EA claims it is only 25% accurate with its rosters.
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2...most_ncaa.html
Printable View
EA claims it is only 25% accurate with its rosters.
http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2...most_ncaa.html
Good summary of the case and the next steps: http://www.sbnation.com/college-foot...-certification
No need to wait. The Liberal trial judge will give Plaintiffs ANYTHING/EVERYTHING they ask for. 9th Circuit will shoot EA/NCAA down as well. EA/NCAA's only hope is to appeal to the Supreme Court.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
http://college-football.si.com/2013/...ncaa-football/
Quote:
EA Sports used ex-Florida quarterback Tim Tebow’s name in its NCAA Football 10 video game, SB Nation reports. That installment of EA’s college football series was released in July 2009, the summer before Tebow’s senior season in Gainesville.
An SB Nation reader found Tebow’s name in the game within Florida’s playbook in a play called “Shotgun Twin QB Tebow – Motion Stay.” The formation was used by the Gators during Tebow’s career, which spanned from 2006-10.
The notion that EA Sports used Tebow’s name in a video game while Tebow was still a student-athlete adds an interesting wrinkle to an issue that has largely dominated the offseason. The Ed O’Bannon v. the NCAA lawsuit pits O’Bannon, a former UCLA basketball player, and others against college athletics’ governing body, EA Sports and College Licensing Company over an alleged violation of antitrust laws, specifically for using players’ likenesses in video games and other commercial items. If the plaintiffs succeed, the suit has the potential to completely redefine the premise of amateurism in college athletics.
That is a "smoking gun" as we call in the law. Of course, that assumes you buy the premise of the argument (which I don't). I think EA has a solid 1st Amendment argument as well as an argument that the Athletes waived their claims by signing a waiver to the NCAA.Quote:
Originally Posted by ram29jackson
Regardless said finding is NOT good for EA or the future of the series.
shouldnt matter all that much. this is only a name of a play. this has zero connection to the player's likeness claim
In reality, I agree with you. But a lawyer could probably leverage it to make a convincing argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
It would depend on the state but actually the unauthorized use of a name for commercial gain is direct evidence of a "privacy" based tort in most/many states. I'd be shocked if it wasn't in California.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Moreover, it can be used to show/argue that EA's intent or mental state with regard to how it "treats" these athletes. It uses their likeness/images (evidence elsewhere) and they even use some of their names without permission and without compensating them.
A liberal San Francisco jury will likely punish EA and award punitive damages. That "Tebow" play is evidence than can be used to not only win but to receive punitive damages to punish EA/NCAA.
I haven't read the case, but what are the plaintiffs seeking?
$Quote:
Originally Posted by TIMB0B
I'm using Tapatalk 2 and the Cleveland Browns STILL suck.
Hmm. I doubt Sam Keller helped EA make any money.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelerfan
It goes a lot deeper than this, but Keller says that along with thousands of other student athletes over the years, EA has been portraying their likenesses and made most, if not all of their money on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by TIMB0B
Interesting. Maybe that's why EA introduced the Legends Mode; to show holes in the plaintiffs argument. Because that would be an example of someone buying a game because of an athlete. However, I never played one second of that mode, and I'm sure 99% of the gamers out there didn't buy the game because of past Heisman winners either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayrah
Doesn't matter. If you buy Plaintiffs theory you cannot use another person's "likeness" (legal term) without their permission. However, your point is a decent one re: Keller's alleged damages. Thus, Plaintiffs' counsel knowing Keller et al. are bums are using a class action lawsuit (trying to represent every NCAA player) so they can increase the damages just by the sheer number of plaintiffs they represent.Quote:
Originally Posted by TIMB0B
If they bring on too many in the suit, his cut of the money decreases. He better watch it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
What I want to know is, what will happen to the franchise if the plaintiffs win? Will they still create the game, but make all of the players the same size, race, and number? I think with the gaming community putting out rosters every year, the game will be fine for us, but will the casual gamer be upset without some sort of accurate default rosters out of the box, therefore hurting future sales?
I was going to rebut this post, but then you used my argument in your next post.Quote:
Originally Posted by TIMB0B
This is why the plaintiffs have a case. If EA put out a game with completely random rosters this would absolutely hurt their sales, especially from ranked game players who can only use the default roster. EA knew this which is why they put out accurate (for EA) rosters with their game.Quote:
Originally Posted by TIMB0B
I don't see any way that the plaintiffs can lose this case because there's no question that EA used player likenesses in their games. Even though they don't use names, EA is screwed. There's no way that they could argue that in their game the starting QB for Michigan (who is a black dude and wears #16, is a SR, hails from Florida, is 6'0, 195, and is easily the fastest QB in the country) is not an accurate representation of Denard Robinson. I don't know enough about the case to know if the big loser will be EA or the NCAA though (but probably both).
The loser will be the gamer.Quote:
Originally Posted by jello1717
Actually his cut will not change no matter how many Plaintiffs there are. In fact, if the lawsuit is certified by the court as a class action (it will be) Keller could get an extra cut for being a "named plaintiff" to "represent" the class. The only people who's cut is effected is the plaintiffs' lawyer thus why they are pushing for the class action device so they can get their Million dollar+ pay day.Quote:
Originally Posted by TIMB0B
No one knows for sure what will happen to the series if Plaintiffs win. I personally don't think the series survives but I could be wrong.
I think the series has to survive just to pay off the damages :DQuote:
Originally Posted by CLW
could bringing up the fact that he waited until now to bring this lawsuit against EA instead of when he first noticed his likeness being used in the game, be something that helps EA?
I mean, we all know that if Keller had the talent to make it in the NFL that he would've never brought this suit, but since he's a no talent never was, he is seeking his NFL payday thru the pockets of EA.
Nope b/c each edition adds hundreds of new Plaintiffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayrah
What you are talking about is called a Statute of Limitations. That is the time period that a person must file their lawsuit by or forever lose their right to make a claim. It varies from state to state but I assume that Keller must not be violating the SOL b/c EA's lawyers surely would have checked that and filed a motion to dismiss on that basis and even a VERY liberal judge would have a hard time not granting a motion to dismiss when the time to file the lawsuit has passed.Quote:
Originally Posted by countryboy
The haters always seem to focus on Keller and O'Bannon and say this is only because they weren't successful pros. They also seem to always ignore the fact that this suit also includes Jim Brown and Oscar Robertson who are as far from "no talent never was" guys as you can get.Quote:
Originally Posted by countryboy
A hater? Ok...I was just bringing up a point as to why Keller and the rest decided until now to bring up the suit, when this has been going on for quite a while. And I understand that Brown, O'Bannon, and Robertson are included in the suit and no where did I mention that they were "no talent never was" guys, only Keller which is why I only used his name.Quote:
Originally Posted by jello1717
Oh ok. Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
too early to bother worrying about anything for a consumerQuote:
the trial now is slated to begin june 2014. Appeals following a decision could extend the fight through 2020.
Yeah if EA just wants to drag it out it certainly can. However, the legal bills have no doubt been HUGE and will continue to be HUGE all the way up through final disposition.Quote:
Originally Posted by ram29jackson
However, if O'Bannon/Keller are really hell bent on just breaking the NCAA EA/NCAA really don't have much of an option other than try to appeal all the way up to the SCOTUS.
Well, at least we know we're 100% safe for a NCAA '15 release, and maybe even NCAA '16 if either side appeals.
Hearing today on motion to certify as class action. Despite the Supreme Court yet again today slapping down the class action device, I'd bet the farm that the judge certifies the case as a class.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...awsuit-vs-ncaa
Ed O'Bannon's fame not carrying over with Oakland federal court house employees. They keep referring to the case as O'Banyon.
— Steve Berkowitz (@ByBerkowitz) June 20, 2013
So would the NCAA be able to appeal a class action certification to the Supreme Court?Quote:
Originally Posted by CLW
Eventually yes they could - often you can do it as soon as the action is certified (Interlocutory Appeal). It would have to go to the 9th Circuit first though for a ruling. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide:Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes
The 9th Circuit (Appellate Court for CA) wouldn't likely grant it immediately b/c they are all liberals knowing that if they affirm a class certification it's that much closer to a potential Supreme Court review.Quote:
A court of appeals may in its discretion permit an appeal from an order of a district court granting or denying class action certification under this rule if application is made to it within ten days after entry of the order. An appeal does not stay proceedings in the district court unless the district judge or the court of appeals so orders.
Of course the Supreme Court doesn't have to rule on the case as they have complete discretion (just about) on what cases they hear.
Most likely NCAA/EA would have to go to trial then appeal the Class Certification (and any other rulings) in one swoop.
According to ESPN. The Judge ordered the Plaintiffs to amend their complaint to add current student-athletes and "suggested" mediation.
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/st...face-challenge
Reading tea leaves that's probably not good for the NCAA/EA as this lawsuit just got even bigger. I suppose the judge could (in theory) want to deny this type of lawsuit for everyone possible but that just seems highly unlikely.
Most likely result this case gets certified as all current and former NCAA athletes are plaintiffs against EA/NCAA. EA/NCAA will undoubtedly try to appeal the certification ruling to the 9th Cir. / Supreme Court but it will be an uphill battle to get the 9th to agree to hear the case.
the longer this goes on..I doubt they rule in favor of the jocks. its consumers that give the players names and not the company perse. And I could care less if I had to generate fictional names from any point onward.
This actually needs to be a side note to the NCAA being told to lighten up on restrictions to student athletes being allowed to make their own money any way they choose while being on full scholarship.
Just like the anti- indian team names crusaders. Its a few whiners trying to create a problem when most jocks live their lives and play their games both on field and on console LOL and don't care. Just more wasted taxpayer money on a long winded dumb legal battle
Actually, the longer a lawsuit goes on the more likely it is to settle out of court. The Judge/9th Circuit knows that. PARTICULARLY in class actions once the case is certified unless you are Wal-Mart (or some other huge Corp with DEEP POCKETS AND A DEEP BELIEF YOU ARE RIGHT) almost all Defendants settle as soon as the class is certified.Quote:
Originally Posted by ram29jackson
Why? Simple the threat of a multi-million (or in this case multi-billion) dollar verdict and the cost of defending against 1000s of Plaintiffs simply just becomes too costly. Better to cut your losses now and move on.
Does EA/NCAA constitute Deep pockets - yeah they definitely have the funds necessary to fight it all the way up
However, do they believe deep in their hearts they are right and thus are willing to spend a fortune to attorneys to finally prevail at the Supreme Court after a decade plus of litigation? - I don't know
To me EA would probably be happy to pay $X per year to use actual player names so they don't really have a "deep"stake in this fight. It will likely be whether the NCAA wants to continue its current Amateurism stance (rightly or wrongly - IMHO rightly). Is it worth it to the NCAA? Time will tell.
EA files Motion to Dismiss:
http://www.polygon.com/2013/7/30/4571472/ea-ncaa-football-obannon-keller-lawsuit-motion-to-dismiss
Odd "strategy" if in fact the Judge told EA to not file a Motion to Dismiss. However, most likely EA is hoping the judge denies it w/o considering it giving them an additional ground for appeal.
Liberal 9th Circuit slaps down EA on 1st Amendment Argument.
http://www.pastapadre.com/2013/07/31...-appeals-court
EA will likely appeal this but SCOTUS doesn't have to take it as their review is ENTIRELY discretionary (except a few cases outlined in the Constitution).
The 1st Amendment is EA's best legal argument and the best potential win for fans of the series as a SCOTUS decision could protect the series from future lawsuits.
Well, if the Supreme Court takes it up, EA does have something in their favor.
Quote:
It’s worth noting The 9th is one of the most reversed courts in the nation. Since 2005 78% of their cases that have reached the Supreme Court have been reversed.
Jim Brown http://www.profootballhof.com/UserFi...im_180-220.jpg
Quote:
In a separate decision also written by Bybee, the same 9th Circuit panel by a 3-0 vote on Wednesday upheld the dismissal of Hall of Fame running back Jim Brown's lawsuit against EA over the use of his likeness in its Madden NFL video game.
It said Brown's likeness was "artistically relevant" to that game, and that there was no showing that EA explicitly misled consumers about his involvement with the game.
EA spokesman John Reseburg said in a statement: "We're pleased with the outcome regarding Jim Brown's likeness, but equally disappointed with the ruling against First Amendment protection in the Keller case. We believe the reasoning in Judge Thomas' dissent in that decision will ultimately prevail as we seek further court review."
Yep the 9th gets reversed a TON its a running joke that when/if SCOTUS takes a 9th Circuit case its to reverse them. There are even instances where Supreme Court takes up Case A from the 9th reverses. Then a few years later case B on the SAME ISSUE comes up and the 9th ignores SCOTUS. SCOTUS takes case and again reverses.Quote:
Originally Posted by SmoothPancakes
Of course that 78% # is only on cases that are actually heard by SCOTUS. TONS of bad 9th Circuit law is still out there but SCOTUS could/would fill its entire docket with bad law from the 9th if it wanted but it has to take cases from other areas too.
Its got a decent shot of being heard but I'd probably put it at slightly less than 50/50. Now the SCOTUS seems REALLY interested in class actions right now so that decision has a really good shot at going all the way up at some point.
Apparently OS doesn't have a "resident lawyer" b/c they are mis-reporting what happened today in the Keller lawsuit. No worries I attempted to correct it for the masses but ALWAYS be weary of reading an article about law/lawsuit by someone who doesn't know jack squat about law. Just sayin'