Extra Innings · Cards & Faces
Who Owns the Broadcast
Baltimore Orioles, Inc. v. Major League Baseball Players Ass'n (1986)
Charge: Right of publicity / property in performances - players claim clubs need their consent to televise games (players' claims against the clubs)Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh CircuitDocket: Cards & Faces
Do ballplayers have a right to stop clubs from televising games without their consent?
The facts
Big-league clubs and the players' union disagreed over who owned TV rights to games. The players said their on-field performances were their own property under state publicity law, so clubs needed consent to broadcast them. The clubs said the telecasts were copyrighted works they owned. The players' contracts did not expressly grant them ownership of broadcasts.
You have the facts the court had. Guilty or not guilty? Call it in the game with your friends, then see what the court actually decided. Wrong call, you drink.
Citation: Baltimore Orioles, Inc. v. Major League Baseball Players Ass'n, 805 F.2d 663 (7th Cir. 1986)
Read more at law.resource.org. The source reveals the outcome.