EA Has A First Amendment Right To Depict Real College Football Players, Judge Rules

Electronic Arts on Friday won the dismissal of one lawsuit against it regarding its use of identifying characteristics of real college football players in its NCAA Football series. A federal judge said EA’s right to free expression under the First Amendment supersedes a former quarterback’s right to control the use of his likeness.

The dismissal was at the federal district court level; it’s unknown if the player in question, former Rutgers quarterback Ryan Hart, intends to appeal or on what grounds he would do so. EA prevailed under a similar argument in 2009 against football hall-of-famer Jim Brown.

Litigation concerning other players whose likenesses were used in EA Sports titles still is pending, though Friday’s decision may affect that.

In NCAA Football current players are often identified by every characteristic other than their real name, including their ethnicity, height, weight, uniform number, equipment, playing position and how well they are rated at that position. Hart hard argued that depiction, even without the name, was enough to identify him.

But Judge Freda Wolfson, a federal judge in New Jersey, ruled that EA’s right to produce works of creative expression protected by the First Amendment, which the Supreme Court recently found video games to be, trumped Hart’s right to privacy and control of his likeness.

EA Wins Dismissal In NCAA Player Likeness Suit [Gamasutra]

Discuss

(7 Comments)
  • [–]

    Andrew Burdusel

    Saturday, September 10, 2011 at 4:10 PM

    This is a stupid ruling. How can a company that intends to use someones likeness to make a profit claim that they should be allowed to use it on the grounds of freedom of expression?

    • [–]

      Freeze S. Preston Icequire

      Saturday, September 10, 2011 at 5:37 PM

      Someone should make a game featuring a company that is EA in all but name then cite precedent when EA inevitably comes after them.

      • [–]

        Otacon

        Saturday, September 10, 2011 at 6:17 PM

        +1

    • [–]

      Braaains

      Saturday, September 10, 2011 at 7:36 PM

      EA had the NCAA licence, which includes likenesses of the players etc. Just like the TV networks don’t have to sign contracts with all the individual players in order to show them as part of their TV broadcasts.

      • [–]

        Rod

        Sunday, September 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM

        But they’re not relying on a contract, they’re citing the First Amendment…

  • [–]

    Quom

    Sunday, September 11, 2011 at 10:05 AM

    I think they do need to pay pro athletes for video games. It’s why Jordan and Barkly weren’t in NBA games as they weren’t part of the players association. Instead they needed to be negotiated with separately. Curiously Jordans personal identifying traits were always altered, he was listed as 6’4 and always had hair. His stats were accurate though. Perhaps EA were more worried about being sued by an athlete with money than amateurs?

    • [–]

      Reoh

      Sunday, September 11, 2011 at 1:28 PM

      First Amendmant for sale, only slightly used; serious offers only!

Join The Discussion