A Look Back at NBA v. Motorola

Several of my recent posts have referenced a 1997 Second Circuit decision, NBA v. Motorola (or, technically, NBA v. Sports Teams Analysis Tracking Systems, aka STATS, Inc.) Although dated, this case set the groundwork for nearly every professional sports copyright infringement issue that has arisen since then, and I think it's important to discuss this case in more detail to better understand the more recent decisions.

This case stemmed from the use of RealTime technology on the Internet - scrolling scores, stats, play-by-play, etc. When this technology first emerged, it was unparalleled and became immensly popular among sports fans and net users. RealTime information was also available on TV; CNN and ESPN, for example, have sports tickers scrolling across the botton of the screen all day updating viewers on games and news. There was a huge demand for this "immediate sports information," since the only way to find out scores before was to turn on the radio, hope to catch them on TV, or pick up the paper the next morning. In response to this demand, Motorola teamed up with STATS, Inc. to create "Sports Trax," a wireless paging device that provided users with up-to-the-minute information about any sports event in progress. STATS, Inc. hired people all over the country to watch games and send the updates to a satellite, which would then transmit that info to anyone who has a Sports Trax pager. In addition to scores and stats, the pager displayed graphics of a basketball court, or football or baseball field, to illustrate where the ball was in play at that exact moment. Motorola also created a website as a companion to Sports Trax, relaying the same info as the pager to users. The pitch was that fans would be able to "attend" any game they wanted to without buying tickets or sitting in front of the TV or radio all day. Sounds pretty good to me - but the problem was that the pager and website were marketed and broadcast games without the permission of any sports leagues, TV stations or radio stations who made money off broadcasting the same games and information to the public.

The NBA took action first, bringing suit against the company in 1996 for copyright infringement. Neither Motorola nor STATS wanted to pay the NBA - or any league - for the right to use and distribute this information, so the NBA sued for damages incurred by the Sports Trax pager, and an injunction to force Motorola to "cease all operations" of the pager immediately.

The copyright infringement claim stemmed from an unfair competition claim in which the NBA asserted that they have the exclusive right to use and license any NBA Intellectual Property "in conjunction with advertising, promotion, and other products and services in all forms of commerce and media." A good point is brought up in this article - the ability and right to control the dissemination of sports information is extremely valuable to all sports leagues. Although some people view them as greedy, money-hungry enterprises, they DO have a right to profit off of their own teams and players. Robbing them of this opportunity, especially illegally, is certainly justifiable grounds for a lawsuit. Sports leagues were already taking steps to limit the use of their broadcasts, and any TV broadcast or ticket to an event clearly display a warning about the illegality of rebroadcasting without permission. STATS claimed that they attempted to negotiate with the NBA for a license to sell sports information via the Sports Trax pager, but when discussions broke down, STATS went ahead and marketed the pager anyways.

While this issue was certainly important, the real issue was the true copyright claim - that the NBA "owns the copyrights in all broadcasts and transmissions in all media of NBA games, and that STATS, Inc. should be prohibited from using game information for commercial profit." The controversy arose over the distinction between creative works and factual information: the former is protected by copyright law, giving owners the exclusive right to such works for a certain period of time. Normally, factual information is not protected under copyright law because it is so broad. The NBA couldn't recover on this theory - they didn't own the rights to the facts of NBA games, so they needed to come up with a stronger argument to win this case. They managed to win on a misappropriation claim, and an injucntion was issued. against STATS, Inc.

This case began in a NY court and when STATS, Inc. appealed, it was heard before the 2nd Circuit. The appellate judges agreed that the NBA did not have a valid copyright claim over the factual, statistical information about the game. However, they disagreed with the injucntion granted by the lower court on misappropriation grounds. They reasoned that "(1) Sports Trax is not a substitute for the product offered by the NBA -- being at the game or watching it on television -- and (2) there was no "free-riding" because STATS and Motorola expended their own resources to collect the factual information (broadcast to the public via television or radio) which they then disseminated." In the end, Sports Trax was allowed back on the market; they adhered to their argument that relaying facts through a pager was in no way comparable to actually being at the game itself.

While other cases dealing with sports leagues and copyright infringement have reached different results, this case was important because it created a huge gap with the leagues and TV networks on one side, and websites, newspapers and the AP on the other. Although this case did not find the transmission of facts to constitute an exhibition of the game, other leagues have a more valid arguement here. Baseball, for instance, has encountered many legal problems in regards to RealTime technology, with regards to its play-by-play (or pitch-by-pitch) features. In the years that have followed, new technology has made the Sports Trax pager obsolete, although the basic concept is still the same. Also, the same legal issues are still being argued over, and while this case did lay some groundwork, new angles are constantly being used by both sides. Hopefully this clears up some of the reasoning behind the more recent holdings about gamecasts and RealTime technology, and sports-related copyright infringement claims in general.

Comments

[AnferTuto]

Hola faretaste
mekodinosad

[Kobe Matthys]

Hi,

My name is Kobe Matthys and am an artist from Brussels. For a project am working on, am looking to acquire a Motorola Sport Trax device. I am aware that they are out of business but I wonder if you might know a way that I can get my hands on one. Any advise would be invaluable.

Thanks and best, Kobe

[Kobe Matthys]

Hi,

My name is Kobe Matthys and am an artist from Brussels. For a project am working on, am looking to acquire a Motorola Sport Trax device. I am aware that they are out of business but I wonder if you might know a way that I can get my hands on one. Any advise would be invaluable.

Thanks and best, Kobe