Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

CBC vs. MLBAM/MLBPA Case - Judge Has Ruled


WJW
 Share

Recommended Posts

Excellent. It was the only possible legal and logical outcome. I had a great discussion about a month ago with an attorney here in DC who worked inhouse for the NFLPA for years and was the first female NFL players agent. We both agreed this was an egregious form of flexing and would go down in flames.

 

 

I don't know if I buy into that.

 

I'll have to read the decision, to see what exactly got addressed, but I go back to the sport of horse racing with how the Equibase company owns the rights to all the performance data produced at NHRA tracks.

 

What really stops the NFL (for instance) from saying what happens in their events is their property? Other than the court of public opinion and possibly annoying the most passionate of their fan base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent. It was the only possible legal and logical outcome. I had a great discussion about a month ago with an attorney here in DC who worked inhouse for the NFLPA for years and was the first female NFL players agent. We both agreed this was an egregious form of flexing and would go down in flames.

 

 

 

When I think about you, I touch myself, oh, oh, oh! :D

 

Gee, boy, you use yur mouth sooo purty! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if I buy into that.

 

I'll have to read the decision, to see what exactly got addressed, but I go back to the sport of horse racing with how the Equibase company owns the rights to all the performance data produced at NHRA tracks.

 

What really stops the NFL (for instance) from saying what happens in their events is their property? Other than the court of public opinion and possibly annoying the most passionate of their fan base.

 

 

Um, Equibase doesnt "own" all the rights to the performance data produced at NHRA tracks. Through private agreements, Equibase has the contractual right to compile the information from the tracks and has licensing deals as the "Official" info provider to companies like ESPN. I imagine if you went and compiled all the same information, you could challenge their contractual exclusivity for the same reasons that the NFLPA, et al., lost.

 

What really stops the NFL from saying what happens in their events is their property is that it is facts and information and you cannot own that. It is really very simple. Copyright law provides that you can own tangible fixed expressions of facts, information, and ideas, but you can't own the actual facts, ideas or information. If the NFL compiles the information in a certain unique and original manner, they could own that. But they cannot own the raw data.

 

So, noone can own the information that goes into making up the Strength of Schedule analysis here at the Huddle, but DMD and WW and the Huddle do own the copyright in their compilation of that information and their addition of original authorship in the form of written and charted analysis.

Edited by skins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, Equibase doesnt "own" all the rights to the performance data produced at NHRA tracks. Through private agreements, Equibase has the contractual right to compile the information from the tracks and has licensing deals as the "Official" info provider to companies like ESPN. I imagine if you went and compiled all the same information, you could challenge their contractual exclusivity for the same reasons that the NFLPA, et al., lost.

 

 

Look at results or entries in your daily newspaper. Why do they show a copyright? Out of curiosity....not questioning the veracity of the above. It's not like the entries and results are not facts and/or information, not to mention publicity for the future event at the track.

 

 

What really stops the NFL from saying what happens in their events is their property is that it is facts and information and you cannot own that. It is really very simple. Copyright law provides that you can own tangible fixed expressions of facts, information, and ideas, but you can't own the actual facts, ideas or information. If the NFL compiles the information in a certain unique and original manner, they could own that. But they cannot own the raw data.

 

 

I guess what I should have asked is whether there is legal precedence to say the NFL can't say "this is ours" when it comes to stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at results or entries in your daily newspaper. Why do they show a copyright? Out of curiosity....not questioning the veracity of the above. It's not like the entries and results are not facts and/or information, not to mention publicity for the future event at the track.

 

I guess what I should have asked is whether there is legal precedence to say the NFL can't say "this is ours" when it comes to stats.

 

 

This is turning into copyright 101, but I like that:

 

I imagine there is a copyright notice because Equibase is claiming copyright in the compilation of facts and information. Think of a collage. You can take 60 items which are all in the public domain, and organize and present them in a new manner which has sufficient original authorship in the "putting together" to give you a copyright--albeit a thin one--in the collective work or compilation. Remember something else, anyone can put a copyright notice on anything and it doesnt mean they own the copyright. It just means they think they do. And one thing I frequently run across is companies which try to create ownership in content where it didnt exist before. They do this through contractual arrangements and business dealings.

 

The legal precedent is the statutory law. All copyright law is federal, all common law and state law copyright was preempted in the 1976 Copyright Act. The law, by default, is that you cannot own a fact. You can only own "tangible expression in a fixed form". That is the definition of copyright. So the NFL cant own the fact that Portis will have 9 straight 100 yard games this season, but they may own every video or film capturing those runs. In that case, anyone can write about his runs, but only they can display or distribute or circulate the video images.

 

This case was a loser from the get go, as most lawyers who understand copyright and rights of publicity understood. I think the goal was to push hard enough to be able to implement a licensing scheme where people recognized that the NFL had rights it didnt legally have. Once the contracts were in place, after enough time, people would believe that the NFL owned those stats. Just like with Equibase. Luckily, there was a fight and no capitulation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information