Home
News Post

GameSpot is reporting that a group of gamers(make that 2 guys) filed suit against EA over football exclusivity.

Quote:
"The class-action complaint focuses on Electronic Arts' actions since 2004, when Take-Two Interactive's NFL 2K5 was released at a $19.99 price point and sold more than 2.9 million copies in the US, according to NPD figures."

Member Comments
# 1 bkfount @ 06/12/08 12:11 AM
where's the facepalm smilie..
 
# 2 stoncold32 @ 06/12/08 12:13 AM
Wow, those 2 guys must wield a big stick to even get this far. Not saying anything will come of it, but more power to them.

I don't believe any of us would have a problem with EA's monopoly if we all felt we were truly getting their best effort year in & year out. But when stuff is still missing and just being re-added as "new" that was in a PS1 version, we get a little ticked and feel like were being duped.
 
# 3 bkfount @ 06/12/08 01:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoncold32
Wow, those 2 guys must wield a big stick to even get this far. Not saying anything will come of it, but more power to them.

I don't believe any of us would have a problem with EA's monopoly if we all felt we were truly getting their best effort year in & year out. But when stuff is still missing and just being re-added as "new" that was in a PS1 version, we get a little ticked and feel like were being duped.
then people should take it up with the NFL. Attacking EA for a "monopoly" on exclusive licenses was laughable in 2005, and it still is. I'm actually shocked it took this long for someone to manage to make enough noise about a lawsuit.
 
# 4 texbuk84 @ 06/12/08 01:34 AM
yeah thats something we can take up with the nfl but even Peter Moore said that they wanted to eliminate the competition in this market so i think that they are making progress but its been 4 YEARS AND MADDEN IS BASICALLY STILL THE SAME GAME. when is enough enough. i hope those guys win and that the exclusivity gets reversed and we can have some competition back in the market again.
 
# 5 Spectre @ 06/12/08 01:39 AM
Pointless

Sue the NFL for their anti-competitive practices, not EA. Sure EA engaged in maneuvers of questionable ethical integrity when they bought out every football-related license on this planet, but the NFL was the one that got the ball rolling. With the dubious handling of Spygate and the continued battle of cable companies vs. the NFL Network, there's a lot of scrutiny on the NFL. Focus the efforts on that body.
 
# 6 bkfount @ 06/12/08 07:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcxiv
I agree to a certain point, but they are scraping up all the exclusives for everything. Soon they will have CH. They already have NFL, Arena, NCAA, Nascar. If i am not wrong they have PGA as well?

ITs about time.

oh yeah, didnt at one point EA say they wanted to take Take Two completely off the Football market by getting exclusives? hmmm....
and again, none of those licenses prevent any company from making football, racing, golf, or soccer games. Leagues are allowed to license out their property, which they can decide to do exclusive like the NFL or not, like the NBA.
 
# 7 muggins @ 06/12/08 08:29 AM
Good for these guys.
 
# 8 mercalnd @ 06/12/08 10:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkfount
and again, none of those licenses prevent any company from making football, racing, golf, or soccer games. Leagues are allowed to license out their property, which they can decide to do exclusive like the NFL or not, like the NBA.
Exactly. Ruling that it's illegal/creates a monopoly to purchase X number of exclusive licenses would hurt the leagues by taking away some of their freedom over their own intellectual properties and trademarks because it would essentially limit the number of potential bidders for license, exclusive or not. It could even go as far as taking away the leagues' advantage in selling their license exclusively since fewer bidders means less money. I doubt that ever happens.
 
# 9 spankdatazz22 @ 06/12/08 10:24 AM
Quote:
The class-action complaint focuses on Electronic Arts' actions since 2004, when Take-Two Interactive's NFL 2K5 was released at a $19.99 price point and sold more than 2.9 million copies in the US, according to NPD figures. Take-Two's previous football game, ESPN NFL Football, sold fewer than 450,000 copies in the US. Meanwhile, EA dropped the price of its Madden 2005 from $49.95 to $29.95 in response.

"This vigorous competition benefited consumers," according to the suit. "Electronic Arts could have continued to compete by offering a lower price and/or a higher quality product. Instead, Electronic Arts quickly entered into a series of exclusive agreements with the only viable sports football associations in the United States: the National Football League, the Arena Football League, and NCAA Football."

With no Take-Two competitor the following year, the suit notes that Electronic Arts raised the price of Madden 2006 back to $49.95, an increase of nearly 70 percent. The suit also brings up Electronic Arts' attempted acquisition of Take-Two, saying that it "would remove one of the few companies with the ability and expertise to compete in the market for interactive football software" if EA somehow lost its exclusive deals.
Interesting. Most of us know the facts of the case, and most of us know the painful ramifications that have likely harmed videogame football from that point going forward. Don't think anything will come of the suit unfortunately, but I definitely appreciate them not taking the passive route - I'm pulling for them
 
# 10 BlackNGold @ 06/12/08 10:59 AM
Someone tried something similar last year

a Federal District Court ruled last year that the NFL’s exclusive licenseing agreemant with Reebok (similar to EA deal) does not constitute a violation of antitrust law.

http://www.chicagoiplitigation.....an-needle/

“Posted on July 24, 2007 by R. David Donoghue
Am. Needle, Inc. v. New Orleans Louisiana Saints, __ F. Supp.2d __, 2007 WL 2042764 (N.D. Ill. Jul. 11, 2007) (Moran, J.).
Judge Moran granted defendants, the NFL, NFL Properties and each of the thirty two teams (collectively the “NFL”) as well as Reebok International, Ltd. (“Reebok”), summary judgment on plaintiff’s Sherman Act antitrust claims, finding that the NFL acts through NFL Properties as a single entity for IP licensing purposes. For more than twenty years, NFL Properties licensed plaintiff to use various trademarks on its headwear. Plaintiff filed this suit after NFL Properties entered an exclusive license with Reebok, ending plaintiff’s license rights. Plaintiff argued that the NFL teams collectively, as well as in concert with Reebok, violated the antitrust laws by acting together through NFL Properties to license their collective intellectual property rights exclusively to Reebok (plaintiff argued that the NFL did not violate antitrust laws when it licensed to numerous parties, including plaintiff, through NFL Properties). But the Court held that licensing coordination between the NFL and its teams was equivalent to coordination between a corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiary. Because the Supreme Court treats corporations and their wholly-owned subsidiaries as single entities, there could be no conspiracy and no antitrust violation.“

Very unlikely they win this. They're not doing this for the 'gaming community, they are likely just looking for a payout.
 
# 11 t216 @ 06/12/08 10:59 AM
They got balls.
 
# 12 mgoblue @ 06/12/08 11:40 AM
I wish the US court system was set up to punish frivolous lawsuits like this...this is absolutely absurd. Sure, EA may suck, but they're not doing anything wrong. Hate their product, stop buying it, whatever, but suing them? Fine, next time someone posts something I hate I'm suing your ***, because that's essentially what these 2 morons are doing.

If you're suing EA, sue the jersey companies who have exclusivity for authentic NFL, NBA, NHL, every sport jerseys. Sue Ford for not letting other companies use the "Mustang" name on cars. It's the exact same damn thing, this is pure idiocy.
 
# 13 mattyg @ 06/12/08 11:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by t216
They got balls.
...for brains.

Just dumb. I get their frustrations but a lawsuit? Gimme a break...
 
# 14 loccdogg26 @ 06/12/08 11:57 AM
Competition is good for everyone.
 
# 15 daflyboys @ 06/12/08 12:09 PM
Here's the irony.....and where 2K dropped the ball a bit: 2K had the chance to make APF a totally customizeable game, both for consoles and PC. They didn't have to provide the pre-made import set of logos and uniforms, etc., but they could make the opportunity for gamers to import on their own. Gaming communities knowing this would establish anything and everything necessary to make said game customizeable as communication about this would spread like wildfire. This could not come back on 2K in any form or fashion as they're not promoting gamers to do this....only providing the avenue that they could.

Why would this work?

Just ask the company that makes MVP2005.
 
# 16 bkfount @ 06/12/08 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcxiv
It does prevent them from making a Pro sports game of that genre. It just doesnt prevent them from making a game that represents football.
no it doesn't. 2k put out APF, which pretty closely resembled pro football to me. They just failed to make it a full game and market it properly.

Obviously the NFL game is the football market for many consumers, however games like APF, if done correctly could sell better. Just because Blitz sold over a million copies with it's unique brand of football and glofication of violence, doesn't mean all games can't try to emulate the professional or NFL style of football.

If Ubisoft, MS, Sony, or someone put out a big budget generic football game done right, it would sell. It's just that no one will go there right now.
 
# 17 mercalnd @ 06/12/08 12:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcxiv
It does prevent them from making a Pro sports game of that genre. It just doesnt prevent them from making a game that represents football.
Actually no. It only prevents them from using the trademarks of the NFL and other leagues that have exclusive licensing agreements with EA. And trademarks are controlled by whoever owns them and they should be able to do with them whatever they please.

A trademark is not a genre.
 
# 18 mjb2124 @ 06/12/08 02:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgoblue
I wish the US court system was set up to punish frivolous lawsuits like this...this is absolutely absurd. Sure, EA may suck, but they're not doing anything wrong. Hate their product, stop buying it, whatever, but suing them? Fine, next time someone posts something I hate I'm suing your ***, because that's essentially what these 2 morons are doing.

If you're suing EA, sue the jersey companies who have exclusivity for authentic NFL, NBA, NHL, every sport jerseys. Sue Ford for not letting other companies use the "Mustang" name on cars. It's the exact same damn thing, this is pure idiocy.
Well said. I don't have a dog in this race (2K vs EA) and I do wish there was competition (it does breed success amongst companies), but this is one of the more frivolous lawsuits that I've seen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcxiv
I understand that, but again, they got this far for a reason.
$$$$$$$$

And it has been spent poorly IMO. I also wouldn't say they've gotten far. They've only filed a class action lawsuit. To the best of my knowledge, that doesn't require very much (aside from getting a lawyer to work with them and it would not be hard to find a lawyer to take this case as long as they get paid).

I think these guys lack common sense. However, if this is how they choose to waste their hard earned money and precious time, go for it. I'm sure their lawyer will be more than happy to take it the bank.
 
# 19 mgoblue @ 06/12/08 03:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjb2124
Well said. I don't have a dog in this race (2K vs EA) and I do wish there was competition (it does breed success amongst companies), but this is one of the more frivolous lawsuits that I've seen.



$$$$$$$$

And it has been spent poorly IMO. I also wouldn't say they've gotten far. They've only filed a class action lawsuit. To the best of my knowledge, that doesn't require very much (aside from getting a lawyer to work with them and it would not be hard to find a lawyer to take this case as long as they get paid).

I think these guys lack common sense. However, if this is how they choose to waste their hard earned money and precious time, go for it. I'm sure their lawyer will be more than happy to take it the bank.
I really really want competition too...I just don't think people are rational when they yell "monopoly"...I'm right with you, I just realize that legally there's nothing that can be done, because EA is 100% legal in this aspect.
 
# 20 lasthour @ 06/12/08 03:59 PM
Just curious, How many lawyers are there on this site?
 

« Previous12Next »

Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.