Comments on: NFL Tells Indiana Churches to Screw Themselves!! Copyright Laws Cited.

By: stephen

stephen — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 15:23:38 +0000

I would agree that a big part of the NFL’s problem with many people watching the game in one place is that the ratings would go down because less people would be at home even though the same number people are really watching the game in groups.

By: Mr. Fusion

Mr. Fusion — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 02:32:57 +0000

#47, Greg, thank you for the update.

I don’t think the NFL would be able to sue any church for showing the game. If the broadcast is “over the air” then it is free. It may not be copied or rebroadcast but you can’t stop anyone from catching your signal. That is the price of using the public’s airwaves to show your broadcast.

Cable broadcasts are different though. They can, and do, put limitations on viewers. That would include Applebee’s which use ESPN.

As others have alluded, this is just a bully boy tactic.

By: GregA

GregA — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 18:37:57 +0000

Actually this story has been updated. I was exactly right. Everyone who disagreed with me was nearly totally wrong.

Further more, I was correct about the nefarious goals of the churches. It seems the churches use this as an important ‘fund raising’ effort, and the half time show is a proselytizing effort.

This whole news cycle was about the war mongering christian fundamentals efforts to influence and takeover the NFL. It is eerily similar to the way these same groups have taken over high school football, and made them church proselytizing efforts.

If you guys want to continue to be free, it is time to take the kid gloves off when dealing with these talibanesque groups.

By: pedro

pedro — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 10:59:09 +0000

#45 asked: “…if a church is a sacred place to worship God why are they watching football in Church.”

To look how to get their comunity closer? To see if they can win back those that say church is boring?

By: Joel Price

Joel Price — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 09:13:12 +0000

My first reaction is if a church is a sacred place to worship God why are they watching football in Church. Now to my point, the reason the NFL doesn’t want Church or Movie theater showings is because the NFL’s biggest sponsors don’t want it. You can’t drink beer in these venues! The NFL does what its sponsors want. Trust me on this one.

By: Thomas

Thomas — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 07:04:47 +0000

Arguing that you can’t get a ticket is specious. You can *always* get a ticket…if you have enough money. Personally, I couldn’t justify even list price of a Super Bowl ticket and frankly, having been to a few stadiums that have hosted Super Bowls, I’d be damn upset if I blew four to five (or more) figures on one of those crappy seats with swill beer where I can’t TIVO replays at my hearts content.

I would bet that while the Nielsen argument is at the root of this policy, enforcement is geared towards PPV. To me, it seems ridiculous that you can force copyright restrictions on something that you are giving away for free. I’m having a Life-of-Brian flashback.

“Four for this gourd? Four!!!! Look at it, that’s worth ten if it’s worth a shekel.”
“But you just gave it to me for nothing.”
“Yes, but it’s worth ten.”

By: John C Dvorak

John C Dvorak — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 05:25:51 +0000

#42 see #35 — it’s just thinking ahead…

By: Lewy

Lewy — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:36:36 +0000

The more interesting question to me is, “What does the NFL expect to GAIN by their action?”

Force everyone to watch the game at the stadium? Nope, can’t get in. It’s sold out.

Force everyone to pay them a royalty? Maybe, but I didn’t see any demand for payment made to presenters.

Keep non-beer drinkers from watching together? Could be, but what about the Catholics, who are not known as teetotalers?

In the old spirit of “follow the money”, where EXACTLY is the money that drives this issue?

By: John C Dvorak

John C Dvorak — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:30:24 +0000

#35 I agree with this. This is just a set up to gouge the public more than they do already. By setting up this enforcement early and setting a precedent they can stave off these churches from putting the PPV up on the big screen when it comes to that. This is all about precedent so nobody can complain later. This also makes sense with the 55-inch limitation. With PPV they will not want a huge group even gathering at your house to watch since it will hurt PPV revenues.

#40 — this is a statistical analysis by Nielsen.. not absolute and it seems unlikely that out of any 500 churchgoers even one person would be a Nielsen person and that person would probably keeps a Nielsen diary that accounts for such viewing. I can assure you that this is not the reason.

By: Wilstar

Wilstar — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:23:57 +0000

According to the NFL, right or wrong, the problem with having 500 people over to watch a public showing of the Super Bowl instead of each one watching the same thing in their own homes is that when you watch it in public, you’re not counted in the Nielson TV ratings. The ratings determine how much they can charge for commercials. So the more TVs tuned to the game, the better, not necessarily the more people.

By: Gary Marks

Gary Marks — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 22:03:13 +0000

This furor with the church explains why the weather report for Miami on Sunday calls for showers throughout the day with a high around 70, and a 40% chance of brimstone. I’m not sure how to dress for the fire and brimstone of a wrathful god, but I guess a light jacket couldn’t hurt.

Game on!

By: John

John — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:58:03 +0000

#21,
If you read the various articles about this you will see that the church was willing to drop the charge, but NFL still objected to their use of a projector telling them that the law limits the viewing to 1 TV at 55 inches or less.

By: Mr.Newton

Mr.Newton — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:34:08 +0000

churches are non-profit? define non-profit.i may own a
thousand companies & say they are non-profit after they send me my share of the $ they make.(vatican),(sally ann) just as 2 examples.
it can all be summed up in 1 word..greed…the american way..
on the other hand,,what is the law..who besides the government is above it?,oops,,lost my head,what was i thinking,,above the law???

By: sagrilarus

sagrilarus — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:25:46 +0000

The issue here isn’t the copyright. The NFL could choose to not let you watch the game at all if they wanted to, or release it unrestricted. The issue is the retarded policy they have chosen.

Personally, I think the NFL is eating their seed corn. The Super Bowl is played in the evening on a school-night — none of my kids have even seen one yet. This game belongs on in the afternoon. And if the NFL had even a one-year outlook on their profitabilty they would be encouraging every social group in the world, church or otherwise, to bring people together to watch. More eyes on the set means more future fans, and frankly, more people watching the adverts.

The lawyers are just enforcing a policy here. It’s the owners that are the idiots in this equation.

Don’t even get me started on Major League Baseball. They’ve shot themselves in the head six times and are currently reloading.

Sag.

By: TheGlobalWarmer

TheGlobalWarmer — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:24:24 +0000

This is just one more step toward the ultimate goal. PPV Superbowl. Once the NFL gets to that point it’ll die just like boxing did.