+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Bye-bye Gamecasts?

  1. #1
    Waiting for the playoffs... Big_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Southeast of Disorder
    Posts
    23,663

    Bye-bye Gamecasts?

    http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,21...w=wn_tophead_1

    Baseball Throws Web a Curve

    Among the major professional sports leagues in the United States, Major League Baseball has consistently been the most innovative in covering its games and promoting its league online. In the past three years, MLB and its interactive division, MLB Advanced Media, has introduced dozens of online products, from radio shows to live video feeds of most major league games.

    But during this off-season, MLB is on a quest to assert what it considers are its exclusive rights to transmit real-time information about its games online. And some of its partners aren't buying it.

    The battle is being waged over what are commonly called gamecasts: real-time descriptions of baseball games, including who's batting, what pitches are thrown, the game situation and the outcome of each pitch. These online presentations of games are a standard feature of many sports websites, from MLB's own site, to ESPN.com, SI.com, Yahoo and CBS Sportsline.

    "If someone is communicating information about a game in real time, on a pitch-by-pitch basis, that's an exhibition of that game," said Bob Bowman, the CEO of MLB Advanced Media. "There's no difference, in our eyes, between exhibiting a game using text and graphics and doing it on radio or television."

    Using that argument, MLB says that it is entitled to a license fee, or that some other accommodation needs to be reached regarding gamecasts. What it is sure of is that anyone doing a gamecast needs to secure the rights to do so from MLB.

    However, some of the other sites and companies involved in producing these sorts of gamecasts disagree. ESPN subsidiary SportsTicker has recently agreed to use statistics provided by MLB in their updates, but ESPN emphasizes that the agreement covers just SportsTicker and has nothing to do with its gamecasts.

    "Our recent agreement is a small piece and a reflection of a positive, wide-ranging relationship with MLB, not a statement of either side's legal rights," said ESPN in a statement. "To characterize it as anything more is an overstatement."

    The legal issues around sports-score updates are cloudy. In 1996, the National Basketball Association sued STATS Inc., a provider of real-time statistical information, and Motorola, the pager manufacturer, to prevent them from offering real-time information on NBA games while they were in progress. This information included the time remaining in the game, the score and who was in possession of the ball.

    The case was first heard in district court in New York, where the court held that STATS and Motorola were using the NBA's proprietary data -- the real-time data of the games -- to make a profit in violation of New York state law.

    But the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit later overturned that ruling, stating that since the underlying facts of the game, such as the score, aren't copyrightable and since STATS and Motorola had spent their own time and money collecting that data, the service could continue.

    "We fully support the conclusion in the Motorola case," said MLB's Bowman. "We don't think of broadcasting of the score every half-inning as an exhibition of the game. But if you're describing what happens every time the pitcher moves his arm, that is an exhibition of the game. Anything more granular than every half-inning is something we think might be a problem."

    Mark Conrad, a professor of sports and new media law at Fordham University, says that the issue is unclear.

    "It's a tug of war between copyright and the exemption made for news," said Conrad. "It's tough for a court to find guidance on issues like this. There's probably a line there somewhere, between every half-inning and a television broadcast. This isn't an issue that's going to go away."

    MLB is continuing to add new features to its gamecasts. For the 2004 season, it will add a "ball tracker" that will chart the speed, location and trajectory of each pitch in the game. These numbers will be crunched, and a new statistic, a "Nasty Factor," will describe how hard a pitcher is to hit. Also, the speed of ground balls will be measured, to give some idea of how hard a play is to make.

    "We think these new features are going to be something that fans become very interested in," said Bowman. "We think they'll end up being used on television and at the ballpark, as well as online."

    To get this information online, fans will have to subscribe to a new, "ultra" version of gamecast. Bowman says that the service will cost several dollars a month. The basic version of the gamecasts will still be available for free.

    As for other sites and their gamecasts, Bowman is optimistic that a solution will be reached that everyone can live with.

    "There are some people who are in the camp of saying that they've collected data, and they can do what they want with it," said Bowman. "But in general, most people, while they may not salute our position, they understand it and are working with us toward a solution. We have rights, and we're going to protect them."

    Fantasy Baseball: Larrupin' Lou's; New York Knights.

  2. #2
    I assume this won't affect MLB.com's own Gamecasts, which are the closest to real time anyway.
    ~John

  3. #3
    Released Outright ACPS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    9,712
    Such a shame, I use CBS Sportsline pretty regularly during the season. Just another example of how expensive things are getting. The day where we have to pay by the hour to even use the internet? It's coming...

  4. #4
    MLB needs to understand that Gamecast and similar products foster greater interest in the game, and probably produce indirect revenue from people attending more games than they otherwise would have, buying more licensed products, etc. Of course, you could make a similar argument about allowing this site to retain its original name.

    btw, Could Congress start charging news outlets a fee for the right to cover presidential news conferences? :rolleyes:

  5. #5
    Baseball understand????? HA

    They made a major error when they took away control of the websites from the local teams 3 years ago. Certainly their should be a shared portal like nfl.com, but each team should be able to tailor for their market. Hey even me a Boston fan got shivers when I heard Bob Sheppard welcome me to the official website of the Yankees, and I miss Sherm Feller who was on redsox.com

  6. #6
    B-B.com Bench Coach patrick.o's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    off the path...
    Posts
    13,527
    Originally posted by nufced1918
    They made a major error when they took away control of the websites from the local teams 3 years ago.
    And another when they stopped radio broadcasts from being available online except directly from them - for a fee. So some kid who lives in Idaho, who has no local team that he can tune in on his radio, can't get exposed to teams without paying for it?

    MLB is greedy and shortsighted. It's a shame that these people are the wardens of our game.
    Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds - Robert Nesta Marley

  7. #7
    NYYF Legend

    2JAY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Lexington Ky
    Posts
    17,631
    Originally posted by patrick.o

    And another when they stopped radio broadcasts from being available online except directly from them - for a fee. So some kid who lives in Idaho, who has no local team that he can tune in on his radio, can't get exposed to teams without paying for it?

    MLB is greedy and shortsighted. It's a shame that these people are the wardens of our game.
    Which is all the more absurd when you consider that MLB wants to draw more fans yet makes decision after decision, that only serves to drive the average fan away.

  8. #8
    Don't look at me like that smr15's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    West Milford, NJ
    Posts
    7,106
    Greedy Bastard-s.
    .Of all the things in life I've lost, I miss my mind the most.

  9. #9
    that's right
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    back in time
    Posts
    9,119
    Originally posted by ACPS
    The day where we have to pay by the hour to even use the internet? It's coming...
    No it's not. As soon as you start charging people/companies/business/etc by the hour not only do you open up a whole new can of worms, but you also cause a significant decrease in internet usage. The internet is not owned by anyone. It's a all about access providers, and it's in the broadband service providers best interests to charge a single, monthly fee. If they started charging by the hour, you think people would still use the internet enough to spend 40-45 dollars a month? Doubtful.

    Not only that, but you start running into issues with educational institutions and who is accessing the internet for what purposes. (research, etc).

    The internet is a system of connections between the world's computers, and the most profit is to be had from charging a flat rate for unlimited access.

  10. #10
    Released Outright ACPS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    9,712
    Originally posted by bakntime
    Not only that, but you start running into issues with educational institutions and who is accessing the internet for what purposes. (research, etc).
    I think it would be preclude .edu, .gov, etc. sites and only be relegated to .com's. It's already done with gambling and porn sites.

    The internet is a system of connections between the world's computers, and the most profit is to be had from charging a flat rate for unlimited access.
    Tell that to Jim.

  11. #11
    NYYF Legend


    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    baltimore, md
    Posts
    6,055
    Originally posted by ACPS


    I think it would be preclude .edu, .gov, etc. sites and only be relegated to .com's. It's already done with gambling and porn sites.



    Tell that to Jim.
    that's simply because gambling and porn are vices. in short, the market bears it.

    i wouldn't surf the net if i was charged by the hour. neither would you. the know this.

  12. #12
    Released Outright ACPS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    9,712
    Originally posted by ojo


    that's simply because gambling and porn are vices. in short, the market bears it.

    i wouldn't surf the net if i was charged by the hour. neither would you. the know this.
    Not to surf, but to access sites like this. Why do you think we always have to click on ads? Because it would go under if there wasn't the money to keep the site up. And the more the internet expands, the more costly it's going to be to keep it up.

  13. #13
    Released Outright
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Arlington, Va
    Posts
    1,768
    Originally posted by ACPS

    It's already done with gambling and porn sites.
    An outrage!

  14. #14
    that's right
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    back in time
    Posts
    9,119
    Originally posted by ACPS


    Not to surf, but to access sites like this. Why do you think we always have to click on ads? Because it would go under if there wasn't the money to keep the site up. And the more the internet expands, the more costly it's going to be to keep it up.

    But that's not charging by the hour for "the internet", that's charging by the hour/click/visit/membership for a specific site. You're lumping internet access providers and internet web sites into the same category. They're not. There already are web sites that charge for access, and while those may increase, there will always be free sites, because that's the only way people will continue to use the net.

    Internet access will continue to be flat rate for the forseeable future.

    Originally posted by ACPS
    Tell that to Jim.
    Jim is not an internet service provider. He runs an individual website/server.

  15. #15
    NYYF Triple Crown

    Bluesexy's daddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Albuquerque,NM,USA
    Posts
    2,812
    Originally posted by patrick.o

    So some kid who lives in Idaho, who has no local team that he can tune in on his radio, can't get exposed to teams without paying for it?

    MLB is greedy and shortsighted. It's a shame that these people are the wardens of our game.
    A crew of scam artists got themselves a nice paycheck by convincing our great commissioner and his sidecick goons that they would make sooo much money on the internet that it would DWARF their stadium , TV, radio, and licensing revenues COMBINED! Pud Selig took it hook line and sinker. Anyone not blinded and stunted by their own raging greed would have known better. Obviously Pud and his goons did NOT know better. If you think back to when this particular outrage was started you might remember Bud drooling like a babby about the "billions" that would soon be rolling in. Bud clearly stated that this "new revenue stream" would be the salvation of failing "small market" teams (like a certain sorry team in Milwaukee with a new stadium and no fans). They are still chasing that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

    At this point I don't know if Selig is so stupid that he still beleives that the billions will soon be falling from the sky or he is simply too cowardly to admit that he and his but@ kissing goons got taken for a ride. I'm sure that the millions that the "consultants" ran off with seemed like chump change at the time but the fact is MLB got coned by a standard "money machine" con. He bought the box but the cash isn't there, and it never will be.

    Any con man will tell you that the greedier and less honest the pigeon, the easier they are to con. Pigeon Selig should be ashamed of himself.

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts