[thepostman]

yeah...they should just tell the church to stop promoting in the way they were, but if bars are able to charge cover charges on super bowl sunday why can't a church charge money in order to have plenty of food...i highly doubt they are making big bucks off of this whole thing....

[Libertine]

Actually, the NFL has a solid point here and it revolves around the money. The church is making money by trading on the NFL's protected names and images. Everything else is an extraneous point off of that. If it were a free or donation-oriented or even potluck event, I doubt that there would be any kind of problem. Bars can make money and charge a cover b/c they sell something else besides the opportunity to watch the game on an enormous screen. The church, in this case, is selling nothing besides a copyrighted broadcast and that's usually called 'pirating'. I'm sure the church's intentions were innocent, but they really should have thought through what they were doing.

The NFL is right.

[Sly Fox]

As the article stated, the church had dropped the admission charge and use of the Super Bowl name and the league still threatened them with legal action. Very classy. I agree that the church was wrong with their initial setup but this is ridiculous.

[Libertine]

As the article stated, the church had dropped the admission charge and use of the Super Bowl name and the league still threatened them with legal action. Very classy. I agree that the church was wrong with their initial setup but this is ridiculous.

I'll agree with that but I'm betting that this part of the situation is less about league policy and more about lawyers being lawyers.

[LUconn]

Actually, the NFL has a solid point here and it revolves around the money. The church is making money by trading on the NFL's protected names and images. Everything else is an extraneous point off of that. If it were a free or donation-oriented or even potluck event, I doubt that there would be any kind of problem. Bars can make money and charge a cover b/c they sell something else besides the opportunity to watch the game on an enormous screen. The church, in this case, is selling nothing besides a copyrighted broadcast and that's usually called 'pirating'. I'm sure the church's intentions were innocent, but they really should have thought through what they were doing.

The NFL is right.

what about a cover charge at the bar? That's an admission price to watch the game. Are you saying if the church simply sold the food to the attendees they'd be on the same playing field as a bar?

In fact, I'd say the church is actually selling the use of their giant screen, projector and facilities.

[PAmedic]

what worries me more is hearing stupidity on the RADIO and TV with announcers using euphamisms such as "the big game" or "the big event"

are you freakin' kidding me? corporations can now copywrite individual words of the English language because they are used in a particular order?

whats next? Being sued becuase you used the phrase "World Series" instead of "the big season-ending baseball series between the 2 division champs" ?

sometimes I think I'm the only sane one left (except you guys of course)

[JDUB]

25-17 colts

[PAmedic]

I think Tupperware should launch a class-action suit against the NFL on behalf of all of us who legitimately paid for their product and are being ripped off by not getting royalties

[LUconn]

My church's youth group has some kind of canned food drive the week before THE BIG GAME (I'm not looking to get sued), and they call it "The Souper Bowl". Will they be next on the NFL hitlist?

[Sly Fox]

The Souper Bowl is a national deal endorsed by the league. So they won't have any cease * desist orders coming their way.

[El Scorcho]

More details courtesy of the professional football association of our nation (The league name is also trademarked, I'm assuming.):

"Aiello said the league has a longstanding policy against “mass out-of-home viewings” of the Super Bowl, even if the hosts don’t charge admission. The NFL makes an exception to that, however, for sports bars that show televised sports on a regular basis."

So, bars are welcome, but not churches.

The main concern for the league, Aiello said, is groups that charge admission to watch games and/or those that use a TV screen larger than 55 inches to show the game.

You heard it, folks. Measure up your set and if it's 56 inches or larger, you're screwed. Toss out your plasmas, LCD's and projectors 'cause the N*L is gonna getcha!!! It's a legal blitz!

I heard it suggested today that the church should counter-sue to revoke the league's right for any player to mention God before or after the game, as well seeking a ban of "Hail Mary" plays.

[RubberMallet]

our church is charging a cover charge...but it is in no way related to watch the game....its to eat....you get a wristband if you buy one you get to eat food...

this event revolves around massive amounts of people getting together and watching....its been that way for years...

[El Scorcho]

Also, the league can claim that NFL broadcasts may only be used with their express written consent, but it doesn't mean anything until they take it to court. I also claim that any radio/television frequencies passing through my home and body are mine to use as I see fit. If you don't want me to use it, get it out of my house and my head. Otherwise, I'll do whatever I please with it, including watching the game on a giant projector on the side of my house and asking the entire neighborhood to come over and watch. We will most definitely be out of the home and the screen will be much larger than 55 inches.*

What now, N*L?

*The preceding statement was purely hypothetical and I am in no way inviting my neighborhood or any of you slobs over to watch the game at my house. Actually, I will be working. And it will probably be too cold to watch the game outdoors.

[kel varson]

Let's say...hypothetically, that this Bears team was coached by a certain Ditka...what would you think the final score would be?

[SuperJon]

Let's say that I was skinny and good looking, would I have a date tonight?


What if questions are useless.

[PAmedic]

25-17 colts

DARN CLOSE JDUB!

nicely done.

[SuperJon]

The commercials sucked.

[PAmedic]

agreed- sitting here at work and we can't think of a single one that we liked. Other than one of the first ones that had that dude w/ the ridiculous beard/comb-over that wrapped around his head. He was getting canned for something, then stood up revealing Daisy Dukes, knee socks and roller skates.

funny thing is I have that outfit.

anyway- not worth 2.6 mil for 20 sec

[SuperJon]

I thought that one sucked.


The Snickers man kiss was decent.

The slapping instead of high fives was decent.

The careerbuilder.com ones were alright.

[PAmedic]

forgot about the Snickers one. Yeah, that wasn't bad

I coulda produced a better one for 1.3 mil though.

[BJWilliams]

How bout some love for the LU kid's commercial wining the Doritos contest?

[PAmedic]

wow- that's cool. What did he win?

[BJWilliams]

They played it during the Super Bowl. It was during the second timeout in the first quarter. They also got recognized during the 3rd quarter as the first fan made commercial to air during the Super Bowl. I honestly don't know if they got cash prizes or anything out of it, but here's hoping that this sort of exposure gets them an opportunity to do many more commercials

[El Scorcho]

The commercials sucked.

I enjoyed the GoDaddy.com commercial because of the cameos by Kevin Rose and Alex Albrecht.

[01LUGrad]

Wow, was I wrong! To my credit, I was sure Bad Rex had died. Unfortunately, he is alive and well. Something tells me his time in Chicago is very limited.

I can't be happier for Tony Dungy and Peyton Manning. Two class acts who definetly deserved this.

Oh...and the commercials were the only thing worse than Rex last night.