Re: Off Vidolib topic--Odd copyright question...

Mark W. Kopp (iu8film@iu08.org)
Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:53:36 -0800 (PST)

--=====================_23807934==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

I don't think the Team Owner has any legal "footing".

-There's no broadcast or rebroadcast.
-If the owners of the rooftop bleachers are advertising their location for
the GAME, they
would have a problem, but we can assume that they have considered those
semantics.
-If they have illegally obtained MLB souvenirs, there would be an issue.
-Drive Inns had tall fences to prevent this problem, most likely because
there's no legal
precedent.
-Is an open "view" really a copyrighted product?
-Do we not have the right to "look" at anything we see, as we walk down a
street? as we
admire a mountain? as we gaze at Mt Rushmore, The Grand Canyon, a scene
in Yellowstone?
-If a Band did a show in Central Park and someone took a photograph, would
they be allowed
to sell it?
-If they build a wall and a taller structure still has a vantage point, you
still can't tell
onlookers they are not allowed to look.

My personal opinion is that the whole thing is a waste of our Judicial System!

The Team Owner has every right to try and block the view, but those
fortunate enough to be able to "view" the game still have the right to do so.

***********************************************************

At 11:19 AM 2/13/03 -0800, you wrote:
>Anyone care to comment on this unusual copyright situation??
>
>
>February 12, 2003
>CHICAGO (AP) -- The Chicago Cubs will have a year to settle their dispute
>with the owners of rooftop bleachers that overlook Wrigley Field.
>A federal judge set a Feb. 23, 2004, trial date for a lawsuit the Cubs
>filed. The team contends the rooftop owners violate copyright laws and
>directly compete with the club for ticket sales.
>The lawsuit seeks compensatory damages and some of the defendant's profits.
>The suit also wants the rooftop owners banned from marketing the Cubs
>without the team's permission.
>Judge James Holderman instructed both sides to meet with U.S. Magistrate
>Judge Sidney Schenkier to negotiate a possible settlement. Lawyers for both
>sides say they want the case resolved before the 2004 season.
>The Cubs have been arguing with the rooftop owners over plans to expand the
>stadium, which currently seats 39,059. Team president and chief executive
>officer Andy MacPhail MacPhail in September said the organization wouldn't
>cooperate with the owners on the expansion plans unless they bought licenses
>to view games.
>
>
>Myles
>Tulsa City - County Library System

****************************************************************************
Mark W. Kopp
Circulation Coordinator
Appalachia Intermediate Unit 8
Instructional Materials Services Department
580 Foot of Ten Road
Duncansville, Pa 16635
(814) 695-1972 Phone
(814) 695-3018 Fax
E-Address:
mail to:iu8film@iu08.org
See us on the Web at:
<http://www.iu08.org>http://www.iu08.org
Click on; "Instructional Materials Services"

--=====================_23807934==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

I don't think the Team Owner has any legal "footing".

-There's no broadcast or rebroadcast.
-If the owners of the rooftop bleachers are advertising their location for the GAME, they     
  would have a problem, but we can assume that they have considered those semantics.
-If they have illegally obtained MLB souvenirs, there would be an issue.
-Drive Inns had tall fences to prevent this problem, most likely because there's no legal 
 precedent.     
-Is an open "view" really a copyrighted product?
-Do we not have the right to "look" at anything we see, as we walk down a street? as we  
 admire a mountain? as we gaze at Mt Rushmore, The Grand Canyon, a scene in Yellowstone?
-If a Band did a show in Central Park and someone took a photograph, would they be allowed  
 to sell it?
-If they build a wall and a taller structure still has a vantage point, you still can't tell      
 onlookers they are not allowed to look.

My personal opinion is that the whole thing is a waste of our Judicial System!

The Team Owner has every right to try and block the view, but those fortunate enough to be able to "view" the game still have the right to do so.

***********************************************************

At 11:19 AM 2/13/03 -0800, you wrote:

Anyone care to comment on this unusual copyright situation??


February 12, 2003
CHICAGO (AP) -- The Chicago Cubs will have a year to settle their dispute
with the owners of rooftop bleachers that overlook Wrigley Field.
A federal judge set a Feb. 23, 2004, trial date for a lawsuit the Cubs
filed. The team contends the rooftop owners violate copyright laws and
directly compete with the club for ticket sales.
The lawsuit seeks compensatory damages and some of the defendant's profits.
The suit also wants the rooftop owners banned from marketing the Cubs
without the team's permission.
Judge James Holderman instructed both sides to meet with U.S. Magistrate
Judge Sidney Schenkier to negotiate a possible settlement. Lawyers for both
sides say they want the case resolved before the 2004 season.
The Cubs have been arguing with the rooftop owners over plans to expand the
stadium, which currently seats 39,059. Team president and chief executive
officer Andy MacPhail MacPhail in September said the organization wouldn't
cooperate with the owners on the expansion plans unless they bought licenses
to view games.


Myles
Tulsa City - County Library System

****************************************************************************
Mark W. Kopp
Circulation Coordinator
Appalachia Intermediate Unit 8
Instructional Materials Services Department
580 Foot of Ten Road
Duncansville, Pa  16635
(814) 695-1972 Phone
(814) 695-3018 Fax
E-Address:
mail to:iu8film@iu08.org
See us on the Web at:
http://www.iu08.org
Click on;   "Instructional Materials Services"


--=====================_23807934==.ALT--