EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

[redsox4evur]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

I'm confused.

The lawsuit relates to the use of legends likenesses from 2001 to 2009.

2001.

The NFL/EA license started in 2004. APF came out in 2007.

So you are claiming that back in 2001, EA thought "Lets make historic rosters with no names to kill a game that 2k may make 6 years from now"?

Really?

#IwillsaywhateverIcantoshowmyhateforEAandtheExclus ivelicense.

[roadman]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

EA had used the likenesses of historic players as far back as Madden NFL 2001, likely earlier. In fact, someone can spot check me on this but I don't recall any recent Madden game (from Madden NFL 06 on, when the exclusive license kicked in) even having historic teams in the game for retired players to sue about. Finally, since retired players are not members of the NFL Players Association, they are free to license their likeness to anyone they choose.

This literally has nothing to do with the exclusive license.

Looks like this post needs to be brought forward again.

[kjcheezhead]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

The exclusive license didn't cause this lawsuit but it's naive to believe it has no effect on retired players.

Historic teams aren't popular anymore, but they get paid to be in MUT packs. With EA owning the NFL, there isn't another game vying for these players rights. Sure another generic game can technically buy the rights, but gamers rejected that in APF. Instead of having 2-3 games competing for the rights to historic players they have to take the deal EA gives them or nothing.

So in turn, legends are more aggressive with lawsuits because there is less opportunity for them to cash in on their namesake. The exclusive license creates a butterfly effect that damages in ways most people don't care to notice.

[roadman]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

The exclusive license didn't cause this lawsuit but it's naive to believe it has no effect on retired players.

Historic teams aren't popular anymore, but they get paid to be in MUT packs. With EA owning the NFL, there isn't another game vying for these players rights. Sure another generic game can technically buy the rights, but gamers rejected that in APF. Instead of having 2-3 games competing for the rights to historic players they have to take the deal EA gives them or nothing.

So in turn, legends are more aggressive with lawsuits because there is less opportunity for them to cash in on their namesake. The exclusive license creates a butterfly effect that damages in ways most people don't care to notice.

The legends are making a one time easy money grab. It's as if they didn't make enough or save enough when they were playing.

They can cash in on their name sake in many other ways than video games. It's just too easy to sit in the recliner and make money on this.

I highly doubt Tony Dorsett or Earl Campbell are sitting down and thinking aloud, if I were in more football games, I could make much more money.

[kjcheezhead]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

The legends are making a one time easy money grab. It's as if they didn't make enough or save enough when they were playing.

They can cash in on their name sake in many other ways than video games. It's just too easy to sit in the recliner and make money on this.

I highly doubt Tony Dorsett or Earl Campbell are sitting down and thinking aloud, if I were in more football games, I could make much more money.

Easy money grab? It's a lawsuit that could take a decade or more to see anything.

Would you not be upset if you're Tony Dorsett or Earl Campbell and you go to your mailbox and find a check from EA that you feel is half what you're worth to them, knowing you could have a bidding war on your likeness if there was a 2k version of MUT. Or better yet, that you could be collecting 2 checks worth your true value instead of 1 for what EA decides it is?

It doesn't matter how much they made or spent playing. That's irrelevant to what they deserve to get from having their likenesses used in products today. The exclusive limits those opportunities. That's a fact that's indisputable.

[aholbert32]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

Easy money grab? It's a lawsuit that could take a decade or more to see anything.

Would you not be upset if you're Tony Dorsett or Earl Campbell and you go to your mailbox and find a check from EA that you feel is half what you're worth to them, knowing you could have a bidding war on your likeness if there was a 2k version of MUT. Or better yet, that you could be collecting 2 checks worth your true value instead of 1 for what EA decides it is?

It doesn't matter how much they made or spent playing. That's irrelevant to what they deserve to get from having their likenesses used in products today. The exclusive limits those opportunities. That's a fact that's indisputable.

It wont take anywhere near a decade. If anything, this will likely be settled given that EA wasnt able to get the suit tossed at the early stages and they dont have much of an argument based on the precedent set by the Kellert and Obannon cases. Plus, EA has no real incentive to go to trial. Like most major corporations, EA likely has an E&O insurance policy that covers likeness claims and their insurer is going to foot the bill.

[roadman]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

Easy money grab? It's a lawsuit that could take a decade or more to see anything.

Would you not be upset if you're Tony Dorsett or Earl Campbell and you go to your mailbox and find a check from EA that you feel is half what you're worth to them, knowing you could have a bidding war on your likeness if there was a 2k version of MUT. Or better yet, that you could be collecting 2 checks worth your true value instead of 1 for what EA decides it is?

It doesn't matter how much they made or spent playing. That's irrelevant to what they deserve to get from having their likenesses used in products today. The exclusive limits those opportunities. That's a fact that's indisputable.

Aholbert answered for me, my whole post was predicated on EA settling out of court, not taking a decade to wait everything out.

In addition, I don't think anyone, retired players or anyone lives in the what if world. If a person lives in that space, that person probably has a lot of regrets in life. That is a fact that is indisputable, too.

I find it highly unlikely Dorsett or Campbell sit back and wonder what if 2K made a game too. That's similar to an investor stating, I lost a lot of money on my CoorsMiller stock, I wonder what would happened if I bought and sold Apple stock instead.

I'm not saying the retired players don't deserve their money from EA from the likeness issue, I'm saying they aren't entitled to anything they don't have control over on what ifs.

And that's it from me on any license talk because it's a quite a reach from the topic at hand. I'll agree to disagree on that note.

[4thQtrStre5S]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

I hate lawyers, they have to be the lowest form of life, along with people who bring up these kinds of lawsuits.

[redsox4evur]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

I hate lawyers, they have to be the lowest form of life, along with people who bring up these kinds of lawsuits.

I'm going to make a multi-hundred MILLION dollar game using full likeness without your name and not pay you? What would you do? Would you say I am fine with this or would want some sort of payment?

[Toupal]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

I'm going to make a multi-hundred MILLION dollar game using full likeness without your name and not pay you? What would you do? Would you say I am fine with this or would want some sort of payment?

Well if you're a flop in the pros like Ed O'Bannon and Sam Keller, you're going to be searching for some kind of paycheck.

[dubcity]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

I'm going to make a multi-hundred MILLION dollar game using full likeness without your name and not pay you? What would you do? Would you say I am fine with this or would want some sort of payment?

Yeah, I swear people are letting their desire to play a new college game fuel their bitterness and judgment on this entire issue. Which is ridiculous.

[redsox4evur]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

Yeah, I swear people are letting their desire to play a new college game fuel their bitterness and judgment on this entire issue. Which is ridiculous.

Exactly no matter the issue they always side with the company. Whereas if were the same situation they would be on the same side as the player. They would want the money.

Also another thing these guys (meaning the historical players) didn't get paid all that much. The cost of living has been raised since they played but the money they got is probably close to being gone. I would imagine a guy like Marcus Cannon makes about the same amount money that a 2nd or 3rd team all-pro made (3 million).

[jvalverde88]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

Well if you're a flop in the pros like Ed O'Bannon and Sam Keller, you're going to be searching for some kind of paycheck.

Man that Jim Brown was a bum, can't believe he sued for some kind of paycheck.

[4thQtrStre5S]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

I'm going to make a multi-hundred MILLION dollar game using full likeness without your name and not pay you? What would you do? Would you say I am fine with this or would want some sort of payment?

Nope..If I am that good I would be rich and because of people like you with your mentality we have no more NCAA to play.

[Toupal]

Re: EA/Madden Likeness Lawsuit Moving Forward...

Man that Jim Brown was a bum, can't believe he sued for some kind of paycheck.

I know, how disappointing!