some of those "stats" are the opinions of scouts(good at tackling?) right?
other stats are historical data that is publicly observable(tackles per game, etc).
i can't see their logic...
Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
91–99 of 99 posts
Re: Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
#92This seems like publicly available info. Should I receive a royalty payment every time somebody views the value of my home on Zillow?
Re: Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL, but if you "stumble" onto data that is legally published, then you are free to use it in your business. It is on you to check that you are obtaining the data in a legal manner.
What if it was not intended to be legally published, but you still got access to it because they could not protect it well? Someone I know actually got access to some stuff this way before; got access to a gold mine that was supposed to be private but someone misconfigured the webserver.
What if you see an open door with gold coins inside? Same answer.
The most you can do is inform the owner that their data isn't protected. And even that, unfairly IMO, is legally dicey.
Re: Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL, but if you "stumble" onto data that is legally published, then you are free to use it in your business. It is on you to check that you are obtaining the data in a legal manner.
What if it was not intended to be legally published, but you still got access to it because they could not protect it well? Someone I know actually got access to some stuff this way before; got access to a gold mine that was supposed to be private but someone misconfigured the webserver.
In the US, once a secret is out, it is no longer a secret. The person who originally disseminated the secret might be punished, but subsequent use wouldn't be.
Facts aren't protected by copyright, they are typically just secrets. Your medical history is secret, and protected by law that would punish the person releasing them. But once released there isn't much you can do about it.
Re: Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
> does not infringe on the copyright of the original source streams Unless you're getting the raw video stream from all the cameras, it'll be transformed through the producer and director's creative control and that, I suspect, would block you from doing this - it's not longer just "facts", it's a particular interpretation of those "facts" (cf bare recounting of historical events vs someone's book covering the same,…
> it'll be transformed through the producer and director's creative control and that, I suspect, would block y I don’t know about that. You’re using the directors production to establish the fact but once you have extruded those facts, it could be argued in principal of not legally that this is a new creative work based off the mere facts.
The "mere facts" would be a wide-angled camera showing the entire pitch and very few people would watch that, I think. Using your judgement as a director/producer to use different angles, cameras, positions, etc. to provide a more interesting spectacle would, for me (IANAL), be transformative enough.
Consider an analogy to classical music - Beethoven's 5th isn't copyrighted but a particular expression of it by an orchestra can be.
Re: Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it'll be transformed through the producer and director's creative control and that, I suspect, would block y I don’t know about that. You’re using the directors production to establish the fact but once you have extruded those facts, it could be argued in principal of not legally that this is a new creative work based off the mere facts.
The "mere facts" would be a wide-angled camera showing the entire pitch and very few people would watch that, I think. Using your judgement as a director/producer to use different angles, cameras, positions, etc. to provide a more interesting spectacle would, for me (IANAL), be transformative enough. Consider an analogy to classical music - Beethoven's 5th isn't copyrighted but a particular expression of it by an orc…
It would be a case to be heard in court no doubt. It could be argued that the footage is but one corroborating account of events in the dream theatre. All it would take would be to independently capture some off camera activity. Director has to assert that somehow your work is derivative. I’m not a lawyer of course and if you are I defer to your expertise. It’s an interesting thought experiment none the less.
Re: Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL, but if you "stumble" onto data that is legally published, then you are free to use it in your business. It is on you to check that you are obtaining the data in a legal manner.
What if it was not intended to be legally published, but you still got access to it because they could not protect it well? Someone I know actually got access to some stuff this way before; got access to a gold mine that was supposed to be private but someone misconfigured the webserver.
Using a somewhat relevant real world analogy: if I go into a house that should’ve been locked (but wasn’t), and I know I don’t have a right to be there, I can’t argue what I did was legal. It’s the same thing with computers: you can’t use[a] data you don’t have a right to use.
[a]: legally use
Re: Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
The idea that everything remotely involving data is forbidden under GDPR is giving it a bad name. I'm reminded of every Comcast sin being labeled as a "net neutrality" issue. Here, specifically, GDPR prescribes exemptions for journalism: https://gdpr.eu/article-85-right-to-freedom-of-expression-an... There are probably other exemptions that would apply for innocuous activity freely done in public, with the explicit u…
I doubt statistics won't be consider personal data. For example "Someone shot 5 shots on goal" is not exactly personal data. "Simon Munster played 54 mintues" should not be personal data it's a fact of a public event.
A famous athlete wearing a brand sneaker is also just a fact of a public event. Yet if that brand uses it in advertisement they still need to pay the athlete for permission.
Re: Players to sue for hundreds of millions over use of their statistics
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt statistics won't be consider personal data. For example "Someone shot 5 shots on goal" is not exactly personal data. "Simon Munster played 54 mintues" should not be personal data it's a fact of a public event.
A famous athlete wearing a brand sneaker is also just a fact of a public event. Yet if that brand uses it in advertisement they still need to pay the athlete for permission.
No they need to pay the athlete to wear the brand. Otherwise he wears a different brand that pays him. They also pay for the time the athlete spends making ads for the brand.
If the player just wears the brand through their own choice and they company advertises "As worn by Jordan in NBA all-star game!" then they would not need to pay.
Ads and stats are two completely different things.