Can he win?

 

At issue is the starting running back on Madden's "All Browns Team." The character is African-American and bears the same jersey number Brown made famous -- number 32.

 

We know who it is but is it enough for the courts? I would think these companys know the laws on this.

 

Didn't OJ wear #32? I wonder if Fred Goldman has been on the phone wanting his cut.

I'll be honest I didn't even read the story. Everytime I see Jim Brown on T.V. it is him talking about Jim. His arrogance for himself is more than I can handle. If he's helped the youth then great for him, that makes me look at him a little different. I just can't stand the arrogance he portrays.

He was good in "The Running Man" though.

If Brown's lawsuit succeeds, it would almost assuredly lead to the end of historical and all-time teams in sports games, since it's impractical for EA to sign contracts with thousands of players. The possibility also exists that EA could sign a deal with retired players' unions, which might end up being the likeliest compromise.

 

http://www.ign.com

 

I love the all-time teams! :lol:

Didn't OJ wear #32? I wonder if Fred Goldman has been on the phone wanting his cut.

 

Thats my point. What is the definition of "likeness"? Without looking I'd bet more than one Browns RB has worn the #32 in the past.

^ And I guarantee Madden will use that in their case...There is no way he can 100% say it was him they were using in the game...

 

That's why they don't have their names and just a number...I doubt he'll win the case.

If someone went around using your likeness and making millions off of it, you would file a law suit too...you know you would.

 

Jim has a history of violence especially with women. He also has done a lot of good work with troubled youth.

 

Love him or hate him he has a right to be paid for using his likeness.

 

 

 

So you're saying no one else in the history of the Browns had any kind of likeness to Brown?

 

That's why it's called a likeness, because it's actually not the player...Hmmm, in that case almost any player in the NFL could say they have a likeness to a player on the all-time team if they match that jersey number and are similar.. It's too broad and that's why they do it...

Can't blame him and like someone said we don't know the whole story.

 

I read his book and he comes across rough, but he has some issues.

 

I like listening to him and he really makes some points when wants to.

 

Raquel Welch was mad at him for a long time.

 

I wouldn't call him a "loser".

Thats my point. What is the definition of "likeness"? Without looking I'd bet more than one Browns RB has worn the #32 in the past.

 

How many have been "All-Time Greats?"

 

And I'd bet not many, if any, have worn it since Jim Brown did.

So you're saying no one else in the history of the Browns had any kind of likeness to Brown?

 

That's why it's called a likeness, because it's actually not the player...Hmmm, in that case almost any player in the NFL could say they have a likeness to a player on the all-time team if they match that jersey number and are similar.. It's too broad and that's why they do it...

 

That's what I'm saying. No other Cleveland Brown was black , wore #32, and played running back that would be considered for the team that EA Sports has put together.

 

Easy call.

How many have been "All-Time Greats?"

 

And I'd bet not many, if any, have worn it since Jim Brown did.

 

You are right. It is him but is that enough to win in court. What if the guy that owns EA says his kid is #32 on the Browns of his pop warner team?

You are right. It is him but is that enough to win in court. What if the guy that owns EA says his kid is #32 on the Browns of his pop warner team?

 

The judge and jury would call him a liar. It would be like having a Buffalo Bills all-star team, showing a running back, black, wearing #32 and trying to say it wasn't OJ. It would offend those being asked to judge.

 

So, again, lets get back to the debate at hand that you raised. Should Jim Brown be compensated? If not, why?

All this will accomplish is EA, et al. removing the all-time teams from the game. Not many, if any, people buy the games for these teams. My guess is that EA, et al. will not pay the retired players unions a dime because it is not what generates sales. The all-time teams are an added nicety and that is it.

All this will accomplish is EA, et al. removing the all-time teams from the game. Not many, if any, people buy the games for these teams. My guess is that EA, et al. will not pay the retired players unions a dime because it is not what generates sales. The all-time teams are an added nicety and that is it.

 

I'm not a legal expert but I don't think its quite as simple as saying "we'll go ahead and remove them, your Honor." They may still be financially liable.

The judge and jury would call him a liar. It would be like having a Buffalo Bills all-star team, showing a running back, black, wearing #32 and trying to say it wasn't OJ. It would offend those being asked to judge.

 

So, again, lets get back to the debate at hand that you raised. Should Jim Brown be compensated? If not, why?

 

Actually no I never asked that question. I just think this is a lame case. I think he probaby deserves to be paid for this but just should have let this go. A large number of people who buy this game have no idea who he is or even care if its him or not.