JoPoy88 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 Not gonna get into the fair use debate going on in here but my whole thing is it just seems like an odd licensing arrangement by the NFL/NFL Films. Pat has the rights to play highlights. On any given highlight the teams’ logos are splayed across all the helmets and field, and the scorebug if visible. Why he can’t use the logos to put together a static promo graphic or an intro graphic for said highlight without paying for a separate license seems incredibly dumb unless accounting for myopic greed. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HunTim Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 No harm, no foul is the way I look at it. Millionaires fighting over money is nothing new. No matter who wins, it is implicit, it's us who they screw. PS: Surely, the "Fair use" clause in prevailing trademark and related intellectual property law applies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoPoy88 Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 4 hours ago, NoSaint said: I think he’s obnoxious as hell sometimes, but that he’s producing a more authentic insight into the nfl than most major media guys. He makes good connections with the players and gets them going in a more unfiltered manner than just about anyone else these days. he’s got the authenticity of a guy that spent time in the locker room and doesn’t burn it the way most ex players do when trying to figure out the media side plus he talks to Aaron Rodgers on a weekly basis, and that guy doesn’t even talk to his family. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorin' Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 11 hours ago, RocCityRoller said: Ironic coming from a guy who has a Bills logo and an AFC Conference logo in your avatar. Is it? Is he hosting a live show that charges a subscription fee and sells multi-million dollar sponsorships? And is his show able to generate millions of dollars due to the popularity of the league and brand in question? I like McAfee and his show. There's no chance he's a millionaire if his audience wasn't pulled from the audience the NFL created. He adds value, he's funny. But he's not the NFL, and so he doesn't have the right to use their trademarks in the creation of content that he charges for. Unless he pays for that right. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17islongenough Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 19 minutes ago, Motorin' said: Is it? Is he hosting a live show that charges a subscription fee and sells multi-million dollar sponsorships? And is his show able to generate millions of dollars due to the popularity of the league and brand in question? I like McAfee and his show. There's no chance he's a millionaire if his audience wasn't pulled from the audience the NFL created. He adds value, he's funny. But he's not the NFL, and so he doesn't have the right to use their trademarks in the creation of content that he charges for. Unless he pays for that right. You can watch his show for free. Not sure why someone is paying for it. He also pays the NFL 4 million a year 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Motorin' said: Is it? Is he hosting a live show that charges a subscription fee and sells multi-million dollar sponsorships? And is his show able to generate millions of dollars due to the popularity of the league and brand in question? I like McAfee and his show. There's no chance he's a millionaire if his audience wasn't pulled from the audience the NFL created. He adds value, he's funny. But he's not the NFL, and so he doesn't have the right to use their trademarks in the creation of content that he charges for. Unless he pays for that right. He got a lot of listeners from the barstool job he took after he left the NFL. One of the reasons he left was basically stuff like this - he was paid a salary but he didn't know the goings-on outside of his podcasts, blogs, etc. He was talent, not a business partner. He's not just NFL either, he has wrestled at multiple WWE events, and was the color announcer on smackdown for like a year. He works for ESPN on College Gameday every Saturday, and does a ton of other ESPN stuff related to both college and pro football. Sending a Cease and Desist letter to an ESPN employee is just so strange and petty to me. I know the reasoning is likely NFL+ related and there will be EXCLUSIVE podcasts that will be able to air whatever they want. 14 minutes ago, 17islongenough said: You can watch his show for free. Not sure why someone is paying for it. He also pays the NFL 4 million a year It's a podcast, they're all free - they just do mid-show ads for things like fanduel and stuff. He's basically made his own barstool sports - but without the controversy that accompanies working with Dave Portnoy. Edited November 2, 2022 by Bleeding Bills Blue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saxum Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 31 minutes ago, Bleeding Bills Blue said: Sending a Cease and Desist letter to an ESPN employee is just so strange and petty to me. I know the reasoning is likely NFL+ related and there will be EXCLUSIVE podcasts that will be able to air whatever they want. This reasoning makes most sense for this organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RocCityRoller Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 1 hour ago, Motorin' said: Is it? Is he hosting a live show that charges a subscription fee and sells multi-million dollar sponsorships? And is his show able to generate millions of dollars due to the popularity of the league and brand in question? I like McAfee and his show. There's no chance he's a millionaire if his audience wasn't pulled from the audience the NFL created. He adds value, he's funny. But he's not the NFL, and so he doesn't have the right to use their trademarks in the creation of content that he charges for. Unless he pays for that right. Tell me you didn't listen to the clip without telling me you didn't listen to the clip. He pays the NFL $4million a year in licensing fees. Not sure who is paying a subscription for his Podcast, it is free to me, as are most of the video clips on youtube. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 (edited) So the thing that sticks out most to me with all of this, is the NFL specifically targeting their show? Why are other companies (ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc) allowed to use NFL team logos when doing the news? Do they have a different contract with these news outlets than they do with McAfee? And I'm not specifically talking about their broadcasting contract. I'm referring to the shows that they have either leading up to the broadcasts. Are those shows actually NFL "owned" shows or do they belong to the broadcast company? Edited November 2, 2022 by The Wiz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorin' Posted November 2, 2022 Share Posted November 2, 2022 15 minutes ago, RocCityRoller said: Tell me you didn't listen to the clip without telling me you didn't listen to the clip. He pays the NFL $4million a year in licensing fees. Not sure who is paying a subscription for his Podcast, it is free to me, as are most of the video clips on youtube. Tell me you've never made a licensing deal without telling me you've never made a licensing deal. He pays for video footage, and explained on his show that he can't even pause it, because then it becomes a graphic. And his deal currently does not include the licensing of graphics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Process Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 Incredible 🤣 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bferra13 Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 On 11/1/2022 at 10:36 PM, NoSaint said: I think he’s obnoxious as hell sometimes, but that he’s producing a more authentic insight into the nfl than most major media guys. He makes good connections with the players and gets them going in a more unfiltered manner than just about anyone else these days. he’s got the authenticity of a guy that spent time in the locker room and doesn’t burn it the way most ex players do when trying to figure out the media side Agreed on the obnoxious thing. He's alright. Kind of a dbag though at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsShredder83 Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 On 11/1/2022 at 10:13 AM, DrDawkinstein said: We get the "black & white", you signed a contract, point of this. I'm not going to argue with you on that. We all get that. It's the most basic way of looking at this. The point of discussion is that the Trillion Dollar NFL is once again shooting itself in the foot for something they could easily smooth over at no cost of their own, and even garner more good will. It's marketing and advertising. They pay a ton for it anyways. It's a short-sighted, greedy move. Sure, they have "the right" to do it, but that doesnt make it "right". But I look forward to the upcoming "NFL Dirt" segments and discussions that will be coming. They poked a bear in a guy that has more media ability to come up with dirt than anyone else. Players love Pat, he's a fun interview, everyone let's their hair down a bit. If you're an nfl player and have a gripe he's the first person I'd think of to go to. Huge outreach, trustworthy, and a guy that knows the business from the inside. Only thing potentially keeping pat from going nuclear (if wanted) is being nervous at losing the permissions he already has. Both sides are motivated to figure this out, so that's what I expect to happen. But what an absolute crap look, yet again, from the nfl. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsShredder83 Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 On 11/1/2022 at 11:09 AM, Beck Water said: I think he did, you don't seem able to decode his answer. HIs answer was that allowing people to use IP without additional charge if they generate effective free advertising for you isn't "giving away IP" and may in fact be an effective means to maximize revenue. Not to mention it directly lines the pockets of a HUGE (possibly largest, unsure, but if it's not, they will be in time) sponsor of the nfls. The biggest promoter of the nfls largest sponsor, seems very stupid to alienate Pat and Fanduel for money that won't move their needle. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted November 3, 2022 Author Share Posted November 3, 2022 On 11/2/2022 at 11:53 AM, The Wiz said: So the thing that sticks out most to me with all of this, is the NFL specifically targeting their show? Why are other companies (ESPN, FOX, CBS, etc) allowed to use NFL team logos when doing the news? Do they have a different contract with these news outlets than they do with McAfee? And I'm not specifically talking about their broadcasting contract. I'm referring to the shows that they have either leading up to the broadcasts. Are those shows actually NFL "owned" shows or do they belong to the broadcast company? Yes, most likely they have specific verbiage that allows them to make and use such graphics. Each contract is different. And the main broadcasters most likely have different contracts and bigger legal teams, than McAfee's organically grown podcast. Those broadcasters are all paying WAY more than $4M/yr. Wouldnt be surprised if McAfee's podcast was originally just looking to be able to show clips, so what they are allowed to do is slimmed down considerably from what the actual broadcasters and TV channels can do. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsShredder83 Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 On 11/1/2022 at 12:13 PM, Limeaid said: Not only players but coaches and front office of Bills. I wonder how long before NFL tells coaches and front office personnel they cannot appear without additional license payment to NFL? The Bills monetized Bills Mafia reducing support of Bills Backers groups who have supported them for 30+ years (we got a Bills Mafia flag this year rather the box of items they used to send) and NFL is being same way monetized whatever they can and dissing those who supported them. Actually thinking of stepping down from Backers Group due to attitude change of teams and NFL. Wow I didn't realize these were affiliated with teams directly. Do the teams take cuts on this to "promote" them, which is realistically probably only listing places on their team websites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsShredder83 Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 On 11/1/2022 at 12:45 PM, MJS said: Honestly, I do not see what anyone likes about Pat McAfee and his show. It is wildly popular. I just find him and the others on the show pompous and annoying. It's quite the opposite imo. He's super relatable, comes across as a common fan who happens to get awesome guests. It's basically the only place you'll see players/coaches/gm's/reporters giving non coach speak answers. The interviews are electric, Beane has been amazing on it several times. I get he probably jokes around too much for certain demographics, but his candor and that of guests makes it the best NFL show period 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsShredder83 Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 On 11/1/2022 at 3:00 PM, C.Biscuit97 said: To be fair, I haven’t listen to him enough but I don’t really get the PM love. He seems like kinda of a spaz and he is still a punter. I think pardon my take is far better than him. I think they're different products. Love both, but when I want info on a big story I'm going to McAfee. When there's nothing Noteworthy going on PMT is a comedy podcast that talks about NFL. So if ESPN is far left, PMT is far right, and Pat rides the middle. I dunno what my point is other than it's a bit apple and oranges, to me anyways On 11/1/2022 at 6:59 PM, hemma said: I didn’t know that. That sounds potentially sticky/borderline filthy. Kraft is in bed with Schefter on a gambling venture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 On 11/1/2022 at 11:59 PM, JoPoy88 said: Not gonna get into the fair use debate going on in here but my whole thing is it just seems like an odd licensing arrangement by the NFL/NFL Films. Pat has the rights to play highlights. On any given highlight the teams’ logos are splayed across all the helmets and field, and the scorebug if visible. Why he can’t use the logos to put together a static promo graphic or an intro graphic for said highlight without paying for a separate license seems incredibly dumb unless accounting for myopic greed. Not to mention that this is coming in week 8 or 9 and the guy has been running his show for how long? Feels like a money grab for the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 Anyone who honestly believes McAfee is VITAL to NFL marketing needs to think again. McAfee would be just a rand9m ranting mook without the NFL. The NFL is VITAL to McAfee's popularity. IMO he should be paying the NFL big rights fees, because without the league he's a NOBODY and would be worth a tiny fraction of what he is currently worth. The NFL is wildly popular and would be so if McAfee had never been born. With that said, how big of an impact does the lack of logos have on McAfee's podcast? Is that really some soft of insurmountable obstacle? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.