OOTP 15 update #3 (version 15.3.11) now available!

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

I would stop short of saying that any business or all businesses would do this. Depending on their position in the world, exposure could be worth more than any ransom they could demand. They would reach an "agreement" that did not involve the exchange of any money, which surely MLB is not interested in.

If you wanted to make a management game for Major League Ultimate, the ultimate frisbee professional league, I doubt they would have lawyers try to shut you down for using names and logos. They might very well put you on the website and help promote it, as it could only help increase the stature of the league.

That's apples and sunflower seeds. No business would stay in business long if it didn't protect its trademarks. A trademark can be lost if not protected. Making silly comparisons to Frisbee (TM) leagues doesn't cut it.

Frisbee is a registered trade mark of the Wham-O toy company and the generic use of that term has damaged the mark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_disc

The term Frisbee, often used to generically describe all flying discs, is a registered trademark of the Wham-O toy company. Though such use is not encouraged by the company, the common use of the name as a generic term has put the trademark in jeopardy; accordingly, many "Frisbee" games are now known as "ultimate" or "disc" games.[2][3]

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

MLB doesn't need exposure. If MLB allows one game to use its trademarked identities for free, it has no leg to stand on to stop anyone else from using those trademarked identities. It's a no-brainer.

Of course, I was responding to the claim that any business would do the same thing. Some would see the benefit, where MLB wants to get paid and (very likely) have some creative control. Some would agree to license everything for game purposes and happily run with it.

If you step back at a high level and look at it, I have to wonder if they are really using their rational (rather than lawyer) brains at all. If people are going to play a baseball game, don't you want them doing it with things that make them think of YOUR league, YOUR teams, and YOUR players? Apparently not, as extracting a ransom for the rights to do so is more important. They could have sent OOTP a limited license from the start, but it seems pretty clear they have no desire to do business that way.

That being said, thanks to Markus for trying to appease all of us as much as he does. This isn't the right thread for this discussion and is probably more appropriate for the other thread about how MLB should embrace OOTP.

[endgame]

I'll save my editorializing about how rampant these kinds of discussions get with no real merit.

Let me instead offer you a possibility that may prove useful. Seriously. Hit the randomize team names button a few times when creating a game and see what happens. Thanks. (Utilizing the latest patch, of course.)

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by Tekneek

Of course, I was responding to the claim that any business would do the same thing. Some would see the benefit, where MLB wants to get paid and (very likely) have some creative control. Some would agree to license everything for game purposes and happily run with it.

If you step back at a high level and look at it, I have to wonder if they are really using their rational (rather than lawyer) brains at all. If people are going to play a baseball game, don't you want them doing it with things that make them think of YOUR league, YOUR teams, and YOUR players? Apparently not, as extracting a ransom for the rights to do so is more important. They could have sent OOTP a limited license from the start, but it seems pretty clear they have no desire to do business that way.

That being said, thanks to Markus for trying to appease all of us as much as he does. This isn't the right thread for this discussion and is probably more appropriate for the other thread about how MLB should embrace OOTP.

Any business with a trademarked identity would do the same thing, regardless of what you think. A different business might say, "You know what? Leave the team names in for now, but we need to negotiate a license deal moving forward, otherwise you'll need to take them out for your next game/product/etc."

MLB has no competitor, nor does it care if someone plays OOTP with fictional teams because it is in no danger of losing business to the Bethlehem Crusaders (just to use a team name from a fictional league I have). If it had a competitor, it would stand to gain from having its trademarked identities everywhere possible. But since MLB has no competitor, it's top priority is protecting its identities, and enforcing those trademarks is how that is accomplished. It's the whole reason trademarks exist in the first place.

My sister is a graphic artist for a major candy company that produces an MLB-related candy. She said that nobody would ever believe the hoops they had to jump through just to put a team logo on a candy. Yes, that candy is great exposure for MLB, but it's also AGAINST THE LAW for her company to make money off MLB without MLB's consent. Same thing with OOTP.

If OOTP was the only game MLB was enforcing its trademark rights on, then your argument would hold merit. But MLB enforces its trademarks whenever necessary, and as others mentioned when this came up in the first place, this was an inevitable result of OOTP continuing to gain Steam, pun 100 percent intended.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by endgame

I'll save my editorializing about how rampant these kinds of discussions get with no real merit.

Let me instead offer you a possibility that may prove useful. Seriously. Hit the randomize team names button a few times when creating a game and see what happens. Let me know. Thanks. (Utilizing the latest patch, of course.)

Oh goody!

**wrings hands together while smiling**

[Airdrop01]

I have every OOTP. Since 1. Perhaps it is because I'm probably older than your average bear. Or because of personal experience or similar. But: It boggles the mind that Markus wouldn't think that he needed a license to use others property or likenesses or any other protected item. Unpopular as it is, the fault for this is not MLB. It won't be MLBPA or MiLBPA either. It is Markus'.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by Airdrop01

I have every OOTP. Since 1. Perhaps it is because I'm probably older than your average bear. Or because of personal experience or similar. But: It boggles the mind that Markus wouldn't think that he needed a license to use others property or likenesses or any other protected item. Unpopular as it is, the fault for this is not MLB. It won't be MLBPA or MiLBPA either. It is Markus'.

In the overall scheme of things, this is 100% accurate, as much as it pains me to post something that puts blame on Markus, considering I think his game is unequaled when it comes to sports games.

[rpriske]

This is stupid. It is also the law.

Sometimes the law is stupid.

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

Any business with a trademarked identity would do the same thing, regardless of what you think. A different business might say, "You know what? Leave the team names in for now, but we need to negotiate a license deal moving forward, otherwise you'll need to take them out for your next game/product/etc."

I totally understand why MLB is doing it, but I disagree that their approach is the only approach. A limited license for the purpose of X product is always available and these kinds of arrangements between businesses happen often. Granted, MLB has all the leverage and no desire to not get paid. They see that OOTP has more to gain from their inclusion in the game than they (MLB) stands to lose by being out of the game and that is good enough math for them.

I'm just disagreeing with the assumption that this applies across the board. I don't have a massive amount of experience with it, but I have worked in a few industries where some were incredibly easy to deal with, others were really complicated with lots of legal mazes, and others were just impossible without paying a King's ransom. At the end of the day, we always did more business with the first one and everybody made more money on those deals than the latter.

[injury log]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

MLB doesn't need exposure. If MLB allows one game to use its trademarked identities for free, it has no leg to stand on to stop anyone else from using those trademarked identities. It's a no-brainer.

Where do you get this stuff from? Someone infringing trademarks cannot defend himself by saying "someone else did it, therefore I'm allowed to infringe the trademark too". A trademark holder does not lose their trademark by failing to enforce it universally. It is only when that failure to police leads a court to conclude the trademark has become diluted, generic, or abandoned that the trademark protection is lost. None of that would apply to OOTP's usage as far as I can tell.

At least that's my understanding of trademark law. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems a lot of people on these forums are offering legal opinions about trademark law, and if they're lawyers, I'd like to know that, and if they're not, I wish they'd say so.

[Poweshow]

Hopefully this change will push at least a couple of people to shift away from MLB leagues and come on over to the FAR superior fictional leagues.

[pstrickert]

Originally Posted by endgame

Hit the randomize team names button a few times when creating a game and see what happens. Thanks. (Utilizing the latest patch, of course.)

^^^^^^^^
Hey, everyone! Try it, you'll like it!

[Tekneek]

Originally Posted by Poweshow

Hopefully this change will push at least a couple of people to shift away from MLB leagues and come on over to the FAR superior fictional leagues.

It is a motivating factor for me. In time, I will forget that an all-in-one MLB setup was even in the game, which will hurt MLB more than me/OOTP.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by injury log

Where do you get this stuff from? Someone infringing trademarks cannot defend himself by saying "someone else did it, therefore I'm allowed to infringe the trademark too". A trademark holder does not lose their trademark by failing to enforce it universally. It is only when that failure to police leads a court to conclude the trademark has become diluted, generic, or abandoned that the trademark protection is lost. None of that would apply to OOTP's usage as far as I can tell.

At least that's my understanding of trademark law. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems a lot of people on these forums are offering legal opinions about trademark law, and if they're lawyers, I'd like to know that, and if they're not, I wish they'd say so.

Not sure where you got the bolded part from, but I never said that, nor inferred it.

I'm not a lawyer either, but I would think that if MLB knowingly and purposely turns its back to OOTP's use of team names, that would be the first step toward a court determining that the trademark has been abandoned. What's the point of a trademark is it's not going to be enforced? Seriously?

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by endgame

i'll save my editorializing about how rampant these kinds of discussions get with no real merit.

Let me instead offer you a possibility that may prove useful. Seriously. Hit the randomize team names button a few times when creating a game and see what happens. Thanks. (utilizing the latest patch, of course.)

Originally Posted by pstrickert

^^^^^^^^
hey, everyone! Try it, you'll like it!

+1

[Donevyn]

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

If you right click on the game in your steam library and click on "properties", then go to the "updates" tab, there's an option that says "always keep this game up to date", you can chance that (via a drop down) to "do not automatically update this game".

Thanks for the info!

[justafan]

Originally Posted by endgame

I'll save my editorializing about how rampant these kinds of discussions get with no real merit.

Let me instead offer you a possibility that may prove useful. Seriously. Hit the randomize team names button a few times when creating a game and see what happens. Thanks. (Utilizing the latest patch, of course.)

Genius, simply genius.

[thevaliantx]

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

It's a minor issue for fans of OOTP. It might make bringing in new custom a bit harder though.

I completely agree. You have received a lot of backlash for your "conspiracy theorist" approach to this witch hunting by MLB, but I know where you're coming from. It's only logical that if MLB is allowed to have any say (which to some degree they have, as is evidenced by the latest patch) about this game, that they will more and more to say about it, under the threat of revoking the license in the future.

I see something like this occuring. First, they say no to team nicknames, which they have. Then, they say no to player names. At that point the game is fictional-only unless someone outside of OOTP steps up and creates mods to work around this. After that they start going after anything that they can prove "sheds negative light on the sport". When THAT is completed they then make it so that the game ships uncustomizable, and they shut down anyone out there is who make mods for the game.

It's only a matter of time before MLB The Show goes away. Already that game is becoming more and more watered down. That game isn't becoming any more sim-like because of MLB, so instead SONY is prettying up menus and just making the game 'look' more and more realistic each year. It's not difficult, to you nay sayers out there who think everything is going to be alright with OOTP, to see where this is heading.

Markus does this for a living, so if it's going to affect his bottom line by not agreeing to licensing, then he will agree to licensing. Anyone out there urging Markus "to go get'em!" or saying "we're behind you all the way!" needs to just shut up.

[thevaliantx]

Originally Posted by Poweshow

Hopefully this change will push at least a couple of people to shift away from MLB leagues and come on over to the FAR superior fictional leagues.

Would you care to share with those less knowledgeable about the game or the sport, in general, on how we can create a "FAR superior fictional league"? You seem to feel really enthusiastic about fictional mode, so I'm only curious.

[injury log]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

Not sure where you got the bolded part from, but I never said that, nor inferred it.

You said this: "If MLB allows one game to use its trademarked identities for free, it has no leg to stand on to stop anyone else from using those trademarked identities. " That's what I was replying to. MLB very certainly would have a "leg to stand on" protecting their trademarks even if they fail to enforce them in isolated cases.

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

I'm not a lawyer either, but I would think that if MLB knowingly and purposely turns its back to OOTP's use of team names, that would be the first step toward a court determining that the trademark has been abandoned.

A trademark is not abandoned by failure to police, except in specific cases - if you look over judgments of loss of trademark on those grounds, it's usually in instances where one company used another's trademark for decades. Abandonment is usually established because of a trademark owner's failure to actually use their trademark, and there's clearly no danger of a court finding MLB has abandoned their trademarks on those grounds.

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

What's the point of a trademark is it's not going to be enforced? Seriously?

Yes, seriously(?). The purpose of a trademark is to identify the originator of a product or service. A trademark still serves a purpose if it is not universally enforced. If OOTP uses the word 'Yankees' as a team nickname, that doesn't create any confusion among fans buying Yankees tickets about whether they are buying tickets to see an MLB game. But if another baseball team in New York also called themselves the Yankees, that would potentially create confusion. Enforcing a trademark in the latter case is far more important than in the former.

It would be unduly burdensome for trademark holders if they were obligated to police even inconsequential violations just so they could maintain their rights in cases of consequential infringement.