Will this have any impact on OOTP9?

[Exodor]

The Supreme Court considering hearing fantasy baseball case.

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court justices were spending part of their time last week on fantasy baseball, but not because summer is near and they were bored with the legal work. Rather, the justices were deciding whether to take up a billion-dollar dispute over whether for-profit, fantasy games on the Internet have a free-speech right to use the names and performance statistics of famous athletes.

If the justices vote to hear the appeal from Major League Baseball, the outcome could have a far-reaching impact, including on the entertainment industry. If the justices were to rule that fantasy sports games have a free-speech right to use the names of famous players, it could cast doubt on some licensing deals for celebrities.

The legal dispute arose four years ago when Major League Baseball Advanced Media, which represents the players and owners, signed licensing deals for fantasy games with a few big companies, including Yahoo, ESPN, Fox Sports and CBS Sportsline. At the same time, Major League Baseball ended earlier deals with dozens of leagues, games and websites that had offered fantasy games.

One of the jilted providers, C.B.C. Distribution and Marketing in St. Louis, went to court and last year won a double-header victory in the U.S. Court of Appeals there. The judges ruled that the fantasy game provider had a 1st Amendment right to use the names and statistics of major league players, and it was free to ignore the earlier licensing deal.

They haven't agreed to hear the case yet but if they do will OOTP still be able to include MLB rosters?

[Markus Heinsohn]

MLB would lose an appeal, I'm sure about that.

[Puckett guy]

No more worry on this issue. Note the following...

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Monday refused to step into a dispute between a fantasy sports business and professional baseball.

Without comment, the justices declined to hear the case involving a segment of the $1.5 billion fantasy sports industry in the United States, in which participants manage imaginary teams based on the real-life performances of professional players.

The lawsuit involves C.B.C. Distribution and Marketing Inc., a Missouri company unable to obtain a license from a subsidiary of Major League Baseball to use players' names in C.B.C.'s fantasy baseball games.

The Missouri company sued, saying it did not need a license to continue to sell its fantasy baseball games on its Web site.

The baseball players' union jumped into the case on the league's side, alleging a state law violation of the players' publicity rights — the ability to profit from the commercial use of a person's name.

A federal court and the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis ruled in favor of the fantasy baseball business, saying that enforcing state law rights would violate C.B.C.'s right of free speech protected by the First Amendment.

The National Football League Players Association supported professional baseball's request that the Supreme Court hear the case.

The case is Major League Baseball Advanced Media v. C.B.C., 07-1099.

[The Wolf]

That settles that. No one can own news, and no one can own history. Not even the MLB.

[Giants44]

got to love the stupidity/arrogance of MLB leadership. Lets squeeze every penny out of our customers by alienating the hell out of them.

[bailey]

Originally Posted by Giants44

got to love the stupidity/arrogance of MLB leadership. Lets squeeze every penny out of our customers by alienating the hell out of them.

Was I dreaming, or were they also sending threatening letters to Little League teams using names like "Red Sox"?

[Bishop]

Originally Posted by bailey

Was I dreaming, or were they also sending threatening letters to Little League teams using names like "Red Sox"?

More like a nightmare, but yeah, it's true.

[CHCfan]

"Sure, I'd like to tape a baseball game without the express written consent of Major League Baseball, but that's just not the way it works."

-Hank Hill