• Home
  • 1st Annual Symposium
  • About
  • Available Positions
  • Issues
    • Vol. 4 Issue 2
    • Vol. 4 Issue 1
    • Vol. 3 Issue 3
    • Vol. 3, Issue 2
    • Vol. 3, Issue 1
    • Vol. 2, Issue 3
    • Vol. 2, Issue 2
    • Vol. 2, Issue 1
    • Vol. 1, Issue 1
  • Staff
    • 2009-2010 Staff
    • 2010-2011 Staff
    • 2011-2012 Staff
    • 2012-2013 Staff
  • Submissions
  • Subscribe
Featured Article

A featured article from the current issue of the Intellectual Property Brief.

Daily Blog

A daily blog of IP-related news and issues

Articles

All of the Intellectual Property Brief’s published articles. All articles are hand-selected from outside submissions and from our very own IPB staff members.

Issues

PDF versions of each of the Intellectual Property Brief’s issues.

Short Circuit

Case-by-case summaries of intellectual property related opinions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Home » Copyright, Daily Blog, Featured

Copyright in Football: Is it Practicable?

Submitted by JJ Gottschalk on September 23, 2010 – 7:12 PM1211One Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2010%2F09%2F23%2Fcopyright-in-football-is-it-practicable%2FCopyright+in+Football%3A+Is+it+Practicable%3F2010-09-24+00%3A12%3A23JJ+Gottschalkhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D1211

A recent Freaknomics guest post commented on the practicability of copyright protection of football plays. In sum, the authors make the argument that because of the dynamism of football, and the barriers of entry for teams implementing innovative plays, copyright protection is impossible. While I agree with the arguments of the authors, one area that they do not discuss is the rationale behind copyright in the first place, to benefit from the protection in the form of making money.

Coaches at all levels of sports look to gain competitive advantage. One such way is to come up with innovative plays that the opposing coach cannot stop. If a coach were to copyright his plays, the protection secured would do little for the “author.” Presumably the reason the coach would look to copyright his plays is to protect them from other coaches using the plays, but another reason a coach would copyright his plays would be to gain financially from the licensing of these plays. Coaches may be willing to part with their innovations for a fee, but would they really want other coaches to know the exact routes of these plays? There seems to be little financial advantage to copyrighting football plays.

One area of law coaches could exploit would be trade secret law. Coaches could require their coordinators to sign confidentiality agreements requiring them to keep the offensive scheme secret. Like other trade secret subject matter, the play could be reversed engineered without penalty. But if the coach did hope to protect his innovations, it would at least allow a modicum of protection at least until the play is used in a game.

Certainly copyright law is not just simply based on money, but it’s a pretty big factor. As the authors point out, football coaches have the obligation to innovate in spite of copyright protection because if they don’t, they will lose their job for their inability to win games. Copyright law is not appropriate for all forms of creative expression, but sports play creation could potentially be a copyrightable expression. However, due to the competitive drive of coaches and sports teams, it seems highly unlikely that their drive to win and innovate regardless of protection will ever be less than any desire to gain financially from gaining protection of their plays.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare

About the Author:

Author: JJ Gottschalk

JJ Gottschalk is a 3L at the Washington College of Law. JJ is a graduate of The George Washington University where he majored in International Business. During his undergraduate studies, JJ interned at the Department of Commerce in the Office of the International Intellectual Property Coordinator. JJ's IP interests include IP finance and IP protection in trade agreements.

JJ Gottschalk has written 23 posts for the IPB.

1211One Commenthttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F2010%2F09%2F23%2Fcopyright-in-football-is-it-practicable%2FCopyright+in+Football%3A+Is+it+Practicable%3F2010-09-24+00%3A12%3A23JJ+Gottschalkhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ipbrief.net%2F%3Fp%3D1211 »

  • Tweets that mention American University Intellectual Property Brief » Copyright in Football: Is it Practicable? -- Topsy.com says:
    September 24, 2010 at 8:07 PM

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by IP ENCYCLOmation and patesalo, The IP Brief. The IP Brief said: New post, Copyright in Football: Is it Practicable? – http://tinyurl.com/25rtskf [...]

    Reply to this comment »

Leave a comment!

Click here to cancel reply »

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

Copyright »

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Appropriating Sid Vicious

Mr. Brainwash’s works recently joined the increasing number of cases on appropriation art after photographer Dennis Morris sued the street artist for use of his 1977 picture of Sid Vicious.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Patents »

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay

The Food and Drug Administration’s recent decision, which reasoned that the drug posed public health and safety concerns, creates serious patent implications with regard to generic drugs.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Trademark »

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million

Supreme, one of the most coveted skate-inspired clothing brands, is suing women’s clothing brand Married to the Mob and its founder Leah McSweeney for trademark infringement to the tune of $10 million.

TwitterFacebookGoogle GmailGoogle ReaderDiggPrintBookmark/FavoritesShare
More articles »

Facebook

Accepting Submissions

The IP Brief is currently accepting submissions. We are looking for papers that address a legal topic relating to any area of intellectual property. Please submit completed papers and a cover page with the name and title of the article to ipbrief [at] wcl.american.edu. Any questions can also be sent to this e-mail address.

Blogroll

  • American University Washington College of Law
  • Carrollogos
  • Copyright Blog
  • GamePolitics
  • Intellectual Property Watch
  • PatentlyO
  • Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property
  • Spicy IP
  • The TTABlog®
  • ©ollectanea

Tags

Archives

  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • January 2010

Random Posts

DC Comics Sues Gotham Garage Over Replica Batmobiles Do You Fear The Deer? Not Without The Milwaukee Bucks Approval The North Face and The South Butt Reach a Settlement Tech Giants Vs. ‘Patent Trolls’: What the Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Decision Could Mean for Patent Litigation A Question of Moral Rights in the United States Led Zeppelin to Release Entire Back Catalogue to the Internet Streaming Community Piracy - A Two Edged Sword? Trade“mark U.S. Copyright Office Gives Pirates a Larger Rope to Swing From Prometheus-Unbound:  Is the Federal Circuit Already Firing Back With Cyclopenzaprine? A Battle for Your Sole: Second Circuit Resolves Fight Between French Fashion Houses Charles Louboutin and Yves Saint Laurent Over Red Soled Shoes.
(refresh random posts)

Latest Video Post

Relatively New Anti-Piracy PSA: Another Analogy Comparison of Piracy to Stealing Cars or an Effective Message?

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Sues Married to the Mob for $10 Million
  • Appropriating Sid Vicious
  • Chick-Fil-A’s ‘Eat Mor Chikin’ Trumps Kale-Promotion Slogan
  • Oxycontin and the Implications of Pay-For-Delay
  • Oh, That’s Different … Never mind: USPTO Withdraws Ruling that IPAD MINI is “Merely Descriptive”

Twitter

  • No public Twitter messages.
  • Copy / Paste
  • Site Search
  • Wikipedia
  • Google
  • Facts
  • Amazon
  • eBay
  • Outlook
  • Gmail
  • Y! Mail
  • Twitter
  • Search & Share
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia Premium theme by Colorlabs Project
The American University Intellectual Property Brief is licensed by the staff of the American University Intellectual Property Brief under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License. IPBrief.net is hosted by Dan Rosenthal. For technical queries, contact dan@danrosenthal.org

Creative Commons License