MLB trying to Copyright Stats, continued

[Unassisted]

Originally Posted by Yachtzee

You don't think MLB.com would love to have all the web traffic from discussion boards in-house? Why let boards like Redszone draw fans away from the MLB.com discussion boards? They sell ad space over there, so competition from other message boards draws visitors away and negatively impacts their ad revenue. They could easily use it to shut down all online discussion groups and message boards that aren't a part of MLB Advanced Media.

Slippery slope is very much a concern here. No one thought the RIAA would sue young children for downloading a few songs off the internet, but they have. Copyright law is seeing a great deal of abuse right now. I'd question the motives of anyone seeking to expand copyright, because if you don't, you may end up with a situation where fair use is a thing of the past.

I don't buy that side of the slippery slope, either. You don't give MLB enough credit. They know that if they bottle up team discussion and fantasy games inside their own walled garden, the stakes will be ridiculously high and they'd have to do all of the work and do it well.

Remember that the commissioner spent most of his professional career selling cars. He knows the value of getting a message out about his product, but more than anything else, he also believes in the value of a tightly-controlled marketplace. By licensing stats on a fee-based system, MLB could let just enough water out of the hose to keep the garden watered and avoid paying for water that goes into the neighbors' gardens, unless the neighbors pay. I am in no way reading this legal action as an indication that MLB wants to have the only garden in town.

[Yachtzee]

Originally Posted by Unassisted

I don't buy that side of the slippery slope, either. You don't give MLB enough credit. They know that if they bottle up team discussion and fantasy games inside their own walled garden, the stakes will be ridiculously high and they'd have to do all of the work and do it well.

Remember that the commissioner spent most of his professional career selling cars. He knows the value of getting a message out about his product, but more than anything else, he also believes in the value of a tightly-controlled marketplace. By licensing stats on a fee-based system, MLB could let just enough water out of the hose to keep the garden watered and avoid paying for water that goes into the neighbors' gardens, unless the neighbors pay. I am in no way reading this legal action as an indication that MLB wants to have the only garden in town.

You do realize you are talking about a group of people who had to cancel the World Series, a World Series that has been held in times of war and has even survived an earthquake, simply because millionaires and billionaires couldn't decide how to equitably divide the massive piles of cash they make playing a game? MLB has a history of being penny wise and pound foolish. I don't have so much faith in them knowing when to draw the line when it comes to foregoing short-terms gains in favor of long-term growth and public goodwill. Even just recently they just about shot themselves in the butt with the MLB Extra Innings deal. It took public outcry and political pressure to get them to recognize the short-sightedness of the deal they were negotiating.

[Unassisted]

Originally Posted by Yachtzee

You do realize you are talking about a group of people who had to cancel the World Series, a World Series that has been held in times of war and has even survived an earthquake, simply because millionaires and billionaires couldn't decide how to equitably divide the massive piles of cash they make playing a game? MLB has a history of being penny wise and pound foolish. I don't have so much faith in them knowing when to draw the line when it comes to foregoing short-terms gains in favor of long-term growth and public goodwill. Even just recently they just about shot themselves in the butt with the MLB Extra Innings deal. It took public outcry and political pressure to get them to recognize the short-sightedness of the deal they were negotiating.

That's an example that has more to do with hard feelings than revenue. This commissioner has seen a 6-fold increase in revenue during his tenure. Baseball was making about $1 billion/year when Bud ascended to the commissioner's office and now it's making $6 billion/year.

Bud may look like a bull in a china shop when left to his own devices on PR, but he has made baseball's money tree into a giant redwood.

[Yachtzee]

Originally Posted by Unassisted

That's an example that has more to do with hard feelings than revenue. This commissioner has seen a 6-fold increase in revenue during his tenure. Baseball was making about $1 billion/year when Bud ascended to the commissioner's office and now it's making $6 billion/year.

Bud may look like a bull in a china shop when left to his own devices on PR, but he has made baseball's money tree into a giant redwood.

Is that because of or in spite of Bud's leadership? I can't help but think that a lot of revenue growth during Bud's tenure is a result of taking advantage of externalities, such as the growth of the internet, cable, and satellite, leading to greater competition for broadcast rights, rather than any kid of business acumen exhibited by those running MLB.

The two areas he's succeeded on his own accord, as I see it, is in bringing about a consensus on realignment and interleague play. And personally, I'd dump interleague play in favor of a balanced schedule that would give the Reds more games against old rivals like the Dodgers, Giants and Braves. Other than that, he strikes me as a "right place, right time" kind of guy when it comes to success (increased revenues) and a PR disaster when it comes to presenting ideas that appear to be under his own leadership (Labor relations, contraction, All-Star games, Extra Innings negotiations, steroids).

[jojo]

Originally Posted by Falls City Beer

Intellectual property law is simply absurd in most cases.

HIGH FIVE

[vaticanplum]

I wonder how the players feel about their names and personal statistics being copyrighted, and whether MLB has bothered to ask them or consider what actions they might take if it were to happen.

If I were a baseball player, I'd be none too happy about an organization attempting to copyright my personal achievements. Would I be subject to legal action if I signed my name and noted my 300th career win right after it? I can't really think of anything comparable in another profession. That's pretty absurd. Seems like some kind of personal infringment there. Not to mention the potential mess of the fact that I'm sure there are hundreds of Michael Youngs and Alex Rodriguezes running around the country.