Slashdot Mirror


Who Owns Baseball Statistics?

Class Act Dynamo writes "A sports fantasy league company has asked a federal court to decided whether baseball statistics belong in the public domain as history or are the property of major league baseball. Basically, they had been licensing the statistics for nine cents (US) per gross from the Major League Baseball Players Association. But MLB recently bought the rights to be the sole licensor and has refused to renew the license of the fantasy league company. From the article: 'Major League Baseball has claimed that intellectual property law makes it illegal for fantasy league operators to commercially exploit the identities and statistical profiles of big league players.' What does the Slashdot community think? Shoud Barry Bonds' record 73 single season homeruns be in the public domain, or should I worry about having to pay royalties for the first part of this compound sentence?"

38 of 609 comments (clear)

  1. Stupid. by NilObject · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have recently acquired the rights to myself as a statistic. You may license me as a single number in your statistics if you pay an appropriate licensing fee.

    Otherwise, you must cease including me in your statistics, like so:

    MLB Fans: 27 - 1

  2. That's just not cricket by Aussie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sorry.

  3. Re:Facts? by Feanturi · · Score: 5, Funny

    Somehow I'm not at all surprised.

    I happen to own your lack of surprise, it's all right here in this deed. You now owe me $5.00 for each occurrence that doesn't surprise you, or the viewing of anything in your surroundings that appears to be perfectly normal.

  4. Re:Facts? by terrymr · · Score: 4, Funny

    That would be silly.

    Of course I could argue that a cop can't write me a speeding ticket because i own the copyright in how fast i was travelling.

  5. Ooooooh by AoT · · Score: 5, Funny

    I got dibs on planck's constant!

    1. Re:Ooooooh by AuMatar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Unfortunately, Microsoft has beaten you and patented 1 and 0.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    2. Re:Ooooooh by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 5, Funny

      I probably get Heisenburg's Uncertainly Principle!

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    3. Re:Ooooooh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      are you sure?

  6. Re:Facts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Holy crap. You might be on to something here. Now find a way to involve the DMCA!

  7. Re:On the Subject of Baseball by beders · · Score: 4, Funny

    The new national sport will be soccer soon until the soccer players become overpaid, whiny, wimps too.

    Welcome to England

  8. That's nothing! by jd · · Score: 4, Funny

    I bought Avagadro's Constant and the Hubble Constant off eBay, and I own stock in e, pi and the golden ratio.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:That's nothing! by (1+-sqrt(5))*(2**-1) · · Score: 2, Funny
      I own stock in [...] the golden ratio.
      Ah, you must be one of my round B investors; listen, I'll buy you out on three-fifths of your initial investment.
    2. Re:That's nothing! by SamSim · · Score: 4, Funny

      Unfortunately for you, the value of pi has decreased since you bought stock in it. Sucker!

  9. What? by eekrano · · Score: 3, Funny

    Did you hear who won the Sox game? Yeah it was great! Who won? I can't tell you, I only sent the MLB a check for $20 in royalties and I already told 10 people. Seriously... if this one goes the wrong way if moving to Canada.... yeah I said it.

    --
    -- Eekrano
  10. Re:Not the weirdest by freedom_india · · Score: 3, Funny
    ...there is no indication in the record that this particular cow had wheels. Therefore, it was not a motor vehicle and thus was not a "land motor vehicle" as defined in the policy.

    WoW ! So other cows "may" have wheels?

    This is deeep man !

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  11. Re:Facts? by jeeperscats · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

  12. Re:Phonebook? by xoboots · · Score: 2, Funny
    Are they seriously trying to argue that records that a player set, as well as numbers calculated from the tabulated performance of an athelete are not facts?

    Perhaps they are admitting that the games are fiction -- so therefore fixed.
  13. Re:Facts? by NoSuchGuy · · Score: 2, Funny

    What, we can own facts now?

    The earth is a flat disk!

    For centuries it worked!

    Ask your GrandGrandGrandGrandGrandGrandMa


    --
    Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
  14. Re:It's about the identities of the players by J0nne · · Score: 4, Funny

    by BadAnalogyGuy (945258)

    Did you pick your nick yourself, or is that what people call you? Because it's spot-on ;-).

  15. Re:Stupid stupid stupid by ajs318 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sorry, but the telco already owns the rights to your number. Or maybe the publisher of the phone book -- which is not necessarily the same entity anymore since deregulation, privatisation and Local Loop Unbundling. At least you knew where you were when BT was all there was. Nowadays you have a choice of different phone companies who will put you on hold, charge you for it and make you repeat yourself at least three times to people whom you have to wonder how the f**k they made it into work that day. Actually I'm surprised they aren't paying Dorling-Kindersley to print the privatised phone books for them. They could have huge, glossy colour photographs of every subscriber -- and absolutely no useful information whatsoever.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  16. Microsoft Patents Ones, Zeroes... by starX · · Score: 2, Funny
  17. Re:You can't copyright raw information by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sir,

    Your legal precendents are no match for our crack team of high priced lawyers.

    To ensure this fact, we have purchased the rights to the rights to the facts concerned in the cases you sight. As a result, any lawyer or judge who considers them will be forced to retire, without pension.

    If you object to this, make moves to object, are seen or heard to object, or are seen or heard to be in a position facilitating objection, we reserve the right to legally force you in bankruptcy and/or exile and/or prision and/or Guantanamo Bay.

    Yours,

    MLB Inc.

    Thought For The Day: 'Greed Is Good.'

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  18. Re:Facts? by Shano · · Score: 4, Funny

    I always thought cricket was a way to work up a thirst before going to the pub, and the statistics were so the maths geeks (who can't bat to save themselves, let alone field) have something to do. A very democratic sport in that respect.

    Radio cricket is an excuse for the commentators to discuss random bollocks (um, not literally) between balls, and televised cricket is pointless because they take it too seriously.

    Given that the sort of statistics we're talking about here are closer to what statisticians would normally call data (X scored Y runs in game Z), it would seem obvious to me that it's historical fact, and not copyrightable. But then, I'm not American and don't give a toss about baseball.

  19. Next logical step by goldcd · · Score: 2, Funny

    is surely a big swirly pattern on the screen after each match
    "You will forget who won, you will forget who won, you won't pirate our stats."
    It must really piss them off with all the DRM they're intent on sticking on media they can't actually do this. Just imagine the fun of being able to resell you the same match every week. In fact they'd just need to tape one game, fire the players and broadcast the tape in loop.
    New legislation will be passed making the Person2Person sharing of stats illegal - MLB agents will be kicking down the doors of mothers whose children discussed results in the playground.

  20. Re:Facts? by CortoMaltese · · Score: 3, Funny
    It is still just facts. Weather statistics, like the temperature and wether the sun is shining or not is one of the most important components for anyone in meteorology, still doesn't mean no one else can tell about the weather yesterday they read about or saw.

    Yeah, but you didn't buy a ticket from the corporation organizing the wonder of weather to see it, did you? Be sure the check the EULA next time you go see a game of baseball! I'll bet it says "You are granted a non-exclusive license to enjoy the game yadda yadda but the ownership and rights to the results remain the sole property of blah blah blaa." ;-)

  21. Re:Football Facts? by rishistar · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh yeah, sorry should point out that the above is for the kind of football where the ball spends most of its time being kicked around by someones foot rather than being thrown around and caught in someones hands.

    --
    Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
  22. what an exciting game! (yawn....) by fantomas · · Score: 4, Funny
    "Statistics are one of the most important components in baseball"


    Remind me to never bother using up any of my life finding out about this game... sounds really exciting ;-)

  23. Re:Facts? by sinistre · · Score: 4, Funny

    Better yet. Have him write the ticket and then collect royalities twice the amount. Actually make money speeding :)

  24. Re:Football Facts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You don't pick the ball up?
    Sheesh, you silly Europeans! That sport will *never* catch on.

  25. Re:Facts? by magores · · Score: 4, Funny

    FYI.... '±' is the chinese character for "scholar".

    -Lets consider that there are 1.3 billion Chinese.
    -Let's assume that .3 billion of them are literate enough to recognize the character. (Might be lower, probably higher.)

    So...
    -Take .3 billion Chinese using the '±' character an average of once a year.
    -Add the 4 Americans using the '±' character when they discuss baseball
    -Multiply by your $50 USD per use

    = You are a friggin kuai-ionnaire!!!!

    Good luck collecting in China though. (The odds say, .... Odds are...., Statistically speaking... Your still poor.)

  26. Re:The really question is... by niktemadur · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's right. Hu is on first. Don Hu, a chinese gentleman. Frank Watt is on second and Pierre Iaduneau from Quebec is on third.

    --
    Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
  27. Mine! by EBFoxbat · · Score: 2, Funny

    All your intellectual property are belong to us. No, really, we own the rights to it. And 51% of the human genome. So basically you belong to us.

    I think legally it will hold up in court. All that means is that the laws need to be changed.

    We should take up a collection for this: Buy the rights to, or patent if unowned, the genes that allow our lungs to process oxygen. Then demand, in court, a $.0001 loyalty fee per breath per person. While entirely silly, it would force the courts to rethink there policies and laws. As a bonus, if they don't reconsider , we'll all be rich.

    Note: The intellectualy propery for this idea is soley mine. Anyone using this idea will have to pay me 10% of gross profits.

  28. Re:Facts? by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Maybe you could use some radar/laser interference device to try to encrypt you speed. When they find a way around your device, to actually figure out your speed, then they would be breaking the DMCA.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  29. Re:Facts? by harmonica · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ask your GrandGrandGrandGrandGrandGrandMa

    Which one? I have 64 of those.

  30. Re:Facts? by tdemark · · Score: 3, Funny


    See that ship over there? They're re-broadcasting Major League Baseball with implied oral consent, not express written consent -- or so the legend goes.
    </obHomer>

  31. Re:Not so off-the-wall by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Funny
    Its perfectly legal to tell someone that The Lord of the Rings is about a fight between good and evil, and that good wins in the end.

    Thanks for the spoiler. Not all of us have read the books yet, let alone seen the movies they were based on.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  32. Re:Facts? by Doctor+Memory · · Score: 2, Funny

    No, I'm Jack's complete lack of surprise

    Part of this complete breakfast!

    --
    Just junk food for thought...
  33. Re:Facts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Well, that depends on where you are from.