Lawsuit Claims EA Used UNLV Fight Song in NCAA Games w/o Permission
Lawsuit Claims EA Used UNLV Fight Song in NCAA Games w/o Permission
October 14, 2008
A lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Nevada late last month alleges that sports game publisher Electronic Arts used the UNLV fight song in various NCAA-licensed games without obtaining permission of the composer.
Gerald Willis of Washoe County says in the suit that he is the composer and copyright holder of both the lyrics and music of Win With the Rebels. Willis claims that his tune can be heard in the following games:
- NCAA Basketball 09
- NCAA Football 09
- NCAA March Madness 08
- NCAA Football 08
- NCAA March Madness 07
- NCAA Football 07
- MVP NCAA Baseball 07
- NCAA March Madness 06
- NCAA Football 06
- MVP NCAA Baseball 06
From the complaint:
...an important element of Defendants' software is its realistic feel that is created, at least in part, by its recorded and reproduced sounds including but not limited to college fight song.
Willis seeks $150,000 per alleged copyright violation. We have a request in to EA for comment.
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGIN / REGISTER
Crispy Gamer
GamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 03/18/10 at 08:04pm
Flamespeak: I never understood why someone should work hard to get a lot of money, just to be punished with more taxes for doing so.
Flamespeak: I never understood why someone should work hard to get a lot of money, just to be punished with more taxes for doing so.
Posted 03/18/10 at 06:44pm
hayabusa75: Isn't the upper class supposed to be footing most of this bill?
hayabusa75: Isn't the upper class supposed to be footing most of this bill?
Posted 03/18/10 at 06:05pm
Austin_Lewis: Of course, that ignores the fact that for the next 4 years, the people will be taxed without 'benefit' from the bill.
Austin_Lewis: Of course, that ignores the fact that for the next 4 years, the people will be taxed without 'benefit' from the bill.
Posted 03/18/10 at 06:04pm
Austin_Lewis: If we go by the CBO's past estimation failures, they're about 300% short on the actual cost.
Austin_Lewis: If we go by the CBO's past estimation failures, they're about 300% short on the actual cost.
Posted 03/18/10 at 05:21pm
ZippyDSMlee: *punt*Roll call, whos on and how are you doing?
ZippyDSMlee: *punt*Roll call, whos on and how are you doing?
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:07pm
JDKJ: No, I did you the favor and said it for you.
JDKJ: No, I did you the favor and said it for you.
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:06pm
Valdearg: What I said was while I may have implied long term accuraccy, and that might have been incorrect, my greater point that the CBO report calculated reduced deficits, expanded coverage, and lower costs is still 100% accurate. :D
Valdearg: What I said was while I may have implied long term accuraccy, and that might have been incorrect, my greater point that the CBO report calculated reduced deficits, expanded coverage, and lower costs is still 100% accurate. :D
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:06pm
Valdearg: Like any good politician, I don't believe I said "I was incorrect." :P
Valdearg: Like any good politician, I don't believe I said "I was incorrect." :P
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:02pm
JDKJ: If you'd said "I was incorrect" 10 shouts ago, I'd have quit twisting your arm to get you see the obvious 10 shouts ago.
JDKJ: If you'd said "I was incorrect" 10 shouts ago, I'd have quit twisting your arm to get you see the obvious 10 shouts ago.
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:00pm
JDKJ: You were they one assuming 100% accuracy. In all caps, no less.
JDKJ: You were they one assuming 100% accuracy. In all caps, no less.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:59am
Valdearg: Yes, my implication that the long term estimates were facts was incorrect, but the short term calculations are absolutely facts, and even the long term estimates are still useful in attempting to determine exactly what will happen with the bill.
Valdearg: Yes, my implication that the long term estimates were facts was incorrect, but the short term calculations are absolutely facts, and even the long term estimates are still useful in attempting to determine exactly what will happen with the bill.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:58am
Valdearg: I do. The Short term costs are actually calculated facts. The long term estimates aren't necessarily 100% accurate, but to assume that they can't possibly be accurate because someone said they might not be 100% accurate is also wrong.
Valdearg: I do. The Short term costs are actually calculated facts. The long term estimates aren't necessarily 100% accurate, but to assume that they can't possibly be accurate because someone said they might not be 100% accurate is also wrong.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:57am
JDKJ: When someone says, "I could be wrong but, as best as I can tell, X," X ain't a fact.
JDKJ: When someone says, "I could be wrong but, as best as I can tell, X," X ain't a fact.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:53am
JDKJ: It's too early in the morning for you to be deaf, blind, and dumb drunk. A "my best guestimate" can't be a fact. Don't you understand the difference between the two?
JDKJ: It's too early in the morning for you to be deaf, blind, and dumb drunk. A "my best guestimate" can't be a fact. Don't you understand the difference between the two?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:41am
Valdearg: By how much depends on variables that can't necessarily be predicted at this point in time. And yes, those Facts are accurate only so far into the future, but those estimates can certainly be used to support this measure.
Valdearg: By how much depends on variables that can't necessarily be predicted at this point in time. And yes, those Facts are accurate only so far into the future, but those estimates can certainly be used to support this measure.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:40am
Valdearg: And I'm saying, as far as the CBO report goes, the facts that it does put forward are deficit reduction, reducing costs, and expanding costs. Those ARE facts.
Valdearg: And I'm saying, as far as the CBO report goes, the facts that it does put forward are deficit reduction, reducing costs, and expanding costs. Those ARE facts.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:30am
JDKJ: You were the one championing a qualified estimate as an indisputable fact. I'm merely pointing out that it's far from indisputable. So says the estimator.
JDKJ: You were the one championing a qualified estimate as an indisputable fact. I'm merely pointing out that it's far from indisputable. So says the estimator.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:27am
Valdearg: Or are you only breaking that argument out because the CBO says that this bill is a good thing for our deficit?
Valdearg: Or are you only breaking that argument out because the CBO says that this bill is a good thing for our deficit?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:27am
JDKJ: The CBO says that, to the extent it is possible to accurately predict defict reduction over the long term, it is likely to reduce the deficit. That's your idea of "a fact that don't lie?"
JDKJ: The CBO says that, to the extent it is possible to accurately predict defict reduction over the long term, it is likely to reduce the deficit. That's your idea of "a fact that don't lie?"
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:26am
Valdearg: Would you be singing the same tune if the CBO came back saying that the bill will likely double the deficit in 20 years??
Valdearg: Would you be singing the same tune if the CBO came back saying that the bill will likely double the deficit in 20 years??
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Here they come! One whiff of EAs blood in the water was all it took....
--------------------------------------------------
I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
It depends, when he says "per infringement" does he mean per game sold, or does he just want 150K for every title it should have been liscenced for.
I'd imagine it's per IP that used it and not per unit. Otherwise there goes EA as a company huh?
Heh. If only.
Really though, it took them this long?
Hell, I hope it is Broken's former, because EA would prolly lose half of their income for the year, haha.
Well, under the new law, should this be calculated per violation/unit? Which would pretty much destroy EA entirely?
Sounds like Gerald Willis needs better Digital Rights Management to control the unauthorized distribution of his work. Hmm, wonder who could help him out with that...?
Irony is teh awesome. :)
If only this guy could put the serious beat down on EA for IPR violations with maximum statutory damages per infringement. It would be such perfect justice!
-------------------------------------------
"The most difficult pain a man can suffer is to have knowledge of much and power over little" - Herodotus
If the man has clear legal claim to the property, then he will likely prevail.
But school fight songs ... don't they typically either belong to the school itself, or to an implied public domain? It would be reasonable to assume that by licensing the right to use the school's IP in the games, that EA may have assumed that right extended to things like school fight songs? I would chalk this up to legal laziness on both the part of EA and the school.
--Verbinator
Wait so a company who whines and shoved down our throats one of the most horrible draconic anti piracy devices ever is now a pirate?
Oh the irony i hope he wont and got paid by EA. I can imagine all the players who dont get paid raging on steroids at this when they are in the game but not officially.