Lawsuit by Former NFL Players Against EA Allowed to Advance

[jpollack34]

I don't feel sorry for EA at all. They created this problem in the first place by making these licenses so important, restrictive, and as a barrier to entry. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. It's time to open up these games and forget these expensive and restrictive licenses. Open your games up to editing and modding.

I would love to see the leagues/players try go after individual users. Their most ardent fans and the ones that spend the most money are the ones that would edit and mod these games. They would be committing suicide by going after the users. You can't have your cake and eat it too EA. I would suggest you work with and alongside the community as opposed to taking away their options to edit/mod. They're the only ones that can save you in the end.

[mestevo]

Quote: Originally Posted by jpollack34

I don't feel sorry for EA at all. They created this problem in the first place by making these licenses so important, restrictive, and as a barrier to entry. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. It's time to open up these games and forget these expensive and restrictive licenses. Open your games up to editing and modding. I would love to see the leagues/players try go after individual users. Their most ardent fans and the ones that spend the most money are the ones that would edit and mod these games. They would be committing suicide by going after the users. You can't have your cake and eat it too EA. I would suggest you work with and alongside the community as opposed to taking away their options to edit/mod. They're the only ones that can save you in the end.

The exclusivity agenda really doesn't apply to this case and open modding doesn't excuse violations of intellectually property and copyright law.

You also can't make a mythical moddable game and say 'they're making the content, not us!' as the creators and publishers of that game could be just as guilty for enabling the violations.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by mestevo

The exclusivity agenda really doesn't apply to this case and open modding doesn't excuse violations of intellectually property and copyright law. You also can't make a mythical moddable game and say 'they're making the content, not us!' as the creators and publishers of that game could be just as guilty for enabling the violations.

I don't agree with this at all considering it's the products EA has exclusive rights to where these likeness issues seem to keep arising. I haven't looked much into this, yet it seems this "target" on EA seems to stem, in one form or another, from EA's exclusive market share in NCAA and NFL video games. I would think if there were more parity among these markets, like there once was, these issues would get resolved differently, for whatever reason. Whether that would be due to there being a more uniform way of handling likeness, it not being as financially beneficial to sue multiple companies with divided market share, there being a more artistic perception/precedent when it's done in various game by various companies or whatever. However the way it stands now, if there is an issue with likeness for those type of games, the exclusives make EA the sole target.

Heavy is the head that wears/bought the crown.

[ODogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by mestevo

The exclusivity agenda really doesn't apply to this case and open modding doesn't excuse violations of intellectually property and copyright law. You also can't make a mythical moddable game and say 'they're making the content, not us!' as the creators and publishers of that game could be just as guilty for enabling the violations.

Not true, Microsoft was sued in the early days of Microsoft Word for people using their product to plagiarize and courts sides with MS that simply making something open and editable doesn't hold a company liable for user created content.

In other words if they made an open NCAA game with just random rosters and a user here on OS named Bob made up the Ohio state exactly how they are and distributed it then the ncaa nor it's players could sue EA, they'd have to sue Bob.

And if Bob wasn't profiting from his work it'd be a tough lawsuit seeing as how anyone can watch TV and figure out who plays on what team and their generation attributes after publicly known..

[mestevo]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

I don't agree with this at all considering it's the products EA has exclusive rights to where these likeness issues seem to keep arising. I haven't looked much into this, yet it seems this "target" on EA seems to stem, in one form or another, from EA's exclusive market share in NCAA and NFL video games. I would think if there were more parity among these markets, like there once was, these issues would get resolved differently, for whatever reason. Whether that would be due to there being a more uniform way of handling likeness, it not being as financially beneficial to sue multiple companies with divided market share, there being a more artistic perception/precedent when it's done in various game by various companies or whatever. However the way it stands now, if there is an issue with likeness for those type of games, the exclusives make EA the sole target. Heavy is the head that wears/bought the crown.

Yeah, no. The lawsuit is over past use, and as far as anyone's identified this was well before exclusivity. Shoving the exclusivity agenda into this is just another way to be able to go off about the devil that EA is in the eyes of some and about how the company is responsible for all that's wrong in your world. This has nothing to do with a lack of options to litigate.

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

Not true, Microsoft was sued in the early days of Microsoft Word for people using their product to plagiarize and courts sides with MS that simply making something open and editable doesn't hold a company liable for user created content. In other words if they made an open NCAA game with just random rosters and a user here on OS named Bob made up the Ohio state exactly how they are and distributed it then the ncaa nor it's players could sue EA, they'd have to sue Bob. And if Bob wasn't profiting from his work it'd be a tough lawsuit seeing as how anyone can watch TV and figure out who plays on what team and their generation attributes after publicly known..

A word processor is a much broader tool than a video game allowing you to create others intellectual property only in that video game that is generating a revenue in part because of those features. A comparable example would be Marvel v City of Heroes. http://www.joystiq.com/2005/12/14/ma...wsuit-settled/

The complaint spawned from the ability to create characters in City of Heroes that closely resembled characters from the Marvel Universe.

Use some common sense here guys, if EA themselves aren't allowed to create players in their own game without licensing, why do you think it's legal for you to? They absolutely could send a C&D to Bob and to EA for any violations. Will/would they? Remains to be seen. Companies don't tend to invest in things that are going to encourage legal challenges because they enjoy making money.

[mestevo]

Finally found the actual case and PDF of ruling for anyone interested: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...6/12-15737.pdf

I was wrong, the 2001-2009 games are cited as having historical teams and that is the reason for litigation. This obviously was during exclusivity, but still maintain that has much bearing if any on the discussion or the litigation.

[RandyBass]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

Lawyers will be the end of civilization

Yeah, because lawlessness is so good for civilization.

This may not seem like a big deal, because after all how much did Madden actually profit from these player likenesses, and how much would that amount to individually for each player? Tough to say for sure, but my guess is not much. That being said, there is a reason you can't hack into a thousand different banks and take a measly dollar.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by mestevo

Yeah, no. The lawsuit is over past use, and as far as anyone's identified this was well before exclusivity. Shoving the exclusivity agenda into this is just another way to be able to go off about the devil that EA is in the eyes of some and about how the company is responsible for all that's wrong in your world. This has nothing to do with a lack of options to litigate.

Quote: Originally Posted by mestevo

Finally found the actual case and PDF of ruling for anyone interested: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...6/12-15737.pdf I was wrong, the 2001-2009 games are cited as having historical teams and that is the reason for litigation. This obviously was during exclusivity, but still maintain that has much bearing if any on the discussion or the litigation.

Let me start off by stating I commend you for not only owning up to your mistake but posting the facts that expose that mistake. That said it would be nice if everyone could refrain from trying to constantly accuse others of some unfounded anti-EA agenda, as demonstrated in the underline portion and just accept things as a difference of opinion.