NCAA Football 14 News Post

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

11:56 AM - August 14, 2013 by vhhsfu0509

The Southeastern Conference announced today that it will not, as a conference, license its trademarks in the EA Sports NCAA Football video game. This decision does not involve member universities as of yet, as this only involves the SEC conference name and logo.

However, this could be the type of event that opens the flood gates to future defections from the game. While the future of the College Football series looked somewhat on stable ground after EA and the CLC agreed to a three year deal, this news rattles the very foundations and future of the series.

"Each school makes its own individual decision regarding whether or not to license their trademarks for use in the EA Sports game(s)," the SEC said in a statement. "The Southeastern Conference has chosen not to do so moving forward. Neither the SEC, its member universities, nor the NCAA have ever licensed the right to use the name or likeness of any student to EA Sports."

This is another move in response to the Ed O'Bannon case which could end collegiate video games forever given unfavorable rulings from the courts.

Today's news only brings more questions as to the viability of the product going forward.

UPDATE: ESPN's Kristi Dosh is reporting that the Big XII says they have yet to make a decision on the inclusion of their marks in future College Football video games.

UPDATE #2: ESPN is now reporting the Big Ten is out as well.

UPDATE #3: In a statement to Joystiq, a CLC representative said "150 collegiate institutions, including SEC schools, have approved renewal of the EA college football license, to begin with the 2015 edition. As with any licensed product, individual schools continue to make their own decisions."

We are putting in a question with the CLC on whether this means schools can still opt out of the game at any time or not as the wording certainly seems to leave that possibility open.

Update #4: Jeremy Fowler of CBS is reporting that the Pac-12's marks also won't be in the new game.

Game: NCAA Football 14Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 54 - View All

NCAA Football 14 Videos

Member Comments

# 141 aholbert32 @ 08/14/13 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bad_philanthropy


	I think this is the trajectory. If athletics conferences are reticent I can only imagine the universities themselves will be wary of legal action. I think at some point the schools and conferences will decide to wait on the ruling before agreeing to license the EA product.

The schools are already a part of the lawsuit though.

# 142 Devlin345 @ 08/14/13 03:14 PM

cfl only has 8 teams it would not be worthwhile making one they should just put a cfl mode in madden

# 143 pietasterp @ 08/14/13 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	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?

Time will tell; you may be right. But I think some people (myself among them) view this as a dominos situation, with one falling after another in succession. I think without the cover of the conferences and CLC, the individual schools may be more exposed in a legal sense to future similar litigation (which I would guess is what all of these pre-emptive moves are about).

It's true that not having to shell out for a license saves EA money in a direct sense, but if the number of people that don't buy the game because there is no "SEC" (no SEC title game, branding, etc.) results in a loss of revenue greater than the upfront fixed cost of securing the license, it will be a net loss for EA. My guess is that there are a lot of people that won't buy the game if there is no "SEC" in it, since most purchasers of the game are casual gamers, not hardcore, and just want to take Alabama or LSU to the SEC title game.

I think it's easy to envision individual schools, i.e. Notre Dame, taking a similar prophylactic tack as the conferences and reducing their exposure to future litigation. I would imagine that the logic of the SEC and B1G pulling out of their EA deals is the same calculus as exists for the individual schools. I don't know what's going to happen, and I don't know the law or the case well enough to say with any confidence, but it seems to me that it's only a matter of time before schools start bailing.

# 144 pietasterp @ 08/14/13 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	The schools are already a part of the lawsuit though.

Collectively or individually? There are really 116+ defendents in the O'Bannan suit? I'm not asking rhetorically - I don't know the details of the case.

# 145 Jadakiss88 @ 08/14/13 03:19 PM

Can't say I didn't see this one coming.....the conferences make so much money that giving it up a percentage via Lawsuit would put some of these conferences in Jeapordy. Two of the most respected have bowed out and I am fairly certain the schools within those conferences will follow suit. If the Pac 12 bows out I believe EA will just scrap any and all plans for a future NCAA Game or any future NCAA Games. And if EA ain't touching it 2k won't and no other major developer will.

Face it we have been spoiled and developers know that they won't sell as many games without some type of resemblance to the real world. RIP NCAA Football

# 146 pietasterp @ 08/14/13 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nortobc


	I totally disagree. There are thousands of die hard college football fans out there. And if a solid customizable football game is created, I guarantee it will sell like hot cakes.

I don't know...All Pro Football 2k didn't do very well at all, and there are a lot of pro football fans...

# 147 RaychelSnr @ 08/14/13 03:20 PM

New Update with a statement from the CLC to Joystiq. Have put in a question to the CLC ourselves about the meaning of the last sentence, as it certainly seems to indicate CLC schools/institutions can still opt out of participation in the game -- which would seem feasible.

# 148 LowerWolf @ 08/14/13 03:23 PM

My best guess: If the SEC is pulling out, Mike Slive will "suggest" that its member schools do as well. And they'll most likely listen to that suggestion.

And after years of pushing up against the line in terms of using player likenesses, EA won't go near that line when it comes to conferences and schools.

# 149 pietasterp @ 08/14/13 03:24 PM

Well, it's been a fun 20+ years of sports gaming, but it looks like we're headed into some dark times ahead for the sports gaming scene...

# 150 aholbert32 @ 08/14/13 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pietasterp


	Time will tell; you may be right. But I think some people (myself among them) view this as a dominos situation, with one falling after another in succession. I think without the cover of the conferences and CLC, the individual schools may be more exposed in a legal sense to future similar litigation (which I would guess is what all of these pre-emptive moves are about). It's true that not having to shell out for a license saves EA money in a direct sense, but if the number of people that don't buy the game because there is no "SEC" (no SEC title game, branding, etc.) results in a loss of revenue greater than the upfront fixed cost of securing the license, it will be a net loss for EA. My guess is that there are a lot of people that won't buy the game if there is no "SEC" in it, since most purchasers of the game are casual gamers, not hardcore, and just want to take Alabama or LSU to the SEC title game.

Who wouldnt buy the game because of a logo? The SEC logo isnt prominent on NCAA football 14's packaging so its not like people will know that the SEC isnt in next year's game from the cover.

So lets say I'm a casual video gamer who loves college football specifically Alabama and I read ESPN's headline that the SEC isnt going to be in the game. I assume that means Bama wont be in the game. So that means I wont buy the game, right?

The problem with that is its August 2013. EA has a year to use its marketing machine to let people know that all the teams are in the game. Ea can use its cover (like it did in the past) to make it clear that all the teams are in the game. Also, there is the internet. Bama fan can easily google search to see if Bama's in the game. Or even after release discover that Bama is in the game.

Finally, the title game will still be in the game. It just wont be called the SEC title game. It will still be at the GA dome in the game and still occur right before the bowls.

# 151 aholbert32 @ 08/14/13 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LowerWolf


	My best guess: If the SEC is pulling out, Mike Slive will "suggest" that its member schools do as well. And they'll most likely listen to that suggestion. And after years of pushing up against the line in terms of using player likenesses, EA won't go near that line when it comes to conferences and schools.

There is no line. Likenesses are completely different than trademarks. The could call the league the "South 14" and be fine.

# 152 pietasterp @ 08/14/13 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	Who wouldnt buy the game because of a logo? The SEC logo isnt prominent on NCAA football 14's packaging so its not like people will know that the SEC isnt in next year's game from the cover.

I would guess a not-insignificant number. Honestly, not having the "B1G" in the game is a huge negative for me. Verisimilitude is a big part of the appeal of these games.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	So lets say I'm a casual video gamer who loves college football specifically Alabama and I read ESPN's headline that the SEC isnt going to be in the game. I assume that means Bama wont be in the game. So that means I wont buy the game, right? The problem with that is its August 2013. EA has a year to use its marketing machine to let people know that all the teams are in the game. Ea can use its cover (like it did in the past) to make it clear that all the teams are in the game. Also, there is the internet. Bama fan can easily google search to see if Bama's in the game. Or even after release discover that Bama is in the game. Finally, the title game will still be in the game. It just wont be called the SEC title game. It will still be at the GA dome in the game and still occur right before the bowls.

Look, I started my comments by readily admitting that you may be right. I gave my opinion, but since none of us knows how this is going to turn out, I intentionally couched all my statements with "if" and "my guess is...". All I'm saying is, I don't think any of us can make any declarative statements or state what is going to happen with future releases with any certitude whatsoever.

# 153 DJ @ 08/14/13 03:33 PM

Not time to panic yet, but as soon as a school like Alabama or Oregon opt out (if they are allowed to under terms of the contract), than it's likely a wrap for college football video games going forward.

# 154 aholbert32 @ 08/14/13 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pietasterp


	I would guess a not-insignificant number. Honestly, not having the "B1G" in the game is a huge negative for me. Verisimilitude is a big part of the appeal of these games. Look, I started my comments by readily admitting that you may be right. I gave my opinion, but since none of us knows how this is going to turn out, I intentionally couched all my statements with "if" and "my guess is...". All I'm saying is, I don't think any of us can make any declarative statements or state what is going to happen with future releases with any certitude whatsoever.

Hold on. I'm not attacking you. This is just a discussion. I'm really trying to understand your thought process here. I just dont get in this age why someone would not buy the game because of a logo. The confusion should be lessened by marketing and by the amount of info available on the web.

Back in 1994-95, when EA released its last unlicensed game, I could see people being confused because most people didnt have the internet and marketing budgets were much smaller. Just cant see that happening now.

Also saying "there are dark times ahead" is kind of a declarative statement.

# 155 prowler @ 08/14/13 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nortobc


	I totally disagree. There are thousands of die hard college football fans out there. And if a solid customizable football game is created, I guarantee it will sell like hot cakes.

A large majority of the people who play this game still don't know named rosters exist, there's no way they'll get on board with a game that requires heavily customization just to get to the baseline. That being said, if it were any other company I could see them taking a gamble on that type of game but not EA.

NCAA Football was never one of their big ticket games to warrant all the extra effort it would take to sustain it. They'll cut their losses and funnel NCAA users toward Madden.

# 156 LowerWolf @ 08/14/13 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aholbert32


	There is no line. Likenesses are completely different than trademarks. The could call the league the "South 14" and be fine.

True, but if the schools pull out and the "South 14" contains schools named "Knoxville", "Gainesville" and "Tuscaloosa" I bet the SEC would find a way to go after them.

# 157 aholbert32 @ 08/14/13 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LowerWolf


	True, but if the schools pull out and the "South 14" contains schools named "Knoxville", "Gainesville" and "Tuscaloosa" I bet the SEC would find a way to go after them.

It would be a waste of money and the case would get tossed at the motion to dismiss stage. The SEC has smart attorneys. They wont waste money suing EA for that especially because EA's use doesnt open the SEC up to lawsuits from other parties.

# 158 fistofrage @ 08/14/13 03:45 PM

If EA had just made 1 solid NCAA title this generation, it really wouldn't be that much of an issue. We could just update rosters and customize conferences and still be able to play until all the legal matters get hammered.

But instead they released inferior products year after year. I never envisioned a new fall season going by without rushing out and getting NCAA football. I owned every one since Bill Walsh. But now I'm actually happy if this is the end. EA got a free pass for too long. They made piles of money while rehashing the same engine and finding a way to break some working feature or delete a working feature every year.

Oh well, all things eventually come to an end, and apparently so does the era of college sports video games.

# 159 nate1986 @ 08/14/13 03:47 PM

I think EA is gonna stop making college football games soon, having "schools" known as "south bend" doesn't seem to have the same appeal when u know it's a knock off

# 160 aukevin @ 08/14/13 03:56 PM

I don't necessarily care about Conference Names, but if there aren't real school names and logos then I won't buy until they return.

« Previous 1 2…5 6 789 10 11…21 22 Next »

More Links

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