Turns Out Major League Baseball Doesn't Own Stats, After All
from the strikeout dept
A few years ago, the folks at Major League Baseball Advanced Media, better known as MLB.com, decided that despite all copyright law to the contrary, they actually owned the rights to factual information about baseball games. One thing that is consistent in copyright law is that you cannot copyright facts. However, MLB.com tried all sorts of contortions to suggest that they did, in fact, own the facts -- and no one else could use them. This came to a head earlier this year, when MLB.com refused to license official player names and stats to an online fantasy league. That league recognized that the players' names and stats are factual information and forged ahead with its service -- not paying baseball a dime. The company that provided the fantasy league, CBC, proactively filed a lawsuit asking for a declaratory judgment, knowing that MLB was likely to sue them. MLB's response was to claim that it wasn't really a copyright case at all, but about the right to publicity -- and the right to control how others use your likeness. It seems that this defense has failed.Richard was kind enough to submit that the federal court hearing the case has sided with the fantasy league, saying they can continue to use the names and stats, since they're in the public domain and there is no violation of the right of publicity. The court noted that there is no indication that CBC is using the names and stats to suggest these players "endorse" or are associated with the fantasy league. Also, there's no commercial harm to the players. As the court notes, if anything, "this case actually enhances the marketability of the players." The court notes that, even if the right of publicity were violated, the First Amendment would protect the use of this data, because it is "historical fact," and just because CBC makes money on their service, it does not take away their First Amendment rights. Finally, the court also notes (once again) the point that facts are not copyrightable. In other words, MLB lost this case on every single argument. What will be interesting is to see the fallout from this decision. Will other fantasy leagues stop paying as well? Also, baseball (and other sports) have made a lucrative practice out of licensing such information to video game makers as well -- and it seems likely this ruling would apply to them as well. Of course, if MLB were smart, they would view this as a good thing. Getting more real info about real players out there in fantasy and video games should lead to more fans and more interest in the overall sport -- leading to many more opportunities to make money.
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
Good....and bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
why was ANYONE paying for this in the first place, it shouldnt cost THAT MUCH to goto court to prove that yes, facts are public domain.
if this is happening just now because ppl wer afraid of being sued, that is fucking terrible, it sohuldnt cost that much money to win an obious court case.
fucking a
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ?
It is difficult to construct a real world parallel for an actor and an athlete. A comment above hints at the distinction: using an athlete's name to promote a fantasy site requires their permission. Posting their game stats next to their name is not an endorsement or "use" of their name – it is a reporting of historical facts. If their were a fantasy league for Hollywood actors, you could conceivable list gate receipts next to their names and gain the same use protection afforded fantasy baseball sites in the decision described above.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ?
The protection for both groups "names" is equal.
An actor could do nothing about say a site like imdb.com listing all the movies he appeared in because these would be facts/stats
But now if imdb tried to say imply the actor endorsed the site, by say either makeing his face part of the logo he could stop them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ?
thats one reason you see the "no one dead or alive" even in fantasy/sci-fi movies.
Also if youare old enough to remember the early NFL game you would have a mix of names and numbers (eg: number 16 completes a pass to number 80...Touchdown S.F)
The union had to get agrement from a number of stars at the time and now the licence is all names/numbers/teams
and everybody gets a small cut of the paycheck (retirement fund?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By MLB's reasoning...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MLBvNFL
For actuall gameplay THAT where it comes to pay, an animation is another thing that might get by but footage is owned by the specific sport
GAMES are team/player "likes & licences" that have the user controlling said player.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ugh...
I suspect that there are way too many lawyers out there with way too much time on their hands. The whole concept that mlb would even consider the notion that they own public facts is bizzare to the extreme. Then again... what did they have to loose? If they pull it off they get paid, big time. In the end it's always about getting paid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ugh...
So by refusing to license one company, MLB has opened the flood gates so that no other company will pay anymore. Those who have licences will not pay after the their license expires, or may even try to get out of those license contracts.
MLB was greedy, and now they're going to pay for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ugh...
be *new* sites will tell them to take a flying leap.
gun, foot, aim, fire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can they get their money back?
Since they've been wrongfully charged, is there any law stating they can't ask for a refund?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can they get their money back?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's Still a Dull game
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sports licensing
Now, video games is a different matter. Baseball isn't the best example -- imagine something like football or basketball, where it's much more difficult to represent the game from pure statistics. Video games are more a representation of the game than they are a mathematical recreation of it, and the leagues and league players' associations are very protective of the way that they're portrayed. I used to produce web content for a large game company, and every time we wrote an article about a sports game we had to send it to the players' association for approval, so they could make sure that we weren't defaming their clients. Put a player's likeness in the game and you're playing in the same arena. The first game company that looks at this decision and says, "Hey -- we don't have to pay the licensing fees anymore!" should invest in a quality legal team, because they're in for a fight.
Sooner or later that's going to happen, particularly since EA has been snapping up exclusive rights deals with the major leagues. One other company is going to get sick of dealing with generic pseudo-players and will decide to test the legal implications of putting Peyton Manning in a game that lacks an official NFL license. It will be interesting to see how that plays out; right now I can't forecast a winner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One other company is going to get sick of dealing with generic pseudo-players and will decide to test the legal implications of putting Peyton Manning in a game that lacks an official NFL license.
>>
My feeling is that the NFL will win a case like that. The player's likeness, the NFL teams jerseys and logos, etc. are not public domain and are not facts. In a case like that I think it makes sense for the NFL to be able to retain control over those. Not to mention, EA does actually get official NFL endorsement by NFL players via their license, they get air time during games and that would certainly not be possible for a non-licensed company.
If the leagues want to make money off of licensing fantasy data, they should really approach it more like they do video games. Have a few, high caliber sites that pay the licensing fees and in return get official endorsements, promotion during games, access to use team logos, themes, branding, etc. In this way the league would actually be adding value to those sites and they would likely be more popular as a result.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
what about live stats
It seems to me that facts are facts and that although you clearly could not replay the FOX feed you could watch it live and give your own commentary in a podcast as soon as the play occured.
But the legal precedents will probably take a couple more years. This baseball fantasy case has taken a year and a half to get to this point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
B: You can podcast a game I would imagine, maybe. You won't be able to do it for profit though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's no surprise to us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
players names
You see this alot in the old school madden teams
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]