Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

June 30, 2009 -

Today's news brings more legal headaches for Electronic Arts.

Last month, GamePolitics reported on a federal class-action lawsuit filed by former University of Nebraska football player Sam Keller. The one-time college quarterback charged that EA used his likeness in its popular NCAA Football game franchise without his permission. Keller's suit also names the NCAA as a defendant.

One-time Rutgers QB Ryan Hart (left) and former University of California QB Troy Taylor filed a similar lawsuit in New Jersey Superior Court, according to MyCentralJersey.com. EA Sports spokesman Rob Semsey told the website:

EA, the NCAA and CLC (Collegiate Licensing Company) have reviewed the complaint, and do not believe that the claims have merit. EA, the NCAA and CLC regularly conduct reviews of EA's NCAA-branded games, and we do not believe that any violations of student-athlete rights or NCAA by-laws have occurred.

GP: It's unclear why Hart and Taylor filed a state suit against EA and did not simply join Keller's federal class-action. Perhaps some of our attorney readers can suggest a reason?


Comments

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

 

Oh great, more lawsuit for EA.  Will this ever end what's next Michael Vicks sueing EA because he'll say "EA made me do the dogfight".

 

mikedo2007

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

What are you talking about?  This is about using someone's likeness without their permission, not "video games made me do it".

"De minimus non curat lex"

"De minimus non curat lex"

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

mikedo2007

Have you ever heard of sarcasm and joke.  I'm aware of that, I'm joking about Michael Vicks.  You need to learn how to tell which is a joke and which is not.

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

It's like that, huh?  I just asked a simple question.  Okay, then...

First of all, it's Vick, not Vicks.  Vick is the football player.  Vicks are what you take for colds.

Second, jokes are usually humorous.  Your comment was about as funny as those 3 2 1 countdowns you abuse so often.  (See?  I know what sarcasm is, I used it right there!)

Third, you look like an imbecile when you try to clown people while using crappy grammar and spelling.

"De minimus non curat lex"

"De minimus non curat lex"

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

I saw that coming from a mile away. Now, I ain't saying deservedly or undeservedly so. Just simply that I saw that coming from a mile away.

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

Have you ever considered the possibility that if you learned how to tell a joke, there'd be less confusion?

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

Ol' Doc Kefka was called away to attend to a patient. Arrangements have been made for mdo7 to post for him in his absence.

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

Former NCAA football players?  They must not have been that great, since they aren't referred to as "and current NFL football players."

 

Freedom of speech means the freedom to say ANYTHING, so long as it is the truth. This does not exclude anything that might hurt someone's feelings.

--- With the first link, the chain is forged.

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

Rutgers huh? Wasn't that the home of those "nappy-headed hos" as Don Imus referred to them as, causing him to lose his job for a brief time due to that asshole Al Sharpton?

When Jack Thompson runs his mouth, does anyone really care what he has to say anymore?

Re: Two More Former College Quarterbacks Sue EA

Perhaps because the attorneys for Hart and Taylor are more interested in getting their own payday than in seeing their clients get a payday? Which wouldn't happen for them if their clients merely joined an existing class rather than filing their own class action suit because only the attorneys of the lead plaintiffs in a class action are allowed to collect attorney fees. After all, class actions usually benefit the attorneys who bring them 10,000 time more than they benefit any individual class member.

 

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonthe thing is unions earned their bad reputation in the US. the way unions oparate the better at your job you are, the likely you want to be in a union.07/07/2015 - 11:33am
InfophilePut that way, "right to work" seems to have BLEEP-all to do with gay rights. Thing is, union-negotiated contracts used to be one of the key ways to prevent employers from firing at will. Without union protection, nothing stops at-will firing.07/07/2015 - 11:06am
Infophilehas an incentive to pay dues if they're represented either way, so the union is starved for funds and dies, unless things are bad enough that people will pay dues anyway.07/07/2015 - 11:02am
InfophileFor those who don't know, "right to work" laws mean that it can't be a condition of an employment contract that you pay union dues. That is, the right to work without having to pay dues. Catch is, unions have to represent non-members as well, so no one...07/07/2015 - 11:01am
MechaCrashUnexpected? Seriously?07/07/2015 - 10:55am
Mattsworknamejob they wanted without the unions getting involved. The problem is, it has some unexpected side effects, like the ones Info mentioned07/07/2015 - 8:49am
MattsworknameThe problem being, right to work states exsist specificly as a counter to Unions, as the last 20 or so years have shown, the unions have been doing this countries economoy NO favors. The right to work states came into being to allow people to work any07/07/2015 - 8:49am
Infophile(cont'd) discriminatory. This can only be done for protected classes which are outlined in law (race, sex, religion, ethnicity everywhere, sexual orientation in some states). So, a gay person could be fired because they're gay and have no recourse there.07/07/2015 - 7:27am
Infophile@Goth: See here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/firedforbeinggay.asp for a good discussion on it. Basically, the problem is that in the US, most states allow at will firing, and it's the burden of the fired person to prove the firing was ...07/07/2015 - 7:25am
Goth_SkunkAssuming that's true, then that is a fight worth fighting for.07/07/2015 - 6:58am
Yuuri@ Goth_Skunk, in many states being gay is not a protected status akin to say race or religion. It's also in the "Right to work" states. Those are the states where one can be fired for any reason (provided it isn't a "protected" one.)07/07/2015 - 6:07am
Goth_Skunkregarded as a beacon of liberty and freedom that is the envy of the world, would not have across-the-board Human Rights laws that don't at the very least equal those of my own country.07/07/2015 - 5:47am
Goth_SkunkI find that hard to believe, Infophile. I have difficulty believing employers can *still* fire people for being gay. I would need to see some evidence that this is fact, because as a Canadian, I can't believe that the United States,07/07/2015 - 5:46am
InfophileFor that matter, even women don't yet have full legal equality with men. The US government still places limits on the positions women can serve in the military. And that's just the legal side of things - the "culture wars" are more than just laws.07/07/2015 - 5:43am
InfophileAnd that's just LGB issues. Get ready for an incoming battle on rights for trans* people. And then after that, a battle for poly people.07/07/2015 - 5:41am
InfophileA battle's been won. In many states employers can still fire people for being gay. And in many states, parents can force their children into reparative therapy to try to "fix" being gay. Those battles still need to be fought.07/07/2015 - 5:40am
Goth_Skunkand now they've switched to battles that don't need to be fought.07/07/2015 - 5:37am
Goth_SkunkIn my opinion, it was the final legal hurdle denying homosexual couples final and recognized statuses as eligible spouses. But even though this war's been won, some people are still too keen to keep fighting battles,07/07/2015 - 5:28am
Goth_SkunkAnd it's a trend I don't mind seeing continue. Same-sex marriage was at long-last made definitively legal by SCOTUS, and it's about time. I'm glad it's finally happened, as it was desperately needed.07/07/2015 - 5:25am
Infophile(cont'd) It started long before that. Perhaps the American Civil War comes to mind?)07/07/2015 - 3:59am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician