Brady Sues Yahoo

I hope this hasn't been posted yet. I just saw it on the Drudge Report.

Brady is sueing Yahoo for using his image to promote the Yahoo Fantasy Football league.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1207061brady1.html

Manning would have sent them roses and chocolates to use his image.

The players and owners should be smart enough to not bite the hand that feeds them. A lot of their income comes through fantasy sports. A lot of Sunday Ticket subscriptions are from Fantasy Football owners. That's how I am with baseball, I don't have a favorite team but subscribe to Extra Innings due to Fantasy Baseball. If they try to take my Fantasy Baseball away from me, they'll lose my Extra Innings money and I won't be the only one.

Just be happy that Yahoo!, etc, leagues, contribute to the Salary Cap through Sunday Ticket subscriptions, Tommy.

The players and owners should be smart enough to not bite the hand that feeds them.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but the problem is that if you let one do it; it establishes a precedent and then you can't protect your image when others want to use it maybe for something you would rather not be associated with......

.................say for condom advertising???

Gumby said:

Yeah, but the problem is that if you let one do it; it establishes a precedent and then you can't protect your image when others want to use it maybe for something you would rather not be associated with......

.................say for condom advertising???

Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking...well, except the condom part, though that's a pretty good example!

Yahoo should know better, it's not exactly a gray area: you just can't use someone's image or likeness to promote a product without their permission.

Gumby said:

Yeah, but the problem is that if you let one do it; it establishes a precedent and then you can't protect your image when others want to use it maybe for something you would rather not be associated with......

.................say for condom advertising???

Click to expand...

Well they need to work it out. There's been rumblings about baseball trying to stop commercial enterprises from running fantasy leagues by not allowing the names of the players. Instead of owning Coco Crisp I would have to own CF, BRS, or something like that. With the purpose being that MLB could monopolize fantasy sports and charge an arm and a leg.

No thanks. If Tom doesn't want his likeness on things, he can get a job as, say, an accountant.

i m not surprised because hes not the highest paid QB in the NFL

FortLauderdaleBroncosFan said:

i m not surprised because hes not the highest paid QB in the NFL

Click to expand...

And thank god for that! He's worth more than Payton and plays for much less, how awesome is that.

BelichickFan said:

Well they need to work it out. There's been rumblings about baseball trying to stop commercial enterprises from running fantasy leagues by not allowing the names of the players. Instead of owning Coco Crisp I would have to own CF, BRS, or something like that. With the purpose being that MLB could monopolize fantasy sports and charge an arm and a leg.

No thanks. If Tom doesn't want his likeness on things, he can get a job as, say, an accountant.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't matter what we think, under US law you can't use someone's likeness. Names and factual information (like statistics), however, don't count as intellectual property so MLB would need congress to pass a new law if they wanted to do that. Fortunately Tom Brady is covered under existing law, and it wouldn't matter if he was an accountant: his likeness is still protected.

Pujo said:

No, it doesn't matter what we think, under US law you can't use someone's likeness. Names and factual information (like statistics), however, don't count as intellectual property so MLB would need congress to pass a new law if they wanted to do that. Fortunately Tom Brady is covered under existing law, and it wouldn't matter if he was an accountant: his likeness is still protected.

Click to expand...

If they keep it to prohibiting a picture, fine. But MLB has been trying to claim that the name is intellectual property. I'm not sure they'd need a new law, more an interpretatin of an existing law.

Regardless the greedy owners and players need to be careful and realize how much of their viewing audience is solely due to Fantasy Sports.

Pujo said:

Yahoo should know better, it's not exactly a gray area: you just can't use someone's image or likeness to promote a product without their permission.

Click to expand...

Exactly! What was Yahoo thinking?

BelichickFan said:

Well they need to work it out. There's been rumblings about baseball trying to stop commercial enterprises from running fantasy leagues by not allowing the names of the players. Instead of owning Coco Crisp I would have to own CF, BRS, or something like that. With the purpose being that MLB could monopolize fantasy sports and charge an arm and a leg.

No thanks. If Tom doesn't want his likeness on things, he can get a job as, say, an accountant.

Click to expand...

No, Yahoo has to seek permission to use images promoting it's product.

BelichickFan said:

If they keep it to prohibiting a picture, fine. But MLB has been trying to claim that the name is intellectual property. I'm not sure they'd need a new law, more an interpretatin of an existing law.

Regardless the greedy owners and players need to be careful and realize how much of their viewing audience is solely due to Fantasy Sports.

Click to expand...

Baseball is being run by the three stooges.

Every 5 year old knew 3 or 4 players couldn't suddenly attain the power to break Babe Ruth's, (Maris) record.

The commissioner also owns two of the teams, one of which, (Expos) he uses like a dummy hand in bridge to stock the Yankees and Red Sox.

Let's not compare that Banana republic to a real sport league and real business issues.

BradyFan83 you're next.

BelichickFan said:

If they keep it to prohibiting a picture, fine. But MLB has been trying to claim that the name is intellectual property. I'm not sure they'd need a new law, more an interpretatin of an existing law.

Regardless the greedy owners and players need to be careful and realize how much of their viewing audience is solely due to Fantasy Sports.

Click to expand...

I know MLB is claiming differently, but I haven't heard of any legal precedent for a name counting as intellectual property (it can't be a trademark or nobody else could ever call their kid Tom Brady, it obviously can't be a patent, and factual information isn't subject to copyright - those are the only three types of intellectual property that exist under US law). Someone could still get in trouble for using the name to imply an endorsement (Spike Lee tried to claim that SpikeTV was using his likeness but dropped the suit when the court ordered him to place money in escrow for SpikeTV's legal bills since it was likely he would lose the case), but the factual use of statistics, including names, is not copyrightable. MLB's claim, by the way, is that only the stats (numbers) are in the public domain and the name is copyrighted, but I'm 99.9% sure that would be rejected by any judge out there since numbers are useless without the associated labels.

Besides, if it were the case, why would baseball own the copyright? It would be owned by the parents of the child under the doctrine of Prior Art (since they were the first to use the name and can prove it).

As far as greedy owners, remember that Yahoo needs the NFL more than the NFL needs Yahoo, it should be Yahoo who's careful about not biting the hand that feeds it.

Tom is absolutely in the right here, they are making money by using his likeness to appear as if he is promoting their product. How much money does Yahoo! make from this? Likely a decent portion of that money will now go to Tom! It may seem petty, but imagine if you came across your picture in an ad for some business, you would not be happy that someone was making money with your likeness without your permission.

Imagine if Nivian was using this image to promote their anti-aging hand cream:


I'm sure that it will only be a matter of time before the old man in this picture will complain.

Looks like there will be 5 other complainants.

Peyton Manning is suing Yahoo or not using his image. :bricks:

BelichickFan said:

Regardless the greedy owners and players need to be careful and realize how much of their viewing audience is solely due to Fantasy Sports.

Click to expand...

Don't remind me. But it's like the new age half-wit fringe of sports fandom. Houshmazilli...LOL Conditioned to care less who wins or loses or flies under the fantasy radar making all the spectacular little plays that count on the field in real game situations, as long as the guy they picked or got stuck with produces often hollow measurable stats that a fantasy game revolves around. It has really lowered the bar on fan appreciation of what it takes to win championships in sports. Something your namesake oddly understands better than most.

Besides the NFL doesn't need fantasy to fuel the engine, as baseball likely does, because gambling has that well covered.