They should publicly say it is cancelled but have it anyway.
Either that or view the game on a screen smaller than 55". Screw the NFL on this one. What a bunch of
S
Posted on 02/01/2007 7:38:48 AM PST by pctech
Fall Creek Baptist Church Family...
We regret to inform you that we have had to cancel our bash to view the Colts game this Sunday in a family friendly environment due to the fact that the NFL believes we would be in violation of the Copyright Act, because we had planned to show the game on a screen bigger than a 55 inch diagonal. We have appealed to their legal counsel and exhausted all options without success. We have been informed that the only exceptions to view the game are given to sports bars and restaurants. While we have argued that we only intend to provide a family oriented environment that will make no profit from the showing, the NFL claims that our event cannot proceed by law. Therefore, we have no choice but to challenge this in court or cancel the event. We choose to cancel the event. We deeply regret that we have been prohibited by the NFL from providing a family friendly environment for celebrating the Colts great season.
Pastor John
good answer.
BYOTV
I had heard the tailgating ban was at the behest of Homeland Security, not the NFL.
Always nice to engage in an adult conversation. And you are quite correct, I have no idea what YOU are talking about. Let's not carry this any further as I suspect the only thing we'll accomplish is a lot of typing practice.
Now that's just too logical
They should publicly say it is cancelled but have it anyway.
Either that or view the game on a screen smaller than 55". Screw the NFL on this one. What a bunch of
S
That's not true at all. That's like telling me that I can't watch porn during the commercials.
You can't charge people money to come to a "Super Bowl" party and advertize that you are showing porn during halftime. The NFL owns the rights. It is broadcast for private, non-commercial exhibition.
And those who are so quick to criticize the NFL for not wanting to mingle its product with a Christian message need to ask themselves what they would think if it was a Mosque or a Klan rally hosting the party.
Of course I can, I have attended several such parties.
Pardon me, you can't legally charge people money to come to a "Super Bowl" party. Maybe someday you'll own your own intellectual property and think about how you would defend it.
I can't imagine watching the game in a church in the first place. I know some think the NFL is a religion but this goes a little beyond that.
Could you imagine being a Colts fan, sitting in church and watching Manning get picked off for a touchdown without being able to let loose a curse word or two??
I think the NFL is being completely stupid about this but I think the church is too.
Agreed. If their transmission signal so much as crosses the property line they are trespassing. Their "property" is subject to confiscation at that point.
Part of the problem is that people don't really think about the copyright. They have their copy and don't think that they are doing anything wrong. The woman who wanted this material in the bulletin had tried to order what we needed and when they told her that they couldn't meet the order in time, she wanted to just make copies, I had to tell her why we couldn't but I also told her to call on the copyright fee. They were actually astounded when we asked and had to get back to us with an amount.
Would a Klan rally include testimonials from Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy? LOL
Well then, they were afoul of the law. "Super Bowl" is copyrighted. You'll notice that advertisers that have not bought a license from the NFL never use the term, talking instead about the "big game."
The only thing I question is if the NFL would be able to restrict the screen size so long as there is no admission fee, no collection and no "donations," and no use of the term "Super Bowl." It sounds like fair use to me.
Profit is profit. It's commercial use of the NFL's property. You can easily make an argument that the NFL "should" allow this unlicensed use of its property because it's "a good cause." But where does it end?
Maybe all FReepers can agree that the average Christian Church is a good cause, or the local kid with leukemia. But what happens when Greenpeace or the World Wildlife Fund wants to use the Super Bowl to raise money for their good cause?
What happens when the local Mosque or Klan gathering wants to use the Super Bowl to profit their "good causes"?
Would FReepers be so much in support if the benefactor of the party was Planned Parenthood? The NFL has to set a "no exceptions" policy. If you thought about it abstractly, you'd see. If you would change your mind about the NFL if it allowed a "charity" you don't approve of to do the same thing, then you aren't really thinking of the big picture.
Somehow. the use of the word intellectual in connection with the superbowl appears ironic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.