and the NFL won't buy it http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/03/s...-recording-broadcast-nfl-troy-haupt.html?_r=0 to sum it, legally the guy cannot sell to anyone else, so the NFL won't pay him fair value
There has to be a legal argument to be made that the fact that the NFL doesn't have a copy that it somehow forfeits their copyright and it is some sort of historical artifact that he has rights to. I can understand his not being able to broadcast it, but not sell it? That would be like finding an ancient piece of art and arguing that some dead caveman owns the copyright so it can't be sold.
thats some bullshit. I would threaten to destroy it if I were him. I bet he could raise more than the NFL's offer if he started a gofundme to send that shit up in a rocket... or the opposite. a gofundme to dissuade himself from sending it up in a rocket.
This telecast is the property of the National Football League and is copyrighted for the private use of our audience and any rebroadcast, retransmission or other use of this broadcast or of the pictures, descriptions or accounts of the game without the expressed, written permission of the National Football League is strictly prohibited.
Did those copyright laws even exist in 1967? $30k to buy it, then threatens to sue if he sells it to anyone else? The organization is worth billions, is tax exempt, and they have the balls to low-ball him like that? Fucking trash.
Pretty sure, I don't think the NFL will win because even if it was able to be copyrighted they don't have a copy to register with the copyright office which I think is part of the process of copyrighting. This is all coming from different articles I read so I could be wrong.
Yeah, I don't pretend to really know what I'm talking about here, but if the NFL doesn't have the top IP legal talent on the planet locked up and working this kind of stuff, well then I guess all I can say is I will be amazed.
You can have the top legal team but if nobody buys their argument it doesn't matter. The NFL doesn't have to be right, they just have to know they can outlast the legal resources of the people who challenge them.
They should buy the tape so they can issue a full Super Bowl Blu Ray collection. Sell them for $25 per Super Bowl; many diehard fans would buy all their team's winning SB blu rays, and some would buy the complete set. They'd make a billion dollars, easily - with the shit they already have. During each offseason, they should also make a 3 hour special / Blu Ray about each team's season and how it went, with some game clips and all that. A lot of people would pay $25 for that; they'd sell +10 million per year, and make +$250 million, spending maybe $64m to make the 32 films. But - they're really fucking lazy. They care more about grandstanding over meaningless bullshit than they do about making money.
Nope. The NFL owns the rights to all copyrighted material whether they have copies of it or not and they don't need to file copies of the material with the US Copyright office. They'd have to be making thousands of filings a week if they were required to do do. _
They aired this game on the nfl network a few weeks ago........Not sure what you mean.It was a big special with commentary from players in the game.Then they re aired the game in its entirety.Boring to watch for the most part
Was thinking the NFL would have an awful lot to do each week of the season but went with what I now know was an unreliable writer. Notice I gave myself the pclfan "I'm not an expert" out, at the end of my post.
They put together clips they had, to come up with a semblance of the 1st Super Bowl but it was not the 1st Super Bowl as it originally aired. What they did air would have been much better if they took away the multitude of people sitting around talking about the game and just try and make it more like a game.
No, they didn't. That was a recreation from NFL films (if you read the article, that is referenced). A replay of SB I has never aired on any network.