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

[Hunkerdown]

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

#5 is apple and oranges. As we discussed earlier in this thread, EA wouldn't have competition that could make a game with the schools/conferences/players likeness.

My point was not the competition, it was that fully licensed game sales way better than a PES game that is a solid game, but with hardly any licensing.

[huntt26]

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

Just put a generic fully customizeable college mode in Madden and NBA Live. Then you can take your player from high school to the big show all in one game.

[BenGerman]

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

Pac-12 out now as well. Looking more and more like there won't be an College Football game next year.

[Scribe1980]

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

SEC=Member Schools. Pac12=Member schools. B1G=Member schools.

Lawyers, guns and money kill things, kids.

[RaychelSnr]

Can definitely confirm Pac-12 is out as well. That's (arguably) the three most lucrative conferences in the land not allowing the use of their marks/name within the game.

[Ky3217]

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

One theoretical scenario that hasn't been mentioned is players - in the very near future - could have contracts in the form of stipends. The argument I've seen is that it's a win/win for players and the universities. Schools get to use player likeness, and all student athletes are given some kind of weekly allowance. If this were to be the case, using a player's likeness may cease being an issue.

Schools have enough trouble paying for their sports programs in the first place. This wouldnt help at all

[RandyBass]

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

One theoretical scenario that hasn't been mentioned is players - in the very near future - could have contracts in the form of stipends. The argument I've seen is that it's a win/win for players and the universities. Schools get to use player likeness, and all student athletes are given some kind of weekly allowance. If this were to be the case, using a player's likeness may cease being an issue.

Another scenario is that conferences are staying away from EA and the NCAA just to see how the lawsuit plays out. If a settlement is reached, or EA wins outright, then schools/conferences may be more likely to sell their logo and usage to EA.

My guess is that, at some point (probably three years down the road), we will see the NCAA series come to a temporary end. After that, it's going to come down to if and when the NCAA can figure out a solution for likeness not to be an issue anymore. This isn't just an issue with EA, it's an issue with the entire NCAA. A resolution isn't really in site yet, but you can bet money that the current rules that are in place won't be there much longer. Once they are changed, we just have to hope that the rules are flexible enough for EA to resume making the game.

I really don't see that happening anytime soon. You're essentially saying the NCAA is going to turn into a semi-pro sports league. For that to happen you'd have to dismantle the entire current system, organize and set up another new system, deal with the inevitable labor unions, and do this all in the face of what would likely be a strong backlash...

Yeah, the NCAA ain't gonna take on that massive undertaking anytime soon. Why would they? What benefit would it be for them? So for anything like what you're suggesting to happen, schools looking to go this route would have to disassociate themselves from the NCAA all together, come up with another governing body to organize these things, and then get other schools to go along with them...

Like I say, ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

[BenGerman]

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

Schools have enough trouble paying for their sports programs in the first place. This wouldnt help at all

If you do some research on it, there are several methods that schools could use to pay players stipends -- at minimal cost to themselves.

[pietasterp]

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

Can definitely confirm Pac-12 is out as well. That's (arguably) the three most lucrative conferences in the land not allowing the use of their marks/name within the game.

Last one out, shut off the lights....!

Will be very interesting to see what happens next...

[kbones21]

Well I'm not buying the new game, if I can't play as Cal in the Pac 12.

[BenGerman]

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

I really don't see that happening anytime soon. You're essentially saying the NCAA is going to turn into a semi-pro sports league. For that to happen you'd have to dismantle the entire current system, organize and set up another new system, deal with the inevitable labor unions, and do this all in the face of what would likely be a strong backlash...

Yeah, the NCAA ain't gonna take on that massive undertaking anytime soon. Why would they? What benefit would it be for them? So for anything like what you're suggesting to happen, schools looking to go this route would have to disassociate themselves from the NCAA all together, come up with another governing body to organize these things, and then get other schools to go along with them...

Like I say, ain't gonna happen anytime soon.

I'm almost 100% sure it will. Then again, I'm only going by what some of the biggest names in the business have said (ie Mike Slive). Paying players is something that will happen in the next five years. People say, "Why would the NCAA do that?". Well, the thing is, the NCAA is constantly under threat that any of the conferences could completely separate themselves from the NCAA. If conferences are calling for something to be done (which they are), then the NCAA is forced to try and comply.

The fact is, if you haven't been following the recent issues with the NCAA and its hypocrisy, that you aren't going to think twice about the whole thing. Just the other day, Jay Bilas busted the case wide open when he revealed that the NCAA's own online shop was using player's names to sell jerseys. People can continue to believe paying to play is never going to happen, but I'd argue those people are the very same ones who aren't paying much attention to the situation.

[bowld]

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

Its over..

NCAA was the one on the hook in the past..they bounced

Individual conferences were going to now be on the hook with the NCAA out..they bounced

Now individual teams will be on the hook..only a matter of time before they bounce as well

[Husker_OS]

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

I dont get this line of thinking:

One, I doubt this came as much of a surprise to EA and its lawyers after NCAA pulled out.

Two, EA knows from its past that the only thing that matters is teams. If Alabama pulls out...thats huge. If the SEC pulls out its logo...thats not.

Three, this actually saves EA money. They dont have to shell out a license fee just so they can use a logo.

I dont get how this is bad for EA right now. When the schools start to pull out, thats when the problem begins but as I stated before what incentive does a school have to pull out?

The CLC is already named in the suit. The CLC also provides protection (insurance and indemnification) when it comes to this lawsuit and all legal costs are shared amongst the schools. Why would a school pull itself out of the CLC (and thus out of EA's game) when staying will cost them no more money and pulling out means it doesnt get to share in EA's license money?

To blow your mind..

The founder and former CEO of CLC is the current AD at Alabama.

[slick589]

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

Kind of a domino effect. NCAA didn't want the blame, now Conferences don't want the blame, next individual schools won't want the blame.

Can't imagine people buying a game without Alabama, Penn State, Ohio State, USC, Oregon.

I wonder what EA will do? In all honesty it's only gonna take one individual school backing out of the game to send the rest of the cards tumbling down.

[Ky3217]

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

If you do some research on it, there are several methods that schools could use to pay players stipends -- at minimal cost to themselves.

Name some. Because from what I've seen, college sports are not money makers for schools.

And remember, if you're going to play football players, you have to pay scholarship athletes for every sport. It's just not something schools can afford.

Which is entirely besides the point that scholarship athletes already get enough as it is.


On topic: Im sure we'll be seeing more conferences backing out as they get a chance to meet about it. We'll probably see real schools playing in conferences like the "Pacific Conference" and "Southern Conference", etc.