EA in $1 Billion Lawsuit from College Athletes

http://www.destructoid.com/ea-could-lose-1-billion-in-ncaa-athletes-suit-207835.phtml

This was parodied in a South Park episode, I hadn't heard about the actual case until now though. They're resting on a First Amendment defense, according to that article. Ur.........

Edit: USA today

edited 3rd Aug '11 8:25:00 PM by occono

Dumbo

I bet I'm not the only one who wants those athletes to win.

To be fair, though, EA would still have quite a bit of money.

edited 3rd Aug '11 11:03:16 AM by RocketDude

"Hipsters: the most dangerous gang in the US." - Pacific Mackerel

So thats what that episode was parodying.

Can't think of anything witty, so have this instead...

The amount sounds rather excessive and disproportionate to the action. Of course this entire suit is just the players trying to get money. I predict that EA will either attempt to draw things out to exhaust the plaintiffs' funds or simply settle out of court for a more reasonable sum.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

$1b sounds like much, but the actual compensation numbers for single cases seem reasonable. Low, even, IMO. It's just that it's so many cases (both in number of players and number of games).

edited 3rd Aug '11 11:05:19 AM by Octo

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

EA might draw it out, but they won't settle. If they did, another lawsuit would appear in 4 years when the current crop of players are out of college(new people getting screwed = new valid lawsuit).

I'm just surprised that EA didn't use the "NCAA gave us permission, and you signed all your rights away to them when you surrendered to their policies of earning them billions of dollars while getting nothing in return" defense.

edited 3rd Aug '11 11:08:53 AM by Swish

Take a look at the article. It breaks out how they got $1B — $1000 per athlete per likeness, times each game an athlete is featured in, tripled because the infringement was "knowing, willful, or intentional" on the part of EA.

And the first amendment argument is really weak, since there are statutes specifically about what kind of control over the use of their likeness a "public person" (like a college athlete) has.

Whether the athletes signed away those rights when they signed NCAA papers is going to be the crux of the matter.

edited 3rd Aug '11 11:10:58 AM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Maybe NCAA has a different set of guidelines than other organizations (NBA, NFL, etc) which allows players to sue?

I actually hope EA wins this because this entire lawsuit just reeks of the opportunism that is endemic to the US civil court system.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

NCAA has different guidelines that restrict a player's ability to sue the NCAA... But when a player gets a sport's scholarship or plays for a school's team, they must sign a contract with the NCAA giving them the right to use your likeness in any way they see fit, while receiving nothing in return but the "right" to play the game for the school(this is for all sports. Just in case women's lacrosse gets popular, or something).

If the NCAA sold those likeness's to EA, the players don't actually have a leg to stand on... Unless they sue the NCAA too. And they'd probably lose that lawsuit as well... Edit: Unless it was a lawsuit over anti-trust violations. That lawsuit would probably win...

edited 3rd Aug '11 11:18:32 AM by Swish

Football's a much higher-profile sport, but I didn't sign any such contract when I competed on my college's fencing team. I did sign contracts restricting my ability to sue the school or the associated athletic organizations (NCAA or FIE, depending on context), but that's it.

edited 3rd Aug '11 11:26:34 AM by Nornagest

I will keep my soul in a place out of sight, Far off, where the pulse of it is not heard.

What? Have you read the article's number, or Madruga's post repeating them?

$1000 dollar per player per likeness is NOT unreasonable, is NOT mere moneygrabbing. If at all, it's too low.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

Whenever there's a discussion involving a lawsuit, ANY lawsuit, there's always at least one person who just assumes that the lawsuit is a frivolous moneygrab. It depresses me.

I hope EA perishes in flames and the entire rotten system with the company. I know they WON'T, but hope springs eternal and all that.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

Sadly if EA loses they'll just engage in more cheap money grubbing tactics in order to make up for the loss.

Frankly, I don't see how it isn't the college students scrounging for extra cash. Probably for more College funds. Because being immortalized in a game that sells means you've got popularity on their side. And doing this means they'll lose it instead. It's a step backwards in a way.

And yes, if they NCAA sold the rights to EA, then they've got nothing to go on as is. It's just a game. The royalties issues really holds little water in this case, since it's just a face and nothing more. Which they already signed away.

Quest 64 thread

It's just a game? Really?

Stop and think about how much money they're making off those players, man.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

You have no idea what you are talking about. if EA was making mucho grande money off MY image and the image of my fellow players, I'd be demanding some sort of payment.

The south park episode that talks about this covers it perfectly.

And no, they dont make popularity off this. No one is going to go "HEY I SAW YOU IN A VIDEO GAME, LET ME GIVE YOU STUFF"

And it may be a video game, but its a video game that makes alot of money off of real life people. If it was a FTP charity game or something, then its different.

edited 3rd Aug '11 12:11:51 PM by Thorn14

^Especially not when it's an EA Sports game.

"Hipsters: the most dangerous gang in the US." - Pacific Mackerel

"Being immortalized"? That assumes everybody wants their image to be seen everywhere. I for one wouldn't.

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

^Well, it's different with sports in general.

"Hipsters: the most dangerous gang in the US." - Pacific Mackerel

It doesn't matter whether they want it or not. They got immortalized in the game by being shown in there. People will recognize them. This doesn't mean they will get free stuff, or anything. But you gain popularity from experiences. The more you're seen, the more you're known.

And frankly, you signed a contract that allowed it. You didn't read the fine print. That's your own fault. Bit players don't get money half the time. That's the way the world works. Demanding you want the money because you got an appearance won't work unless they actually stole your image. Which, in this case, didn't happen. They still have nothing to go on here.

edited 3rd Aug '11 12:19:27 PM by Hydronix

Quest 64 thread

No one is going to recognize them. They'll get just as much fame in the game as they will in college arenas, even less. Unless you are a star player, you're going to be a number and a jersey, thats it. NO ONE is going to get in the NFL because they were in a video game.

And no, the players didn't sign the contract, NCAA did.

edited 3rd Aug '11 12:23:51 PM by Thorn14

Even if they did sign it, a contract's existence is not infinitely legally enforceable. There are limits, and 'I get to make billions of dollars off of you while you play for the exposure' is a pretty obvious place to start drawing lines in the sand.

Furthermore, I think Guantanamo must be destroyed.

People will recognize them, because they see them. Not every player will be recognized, of course, but some will. That's just how being immortalized in a video game works. People recognize unimportant monsters in video games, so why wouldn't they recognize other bit players? You give them no credit, instead of little.

And the "player" signed the NCAA contract. The NCAA may have given it over to EA to use. Outside of trust issues, do they have any actual law breaking stuff to go on? Likewise, getting 1,000 dollars per person is mostly useless, since lawyers cost a lot. At worst, EA loses 1 billion plus the lawyer fee. This won't hurt them at all considering how much money they make. On the other hand, the college students won't get as much as they wanted.

Likewise, suing for 1,000 dollars each really... is just a quick-cash grab. There's no point in this at all. If they cared, they would've tried to get more money for that, but this is just so small that it's chump change. EA'll make it back extremely quickly, considering how much they sell.

The bigger issue is what it'll do to their reputation. (not that it's good, but...) If they let them win, other players will try to sue. If they lose, some people may think they don't give players credit for using their likeness.(and unless they actually make up names for the likenesses... I don't see how they're not giving them credit, so they got nothing to lose on that end)

Which is more morals than breaking the law. Morals don't win court cases. Laws do. They can get pissed off all they want, but unless it's breaking the law, the chance of them winning is pretty much nonexistant.

edited 3rd Aug '11 12:33:16 PM by Hydronix

Quest 64 thread

I'm not sure exactly how you think they'd go about getting more money than the law EA's violating says they get.

Infinite Tree: an experimental story

Good point. I'd be able to read the article if the site wouldn't stop redirecting to some Borderlands 2 advertisement. So my bad on that.

Quest 64 thread