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 This theme may be out of date.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.]]

The Future of Fantasy Sports


Hitman
 Share

Recommended Posts

It looks like MLBPA & the NFLPA are wanting "royalties" from the use of their names in fantasy sports. This topic seems to be heating up on the legal front, and what will it mean for the future of Fantasy Sports, and of course more specifically FF? :D

 

Views

 

More stuff

 

 

The ever so anticipated Fantasy Sports Trade Association (FSTA) meeting was a few days ago. One of the main topics (in fact almost the only topic) was this licensing issue. This is no surprise because for good or bad this issue will have the second greatest impact this industry has ever seen. (The first being the invention of the Internet.)

 

DMD, WW, you guys are members of this association right? I'd like to hear your views/opinions on some of this stuff.

 

Will Peyton Manning one day become Player #18 in fantasy land?

"I'll trade you #18 for #81 and a 1st round pick." :D

Greedy bastages! :D

Edited by Hitman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

First off, there's a Fantasy Sports Trade Conference? Oh, it's in Las Vegas.....

 

Maybe one of the someone else can chime in, but I thought there were suits vs. the MLBPA that prevented them from acting on any cease and desist letters they sent out last month?

 

And to only provide 12 licenses at $25,000 a pop is ridiculous.

 

I'd blame the NFLPA and the MLBPA, but mlb.com and nfl.com run a couple of pretty extensive fantasy games, as do their corporate broadcasting partners at FOX, cbssportsline, and ESPN that all no doubt got licenses.

 

A legal quesiton: While I know the PAs can't put a copyright on stats, how can they put a copyright on a game someone puts together that features performances from "L.Tomlinson" instead of LaDanian Tomlinson?

Edited by godtomsatan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, we do belong to the association and are very aware of everything revolving around the NFLPA and the MLBAM (very big news if you own a fantasy site).

 

It is, absolutely, all about the money. They want their share of the pie even though legally it has not been established that they have any right to it. For a long time, they contended that they owned the stats generated by players and therefore you could not use them commercially without a license from them (which they have a monopoly on deciding how much and to whom). Bottom line is that they would prefer to only have a few companies (ESPN, Sportsline, Yahoo and Fox) to have licenses for millions and no one else.

 

They are apparently softening on the notion that they own the stats since they are public information and other court cases have not gone their way on it. They now are more contending that they own the player names. To make it sweeter, they really do not understand anything about fantasy sports, they just have lawyers and want money.

 

I could write 100,000 words on the subject. The MLBAM is leading the way with the MLB and the NFLPA will undoubtedly follow suit. The fantasy baseball game offered by USA Today and a ton of other places is ran by CDM who was denied a license by the MLBAM. They merely have been offering games for about 15 years and are as instrumental in making fantasy sports popular as anyone. CDM is suing the MLBAM right now.

 

Very long story but bottom line it is all about lawyers and money and nothing about fans or the products you can buy. I may ask you guys to write a letter to the NFLPA or even congress at some point if it helps the fantasy football marketplace avoid being stripped of options and making only the biggest 4 companies able to provide fantasy sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI - in order to be licenses, you have to pay a fee PLUS open your books and give them a percentage of gross revenue.

 

The MLBAM wants $10k from small companies (less than 5000 customers) and then jumps to $500K immediately for anything over that. Customer 5001 is extremely expensive. They only reason they even allow $10k level is to not look like the money grubbing hacks that they are (this comes next year probably). Plus they want a percentage of your gross revenue.

 

The reality is all they want is the big 4 companies for millions and no one else to be able to participate in the market place. It is really sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sucks!

 

 

Start a Huddle pettition if you need to.

Edited by NSab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may ask you guys to write a letter to the NFLPA or even congress at some point if it helps the fantasy football marketplace avoid being stripped of options and making only the biggest 4 companies able to provide fantasy sports.

 

755754[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I totally agree, and honestly ...I have a strong interest in this issue also because I've been working on getting into the business myself in some form. I offer my support to you guys in any way possible, as many others here will also I'm sure! The rally cry to the huddle masses will be answered when the time comes! :D

Edited by Hitman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if we just spelled the player's names backwards? :D Or used every other letter? Sounds stupid, but.....?

 

Another thing I dont get is how can a newspaper print names and stats, then? They are using this info to sell papers, so they are generating money from the pro sports leagues too. Same for Sports Illustrated, you name it. i admit, it's all way over my head, but I'd certainly be willing to write a boatload of letters, if that would be helpful.

Edited by Rovers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been hearing about this for a little while but had never read much about it. The factual and legal summary provided in the Sportz Tawk thread (Views link above) is very well done. Coincidentally, I have had a case in the past against Bill Heberer, the lawyer who spoke at the FSTA.

 

This is about muscle flexing in the marketplace and outspending the opposition in an effort to throw a net of control over "intellectual property" in the form of licensing. I deal with it on both sides of the table and it happens all of the time. The last thing that the MLBAM or NFLPA want is a court decision because they will probably lose on the right of publicity issue. That is why I was encouraged to see that the FSTA at least considered going for declaratory judgment on the issue of whether the MLBAM can control player names/rosters under a state law right of publicity or--though I really doubt it--under some collective work/compilation argument under copyright law. Seeking declaratory judgment is very aggressive but makes the MLBAM the defendant and the FSTA the plaintiff.

 

What the MLBAM hope to do is bleed CDM dry with fees and court expenses in order to force a licensing deal settlement on them. And by example, show everyone else what can happen to them if they do not play ball. Once a licensing scheme is in place the legalities of the matter will become secondary because the terms of the relationships will be governed by the contracts and licensing agreements.

 

This happens all of the time with intellectual property. Large companies with vast resources lean on, intimidate and outspend smaller competitors or adversaries in order to force settlement arrangements which are stronger and more beneficial than their original legal rights.

 

I just dealt with it in a knock off golf club case where the giant golf club company cruised the trade show where everyone was exhibiting their new lines and passed out cease and desist letters at the booths in front of everyone. The claims were that the so called knock off clubs infringed design patents on the decorative elements of the giant company club heads. My client had some woods, irons and a putter at issue, but the design patent claims were pretty thin and there did not appear to be a valid claim for any club but our putter. Of course, we could have litigated and fought the validity of the design patents and had some thrown out and maybe lost on the one club. That could have easily cost my client six figures. So I negotiated a settlement and, of course, in the settlement negotiations, the giant company's $600 per hour lawyer wanted all kinds of crazy admissions and concessions which went far beyond any legal rights they had. And he had gotten them from almost all of the other smaller companies who had negotiated the settlements themselves.

 

But not from us.

 

This is about control in the short term which will lead to money in the long term.

Edited by skins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI - in order to be licenses, you have to pay a fee PLUS open your books and give them a percentage of gross revenue.

 

The MLBAM wants $10k from small companies (less than 5000 customers) and then jumps to $500K immediately for anything over that. Customer 5001 is extremely expensive. They only reason they even allow $10k level is to not look like the money grubbing hacks that they are (this comes next year probably). Plus they want a percentage of your gross revenue.

 

The reality is all they want is the big 4 companies for millions and no one else to be able to participate in the market place. It is really sad.

 

755771[/snapback]

 

 

 

Keep us posted on what you'd like us to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what grounds do they have? I mean, I understand a golf club design issue, but we're talking about public information. To me, this is almost akin to the NFL suing Las Vegas for allowing betting on their games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may ask you guys to write a letter to the NFLPA or even congress at some point if it helps the fantasy football marketplace avoid being stripped of options and making only the biggest 4 companies able to provide fantasy sports.

 

755754[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

You got it.

 

What these idiot lawyers don't realize is that the popularity of fantasy sports is already bringing in tons of money into their respective leagues. Alienate the fans and all of the licensing revenue in the world will not be worth the loss of fan support they'll experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lavar Arrington refused to let his name be used, so MFL used something like WAS LB#56 to identify him in IDP leagues.

 

755936[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I believe that was actually because Lavar Arrington wasn't part of the MLBPA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what grounds do they have? I mean, I understand a golf club design issue, but we're talking about public information. To me, this is almost akin to the NFL suing Las Vegas for allowing betting on their games.

 

755977[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

The names of the players and their use in commercial exploitation fall under state name and likeness/right of publicity statutes. That is the players association legal position. And they are trying to say that using the rosters of the teams, and the names, and any other informatio they can lay claim to, should be licensed through them. They are trying to set a precedent that they should control this information and intellectual property and once set, it will be difficult to disprove.

 

You got it.

 

What these idiot lawyers don't realize is that the popularity of fantasy sports is already bringing in tons of money into their respective leagues.  Alienate the fans and all of the licensing revenue in the world will not be worth the loss of fan support they'll experience.

 

755993[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I think yer naive. Are you suggesting that any of us will stop watching football and playing fantasy football? Those lawyers arent idiots. They know you better than you know yerself.

Edited by skins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You got it.

 

What these idiot lawyers don't realize is that the popularity of fantasy sports is already bringing in tons of money into their respective leagues.  Alienate the fans and all of the licensing revenue in the world will not be worth the loss of fan support they'll experience.

 

755993[/snapback]

 

 

 

Last fall I read somewhere that fans that participate in fantasy leagues have a tendancy to watch more games. If the NFL has a higher Neilsen rating won't this give them more leverage on the tv contracts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'll take ladernian tompkins with the first pick, please

 

756107[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

:D

 

Just make sure you leave Shane Alexandera alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think yer naive. Are you suggesting that any of us will stop watching football and playing fantasy football? Those lawyers arent idiots. They know you better than you know yerself.

 

756057[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Nope...

 

Last fall I read somewhere that fans that participate in fantasy leagues have a tendancy to watch more games.  If the NFL has a higher Neilsen rating won't this give them more leverage on the tv contracts?

 

756116[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Agreed. I'll certainly be less inclined by purchase the NFL Sunday Ticket package if the NFLPA tries to screw fantasy owners. Hell, I might just stop playing FF completely.

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