Okay, this is proof that there are too many lawyers in the world. Seriously! Who sits around and thinks about this moronic stuff that they think they can do? This starts out like a bad joke monologue... "There's these business lawyers that are talking in their billable free time..."

This subject came up talking with another baseball buff. There's supposedly been talk of trying to copyright statistics. Lessee if we can break down the logic of this.

Statistics are the reporting of historical data. For these "statistics" to be of any kind of real value in measuring, monitoring and/or forecasting, they need to be accurate. Accurate meaning factual. Hmmm. This is where it could get really carried away, meaning to the point of idiotic laws and civil judgements. If so-and-so player hits a single and a home-run while scoring another run, that's relaying factual results. Can I watch a pee-wee baseball game and "copyright" those stats, simply because I reported them? Sure, the article that might be put in a local paper or online could be considered subject to copyright protection. But can I steal that information because I watched the game and was the first to use it?

So this majour league player has a good day. It's reported on all of the usually news sites, the association's baseball site and hundreds to thousands of other sites which run from gambling establishments to fantasy sports. Who owns the information then? And the really sickening part is the claimer on the site that all information included on it is the sole-property of that individual/corporation.

Sure, I can write a school textbook about astronomy and indicate that Malmut-098 is an astral body exactly 1.3482 light years away, but from that moment on, does that information mean I deserve royalties for anyone using it?? How's it different from when a sports figure "produces" results in a competitive event? Not to mention the other myriad of facts that are out there that are simply awaiting the "copyright" of supposed owners. Let me jump the gun here... I hereby copyright all facts!!

© 2006, RancerDS

All information contained herein is the sole property of copyright holder. Any reuse or rebroadcast of this information is prohibited. Per Section 43.7, subsection D., violaters will be arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The maximum fine is $100,000 per instance of violation per violater and may result in confinement within the Gulag. If you travel, Interpol will be notified, just so you know there is no escape.... and that they pursue all copyright/trademark crimes with great diligence.

By the way, since it's copyrighted, I'm sending Delta the bill for the right to publically display this article.

Postscript: Like you were really going to take this post seriously? :)

[NOTE: Some content may not be appropriate for all ages. Parental consent is advised.]

Oh yeah... and let's throw in registered trademarks!

America Online (AOL) tried to register "You have mail!" as theirs. Only problem is.. the people that use the AOL service don't get mail... they get e-mail online. Whew, good think it wasn't registered or the poor U.S. Postal Service would never be able to use that slogan. And if they ever made the goof of using it when it was registered, they'd have to pay AOL and then stop using it.

Looking at Fox News lately, they're showing "Fair and Balanced" as a trademark of theirs. Is that really fair and balanced? OMGosh!! Have I violated that now and facing serious repercussions? Wait! Maybe I didn't use it in a way to violate the terms of the trademark protection. So I need to a hire an expensive and competant (mutually exclusive!!) lawyer to be sure I'm safe?! Or do we all need to think like lawyers.. and become one in our spare time? Even if I were a lawyer, if this weren't my area of practice, I'd still probably have to hire another leech to tell me what he thinks the laws mean regarding that. And we all know we have better things to do than become lawyers ourselves.

Hey, while I'm thinking of how ludicrous this is... I'm going to trademark a phrase. I'll even say it was coined by me. It's the phrase: "running bloody fuck". Because I really don't give one. Honestly, when the world's biggest morons think they deserve something for nothing, just because they had a clever moment, the world is certainly in the state of shambles.

Okay, enough ranting. Speaking of clever phrases, how about "What planet do you inhabit?" Say that fast as you can three times. After a while, you sound like a talking frog on speed.

How about you? Got any quotes that you want to "protect" via copyright and/or trademark so as to insure you don't lose any potential profits or suffer copy-catting??

Oh, yeah, I remember telling you about this a while back. The copyright thing.

They are claiming that it goes under "player's likeness" and thus, would be property of either the player or the player's association. Basiclly the article I read in SI said what you said, that if they actually carried this out, not only would things like fantasy baseball become a bitch to play, due to the fact you'll be paying real cash whenever your player did.....anything, but it would also prevent magazines, newspapers, online sites, all the way up to ESPN itself from event publicly discussing it.

As for the last bit, its interesting to read the copyright laws in refernce to the content on this site. ;)

Talking about likeness, guess that one is still a bit of a sticky issue.

For instance, if the MLB Players Association wants to protect the photographic likeness of players, they can take photographs and copyright all of them. The same with the news media, they can copyright the pictures they pay to have taken. But if an amatuer takes photos, is that infringing on their "profits" and protected rights?

For example, if a player doesn't want to have their picture taken, is that something that can be universally prohibited? After all, celebrities of all types have to deal with the papparazzi. But if the courts decide that the rights to having snapshots done by anyone, does that mean that other "likenesses" of them are unprotected?

Awesomeness!! A fair and just ruling!

I can't believe it. <pinching myself>
A judge made the right call on determining that MLB player statistics are public domain. Even the player and team names can be used.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060809-7456.html

Awesome, though I'm not overly surprised. Only a very stupid judge would rule the other way, it would really lead to an interesting precedent, one that would overly affect alot.

Judges try to avoid that.