[stonesthrowaway]

> but stating facts of the individual events can’t actually be copyrighted, regardless of what the nfl and olympics say in their disclaimer.

That's interesting. Does that mean someone could go to an NFL game and broadcast the play by play of the game? Stating facts like: "It's 4th and goal, mahomes drops back and passed to kelce for a touchdown". You could legally broadcast that?

[mattclarkdotnet]

Legally? As in do you have a right to? No. You accepted terms and conditions when you bought a ticket, and they will prohibit you from broadcasting. So it’s a breach of contract if you do that.

I do wonder what the intersection of that with viewing rights is. You can probably report what you saw on screen in real time because that’s happening in your home. But who really knows…

[Y_Y]

But that's just a shitty contract of adhesion. There is no "meeting of the minds", terms are not negotiated. The enforcability depends more on the relative appetites of the contracting parties.

The copyright situation is distinct, and may fall under "hot news", but isn't affected by a clickwrap on the site that sold you the ticket.

(See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_News_Service_v._... )

[sandworm101]

A ticket to a football game will never be considered a contract of adhesion. The terms are very much negotiated. Nobody has any need to go to a game. Nobody is being tricked or forced into anything. It is a one-time ticket to watch a show or shows, with an agreement not to rebroadcast that show.

[Y_Y]

Do we live in different realities? I've gone to lots of football games of lots of kinds of football and I've never negotiated the terms with the venue. I can't even remember bringing my lawyer!

[sandworm101]

Your negotiation occurs by you deciding to buy or not to buy a ticket. You can go to a baseball game instead. Or go skiing. There is no power imbalance. Compare government-mandated car insurance, or water/sewage service to your home, situations where one does not have great choice in providers nor can one easily walk away.

[Y_Y]

Maybe it wasn't clear, but I'm using "contract of adhesion" and "negotiation" in their customary legal meanings. A negotiation here would be communication between the parties in order to decide on the terms of the contract. Since this doesn't occur (the venue has already written the contract and only offers it as-is) the contract is deemed to be one of "adhesion". (Definitions vary among jurisdictions, and I'm only familiar with some English speaking common law ones.)

[josephcsible]

When was the last time a fan went to a football game under a contract other than the one preprinted onto the ticket stock? If the answer is "never", then the terms are most definitely not negotiated.

[mattclarkdotnet]

You’re missing the point that the ‘negotiation’ occurs when you buy the ticket or don’t buy the ticket. It’s up to you, the terms are clear, and you could go spend your time on something else without those damn football teams interfering with your life at all.

[josephcsible]

"My way or the highway" is not a negotiation.

[dehrmann]

There are tall buildings near some baseball fields that can see onto the field, and some even have bleachers on the roof. There was no contract with MLB if you watch the game from there.

[DidYaWipe]

That kind of situation (with Wrigley Field being a great example) was ruined when people started trying to profit by charging people to sit on the roof. That's when teams started putting up barricades to block their view.

Just another example of greed ruining what people enjoyed for decades in a sort of detente.

[foobar1962]

Famously, again in Australia, the ABC lost the rights to broadcast football final games to a commercial station, so two ABC comedians (Roy and HG) did a radio show where they watched the game on tv live and added their own humorous commentary. Viewers would watch the commercial TV channel with the sound down and the ABC radio station sound instead.

[rstuart4133]

To this day, I take a radio to cricket matches. I watch the live game, and listen to the ABC commentary. But I guess it's not a surprise the radio commentary is better than none at all.

It's not really a surprise Roy & HG do a better job than the TV commentary. I still have no idea what name gymnastics uses to describe the "Hello Boys" and "Dutch Wink" manoeuvres. The curious can view some of them here: https://www.royandhg.com/gymnastics

"And New Zealanders perform at their best when they're sitting down going backwards." Such astute observations are Roy's trademark.

[NhanH]

The corporation certainly can kick you out of the stadium, but any law that can make such broadcast illegal is probably nigh unconstitutional in the US.

[jkaplowitz]

It’s amazing how many constitutional rights are allowed to be restricted by contract in the US. First Amendment free speech rights are on that list.

[umanwizard]

Obviously rights can be limited by contract. That’s what a contract is: two parties agreeing to things they’re not legally forced to do.

[FireBeyond]

Definitely not unilaterally.

Washington Landlord Tenant law lists several unwaivable rights of tenants, even given specific consideration.

You can't put a clause in my lease that says "For a discount of $100/mo, I forego the relevant rights on habitability (heating, water, etc.)" - even if I am willing to agree to it.

[latexr]

No, that is not correct. Search for “unwaivable rights”. Obviously you can’t just limit rights with a contract. If you could, labour laws would be useless and minimum wages wouldn’t exist.

[drysine]

>First Amendment free speech rights are on that list.

Do you think NDAs should be prohibited?

[DidYaWipe]

The First Amendment only prohibits speech restriction BY THE GOVERNMENT. It does not prohibit it by any other entities.

[DidYaWipe]

Only tangentially-related anecdote: I took my camera to a Dodgers game. To get in, you have to go through metal detectors. No problems.

I was sitting in my seat with friends, looking through my camera when a security guy came up and told me that I couldn't take pictures and that I had to take the lens off my camera. Of course I thought this was a joke and laughed in his face.

But no, he (and his buddy who also showed up) were serious. They claimed that my lens was TOO LARGE and therefore couldn't be used. I said well I went through security and they obviously didn't have a problem with it, and no fucking way was I taking it off my camera and leaving the sensor exposed all afternoon.

They grudgingly let me keep the camera together but threatened me with punishment if I was seen using it. And they seriously loitered around in the grandstand eyeballing me for the rest of the game.

It's incredible what people are expected to (and, sadly, do) tolerate now. I, the taxpayer and admission-payer, am being berated and abused for simply enjoying what I paid for.