Jump to content

NFL puts kabosh on Super Bowl parties


Bleujayone

Recommended Posts

So if I have a big-@$$ projection TV screen does this mean the NFL is gonna call the cops on me? What a crock of $#!+. I really don't see why a church showing a game is bad, but a bar or restaurant is fine by them.When you're at a bar or restaurant you have to purchase something from them in order to watch the game there so the argument for not charging someone to watch a free broadcast goes out the window.

:cursing: Up yours, NFL! Your ratings be damned. These people are still watching your product and your precious TV ads too. This doesn't violate a copyright law.

I remember a few years back a local movie theater was showing Patriots games via dish on their 50' screens. They couldn't charge for tickets but like any other establishment, you had to purchase food and beer. Can't say "Super Bowl"? Fine. Borrowing form the former XFL, everyone come on over for "The Big Game @ the End of The Season" Party on my big honking 80" projection. We'll be channel surfing until we happen to land on something that catches the group's interest. I won't charge admission, but you will have to pay $3 at the door for your your collector Coleman plastic beer cup. NFL's a bunch of jack@$$e$.

------------------------

NFL won't let church show game

INDIANAPOLIS - The NFL has nixed a church's plans to use a wall projector to show the Colts-Bears Super Bowl game, saying it would violate copyright laws. :blink:

NFL officials spotted a promotion of Fall Creek Baptist Church's "Super Bowl Bash" on the church Web site last week and overnighted a letter to the pastor demanding the party be canceled, the church said.

Initially, the league objected to the church's plan to charge a fee to attend and that the church used the license-protected words "Super Bowl" in its promotions.

Pastor John D. Newland said he told the NFL his church would not charge anyone and that it would drop the use of the forbidden words.

But the NFL objected to the church's plans to use a projector to show the game, saying the law limits it to one TV no bigger than 55 inches.

The church will likely abandon its plans to host a Super Bowl party.

"We want to be supportive of our local team," Newland said. "For us to have all our congregation huddled around a TV that is big enough only for 10 or 12 people to watch just makes little sense."

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league's long-standing policy is to ban "mass out-of-home viewing" of the Super Bowl. An exception is made for sports bars and other businesses that show televised sports as a part of their everyday operations.

"We have contracts with our (TV) networks to provide free over-the-air television for people at home," Aiello said. "The network economics are based on television ratings and at-home viewing. Out-of-home viewing is not measured by Nielsen."

It is also the reason no mass viewings are planned in large arenas like the RCA Dome or Conseco Fieldhouse.

Newland said his church won't break the law.

"It just frustrates me that most of the places where crowds are going to gather to watch this game are going to be places that are filled with alcohol and other things that are inappropriate for children," Newland said. "We tried to provide an alternative to that and were shut down."

Other Indiana churches said they are deciding whether they should go through with their Super Bowl party plans, given the NFL's stance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would love to see the church go ahead as planned and see if the NFL would file a lawsuit against a church. Seems like it would be a steep uphill climb for the NFL PR department to make it seem they were in the right. "We here at the NFL would like to stand here with our good friend Satan and denounce this church congregation from enjoying our sport with each others company." Quite ridiculous...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league's long-standing policy is to ban "mass out-of-home viewing" of the Super Bowl.

Excuse me, but I believe we live in the USA :flagusa: , not the NFL. Go ahead corporate entity NFL and make all the "policy" you want, but your "policies" are NOT LAWS.

If they don't charge admission and don't use your copyrighted "Super Bowl" name, they should be free to show the game to as many people as they want on as big a screen as they can get.

Perhaps the NFL should pass another "policy" to force Nielsen to count viewers the way it wants instead. :mad:

There's no reason stadiums in Chicago and Indianapolis shouldn't be full of fans all gathered to enjoy the experience in a game-like setting on a Jumbotron.

What the hell is this? Orwell's 1984?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no reason stadiums in Chicago and Indianapolis shouldn't be full of fans all gathered to enjoy the experience in a game-like setting on a Jumbotron.

I'm assuming this is banned as well?

That's pretty lame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is, as the copyright owners, the NFL can choose to license their intellectual property as they see fit. They have consitantly and explicitly prohibited public viewings of their content for years. It really is their call.

That being said, I don't think it's a good PR move in the least. With the millions of viewers wordwide, a thousand people at a church is a drop in the bucket, and they're only bringing bad publicity upon themselves. If I were them, I would have stopped right at the "Super Bowl" trademark argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

R I D I C U L O U S

Isn't this an entertainment business isn't the idea to have as many people watching the games as possible. I understand their issue with charging a fee to watch the game but have "restrictions" on how big your screen can be???? They don't want 100 people sitting in a gym or somebody's nice media room watching the game on one big screen because then it lowers their Nielsen ratings which in turn cost them advertising $$$

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it is therefore illegal to do this with ANY TV show? Would it have been illegal for a "Last Seinfeld Episode" party? I am absolutely baffled by this.

I can't invite someone to my house to watch TV if my screen happens to be over 55-inches?

Enforcability will be impossible for at-home parties, so only the high-profile ones (i.e. these churches) will be scrutinized.

The NFL is usually pretty solid with PR. This seems like a bad move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, the little guys stand up to the apparent corporate behemoth. Why should they not protect their investment? Last I checked, the NFL was a private company, not a public service. Their sole purpose is to make money, and a byproduct of that is entertainment for the public. Nothing is "owed" to anyone. Is it a crack in the public image to take on a church? Possibly. But is it wrong or some sort of affront to their basic human rights? Absolutely not. Much in the same way I can't take a legally purchased Dave Matthews Band concert and play the whole thing on loudspeakers from my iPod. It was obtained legally but the license for me to listen to it was a personal one not for a public performance.

And also, rounds of applause to all of you who didn't even take the time to read the article and rather jumped on the anti-NFL bandwagon.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league's longstanding policy is to ban "mass out-of-home viewing" of the Super Bowl. A major exception to the rule is made, however, for sports bars and other businesses that show televised sports as a part of their everyday operations.

It's in quotes right there. Out-of-home viewing. So while your comments about the league coming to your house and taking away your 60 inch tv were cute and let you be part of the mob, they were also inaccurate. But why let the story get in the way of a good zinger, right?

By the way, if anyone needs a free copy of Windows Vista, let me know. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter is, as the copyright owners, the NFL can choose to license their intellectual property as they see fit. They have consitantly and explicitly prohibited public viewings of their content for years. It really is their call.

I just don't see how they can license their intellectual property to be shown on free, over-the-air TV and then have any say on what you do with that broadcast one bit. Once it's out there, it's out there and who the hell are they to say how you can choose to display it?

Now, I can see the TV network saying you can't charge people to watch what we are giving you for free without giving us a cut since we are the ones who created the broadcast.

I can also see the NFL not allowing you to use their trademarked Super Bowl? phrase to promote something.

But they shouldn't have any legal right to tell you what size display of the free network broadcast you can set up and how many people you can have over to watch it.

It seems like some kind of Pandora's box where the car makers would be allowed to tell you cannot drive over a certain speed, eat, use the phone and how many passengers you can have in your car (even if it will go faster and hold more people than their "limit"), or a TV set maker who has a "policy" that you can't watch porn on the TV you buy from them.

(perhaps comparing objects to events isn't the best direct comparision, but I'm rushed for time and hopefully you get where I'm coming from)

It just seems legally unenforceable once you clean out the "Super Bowl" language in the promotion and don't charge admission in any way, shape or form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.