NCAA Football 12 News Post

Judge Nixes NCAA Players Antitrust Claims -- Case Not Over...Yet

12:02 PM - May 4, 2011 by RaychelSnr

You may remember the NCAA players lawsuit which claimed anti-trust violations occurred by EA and the NCAA in using college players likenesses right? Yesterday, the NCAA players lawsuit's anti-trust claims against EA and the NCAA were shot down by Judge Claudia Wilken.

Quote:


	"A California federal judge on Monday nixed putative class antitrust claims that Electronic Arts Inc. plotted with the NCAA and its licensing firm to profit improperly off college athletes' likenesses. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken dismissed claims that the video game company, along with the NCAA and The Collegiate Licensing Co., conspired to avoid paying student basketball and football players for the use and sale of their likenesses in popular NCAA-themed video games. However, the judge granted the players two weeks to amend their antitrust allegations."

This isn't a complete dismissal of the lawsuit, and I think that needs to be stressed. But it is a serious blow against Keller and Co's case for sure. We'll keep on top of this case as we have since the beginning!

Game: NCAA Football 12Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 104 - View All

NCAA Football 12 Videos

Member Comments

# 21 Dame @ 05/04/11 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dbrentonbuck


	I disagree about the star players. Life isn't fair. The real world doesn't work like that. There is an offer on the table: 1 free education and a 4 year interview for a job where you can make millions of dollars. The offer is the same for every one. Tim Teabow benefited from playing at Florida. Had he played for Mary Help the Christian Sisters University, he would not have a brand that he can and is using to make millions of dollars, so if the University wants to sell #15 jerseys then let them. They took a gamble on him and it paid off. They took the same gamble with Brantley and he probably cost them more to educate than the money he will bring in. The fact of the matter is that had Teabow not played football in an NCAA school after highschool he would be on a mission trip in Africa living off of donations. Instead, he got a free education, a chance to build a multimillion dollar brand name and a chance to impress the NFL as part of his deal. Keller didn't cash in on his deal the way Teabow did and that is why he is crying. Even if Teabow had not been drafted he could have made plenty of money endorsing products in the state of Florida because of being a gator. To me, that is a fair trade.

I put that similar argument in my post

Quote:


	the other side will argue its because of the college that your value has risen you will never find a fair medium.

I understand what you was saying and it would be a fair trade if Florida university only profited of the kid but others are profiting of the kid too and he didnt sign an agreement with them. andi think thats where the problem comes from. he didnt agree with EA or ESPN or reebok or Nike and those are the companys who are getting money from their likeness not the school.

But like i said i dont care either way i'm able to see both side of the argument I was just stating that i dont like the "if it was me" type argument that these cases usually bring because it dont work that way. If it was me now at 30 I would sign away my likeness now for my student loans would be paid but thats only me it a whole group of people who wouldnt. i'm no arguing or saying that you are wrong

# 22 Dbrentonbuck @ 05/04/11 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	See I hate this kind of attitude. I get paid good money to do my job. I'm thankful for the amount I get paid. But if I found out my job was selling T-shirts with my face on them, charging 20 bucks a pop for them and my job was making millions off of them.....I would want my damn cut. Its the same with college athletes. One, you are wrong about most of them getting merchandise money. There are 10,000 Division 1-A football players each year. Maybe 200-300 tops sign memorabilia deals or merchandise deals when their college career is over. Two, they didnt "rape the system". They held up their end of the bargain. They played college football. The school gave them a scholarship. That was the extent of the deal. There was no likeness deal. Three, if any top football player agreed to that ridiculous suggestion that in exchange for a 50k scholarship they give up their likeness rights for life....that player is dumbest person on earth.

See that is a sense of entitlement. That isn't how the real world works. I will give you an example. I was asked 7 years ago to manage an advertising office. When I was hired, I was told the job was salary and that raises were based on yearly reviews and averaged between 2-7 percent. Now, when I started the office billed about 87,000 per month. Within the first two years we were billing over 110,000 per month. That means I helped that company make over 20,000 dollars per month. Do you think the company came to me and said, "please accept this 10,000 dollar monthly raise as it is your cut of the profits". In fact, they took some of the things we were doing and rolled them out to other offices so their profits increased as well. Do you want to know what I got from the deal? 3 years ago all raises were frozen due to a bad economy even though we continue to bill over 110,000 per month. Can I go to a judge and say, "hey I want this company to give me my share of the profits they made because of me"? Nope. Welcome to the real world.

You make it out like if it wasn't for the NCAA, these kids would be millionaires. If it wasn't for the NCAA no one would know who they are. Many of them wouldn't have gotten an education at all and would be serving us fries. They had an opportunity to build a brand name BECAUSE they played for a NCAA school which gave them exposure to millions of fans and television. It is up to them what they make out of the chance.

If it wasn't for the NCAA, no one would give a flying fudge who Cam Newton is. My local university has a club football team that is not affiliated with the school and they play other club football teams, guess what... I don't care about anyone on that team. They may have the next Tom Brady and I wouldn't care...and neither will anyone else. And, when Tom Brady Jr. graduates, the local car dealer isn't going to call him to make a commercial. Do you want to know why? Because club football players do not have the multibillion dollar branding machine of the NCAA behind them.

Each of these kids had the same chance as every other kid on an NCAA team to build a personal brand and impress the NFL... some did, some didn't... this is life.

# 23 DerkontheOS @ 05/04/11 04:02 PM

Good I'm glad, this falls in the same boat as that guy suing because McDonalds made him fat........Just nonsense.

# 24 Dbrentonbuck @ 05/04/11 04:09 PM

The problem in all of this is that the NCAA likes to pretend it is a student athletic organization instead of a business. It needs to just be honest with itself and make kids sign an agreement that allows them to use their likeness for profit the same way it makes schools agree that they can use their team logos etc. Each kid would have the chance to either sign the agreement and get a free education, chance to impress the NFL and build a personal brand name in exchange for the NCAA using them to make a profit or they can go play for a club football team. It is as simple as that. If the NCAA would stop pretending to be a charitable organization, then none of this would be an issue.

# 25 aholbert32 @ 05/04/11 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SECElite3


	AHolbert, I fully understand your argument and to some extent agree with it. Where do you draw the line in regards to likeness? How far does one go with his or her interpretation of likeness in regards to a football game? Some might make the argument that replicating a uniform which thousands of other players have worn, putting a number on it which thousands of other players have worn, and putting that player at the same postion which thousands of others have played, would not necessarily represent a true likeness. Maybe my perspective is skewed a little here and maybe it is not, but your example of your company pasting your face on a shirt and selling it for profit is not appropriate for this scenario. EA is not putting these players faces in the game. The faces in the game are generics. They are not putting names on the jerseys. As obvious as it might seem to some that a player or players in a game represent real life counterparts, I believe this case is going to be determined by interpretation

The line is here for me. If you have the 2011 Michigan Wolverines with a QB with the number 16 who is black and has dreds......thats Denard Robinson.

If you have the 2011 Michigan Wolverines with a QB with the number 14 who is white and has a mullet......thats not Denard Robinson.

# 26 TDenverFan @ 05/04/11 04:23 PM

Frankly, the fact that these players recieve 50k Schollys a year seems like a fair trade to me. Plus, is every player making the school the a lot of cash? No! So is the NCAA going to have to calculate the aproxomate value the specific player makes the school and charge based off of that number? Outside of a couple of players (Tebow, Robinson, etc.) the schools don't directly profit from most players (Is North Texas's backup placekicker truly raking in the big bucks for the Mean Green? Is USC's 9th string tailback earning the school millions?). So, many of these college players would be compensated in pennies, if your basing it on how much the school makes off of them.

# 27 aholbert32 @ 05/04/11 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dbrentonbuck


	See that is a sense of entitlement. That isn't how the real world works. I will give you an example. I was asked 7 years ago to manage an advertising office. When I was hired, I was told the job was salary and that raises were based on yearly reviews and averaged between 2-7 percent. Now, when I started the office billed about 87,000 per month. Within the first two years we were billing over 110,000 per month. That means I helped that company make over 20,000 dollars per month. Do you think the company came to me and said, "please accept this 10,000 dollar monthly raise as it is your cut of the profits". In fact, they took some of the things we were doing and rolled them out to other offices so their profits increased as well. Do you want to know what I got from the deal? 3 years ago all raises were frozen due to a bad economy even though we continue to bill over 110,000 per month. Can I go to a judge and say, "hey I want this company to give me my share of the profits they made because of me"? Nope. Welcome to the real world. You make it out like if it wasn't for the NCAA, these kids would be millionaires. If it wasn't for the NCAA no one would know who they are. Many of them wouldn't have gotten an education at all and would be serving us fries. They had an opportunity to build a brand name BECAUSE they played for a NCAA school which gave them exposure to millions of fans and television. It is up to them what they make out of the chance. If it wasn't for the NCAA, no one would give a flying fudge who Cam Newton is. My local university has a club football team that is not affiliated with the school and they play other club football teams, guess what... I don't care about anyone on that team. They may have the next Tom Brady and I wouldn't care...and neither will anyone else. And, when Tom Brady Jr. graduates, the local car dealer isn't going to call him to make a commercial. Do you want to know why? Because club football players do not have the multibillion dollar branding machine of the NCAA behind them. Each of these kids had the same chance as every other kid on an NCAA team to build a personal brand and impress the NFL... some did, some didn't... this is life.

Again thats a horrible analogy. You made an agreement to work for your company and bill a certain amount in exchange for a salary and benefits. Nothing else. You dont have the right to demand more money based on how much you bill. They dont have the right to use your likeness and make more money off of it. In your employment agreement, they have the right to freeze your raises and fire you at will if they like. You agreed to this deal.

Stop trying to complicate the issue. Its simple. College athletes are given a scholarship in exchange for them playing football....thats it. They dont agree to sign over their likeness rights.

I dont make it like these college athletes should be millionaires. I make it like they should get a cut. Cam Newton made Auburn millions this year. So did Nick Fairley. So did the 70 other players on Auburn. I'm not arguing that Cam should get a cut of the bowl money or tv money because that comes directly from them playing on the field. Do I think they should get a cut of any jersey sold with their number on it? Yep. A video game using their likeness? Yep.

# 28 Dame @ 05/04/11 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	Stop trying to complicate the issue. Its simple. College athletes are given a scholarship in exchange for them playing football....thats it. They dont agree to sign over their likeness rights.

Yea this is it

# 29 Dazraz @ 05/04/11 04:43 PM

Hopefully we are on the way to seeing this ridiculous episode come to it's rightful conclusion. Without real names, faces or statistical histories, a player in a videogame can only be regarded as generic. You need a little more than skin tone & body type to put a genuine argument that you have been replicated without reward in product.

# 30 Dbrentonbuck @ 05/04/11 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	Again thats a horrible analogy. You made an agreement to work for your company and bill a certain amount in exchange for a salary and benefits. Nothing else. You dont have the right to demand more money based on how much you bill. They dont have the right to use your likeness and make more money off of it. In your employment agreement, they have the right to freeze your raises and fire you at will if they like. You agreed to this deal. Stop trying to complicate the issue. Its simple. College athletes are given a scholarship in exchange for them playing football....thats it. They dont agree to sign over their likeness rights. I dont make it like these college athletes should be millionaires. I make it like they should get a cut. Cam Newton made Auburn millions this year. So did Nick Fairley. So did the 70 other players on Auburn. I'm not arguing that Cam should get a cut of the bowl money or tv money because that comes directly from them playing on the field. Do I think they should get a cut of any jersey sold with their number on it? Yep. A video game using their likeness? Yep.

Ok, again, if Cam Newton played for the West Texas Community College Cole Miners do you think anyone would buy a jersey with his name on it? Of course not. The only reason anyone in the world cares about Cam Newton is because he played for an NCAA school which had a built in fanbase, a multimillion dollar television deal and the branding and marketing of the NCAA juggernaught. No one would give a flying flip about Cam Newton had the NCAA not given him a chance to shine in their spotlight. His name was worth NOTHING before he went to a NCAA school and thus he should be paid NOTHING. He has the chance to use his personal brand, that he had the opportunity to build SOLELY because the NCAA allowed him to, to make money now. The NCAA should be allowed to make money from his success since they are the ones that gave him the chance to succeed in the first place. How many Cam Newton fans were not already NCAA football fans before he came to Auburn? How many fans will stop being NCAA football fans after he is gone? Auburn was already selling out games before he was there and they will be selling out games long after he is gone because they are Auburn. Cam owes them everything, they owe him NOTHING lol. That is why you don't hear successful players complaining.

Oh and they are raping the system by knowing full well that there is an NCAA football game every year and has been since before they accepted a scholarship and that the NCAA sells jersies with numbers that correspond to popular players and then accepting that scholarship, playing 4 years and getting a free education and THEN complaining about it. Let someone turn down a scholarship and THEN sue NCAA and then I may respect this suit a little more... as it stands now it is just a loser trying to get more money from the "glory years".

# 31 MBFranchise @ 05/04/11 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	Stop trying to complicate the issue. Its simple. College athletes are given a scholarship in exchange for them playing football....thats it. They dont agree to sign over their likeness rights.

Actually, yes they do. Heck, I was a DIII Cross Country runner and I signed over my likeness.

# 32 Dbrentonbuck @ 05/04/11 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MBFranchise


	Actually, yes they do. Heck, I was a DIII Cross Country runner and I signed over my likeness.

Dude! I have a shirt with your face on it!

Is this you?

# 33 Dbrentonbuck @ 05/04/11 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JerseySuave4


	any reasonable person has to understand that the players are right for being upset about this. Is it money motivated? Of course, but it goes beyond just that. Ed O'Bannon is one of the main people suing the NCAA and video games because they used #31 PF for a classic UCLA team. Ed was no longer a college athlete, the model didn't look exactly like him, but you'd be a fool not to realize the player is based on him. Yes lots of players receive scholarships, but not every player. You wouldn't think it was fair either if people were making millions of dollars off you and you saw none of the profits. How many Florida #15 jerseys do you think the University sold while Tebow was there? And how much of those profits did he see? Yes he received a scholarship, to play football. The problem is they force these kids to sign a lifetime waiver saying that the NCAA can use their likeness forever.

And how many Jerseys did Tim Tebow sell before he played for an NCAA school? How many would he sell had he played for a club team instead of an official NCAA BCS school? Unless Tebow brought those tens of thousands of fans with him as a high school senior the the NCAA doesn't owe him a dime and he has no right to ask for it. He gained every ounce of popularity and marketability he has BECAUSE of the NCAA school he played for. He used the NCAA's relationship with media and television broadcast rights to build a brand for himself. The only way this argument holds any water is if the NCAA is taking already branded individuals with hundreds of thousands of fans before coming into the NCAA and exploiting them... they are not doing that... they have already built a brand that these kids are benefiting from.... the NCAA doesn't ask Tim to give them part of his product endorsement deals even though they are the ones who gave him the exposure to build a personal brand that he can make money on. If anything, they have a better legal case than he does.

# 34 FedExPope @ 05/04/11 07:48 PM

No the point of NCAA isn't to get away with not paying players, its to avoid using generated rosters. I don't see how any judge would be able to side with those two douche bags at all. Look this discussion is NOT supposed to be about whether or not players should get paid at ALL for the amount of money they help generate. Its about this specific use of their likeness, which you can guarantee EA doesn't make half of what these universities make every year from football teams alone. This isn't the issue that should be brought up when we talk about college players not getting paid. Its small potatoes compared to how much they help generate for their universities. Now does EA have to pay the conferences for using their logos, and universities for using their names and details and unis etc.? If not, then HELL no the players shouldn't sue EA for using their likeness without paying.

# 35 UniversityofArizona @ 05/04/11 07:59 PM

I feel like the scholarships should be converted into cash payments to the students that they can spend on getting an education or not. Forcing everybody in the entire market, and yes I do believe the NCAA is a trust, to accept something as payment that they may necessarily not want or need is by no means right. Hell huge percentages of these athletes never even graduate, and in essence end up providing a tremendous amount of labor for NOTHING. Athletes do not get a guaranteed degree, they get the opportunity to get a degree. If my boss forced me to sign an agreement when I went to work for him that said he didn't have to pay me except with the possibility of earning something in the future that may or may not help me earn more money in the future then I would be angry as hell especially if that employer had to the ability to block my entry into an entire field of work unless I agreed to do what he wanted, and was preventing me from making money in any other way to support myself in the meantime.

Degrees are only as good as what you make of them, and what employers value them at. If employers didn't value degrees then their value would be akin to giving a 4 year starter at Auburn a bag of potato chips for his services. If these degrees are worth so much then pay the players a comparable amount of cash, and let them decide if they want to spend that money on class, or if they want to spend it on a car while they play for said university.

# 36 canes21 @ 05/04/11 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UniversityofArizona


	I feel like the scholarships should be converted into cash payments to the students that they can spend on getting an education or not. Forcing everybody in the entire market, and yes I do believe the NCAA is a trust, to accept something as payment that they may necessarily not want or need is by no means right. Hell huge percentages of these athletes never even graduate, and in essence end up providing a tremendous amount of labor for NOTHING. Athletes do not get a guaranteed degree, they get the opportunity to get a degree. If my boss forced me to sign an agreement when I went to work for him that said he didn't have to pay me except with the possibility of earning something in the future that may or may not help me earn more money in the future then I would be angry as hell especially if that employer had to the ability to block my entry into an entire field of work unless I agreed to do what he wanted, and was preventing me from making money in any other way to support myself in the meantime. Degrees are only as good as what you make of them, and what employers value them at. If employers didn't value degrees then their value would be akin to giving a 4 year starter at Auburn a bag of potato chips for his services. If these degrees are worth so much then pay the players a comparable amount of cash, and let them decide if they want to spend that money on class, or if they want to spend it on a car while they play for said university.

These kids are getting accepted into a school, not getting a job. They aren't employees, they are students. They are geting a free education because they are athletic, not because they are the smartest kids out there. Some guys like Ponder, the Duke roster, Stanford roster, are also smart and could probably go to a lot of schools for next to nothing off their smarts, but not your average player. A lot of these guys score low ACT scores that barely get them eligible, which is an 18, which is also an absolute joke. They should be required to score a 21, in my opinion.

Anyways, they're being accepted into school and you think the university should give them money to spend on an education or anything else they want? Ridiculous.

# 37 UniversityofArizona @ 05/04/11 08:20 PM

What if they don't want the education but still want to play? Not everyone wants this almighty scholarship everyone keeps talking about. If players could play without getting the education, and instead getting a comparable amount of cash how many athletes do you think would take them up on that offer, and would abandon this ridiculous pretense that they are hard working students as well? There are plenty of players that are more than talented enough to play for the best teams in the United States yet they are prevented from doing so because they don't have the grades and of course there is no other organization that they can go to in terms of showcasing their talents and developing them, and you think we should make it even more difficult and remove even more opportunities from people by raising academic requirements on athletes who already could care less for the academics? Make it an option to take the scholarship or cash, and we will see just how happy athletes are about only being compensated with scholarships.

Also, I am not saying give them a scholarship and cash. I am saying give them the option. I don't even think athletes should even be required to attend the university as students to be able to play for the university under contract on a year to year basis. Coaches already screw universities and players over by leaving all the time. Let the players do likewise to coaches and universities. The universities already make more than enough money anyways so I don't feel sorry for their athletic budgets which do nothing to help the educational process in the first place.

# 38 canes21 @ 05/04/11 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UniversityofArizona


	What if they don't want the education but still want to play? Not everyone wants this almighty scholarship everyone keeps talking about. If players could play without getting the education, and instead getting a comparable amount of cash how many athletes do you think would take them up on that offer, and would abandon this ridiculous pretense that they are hard working students as well? There are plenty of players that are more than talented enough to play for the best teams in the United States yet they are prevented from doing so because they don't have the grades and of course there is no other organization that they can go to in terms of showcasing their talents and developing them, and you think we should make it even more difficult and remove even more opportunities from people by raising academic requirements on athletes who already could care less for the academics? Make it an option to take the scholarship or cash, and we will see just how happy athletes are about only being compensated with scholarships.

If you want to play sports at a UNIVERSITY then you should have to meet academic requirements for that university. If you can't qualify academically, then you don't deserve to play there.

# 39 UniversityofArizona @ 05/04/11 08:50 PM

Well then show me the developmental league that the NFL is too lazy to create to bring up their own talent. The athletes shouldn't have to do the whole shebang to play football in this monopolized to the limit sport. We don't require coaches to be taking classes at a university to coach there do we? The athletes are just as capable of playing for the university and representing the university regardless of their ability to take classes at the university. Requiring someone who is being brought into a university to play football to also attend class is like forcing somebody you brought in on an academic scholarship to also play sports.

# 40 canes21 @ 05/04/11 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UniversityofArizona


	Well then show me the developmental league that the NFL is too lazy to create to bring up their own talent. The athletes shouldn't have to do the whole shebang to play football in this monopolized to the limit sport. We don't require coaches to be taking classes at a university to coach there do we? The athletes are just as capable of playing for the university and representing the university regardless of their ability to take classes at the university. Requiring someone who is being brought into a university to play football to also attend class is like forcing somebody you brought in on an academic scholarship to also play sports.

It's not even close to that. Playing football at a university is not a right, it is an honor and a privilege. To earn the ability to play a sport at a university you must attend that university.

Also, if universities played players in cash and did not require them to attend classes there, wouldn't that make them professional athletes?

« Previous 123 4 Next »

More Links

Judge Nixes NCAA Players Antitrust Claims -- Case Not Over...Yet