Superbowling

An assortment of Super Bowl tidbits: Supposedly sports gambling sites are being threatened with denial of service attacks if they don't pay protection money - also a Reuters story. Infinitus writes "The NFL's legal firm has a PDF up that outlines the NFL's intellectual property rights to words like 'Super Bowl' and 'NFL'. Including a neat little chart that tells you what you can and can't say..." VeggiePossum23 writes "Panthers Upset Patriots, 29 to 21... at least in the Sony Sponsored '989 Sports Game Before the Game' played on NFL Gameday 2004 on the PS2 Console. This annual event, held Wednesday night in Houston, has a perfect 8-year track record of picking the winner of the Super Bowl. Carolina Panthers Wide Receiver Steve Smith controlled the Panthers, winning an upset victory against New England Patriots' Wide Out Troy Brown, also controlling his own team." lordbyron writes "CBS is doing a SuperBowl of commercials that will include a vote for the best commercial in history. You can watch the top 10 now and make sure that you vote at 9pm on Sunday 1/31. It includes some classics like the Apple commercial and the exploding mosquitos from Tabasco."Wing Bowl.--->

Comments

Don't forget the ad CBS is refusing to air.

[OS24Ever]

Pretty potent/A. non-sex non-beer ad with only one statement in it.

Pretty effective ad no matter what you US Political viewpoint is.

Re:Don't forget the ad CBS is refusing to air.

[kermyt]

Quoted from moveon.org

The CBS networks still refuses to run our winning ad in the Bush in 30 Seconds ad contest during the Super Bowl. The
MoveOn.org non-partisan campaign to get CBS to air issue ads continues, but we're not going to let CBS's censorship stop us
in the mean time. That's why we're spending over $1 million to air the ad in our swing states and nation-wide on other
channels -- starting with two spots on CNN that will air during the Super Bowl half time.

This Sunday, during the Super Bowl half time show, join us in changing channels on CBS. At 8:10pm and 8:35pm EST, switch
over to CNN to watch "Child's Pay" on a channel which doesn't censor its ads. We'd like to keep a tally of the number of
people who participate -- you can sign up here:
http://www.moveonvoterfund.org/boycott/?id= 2293-33 48214-6QjmVnR6_TwkZW4t8xOELQ

The number of groups, individuals, and newspapers that have called on CBS to run our ad is remarkable. The National
Organization for Women and the American Civil Liberties Union have asked their own members to call CBS. Senator Dick Durbin
(D-IL) gave a powerful speech about CBS on the floor of the Senate, saying, "Maybe network executives at CBS are so afraid
of political pressure from the right wing and their business advertisers who are in league with the right wing politics of
America that they are afraid to put anything on the air that might in fact make things uncomfortable. If that is the case,
it is time for CBS to announce the name of their network is the 'Conservative Broadcasting System' and come clean with
American viewers."

28 members of the House of Representatives wrote a letter to CBS which stated, "The choice not to run this paid
advertisement appears to be part of a disturbing pattern on CBS's part to bow to the wishes of the Republican National
Committee. We remember well CBS's remarkable decision this fall to self-censor at the direction of GOP pressure. The network
shamefully cancelled a broadcast about former President Ronald Reagan which Republican partisans considered insufficiently
flattering." Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) wrote a separate letter to CBS urging them to reconsider their decision.

Today, the L.A. Times printed an Op-Ed piece of ours which lays out the case against CBS's censorship. That's attached
below. But the editorial pages of the Boston Globe, San Francisco Chronicle, and many other papers came out in our favor as
well. As the Globe wrote, "MoveOn.org's 30-second ad, which has aired on CNN, is a gentle yet powerful depiction of how hard
today's children will have to work to pay off the country's mounting deficit. That's a vital message that might get lost in
a year of campaign rhetoric, and it deserves a response from the White House in its own 30 seconds of imagery. America,
sitting on the couch, junk food in hand, just might sit up and want to know more."

Luckily, there are still some networks that do allow the free exchange of ideas. Please join the one-minute boycott: at
Super Bowl halftime, switch to CNN and watch "Child's Pay," and let us know at:
http://www.moveonvoterfund.org/boycott/?id=22 93-33 48214-6QjmVnR6_TwkZW4t8xOELQ

Re:Don't forget the ad CBS is refusing to air.

[kermyt]

For the record, CBS's reason for not accepting that ad is because they don't accept any debatable political issue issue ads. They would have accepted ads from candidates because they have to, but none came forward with the money to do so.

If that was true then CBS certainly would not run the white house ad that connects marijuana users to terrorism. but that is exactly that they are doing.

Re:Don't forget the ad CBS is refusing to air.

[finkployd]

It is amazing how many people do not understand what censorship actually means.

Sad really

I guess it is now censorship when a corporation decided not to play an ad that would piss off the majority of the country

Just like it is censorship when the public decides to not boycott a movie/tv show because the ignorant actor/actress made some boneheaded statements about their assinine political views.

Oh, and we cannot forget book publishers not publishing books that contain views they don't like. Obviously this is censorship, and not a business decision.

Finkployd

Re:Don't forget the ad CBS is refusing to air.

[Heisenbug]

A few notes on this ... if you haven't seen the MoveOn Child's Pay ad, it's not exactly incendiary rhetoric. Even Bill O'Reilly said he was surprised they refused to play it.

CBS defends the policy by saying that if they allowed issue ads, large corporations could buy time to push their favorite issues and it would disenfranchise us folks with smaller ad budgets. Eli Pariser of MoveOn responded by pointing out that this creates an awfully friendly environment for the status quo, and those same corporations. We have oil company ads but no anti-oil ads, shoe company ads but no sweatshop ads, drug war ads but no decriminalization ads.

What we're really getting here is a one-sided agenda, and, yes, censorship, in the guise of fairness.

Re:Don't forget the ad CBS is refusing to air.

[damiam]

A corporation not playing an ad because of its political viewpoints is censorship. It's their right, and it's perfectly legal (unless you want to get into some argument about the "public" airwaves), but it's still censorship. Besides nothing in that ad is at all controversial - the deficit estimate is even a bit low, according to the Congressional Budget Office. If they're gonna air ads from the White House (containing some very shaky statements about drugs and terrorism), they should air this ad (which doesn't even promote a candidate).

Re:Don't forget the ad CBS is refusing to air.

[dbc001]

The right decision would have been not to allow policital ads at all. By airing an ad from the whitehouse, which I paid for (and I would much prefer that the money be used for education instead of fucking superbowl ads), they have basically dumped politics into the superbowl. They should either remove all the politics (arguably the wise choice) or allow everyone to advertise. Again, I agree that the superbowl should be an all-fun event. Politics and fun don't mix well. But they have clearly chosen sides, and that has already taken some of the fun out of it.

Radio Contests

[LordArathres]

Here in Los Angeles, KROQ is doing a "Super Bowl" contest where they send someone to the "Super Bowl" game, but they cannot call it the "Super Bowl" becuase of the NFL restriction. So they are referring to it as the "Big Game". It would cost them an insane amount of money to call it the "Super Bowl Contests" and its ridiculous. This whole trademark BS is so stupid sometimes. How can we live in a age where you cant refer to something by its official name without paying money??? I read slashdot all the time and I am so disgusted by the crap going on around us, what IS this world coming to?

Mario

Re:Radio Contests

[LostCluster]

What's even further ironic is that KROQ is owned by Infinity Radio, the radio arm of Viacom whose CBS network will be airing the Super Bowl this year...

Football IP?

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

intellectual property rights to words like 'Super Bowl' and 'NFL'.

Funny, I never thought I'd see "intellectual", "SuperBowl" and "NFL" in the same sentence ...

Re:Being English, I have to ask...

[eln]

Surprisingly enough, some of us actually enjoy the game. And please don't go on about how it's just big men hitting each other in pads. If you put any sport into similar words you can make it look silly, especially Cricket.

Beyond those who watch it because they love the game, like me, there are the people that watch it because it's an EVENT. It's an excuse to throw a party. Every culture on Earth has numerous holidays that are fairly meaningless except for as excuses to throw parties. This is one of those days for the US.

1024 of your closest friends

[bstadil]

Sure there is events that "predicts" superbowl with amazing accuracy. If you don't believe me just send a message to your 1024 closest friends and tell half that the A team will win and other B team.

Do this for 8 years and four of your friends thinks you are a genius and the remaining 1020 have forgotten the whole thing.

This works with stock tips and is a scam that has been used for ages.

Copyright and Trademark Laws

[sabNetwork]

I'd love to see this stuff hold up in court. Has it before? I doubt it.

It is perfectly legal (and EXPLICITLY legal) to use trademarks in news and mention as long as they don't cause brand confusion.

Also, the use of copyrights to protect news is not legal. No one is allowed to rebroadcast the the coverage of the game verbatim, but nothing prevents someone from relaying the general events from the game. This is in the First Amendment, and there are no exceptions.

--

Re:Being English, I have to ask...

[The I Shing]

American Football is big, big business in the USA. It represents what Americans love best, which is war. It has nearly all the elements of a war, fought during a time frame of about four hours, with sixty minutes of actual game time. It has offense, defense, gaining ground, losing ground, battle after battle, strategies, tactics, hierarchical command structures, casualties, statistics, a winner, and a loser.

The Superbowl represents the pinnacle of all this, the wheat having been separated from the chaff throughout the regular season and post-season.

It's a chance for American Football aficianados to gather over pizza, chicken wings, potato chips, shrimp cocktail, and copious beer, and cheer on one team or the other.

For the fans in the home city of a Superbowl contender, there is a level of excitement that would probably embarrass a British person to death. Scottish people, on the other hand, would quite understand.

At least...

[Bagels]

At least their legal team seems to realize how ridiculous some of this IP stuff is. From the chart of dos and don'ts mentioned in the post:

- You *can* make fun of the fact that you cannot say the phrase "Super Bowl" (e.g. by beeping it out).

Don't forget CBS is helping MoveOn

[toupsie]

Actually having CBS not air the commercial has allowed more people to see the ad. MoveOn should be jumping for joy that CBS denied the ad buy. It has brought more attention to their message and allowed them to air the ad for free on various news shows. You are even helping out MoveOn by publicizing the ad here on Slashdot.

CBS is making a smart business decision not to air this ad. Why should CBS want to bring in unneeded controversy into the Super Bowl that would distract from the game? Since it has a product that is in high demand for advertisers, CBS can pick and choose which advertisers it wants to fill in those 30 second gaps between plays. Also, if you are spending $2 million an ad as advertiser would you want your commercial message to be drowned out by adjacent partisan political message? Heck no! This would make it hard for CBS to sell the ad space next to the MoveOn ad.

This isn't political censorship, its smart business on the part of CBS.

That's not all...

[MisanthropicProggram]

Outside of Atlanta, in Gwinett County, the Falcons have a proactice camp. This is an important detail - with no fence around their compound. Nearby, there's a hill with a McDonald's on top wih a view of the Falcon's practice field. There's big sign on the border of their properties border with the Falcon's field that says, "No Looking!"
The Falcon's compound is also used for coporate meeting and classes. I was their for one. During my lunch break I went outside to get some fresh air and eat. I happend to be looking at the Falcons standing around talking - it was about fifty yards away, no fences or anything else to obstruct my view - when a police cruiser pulls up. The cop then told me that there's no looking. I responded with something along the lines of, if it's that important to be secret, why don't they put a fence up? The cop told me that it's "NFL RULES." and I have to move along. He says he has to tell people who are on McDonald's property the same thing.

So, I guess NFL's rules supercede our civil rights.

direct links and synopses

[Teach]

Any of you folks running linux may not have the best RealPlayer integration in your browsers, so here are the direct links to each of the RealMedia files, with a brief synopsis of each commercial (but no "spoilers").

Slashcode will probably embed spaces in these URLs, so you may have to manually remove them.

• 1984 Apple Computer ad about Big Brother
• 2003 Budweiser spot with the zebra
• 1980 Coke ad with "Mean" Joe Green and a little kid
• 2002 Levi's Jeans commercial with the guy who walks funny
• 1993 McDonald's spot with Larry Bird and Michael Jordan playing HORSE
• 2000 Mountain Dew ad with the cyclist chasing the cheetah
• 1973 Noxzema ad with Joe Namath and Farrah Fawcett
• 1992 Pepsi spot with a kid trying to drink every last drop of his beverage (note that the screenshot shown isn't from the linked commercial)
• 1998 Tabasco sauce ad with the mosquito
• 1977 Xerox spot with monastic scribes

I quit watching television about seven or eight years ago. However, I try to catch the Super Bowl every year, if only for the commercials. In fact, I've always told folks that if there was a channel that just played commercials all day, I'd probably tune in to it.

I imagine it could be like VH-1 Classic, with an hour for commercials from the 50s, another from the 60s, etc. Maybe a "groundbreaking" commercials hour. Maybe one with ads from various countries.

I'd tune in, anyway.

Re:Hey, if we're talking about CBS...

[corebreech]

That had nothing to do with the ad, it has to do with the fact that TV networks don't air "issue ads," or political ads not endorsing a certain political candidate.

Not true, they air such ads all the time when they come from the Democrats and/or the Republicans.

Basically, they're too controversial and the networks don't want to show anything that might make people want to change the channel.

And ads for three different drugs that induce erections aren't?

Yup, sucks...

Yes, it does. Hence my pointing it out.

but that's the way things work.

Or to put it another way, we live in a totalitarian state.

And this has nothing to do with the first amendment, CBS is a corporation, the first amendment only applies to the government.

A very simplistic reading of the situation. Those our are airwaves. The very fact that the networks can be given exclusive access to those airwaves on the one hand and then be allowed to suppress speech is de facto government censorship.

NFL = No Fun League

[doormat]

First the NFL says NO to ads for Las Vegas during the superbowl. Then CBS says NO to ads against Bush during the game. The NFL says NO WAY to Casinos in las vegas showing the game on anything bigger than a 55" TV. They say its copyright law, but last I checked copyright law didnt say anything about TV Size. Its just the NFL's arbitrary size. The Palms was planning to show it on their huge movie theater screens. Oh well, I guess the NFL doesnt like its superbowl party being upstaged by Vegas. Now they're just taking their ball and going back to Houston. Paul Tagliabue caused lots of casinos to lose lots of money because of the NFL's childlike behavior. Hello, only so many people can go to the game! What are the rest supposed to do, wait outside and be happy they're near the game?? Paul also threatened the players with fines or possibly suspensions for "excessive celebration" during the Superbowl.

The NFL is definately the No Fun League.

Re:NFL = No Fun League

[ktakki]

The NFL says NO WAY to Casinos in las vegas showing the game on anything bigger than a 55" TV. They say its copyright law, but last I checked copyright law didnt say anything about TV Size.

Perhaps you should check again. From 17 USC 110:

(II) if the performance or display is by audiovisual means, any visual portion of the performance or display is communicated by means of a total of not more than 4 audiovisual devices, of which not more than 1 audiovisual device is located in any 1 room, and no such audiovisual device has a diagonal screen size greater than 55 inches, and any audio portion of the performance or display is communicated by means of a total of not more than 6 loudspeakers, of which not more than 4 loudspeakers are located in any 1 room or adjoining outdoor space;

I've been involved with copyright issues for over 25 years and I've seen the Copyright Act go from a fairly straightforward document to one that's filled with exemptions and intentional loopholes, some that actually benefit the consumer at the expense of corporate interests. Those are the minority, to be sure, but they're in there.

k.

threatened with denial of service attacks

[stephanruby]

Supposedly sports gambling sites are being threatened with denial of service attacks if they don't pay protection money - also a Reuters story.

Finally, a viable business model for Slashdot.

what words?

[fermion]

The Super Bowl is happening on Super Sunday. The National Football League(NFL), American Football Conference(AFC) and National Football Conference (NFC) will hold this contrived event to determine who is the best Football team in the world. Of course the rest of the world in not invited.

In this contest, between Carolina Panthers and New England Patriots, extremely wealthy men will forgo their normal environment and put on many pounds of gear to play whimped down version of Rugby. The winner of the game will be the champion.

Of course, this is entertainment so the true relevance is the demographic that it delivers to the advertisers. In this sense, the Super Bowl will once again fulfill it's primary mission.

One also suspects that many Americans, for the first time, will know the existence and location of Carolina.

Questionable Industries welcomes all Super Bowl guests to Houston. We will be scalping tickets on the corner of Fannin and Holly Hall. We will also be offering certified disease free hookers along Holly Hall and Murworth, conveniently grouped by age. The 18 year olds will be in the Excalades, the 19-21 year olds will be in the Explorers, and 21-25 will be in the Durangos. Hookers over this age will be conveniently located in their normal environment of the Holly Hall apartments. The males will be in the blue cars and females in the pink cars. Please do not be racist and expect certain ethnic types. We are a class operation!

A limited number of 12-18 year olds will be available in the customized vans. Younger hookers are available with 24 hours request, as they must be brought in from Mexico.