof that the bid process for the NFL gaming license was fixed so EA would win it. Otherwise, from what we know, EA obtained the NFL license in a legal manner. The American Needle case doesn't change that (it might change how future license bids are handled however). The only way this gets prosecuted and EA has to pay up is if it is proven that they obtained the NFL license in a non-competitive manner. Otherwise, the NFL can market it's brand HOWEVER it likes in terms of the terms of its video game brand licensing and EA simply won the bid. Is that popular among gamers? No. But it's the law.

When I said "irrelevant", I was referring to your comments about I should be rational and all the stuff about emotions towards EA.

Like I have said before, i am NOT a lawyer but I play one in OS threads and I am just stating my viewpoint. I don't know if you on the other hand are some kind of Matlock prodigy or something but it really doesn't matter. I have read and comprehended what you wrote as well as I would hope you have my statements, but I just disagree with yours.

Maybe I am in disagreement due to my misunderstanding of antitrust laws but until this case is decided by others presumed far more antitrust law savvy than either of us, that is my view.

[youALREADYknow]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

How is this even generating this much debate?

Until the date that a legitimate antitrust lawsuit is made, this is all nonsense. 2K Sports should have grown a sack and went for the gusto a long time ago. The suit would probably have gained some traction by now.

[TajDeni]

Im not a lawyer so i dont pretend to know if they case has a real chance of succeeding or not....

but i do know guarilla strong arm tactics when i see it...And EA strong-arm the comp by playing a mean game of big bank takes little bank

can someone verify or disprove this claim....didnt madden initally drop at standard price and then change its price later....or didnt 2k drop like a week early or something like that...

[khaliib]

What is funny, is that this is exactly what happened within a similiar case I was involved in. A group of "Non-Lawyers" were locked in a room to decide the case according to the information presented to them during the trial. And there were some who always spoke down to other jurors understanding because their concluding perspective(s) about the case differed. The case lingered a very long time because the focus shifted to an "I'm right and you're wrong" atmosphere (did I mention none were lawyers!!!).


If this case goes to trial, there "Will" be an asumption factor (from personal experience) because a jurors will not look at the claim/counter-claims from a black and white letter of the law viewpoint, but from what it looks like on the surface to them (key word "Surface").

If the claimant list is very large (the reason it's stil open) the "Perception" to a jury would not bode well for EA.

Although these cases are difficult to prove, as some have noted. The possibility of a loss and the damages that could be awarded based off of the concluding "Perception" of the jury, no matter how many prior cases were not successful, is not a place any company wants to be in.

Again, the fact the a Judge certified the claim instead of throwing in out, opens the doors of "Possible", which would allow them to present the "Perception" to the understanding of a group of regular folk. The biggest hurdle for their claim has been cleared.

BTW, I am not an attorney and have zero trial experience (participated though) in AntiTrust Law, so I don't have grounds to say you're perspetive is right or wrong.

Any good lawyer would tell you that no case, even if the facts are on your side, is a definite win when argued before a jury in a Court of Law.
Only a foolish attorney would promise such a thing!!!

It would be interesting to know were these former Football Game Developers stood on this claim.
989 Studios
Acclaim

[Tbo24]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

I know that Madden is $60 like every other game, but don't they charge you for alot of the game content? Not being able to buy used copies, because of the whole paying for online play issue was kind of a bummer. Don't they charge for the Madden Moments too? Im not 'siding' with anyone, but a $60 game that charges for a majority of game content, can add up.

EDIT: I don't think thats part of the argument though. Sorry for babbling about something I know nothing about, lol.

[Kaanyr Vhok]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

What your forgetting is that the NFL ask for bidders to own the rights for the NFL license. Thats a huge piece of information. EA did not go to them. The NFL made it clear. You want to make a football game then you have to pay us!!!

The NFL does this with pretty much everything. Satellite TV anyone??? Hats??? Jerseys???

Yes EA did go to them.
I have most posted a couple links in the past. A rep for EA admitted to that they tried to get the license several times and were turned down. So yes the NFL did offer it but only after turning EA down several times.

[zav]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

anyone who knows anything about law knows that they dont intend to win this case. they intend to settle with EA. The case isnt strong but its viable which is always a dead giveaway for an upcoming settlement.

oh a much stronger case would be to try and nab them for monopolizing. Itd be tough but i think that would would win in court. Also you can go after the NFL as a trust(already done and won for hats) but apply it to madden sales essentially making it so that each team would be able to choose if they wanted to sign off their rights to madden or 2k or whatever comes up

edit: the fact that the game cost 60 and every other game does as well isnt the point. The point is that there is no competition which allows them to price the game freely. Because EA eliminated the competition by choice then the market is artificial. A good lawyer could win this easily but in all likelihood its going to settle which is why im getting in on this right now.... if it settles for a few mil and 10k people join as plaintiffs... we might all get a lil somethin

[JaymeeAwesome]

I urge anyone who does not agree with this class action to not join into it. The outcome will not breed competition, it'll only hit the financial backing of the only NFL game in town. It's only up to tue NFL to allow competition, not EA. If any of you want a better football video game for the years to come, please don't join this suit. It'll only hurt us, the gamers, for the next few years.

[SmashMan]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

edit: the fact that the game cost 60 and every other game does as well isnt the point. The point is that there is no competition which allows them to price the game freely.

I wouldn't just dismiss that (other games' prices) as so many others are. The fact is, there is a generally agreed-upon "typical" price for new video games. Last gen it was $50, this gen is $60. There aren't separate pricing models for every genre of game. You (the general you, not specific) could argue that there shouldn't be a "typical" price, but there is.

I don't see how you can look at previous games (2004 and prior) and games after exclusivity (2006 and later) and prove that 2005 wasn't an anomaly. (You can infer it, but inferring is not proving.) Yes, EA lowered their price to compete against a lower-priced alternative. Yes, EA's price went back to normal after that alternative ceased to exist the following year; but I'd argue they did so to return to their usual pricing scheme. They didn't charge any more than they previously did (2004 and prior), which again seems to show that 2005 was an anomaly.

[moylan1234]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

EDIT: I don't think thats part of the argument though. Sorry for babbling about something I know nothing about, lol.

don't be sorry about that. If no one babbled about things they don't know about then places like OS wouldn't exist!

[Kaanyr Vhok]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

I wouldn't just dismiss that (other games' prices) as so many others are. The fact is, there is a generally agreed-upon "typical" price for new video games. Last gen it was $50, this gen is $60. There aren't separate pricing models for every genre of game. You (the general you, not specific) could argue that there shouldn't be a "typical" price, but there is.

I don't see how you can look at previous games (2004 and prior) and games after exclusivity (2006 and later) and prove that 2005 wasn't an anomaly. (You can infer it, but inferring is not proving.) Yes, EA lowered their price to compete against a lower-priced alternative. Yes, EA's price went back to normal after that alternative ceased to exist the following year; but I'd argue they did so to return to their usual pricing scheme. They didn't charge any more than they previously did (2004 and prior), which again seems to show that 2005 was an anomaly.

Proving it was an anomaly is just as difficult as proving it was a trend mainly because of how well 2k5 sold. It even outsold Madden on the Xbox. It is reasonable to believe there was going to be at least a temporary price war.

[SmashMan]

Re: Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

Proving it was an anomaly is just as difficult as proving it was a trend mainly because of how well 2k5 sold. It even outsold Madden on the Xbox. It is reasonable to believe there was going to be at least a temporary price war.

Yeah, there's no way of knowing whether 2005 was a one-off situation or the start of a new trend. All I can do is look at the preceding and following years and all I see is a game that was $50 both before and after 2005.

I have no doubt whatsoever that 2K would've priced their game below Madden, but I have serious doubts that they would've maintained the $20 price point. And for that all I can look at is their MLB and NBA titles; which both increased in price following a lower-priced 2K5. If they increased those, I'm only left to assume they would've also increased their NFL game. That's where I'm drawing my anomaly conclusion from.

I mean, this is all hypothetical stuff, and I have no legal knowledge whatsoever. It just makes for some mildly interesting discussion.