Baseball Still Insists It Owns Facts
from the let's-try-this-again dept
For years, we've noted that Major League Baseball seems to have a problem understanding basic copyright laws. MLB tried to say that it was illegal for anyone to offer real time data concerning games, even though you cannot copyright facts. In a similar case from nearly a decade ago, the NBA lost a lawsuit to Motorola, saying that there was no violation of copyright when Motorola sent basketball scores to pagers. However, MLB came back and said that argument only applied to scores, and not any other data. This is, of course, ridiculous. Data, such as statistics or a straight description of what's happening on the field is a fact which simply cannot be copyrighted. However, that's not stopping MLB -- and the further they push this, the bigger the risk that they lose some of their huge contracts. The latest lawsuit has to do with online fantasy leagues. MLB, in its short-sighted non-wisdom decided not to grant one fantasy baseball site the right to use MLB statistics. The company decided to do so anyway, leading to the latest lawsuit. Of course, if MLB loses, it means that no fantasy sites will have to pay -- and it raises a question about baseball video games as well. A year ago, MLB granted a mostly-exclusive license to Take-Two, for it to publish video games based on real MLB information. If the organization loses this fantasy case, some video game firms may claim that as long as they just offer "factual" information within their games, they should be able to do so without a license from MLB. Of course, the silliest part of all of this is that this move seems much more likely to hurt MLB than help it. Things like fantasy baseball have helped to rejuvenate the sport by building up a lot more interest in the sport. Trying to force every online fantasy league to pay up to them is doing more harm than good, cutting off one of the avenues to build up more fans (who will spend a ton on MLB products over a lifetime) in an effort to get a few extra dollars up front. It goes back to the issue of jealousy, and one organization being upset that another is making its product even more valuable, without paying up first.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Corporations getting stupid or more vocal?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Like anyone cares about spectator sports?
Sadistic parents have a new toy to give to children -- low-tech robots made out of wood. Can be purchased here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Like anyone cares about spectator sports?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silver lining
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Interesting to see this story here...
-jim
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dealing with MLB
When we dared to purchase the baseball.tv domain, we were told in no uncertain terms that we would not be allowed/licensed to broadcast MLB games or highlights. When we tried to publish only the data that we were gathering, we were threatened with lawsuits.
In the end, our sales/marketing force (made up of former MLB players and coaches) never asked for checks for the software we provided and the company went under. It certainly was not the fault of MLB, but the attitude of the "good ole boy's club."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MLB just may be correct, legally...
But they're not claiming to copyright facts. Have you ever watched an NFL game on TV? They always have this little 30 second spot during halftime that shows still pictures of football greats (Namath, Elway, Lombardi, etc) with a voice-over that basically says, "this broadcast is the sole property of the NFL, any descriptions or accounts of the this event without the express consent of the NFL is prohibited".
Now, I'm not an attorney, but this is the line of reasoning that I think the NFL (and by extension, professional sports in the USA) are following: These events and everything that happens in them are our property. They are not public facts, but private events that you can pay a license fee to watch. If you want to let others, who have not paid to be included in this event, know about the occurences of the event, then you must pay us (the owners and propieters of the event) cold cash. If we, the owners, did not spend billions of dollars in player fees, stadiums, and all kinds of deals, there would be no statistics for you compile. We are not like a phone book, or the weather, or government meetings. We are private, for-profit, and every single aspect of this event that we put on must generate money for us. You wouldn't ask any other private company to give away its internal company statistics without consideration; we are no different.
Now, do I agree with this? Absolutely not. But the way the law is written, MLB just may have a leg to stand on. If you don't like it, then you should buy yourself your own congresmen, like MLB has done, and have them pass laws on your behalf.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
Even if that were the case, if someone went to every game and jotted down all the facts, nobody else could claim copyright on it. That would be akin to someone going to a concert and the performer saying you couldn't write about what you saw. While similar things have happened, they've always been tossed out of court because of the original arguement of the article: they're facts and facts cannot be copyrighted. If so every un-authorized biography of a celeb would be able to be prosecuted.
Of course, you could just do the really disruptive thing and give the idiots what they deserve...bad stats but they seem to be doing that to the game itself right now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
I can put anything I want into a legal disclaimer, but if the contents are not within the bounds of the actual law then the disclaimer, or at least the illegal parts, are not enforcable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
This all smacks of the arrogance so readily exhibited by the record labels in the face of song swapping. Had the labels embraced the new technology, they would have a profitable model in place by now. Instead, they continue to sue high schoolers and bully single moms. Next thing you know, MLB will be rounding up 10 year olds who talk pitching averages with their friends.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Personally, I think that the jurisdiction should..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
heh
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Like anyone cares about spectator sports?
I would argue that quite a few do. Have you been to a baseball game recently? There are kids everywhere! At least at the Washington Nationals games.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
There is a major difference between what you are describing and what the MLB is doing here. The 30 second spot you are talking about where the MLB says "this broadcast and its contents are produced by MLB... any unauthorized copying or distribution thereof without the express permission of MLB is unlawful...." is the MLB provioding notice that the "broacast" and the "public performance" of the baseball game over the air are copyrighted and owned by the MLB. Unlike factual data, i.e. stats, public performances and transmissions ARE copyrightable.
Amazing, for once is looks like Mike has the law right. CONGRATS MIKE!
One possible argument that the MLB might be trying to amke is that they own a copyright in the compilation of data that is MLB stats. However, this copyright would not extend to the facts themselves, but rather to their arrangement. I.e. if the MLB alweays puts ERA before strikeouts, before batting average against etc... that arrangement "might" be copyrightable, but I strongly doubt that the numbers themselves would be.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
Your argument would apply to most radio broadcasts, but t.v. sportcasters, which reproduce clips of games and such ( Espn's "Webgems" comes to mind) usually (and should) have a negotiated license with MLB to reproduce and rebroadcast all or a certain portion of a game.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
Ignoring your sarcasm at my understanding of the law, this last point you make is an important one, that I had wanted to mention, but seemed fairly specific for a short post. It's the Westlaw trick of copyrighting page numbers to try to monopolize the publishing of public domain legal decisions.
However, with MLB stats there would be easy ways around this, as you note. So far, though, it doesn't seem like MLB has made this specific claim at all, though they may at a future time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Like anyone cares about spectator sports?
How many of them are there on their own will, as opposed to a father-son activity? From what I have heard in the U.S., major league sports are suffering declining attendance. In Japan, a recent "shocker" on TV had famous TV actors interviewing kids on how TV should be improved, and the kids all said that TV should stop showing stupid baseball games.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Like anyone cares about spectator sports?
Not hard to look up the actual figures online and see that baseball attendance is at record highs and seems to keep getting higher. It would appear that dorpus has a problem with facts.
> In Japan, a recent "shocker" on TV had famous TV actors interviewing kids on how TV should be improved, and the kids all said that TV should stop showing stupid baseball games.
Yeah, that's right. Judge the entire sport based on what a couple of kids said. Japanese baseball has struggled somewhat, but part of the reason is that many Japanese stars have moved to the US major leagues -- meaning that attention has been focused on US baseball more than the domestic variety.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Camel Polo Enthusiast
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: MLB just may be correct, legally...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
Take two computer games, Strat-o-matic and Diamond Mind. Strat pays MLB for the use of the names, Diamond Mind doesn't. The difference appears to be that Strat produces player cards with which to play their games, and those cards could be considered collectibles. All Diamond Mind, which unlike Strat does not have a traditional game to go along with the computer version, does is use the players and their statistics, and they are very careful not to use any club names or anything that could be considered the legal property of major league baseball.
Diamond Mind isn't exactly like CDM - everyone plays seasons from the past, not the current season, which might make some difference - but if Diamond Mind's interpretation of the law is correct, I think CDM will win the lawsuit.
This is not a clear-cut case, but I'd definitely say that, based on the law, MLB has the weaker case. It's not a slam dunk for CDM, however. My guess is though, that this will never go to trial; MLB has far too much to lose to risk having a precedent set against them. There's a reason MLB has never sued anyone over this; instead they've tried bullying, blackmailing, etc.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
But the real key here isn't MLB/baseball. Fantasy baseball is certainly played, but it pales in size to fantasy football. Should MLB win, could the NFL be far behind?
I don't think they would since the NFL's business model has made it the single most successful sports league in the U.S., likely in the world. Only fantasy players would have watched the week 17 "match up" between Houston and San Francisco. Without fantasy, we just revert back to only watching the game of our favorite team.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
New Flash
[ link to this | view in thread ]
New Flash
[ link to this | view in thread ]