Man has copy of original CBS broadcast of SB 1 - NFL says FU

[Prickly Pete]

Getting a kick out of some of the inaccurate replies in here. OF course, this ONE-OF-A-KIND recording is much different than the weak analogies that have been offered up in this thread.

 

Also, before I even read the post above about the "new" article, my 14 year-old daughter could have told me that the guy could sell it to whoever he wants to. The copyright, and the warning that is spewed out for just about all broadcast sports events, is meant to prevent REBROADCAST or retransmission.

 

Selling it is NOT rebroadcasting it. And if he conducted the sale "in private", to another "private buyer", how would the NFL even know about it?

 

Yeah. I can't figure out why, but some people relish the idea of this guy losing out.

Lowballed?

 

It's like he worked 15 years for this tape. What did he even personally do to acquire it?

 

Is this the complaint, "he didn't work for it"? I have to resort to an emoticon for this....

He inherited it, just like most of the NFL owners inherited their wealth, or in some cases the team itself.

Edited February 5, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[FireChan]

 

Yeah. I can't figure out why, but some people relish the idea of this guy losing out.

 

Is this the complaint, "he didn't work for it"? I have to resort to an emoticon for this....

He inherited it, just like most of the NFL owners inherited their wealth, or in some cases the team itself.

I see you edited this, so I'm going to clarify.

 

First of all, "the complaint." I'm speaking for me personally. Not WEO or anyone else you feel the need to demonize and lump together.

 

Second of all, the way you come off is painting this guy as a "David"-esque character. The "little guy." He's just a guy who has a tape left to him. He's not a small business owner who is getting screwed by corporate interests. This isn't his life's work. This isn't the way he puts bread on the table and it's getting stripped from him. IMO, that's how you're painting it to elicit an emotional response rather than a logical one. Along with your constant references to "relishing" him getting screwed and claims of financial sector greed.

 

Third, this guy will get what market forces bear. No more, no less. If there isn't a market to sell the tape because of the law, then he gets nothing. For him that sucks, but you'll excuse me if I don't feel bad because a guy trying to sell something isn't getting what he "deserves," or what he's "entitled to." He's entitled to nothing. He deserves, again, what he's offered.

 

Fourth, the businesses like the NFL don't get to where they are by overpaying extravagantly. If the seller isn't technically allowed to sell the broadcast, and they offer him $30k as a gesture or gift, that's icing on the cake for this guy. Again, both you and he feel he's entitled to get $1M for it. Fine, go find the buyer who is willing to pay $1M. The NFL is under no obligation to do so. If he can't find a buyer, well then too bad.

[Prickly Pete]

I see you edited this, so I'm going to clarify.

 

First of all, "the complaint." I'm speaking for me personally. Not WEO or anyone else you feel the need to demonize and lump together.

 

Second of all, the way you come off is painting this guy as a "David"-esque character. The "little guy." He's just a guy who has a tape left to him. He's not a small business owner who is getting screwed by corporate interests. This isn't his life's work. This isn't the way he puts bread on the table and it's getting stripped from him. IMO, that's how you're painting it to elicit an emotional response rather than a logical one. Along with your constant references to "relishing" him getting screwed and claims of financial sector greed.

 

Third, this guy will get what market forces bear. No more, no less. If there isn't a market to sell the tape because of the law, then he gets nothing. For him that sucks, but you'll excuse me if I don't feel bad because a guy trying to sell something isn't getting what he "deserves," or what he's "entitled to." He's entitled to nothing. He deserves, again, what he's offered.

 

Fourth, the businesses like the NFL don't get to where they are by overpaying extravagantly. If the seller isn't technically allowed to sell the broadcast, and they offer him $30k as a gesture or gift, that's icing on the cake for this guy. Again, both you and he feel he's entitled to get $1M for it. Fine, go find the buyer who is willing to pay $1M. The NFL is under no obligation to do so. If he can't find a buyer, well then too bad.

 

I never said he was "entitled", and when I edited my post, I only added to it.

 

I see this guy as someone who got very lucky, and who the NFL is trying to use it's weight against to underpay for something that is obviously valuable. Then people here attack him, like he should just accept being bullied (like perhaps, they have all their lives).

 

He will get what the market bears, and I'm confident that it will be more than $30,000. It would be great to see what collectors would be willing to pay at an auction. Then it's true value would be there for all to see, no?

 

But instead, some here want to side with the NFL, who foolishly didn't preserve copies of the event.

 

That's right !@#$er, I'm for the little guy.

[WotAGuy]

I used to buy DVDs of game broadcasts on eBay all the time until the NFL (I assume) cracked down on eBay and now those sellers are very reluctant to do anything other than "trade" for other games they don't have. So, there must be a legal reason, or a good threat of it, that prevents that guy from doing an open bid or sale of that tape.

[FireChan]

 

I never said he was "entitled", and when I edited my post, I only added to it.

 

I see this guy as someone who got very lucky, and who the NFL is trying to use it's weight against to underpay for something that is obviously valuable. Then people here attack him, like he should just accept being bullied (like perhaps, they have all their lives).

 

He will get what the market bears, and I'm confident that it will be more than $30,000. It would be great to see what collectors would be willing to pay at an auction. Then it's true value would be there for all to see, no?

 

But instead, some here want to side with the NFL, who foolishly didn't preserve copies of the event.

 

That's right !@#$er, I'm for the little guy.

Like I said, trying to elicit an emotional response.

 

How is the NFL "using its weight?" Do they not have copyright? Is it not their property?

 

If the NFL has a legal case (I'm inclined to think they do), then you aren't allowed to break the law, no matter how "underpaid" you are. Go pursue legal reform, if you want to make a difference. The facts are the facts and the law is the law. It's not being "bullied." You don't get to bluff for $1M and then pout and whine when the league calls your bluff. The guy should've consulted his legal counsel before rejecting the $30k deal. His self-imposed ignorance dug him in this hole.

Edited February 5, 2016 by FireChan

[Prickly Pete]

Like I said, trying to elicit an emotional response.

 

How is the NFL "using its weight?" Do they not have copyright? Is it not their property?

 

If the NFL has a legal case (I'm inclined to think they do), then you aren't allowed to break the law, no matter how "underpaid" you are. Go pursue legal reform, if you want to make a difference. The facts are the facts and the law is the law. It's not being "bullied." You don't get to bluff for $1M and then pout and whine when the league calls your bluff. The guy should've consulted his legal counsel before rejecting the $30k deal. His self-imposed ignorance dug him in this hole.

 

But it hasn't been to court yet, so you don't really know if he is "pouting", or if he was leveraged, now do you?

 

Again, if he wins in court, will it be "yeah, that guy was smart, good for him, the Law of the Land has served justice", or are YOU emotionally invested in him not succeeding? I'm inclined to believe the latter.

[ToGoGo]

 

I never said he was "entitled", and when I edited my post, I only added to it.

 

I see this guy as someone who got very lucky, and who the NFL is trying to use it's weight against to underpay for something that is obviously valuable. Then people here attack him, like he should just accept being bullied (like perhaps, they have all their lives).

 

He will get what the market bears, and I'm confident that it will be more than $30,000. It would be great to see what collectors would be willing to pay at an auction. Then it's true value would be there for all to see, no?

 

But instead, some here want to side with the NFL, who foolishly didn't preserve copies of the event.

 

That's right !@#$er, I'm for the little guy.

 

Haha, careful there.

 

Even if the NFL was in the right, I would still root for this guy to get $20 million. The NFL can go f*ck themselves!

[Prickly Pete]

 

Haha, careful there.

 

Even if the NFL was in the right, I would still root for this guy to get $20 million. The NFL can go f*ck themselves!

 

Ha, I know it gets censored. And the other guy calling people "asshats" ain't cool.

[FireChan]

 

But it hasn't been to court yet, so you don't really know if he is "pouting", or if he was leveraged, now do you?

 

Again, if he wins in court, will it be "yeah, that guy was smart, good for him, the Law of the Land has served justice", or are YOU emotionally invested in him not succeeding? I'm inclined to believe the latter.

How was he "leveraged?"

 

How is the NFL "using its weight?" Do they not have copyright? Is it not their property?

 

You're inclined to believe I'm emotionally invested in the outcome? The poster with 3 (now 4) posts in this topic? And you leading the charge with 19? I think you should look it the mirror when it comes to emotional investment.

[ToGoGo]

How was he "leveraged?"

 

How is the NFL "using its weight?" Do they not have copyright? Is it not their property?

 

You're inclined to believe I'm emotionally invested in the outcome? The poster with 3 (now 4) posts in this topic? And you leading the charge with 19? I think you should look it the mirror when it comes to emotional investment.

 

The NFL can pay this guy $100k no problemo.

 

We know the NFL secretly wants it. We know the guy wants to sell it. Yet, they're playing the "all offers off the table" game. They know he can't sell it because they have a platoon of copyright lawyers ready to go. So instead of a compromise, some egos got hurt at the NFL office and they decide to play hardball with a nobody.

 

I think this whole thing is about the NFL not being able to stand somebody getting the best of them. I'm in real estate and people get their feelings hurt during negotiation everyday. Even lawyers and people you wouldn't expect to. Lowballs and highballs hurt people's egos. This is all about the NFL trying to pin him.

 

The NFL wants him to call them and beg for $30k again. Then they'll offer him $10k and he'll take it. That's what this is all about. Ego.

[WotAGuy]

I wonder if the NFL spent more or less than $30K creating the special they just televised. I'm thinking more.

 

From the article, it sounds like the quality of the tape is really not even up to the quality standards for broadcasting. I wonder if it was actually broadcast-quality whether the NFL would have forked over a lot more. I think so, but no way would they pay $1M. Just because SI quoted that estimated value doesn't make it so.

[Prickly Pete]

How was he "leveraged?"

 

How is the NFL "using its weight?" Do they not have copyright? Is it not their property?

 

You're inclined to believe I'm emotionally invested in the outcome? The poster with 3 (now 4) posts in this topic? And you leading the charge with 19? I think you should look it the mirror when it comes to emotional investment.

 

I make no bones about it. I WANT THE GUY TO WIN.

And I want the kind of people that favor Goliath's like the NFL to LOSE. EVERY !@#$IN' TIME.

 

The NFL can pay this guy $100k no problemo.

 

We know the NFL secretly wants it. We know the guy wants to sell it. Yet, they're playing the "all offers off the table" game. They know he can't sell it because they have a platoon of copyright lawyers ready to go. So instead of a compromise, some egos got hurt at the NFL office and they decide to play hardball with a nobody.

 

I think this whole thing is about the NFL not being able to stand somebody getting the best of them. I'm in real estate and people get their feelings hurt during negotiation everyday. Even lawyers and people you wouldn't expect to. Lowballs and highballs hurt people's egos. This is all about the NFL trying to pin him.

 

The NFL wants him to call them and beg for $30k again. Then they'll offer him $10k and he'll take it. That's what this is all about. Ego.

 

Yeah, but some want to act disingenuous..."Oh, the NFL just offered a fair value. This guys pouting when all he has is the only copy of the first Super Bowl, the biggest yearly event in television....Take it dude, and go buy a nice used car."

 

Like one guy said, I'd sooner send them the ashes.

Edited February 5, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[ToGoGo]

Yeah, but some want to act disingenuous..."Oh, the NFL just offered a fair value. This guys pouting when all he has is the only copy of the first Super Bowl, the biggest yearly event in television....Take it dude, and go buy a nice used car."

 

I never understood that frame of mind. Siding with the billion dollar corporation. I don't know if these people are just so beaten into obedience they have Stockholm Syndrome. Or they just don't want to see anybody like them (Joe Schmo with videotape) get a big pay day, so they're playing crabs in a bucket.

 

It's like the fans that look down on players that come from poverty trying to get an extra couple million, and support the billionaire owners who don't want to open their pockets.

[WotAGuy]

I think a lot more people would be on the little guy's side if he had a sound legal position, but he doesn't seem to.

 

If someone was trying to get something over on you that the law didn't allow for, wouldn't you want protection of said law?

 

I wonder if the guy would have taken the $30K if he didn't read SI and get lawyered up.

[Prickly Pete]

 

I never understood that frame of mind. Siding with the billion dollar corporation. I don't know if these people are just so beaten into obedience they have Stockholm Syndrome. Or they just don't want to see anybody like them (Joe Schmo with videotape) get a big pay day, so they're playing crabs in a bucket.

 

It's like the fans that look down on players that come from poverty trying to get an extra couple million, and support the billionaire owners who don't want to open their pockets.

I think it's that.

 

"He didn't work for it".

 

I'm sure EVERY one of them would absolutely be pissed, if they were in this guy's position. Even Chan's On Fire, and Mr. World Endoscopy Organization.

Edited February 5, 2016 by HoF Watkins

[FireChan]

 

The NFL can pay this guy $100k no problemo.

 

We know the NFL secretly wants it. We know the guy wants to sell it. Yet, they're playing the "all offers off the table" game. They know he can't sell it because they have a platoon of copyright lawyers ready to go. So instead of a compromise, some egos got hurt at the NFL office and they decide to play hardball with a nobody.

 

I think this whole thing is about the NFL not being able to stand somebody getting the best of them. I'm in real estate and people get their feelings hurt during negotiation everyday. Even lawyers and people you wouldn't expect to. Lowballs and highballs hurt people's egos. This is all about the NFL trying to pin him.

 

The NFL wants him to call them and beg for $30k again. Then they'll offer him $10k and he'll take it. That's what this is all about. Ego.

So they can pay $100k. So what? A millionaire can pay a ton for a trailer. He doesn't have to, and nor should he.

 

The NFL has already won. This guy gambled 30k vs. $1M and lost.

 

 

I make no bones about it. I WANT THE GUY TO WIN.

And I want the kind of people that favor Goliath's like the NFL to LOSE. EVERY !@#$IN' TIME.

 

Yeah, but some want to act disingenuous..."Oh, the NFL just offered a fair value. This guys pouting when all he has is the only copy of the first Super Bowl, the biggest yearly event in television....Take it dude, and go buy a nice used car."

 

Like one guy said, I'd sooner send them the ashes.

You mean the guys that favor the law? Because that's what this is about. If this guy was in the legal right, it'd be a different story.

 

You favor breaking the law, I guess? Or not upholding it? Just because the NFL makes money, and this nurse anesthetist doesn't make as much as them? Sounds like a case of the "give me some of that."

Edited February 5, 2016 by FireChan

[ToGoGo]

I think it's that.

 

"He didn't work for it".

 

I'm sure EVERY one of them would absolutely be pissed, if they were in this guy's position. Even Chan's On Fire, and Mr. World Endoscopy Organization.

 

Oh God, I can't even imagine. My father has the ONLY tape of Super Bowl I in the world and I can't sell it because some billion dollar greedy corporation refuses to pay me a life changing sum that would be pennies to them just because they have their panties in a twist.

 

Didn't some guy buy Google.com for $12 a few months ago because it accidentally became available. Google could have just sued him and taken the name back, but instead they gave him $6,000 and said sorry for the trouble. That's how you do it. Not this shady, greedy way. I can't wait until they start diagnosing CTE in living players and the NFL turns into flag football.

[WotAGuy]

$6K for the Google name is a far bigger travesty than $30K for a crappy tape that isn't even needed now.

 

Oh God, I can't even imagine. My father has the ONLY tape of Super Bowl I in the world and I can't sell it because some billion dollar greedy corporation refuses to pay me a life changing sum that would be pennies to them just because they have their panties in a twist.

 

Didn't some guy buy Google.com for $12 a few months ago because it accidentally became available. Google could have just sued him and taken the name back, but instead they gave him $6,000 and said sorry for the trouble. That's how you do it. Not this shady, greedy way. I can't wait until they start diagnosing CTE in living players and the NFL turns into flag football.

That sounds rather greedy and shady.

[ToGoGo]

$6K for the Google name is a far bigger travesty than $30K for a crappy tape that isn't even needed now.

That sounds rather greedy and shady.

 

You're starting to take things personal in this thread and the other one. Why don't you take a break.

[John in Jax]

You mean the guys that favor the law? Because that's what this is about. If this guy was in the legal right, it'd be a different story.

 

You favor breaking the law, I guess? Or not upholding it? Just because the NFL makes money, and this nurse anesthetist doesn't make as much as them? Sounds like a case of the "give me some of that."

Huh!? I guess you missed the linked article in post #98. It IS NOT cut and dried that the guy has "no legal right" to sell it. In fact, in that article, some legal eagles are very confident that he can sell the tape with no repercussions, to the highest bidder.