BP Comment Quick Links
| Home | Unfiltered | Articles | Newsletter | Statistics | Fantasy | Events | Radio | Glossary | Search |
![]() |
|
|
|
August 14, 2006 The Ledger DomainThe Fantasy Stats Case Ruling and Its RepercussionsFor the time being, the use of MLB player statistics for fantasy sports purposes does not require a licensing agreement with MLB Advanced Media. In St. Louis on Tuesday--4 weeks before trial was set to begin on Sept. 5th--United States District Court Judge Mary Ann Medler upheld the argument by CBC Marketing, Inc. that MLB Advanced Media (MLBAM) and the MLB Players Association (MLBPA) could not force businesses to pay for statistics used in the online sports fantasy industry. Judge Melder ordered that CBC’s Motion for Summary Judgment be granted and that the MLBPA and the MLBAM not interfere with CBC’s fantasy games. The summary judgment is seen as a decisive victory for the fantasy sports industry, which has an estimated 15 million people playing fantasy sports games, spending an estimated $1.5 billion to do so. CBC Marketing, Inc., which runs CDM Fantasy Sports, had sued MLB Advanced Media (MLBAM) and the MLB Players Association (MLBPA), claiming that statistics were part of the public domain, and therefore not a violation of player privacy rights, as claimed by the MLBAM and the MLBPA. In her conclusion, Judge Medler wrote, “[T]he court finds that the undisputed facts establish that the players do not have a right of publicity in their names and playing records as used in CBC’s fantasy games and that CBC has not violated the players’ claimed right of publicity.” She continued: “The court further finds, alternatively, that even if the players have a claimed right of publicity, the First Amendment takes precedence over such a right. The court further finds that the undisputed facts establish that the names and playing records of Major League baseball players as used in CBC’s fantasy games are not copyrightable and, therefore, federal copyright law does not preempt the players’ claimed right of publicity.” The following day, the MLBAM and MLBPA issued a joint statement announcing their intent to appeal the ruling. “We are disappointed by the Court’s decision yesterday in CBC v. MLBPA and MLBAM,” the statement read. “We expect to appeal the decision, and remain confident that we will prevail in that effort. We continue to believe that the use of the players, without their consent, to create this type of commercial venture is improper.”
|