Judge Certifies Class-Action Football Game Pricing Lawsuit Against EA

[reddogmaddogbul]

Quote: Originally Posted by splff3000

In every class action lawsuit I've ever been part of, no one actually came to verify anything. I'm assuming because the payouts to each individual are usually so little they don't feel like it's worth it. I don't know if it will be the same in this case, but I'd be willing to bet it will be. Either way, this is all conjecture at this point because it's not a given that EA will lose this case.

Couldn't of wrote it no better myself
(co-sign) .....I'm assuming because the payouts to each individual are usually so little they don't feel like it's worth it.
Sad but True

[mestevo]

You could have written it better by saying EA has settled, they've already 'lost' the case by paying $27m (perhaps a little more, based on the extension of the claim period) into a fund. That's why we're talking about payouts, that's why there's a 'Settlement website' - http://www.easportslitigation.com/

[gtyjrocks]

When do we get a check if we submitted a claim?

[DocHolliday]

The best chance of this exclusivity going away won't be through legal action....it will happen if the NFL feels like the negativity is actually affecting their image/brand.

Twitter and a viral campaign would be the only hope.

[howboutdat]

to me the lawsuit is just for kids who want to get a few bucks outta EA. i personally cant stand EA and the way they do things, however to me i have no interest in joining this for a key reason. Now it claims the reason for the suit is basically due to the contract EA has with the NFL, basically making a monopoly , and allowing them to raise price. While they do have a monopoly , which is supposed to be illegal, this lawsuit while stating that as the problem, does absolutely NOTHING TO FIX IT. If the lawsuits agenda was to make the contract between EA and NFL be deemed illegal and would make them stop doing it , then id be all for it because that is what needs to happen. But just trying to take a few bucks from them , to me , is just being just like the greedy aholes people are saying they dislike(numer 1 disliked company in the US , 2 YEARS RUNNING). Id rather not stoop to their levels myself. We just need that contract to be stopped from being renwed or ever done again.Sure , if that happened, 2k wouldnt have a great NFL game for a few years, but it would at least open the door for them , so they could get it going . Im sure they would do well with it within a few short years of making one.Problem is, we will never know, as long as lawsuits like this only go for money , instead of going to fight and get rid of the real problem. So have fun with the 5$ people.......

[Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by howboutdat

Now it claims the reason for the suit is basically due to the contract EA has with the NFL, basically making a monopoly , and allowing them to raise price. While they do have a monopoly , which is supposed to be illegal, this lawsuit while stating that as the problem, does absolutely NOTHING TO FIX IT.

The exclusivity agreement between EA and the NFL is not a monopoly situation.

The NFL has the right to sell the right to use of its properties to whomever it chooses. If the NFL is agreeable to an exclusive arrangement, so be it. It isn't obligated to allow other companies to license its properties, just as MGM isn't obligated to license the James Bond franchise to any company but Activision-Blizzard. A court can't dictate how the NFL manages its own intellectual property rights.

Further, the situation is not a monopoly because the agreement doesn't stop other companies from producing video games or even realistic American football video games; the opportunity for direct competition still exists. Indeed, at least four full-scale console releases have been published since the agreement happened (Blitz: The League, Blitz: The League 2, All Pro Football 2K8, Backbreaker). Even without full-scale football video games in the market, EA Sports titles still face competition from other sports games - NBA 2K, The Show, etc. - and also non-sports games - Halo, Call Of Duty, etc. - for consumer attention.

Just because a situation is unfavorable to consumers (which the exclusivity license is, you won't get an argument from me on that point) doesn't make it against the law.

[infemous]

they never reduce the price by much any more and with the next generation not going to allow re-sales of games, destroying the rental market and with ZERO competition there is an unfair advantage held by EA.

I'd also like to ask anyone who defends EA here why they would want a game to stay expensive?

[mestevo]

Quote: Originally Posted by infemous

they never reduce the price by much any more and with the next generation not going to allow re-sales of games, destroying the rental market and with ZERO competition there is an unfair advantage held by EA. I'd also like to ask anyone who defends EA here why they would want a game to stay expensive?

Except those are all rumors and not likely true since they've been contradicted by other rumors and Sony statements already.

Not touching the straw man, and defer to CM Hooe's explanation above as to it being an 'unfair advantage'.

I'd contend that other companies flat out declining to compete is a bigger advantage than the NFL license at this point. Really isn't the thread for that discussion though. They've been sued over the licensing too - and lost/settled - and the end result is no exclusive AFL or NCAA license while leaving Madden unscathed. Search will find a thread or two about that too.