Thumbs high to the judge who made a good common sense decision today to allow fantasy baseball leagues to use player names and stats without a license from Major League Baseball. MLB had wanted to make such a thing illegal, but a federal judge ruled against them today.
Had MLB gotten their way, there would be only a handful of sites out there who had licenses to use the stats, and if you wanted to keep your league on your favorite site, you’d have been playing with “Phillies 1B #6″ instead of “Ryan Howard.” A company called CBC Distribution and Marketing Inc., made the argument that Howard going 1-3 with a double was basic, factual information, and that MLB had no right to stop anyone from using that information.
It was a sleazy, selfish and money-grubbing thing for Major League Baseball to attempt in the first place. I’m sure they don’t mind the free promotion they get from their players names appearing freely in newspapers and box scores in every newspaper and website in the world. But then MLB saw $1.5 billion a year being spent on fantasy sports, and they wanted their cut of it, you and your fantasy league be damned. There was money out there for them, an they suddenly became big believers in intellectual property.
Thankfully, they didn’t get away with it. Mary Ann Medler, you are my favorite U.S. District Court Judge in the history of District Court Judges. If you’re reading this, sweetheart, look me up, and let’s see what kind of hot judicial womanhood you’ve got sizzlin’ under that robe. Rrrrrow.
unc_samurai Says:
August 9th, 2006 at 8:43 am
Correct me if I’m barking up the wrong tree, MJD, but don’t we see those PSA-style fine print messages towards the end of a sports telecast exclaiming the game we’re watching is the exclusive property of the sports league? I distinctly remember the NFL’s annoucement saying “Any rebroadcast, transmission, or account or description of the game is not to be used without explicit permission of the National Football League.
Now, I understand there may be a difference between league policies, and there is even a difference between an account of the game and simply using statistics. But how does that piece of legalese work? Can the NFL say you don’t have the right to stand in a busy intersection and talk about last night’s game? Do these legalities only come into play when money is changing hands? If the latter is the case, that still doesn’t mean the NFL can waggle their finger at my fantasy league, because Yahoo doesn’t charge for any of the services I use (Let’s assume we’re not buying Stat-tracker for a moment).
A sports game is a public event, but can a sports league say that the dissemination of information regarding an event which occurs in a member institution’s building is subject to league approval?
Regardless, I think it’s rather ironic that we’re discussing a story on the NYT page which I can’t access because you have to freaking register. (I know, it’s free, and there’s bugmenot.com, but of all the papers that shouldn’t use registration tactics, this is the one. “All the News That’s Fit to Make You Give Us Your E-Mail Address So We Can Sell It to Advertisers.”
Bouj Says:
August 9th, 2006 at 11:01 am
I think it applies to commercial operations, or someone trying to make money off of it. Media outlets (newsapapers, TV, radio) probably have long-standing agreements that cover the legal aspect of that PSA. Maybe someone in the field could asnwer that.
MLB made YouTube take down all of its MLB content under the same auspices. Since YouTube sells advertising, they were technically making money off of MLB by rebroadcasting MLB-owned content (”Advertise with us because we get lots of hits on the baseball stuff!”). But it would be OK to record the game at home and watch it later, since I’m not trying to commercialize the rebroadcast. There are legal provisions that cover personal use of publically-broadcast multimedia (which is why it’s legal to own a VCR or DVR in the first place). Again, I’m guessing it’s similar to the Fair Use Doctrine.
Matt Moore Says:
August 9th, 2006 at 12:31 pm
It doesn’t just apply to commercial operations, it’s just that baseball doesn’t (usually?) bother to enforce their policy until money changes hands.
There was some blogger last year who wanted to show a world series game he’d taped 80s at a party, and he actually wrote the league and asked for permission. Surprisingly enough they responded and told him it was cool.
max power Says:
August 9th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
Reason #493487 that baseball blows.
your with me, bastardized cricket.
mjdReader Says:
August 9th, 2006 at 1:14 pm
According to TechDirt (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060808/1850214.shtml), you can’t copyright facts.
I’m wondering if this logic could be applied to sports video games. They couldn’t use a players image, but team and players names might be eligible.
WBRS Sports Blog Says:
August 9th, 2006 at 4:08 pm
Judge Judy is awesome!
john Says:
August 11th, 2006 at 1:48 pm
Yeah! ESPN (the underdog that it is) gets to exploit players’ name and statistics for millions of dollars without paying the players one red cent. Talk about a win for the little guy!
Ridiculous.