From the article:

An agreement in principle happened last September through Electronic Arts and the Collegiate Licensing Corporation, but issues held up the proposed settlement. The NCAA objected to their co-defendants leaving and the lawyers representing the three different classes of players couldn’t agree on the financial aspect.

In September of 2013, EA Sports announced that it’s college football series would be placed on hiatus with no new game coming in 2014 while EA hasn’t made a college basketball video game since NCAA Basketball 2010.

This is a landmark settlement as college athletes look like they’ll finally claim some money for their NCAA likenesses appearing in video games and it sets up an interesting court battle between O’Bannon and the NCAA in the upcoming antitrust lawsuit that is scheduled to begin on June 9th.

http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.c...0-million/

Yup. The lawyers win another class action lawsuit. They get 1/3 of the settlement while the actual players will get less than $4k each with many getting under $100. Some victory for the players. And now, well the rest of us are out some of our favorite video games. So once again in a class action lawsuit, the lawyers win and everyone else loses.

(05-31-2014 08:56 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Yup. The lawyers win another class action lawsuit. They get 1/3 of the settlement while the actual players will get less than $4k each with many getting under $100. Some victory for the players. And now, well the rest of us are out some of our favorite video games. So once again in a class action lawsuit, the lawyers win and everyone else loses.

Lawyers suck, amirite?

(05-31-2014 09:23 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(05-31-2014 08:56 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Yup. The lawyers win another class action lawsuit. They get 1/3 of the settlement while the actual players will get less than $4k each with many getting under $100. Some victory for the players. And now, well the rest of us are out some of our favorite video games. So once again in a class action lawsuit, the lawyers win and everyone else loses.

Lawyers suck, amirite?

They don't suck, just overpaid.

(05-31-2014 09:27 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(05-31-2014 09:23 PM)Knightsweat Wrote:  

(05-31-2014 08:56 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Yup. The lawyers win another class action lawsuit. They get 1/3 of the settlement while the actual players will get less than $4k each with many getting under $100. Some victory for the players. And now, well the rest of us are out some of our favorite video games. So once again in a class action lawsuit, the lawyers win and everyone else loses.

Lawyers suck, amirite?

They don't suck, just overpaid.

Po Tay To, Po Ta To

Athletes who appeared in the video games will receive almost $2,000 if they file. Walk-ons and players on real rosters who were left out of the game will receive about $1,000. http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...settlement

A bunch of bag men in the SEC might get to keep some of their spending money this month... http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...-interview

(05-31-2014 08:56 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Yup. The lawyers win another class action lawsuit. They get 1/3 of the settlement while the actual players will get less than $4k each with many getting under $100. Some victory for the players. And now, well the rest of us are out some of our favorite video games. So once again in a class action lawsuit, the lawyers win and everyone else loses.

America....ya gotta love it!!!!

Hey thats found money for playing as an image of Your self and never breaking a sweat. What do You think Clones will get paid in the future if They ever happen?

At most, O'Bannon will pocket $4,000. I would have paid that myself to keep the EA annual installment of NCAA football.

Does this mean we'll get more NCAA games in the future?

My hunch is that yes we will see more NCAA games in the future. Think it'll be much easier now quite frankly... Maybe even better as I think instead of having guys named QB #12, it'll be the actual name of the player. I'd kind of guess it'll be for the 2016 season but 2015 is possible.

I agree - if players could get paid directly for their likeness then it would be easier/better. The only other roadblock is that a lot of programs and conferences made public statements (prior to EA announcing they would not longer produce the game) that they would not allow use of their names/colors/fight songs, etc.

Of course, I sense yet another revenue stream...$$

(06-02-2014 11:14 AM)LSUtah Wrote:  I agree - if players could get paid directly for their likeness then it would be easier/better. The only other roadblock is that a lot of programs and conferences made public statements (prior to EA announcing they would not longer produce the game) that they would not allow use of their names/colors/fight songs, etc.

Of course, I sense yet another revenue stream...$$

I think that was posturing. If $$$ can be made for it, it'll happen.

just saw this:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ay-players

Electronic Arts would have paid college football and men's basketball players for the use of their names, images and likenesses in NCAA video games if not for NCAA rules prohibiting such payments, lawyers for the Ed O'Bannon plaintiffs wrote in a court filing late Tuesday night.

In a brief outlining next week's trial in U.S. District Court in Oakland, the O'Bannon plaintiffs wrote they will provide “documentary evidence and testimony” from EA executive vice president of business and legal affairs Joel Linzner showing that although EA followed the NCAA's rules, “it nonetheless wanted to obtain the rights for more precise likenesses and the names of every college athlete on each roster, for which EA was willing to pay more to the NCAA and the college athletes themselves.”

The trial brief quotes then-NCAA president Myles Brand as saying in 2006, “[I]t is far from certain that the presidents will agree to providing names and [better] likenesses in video games. They may decide to leave the money on the table.”

The plaintiffs wrote “EA knew that consumers wanted those improvements to the video games, and increased sales would result. But the NCAA remained steadfast in its prohibition against sharing revenues with players and worried that any additional similarities between the athletes and the video games would further expose the fiction that the video game ‘avatars' did not represent real people.”