SEC, Pac-12, Big Ten Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

[Devlin345]

What about Big South Conference or Pac south

[Devlin345]

big southeast

[TripleCrown9]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

What about Big South Conference or Pac south

Big South is taken, Pac-South makes absolutely no sense.

[Duece]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

I'm wondering if EA would have the guts to release a fully customizable game of football. I could see it working for hardcore gamers, but it might be too far of a jump for people who just want to pick up the controller and play.

I don't think so.
EA may shoot themselves in the foot if they do that. People are still playing NFL 2K5 years later because it's a good game with good gameplay and a good fun factor. Let's just say that College Football '15 turns out to have great gameplay and a good fun factor as well as have 100% customization of everything from rosters, helmets, jerseys, pants, socks, outfitters, stadiums, coaches, band-music, mascots (hell even rules).

People may not buy another football game again for years. They'll just wait for the creative kids with boat loads of time to update the uniforms, rosters for each incoming season. That may put a dent in EA's sales..

I could be wrong....but

[Devlin345]

yeah true i forgot pac 12 means pacific 12 my bad

[Soonerfan09]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

back to avalon hill's bowl bound

[aholbert32]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

What about Big South Conference or Pac south

Big South is already a conference in real life.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

There are tons of names they could use, it all comes down to how dumb you want it to sound.

[aholbert32]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

They could even go as shallow as Southeastern Football Conference, and they would be fine.

Thats a little to close. I help manage my company's trademarks and if another company used a name that close, we would send a cease and desist letter and threaten to sue.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Thats a little to close. I help manage my company's trademarks and if another company used a name that close, we would send a cease and desist letter and threaten to sue.

Even if it's not an exact match? Didn't know that.

[fballturkey]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

I don't think so.
EA may shoot themselves in the foot if they do that. People are still playing NFL 2K5 years later because it's a good game with good gameplay and a good fun factor. Let's just say that College Football '15 turns out to have great gameplay and a good fun factor as well as have 100% customization of everything from rosters, helmets, jerseys, pants, socks, outfitters, stadiums, coaches, band-music, mascots (hell even rules).

People may not buy another football game again for years. They'll just wait for the creative kids with boat loads of time to update the uniforms, rosters for each incoming season. That may put a dent in EA's sales..

I could be wrong....but

Naw. Nobody is buying the new NCAA games every year because of the new sunbelt teams that get added. They're buying due to graphics and gameplay improvements.

[aholbert32]

Re: SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Can't use that name, it's trademarked by the actual Southern Conference.

If schools start pulling out of this I'll never buy the game again.

How many schools would have to pull out? Lets say Alabama, Notre Dame and USC pull out. But the game allows individuals to replicate those teams through Teambuilder. Meaning people can create uniforms, stadiums and logos for those teams.

Would you still not buy the game?

[UH53]

By the way, comparing minor league baseball and college players is a horrible comparison. Minor league players may not have the same publicity but they are getting paid, they don't have thousands of rules to follow, they can spend their money how they want, they can invest their money how they see fit, NCAA players cannot. Jadeveon Clowney has created more money for the university than they have invested in him and we can go down the line of players who have made money more than enough to pay for their own scholarships. I don't buy into the idea of student-athlete because it's being naïve because no one outside of a handful of people really care about them as students, they care about how they perform on the field and their scholarship is based upon athletics not academics. Also, their scholarships can be revoked for almost any reason no matter how well they are doing academically. I hope they take advantage of their opportunity but I'm under no illusion as to why they are there and I'm saying that as a former high school teacher who has had a few students get athletic scholarships to universities. I care about them completely because I knew them but even they cared more about athletics than their academics and I definitely know the only reason coaches came around was for their athletic talent. I'm fine with that, it's how the game is played and it still gives them opportunities which is great but I'm not going to pretend college sports is about academics because it isn't.

Well said and 100% agree!

[aholbert32]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Even if it's not an exact match? Didn't know that.

Yep. If I'm the SEC I would argue that because the SEC's entire mark is being used (Southeastern Football Conference) that its infringement and there is a high likelihood of confusion that people will think the conference that appears in the game is affiliated with the SEC.

[Cryolemon]

Re: The SEC Won't License Trademarks in Future Video Games

Even if it's not an exact match? Didn't know that.

The legal precedent is whether it would confuse "an idiot in a hurry".