Madden 2013

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by bowener

It isn't a monopoly. Mecca is correct. No, I am not a lawyer, nor do I claim to be. This just simply isn't a monopoly. EA bought the rights to use NFL names/images. 2K can go out and make a football game that looks similar to EA's madden if they wish (just not too similar), they just don't have permission to use any trademarked images/names the NFL owns.

Hell, 2K can probably make a game that is called "Pro Football 2013", which has 32 teams in 31 cities (2 in NYC), each active roster would have 53 men, etc... as long as they don't have a team in Arizona called the "Arizona Cardinals". They can have a team in KC as long as it is something like, "the KC Cherokees" or something. I'm not sure if they could use the same NFL color schemes for each team tho.

I'm surprised somebody like 2K hasn't made this game where the owners of the game are allowed to customize everything, including editing images/rosters/player names, stadium names, etc. I know they wouldn't make much money on it being a yearly release since you could just edit the previous one to play like a new game.



Sega and 2K can make another pro football simulator if they wish, they just can't use anything trademarked by the NFL.

Do you think Warner Bros. has a monopoly over Batman films? They own the exclusive rights to produce Batman films. I'm sure FOX would love to be able to make a Batman film, but unfortunately they do not have the exclusive rights to do so... much like Sega/2K.

Get back to me when a company makes such a game and it actually attracts buyers. EA owns the football genre and everyone knows it. No company is going to make an unofficial sim because they can't compete with the real thing. EA would still control the market and it would still be a monopoly because they have exclusive rights to the product.

Why did EA just settle a lawsuit complaining about their exclusive rights if there wasn't a monopoly? Hell... they are paying back customers who bought the game after 2005 because of this. They also just accepted a ban from exclusive rights to NCAA after 2014 for 5 years. All of this to keep their exclusive rights with the NFL because thats where the money is.

[bowener]

Originally Posted by jd1020

Get back to me when a company makes such a game and it actually attracts buyers. EA owns the football genre and everyone knows it. No company is going to make an unofficial sim because they can't compete with the real thing. EA would still control the market and it would still be a monopoly because they have exclusive rights to the product.

Why did EA just settle a lawsuit complaining about their exclusive rights if there wasn't a monopoly? Hell... they are paying back customers who bought the game after 2005 because of this.

You just answered this yourself. It is not a ****ing monopoly. Any other company is free to make a football game. They just can't make one using the NFL's trademarked images/names. It isn't EA's problem if 2K can't make a profit. I am not a fan of this at all, but that is the cut and dry of this. One company has a ton of money and can afford to throw it around to make more money for themselves.

And I do not know anything about the law suit, except for the fact that they settled and did not lose. If they lost then it could have been a monopoly. This just tells me they realized settling would net them more profit in the long term. Plus, if there was a legitimate monopoly suit filed against them it couldn't be settled, it would be handed down by the ****ing US government, not private companies or consumers...

You must agree then that Warner Bros. holds a monopoly on Batman images for film then.

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by bowener

You just answered this yourself. It is not a ****ing monopoly. Any other company is free to make a football game. They just can't make one using the NFL's trademarked images/names. It isn't EA's problem if 2K can't make a profit. I am not a fan of this at all, but that is the cut and dry of this. One company has a ton of money and can afford to throw it around to make more money for themselves.

And I do not know anything about the law suit, except for the fact that they settled and did not lose. If they lost then it could have been a monopoly. This just tells me they realized settling would net them more profit in the long term. Plus, if there was a legitimate monopoly suit filed against them it couldn't be settled, it would be handed down by the ****ing US government, not private companies or consumers...

How is it not? 1 company controls the ****ing market.

Next are you going to tell me that Microsoft just stopped making football games because it wasn't profitable enough? Or how that after EA was given exclusive rights the price from NFL 2k went from 19.99 to 49.99 for Madden?

EA controls the market and the pricing. That is a monopoly. Look up the definition.

[Kyle DeLexus]

Originally Posted by jd1020

How is it not? 1 company controls the ****ing market.

Next are you going to tell me that Microsoft just stopped making football games because it wasn't profitable enough? Or how that after EA was given exclusive rights the price from NFL 2k went from 19.99 to 49.99 for Madden?

EA controls the market and the pricing. That is a monopoly. Look up the definition.

When has a new copy of Madden been more than a new copy of most other video games?