NFL Stops Churches from having SuperBowl Parties (1 Viewer)

[PatsFanCT]

Where on earth did this 55" rule come from?

I know that's my wife's limit...

 

[fatness]

We have potential heroes here: link

At least one church plans to defy the NFL’s objections and host a big-screen party anyway.

 

[Gr00vus]

Copyright law in its current form is ridiculous, odious and completely contrary to the reason the citizens of the U.S. allowed copyright in the first place.This is just yet another disgusting abuse of a right no-one should have to the extent it's now encoded.

Care to give us your reasoning?As someone that makes my living creating intellectual property (mostly software but also photography and computer generated graphics) I like the idea that my work is at least somewhat protected from those that would use it without reimbursing me for it.

Sure. I make my living working in software engineering too - including writing. I get paid for the service I provide - like most other engineers - not for the resale of copies of my labor. It's pretty simple. In an age when producing and distributing copies of executables, music, video, etc. is incredibly inexpensive current copyright laws are debilitating and seem to serve only to make the rich richer at the expense of those who would benefit most from a more open environment for exchanging knowledge, ideas, etc. Copyright is an artificial monopoly on an ephemeral good - an idea. From an economic perspective it's inefficient. From a humanistic perspective I find it oppressive. In total humanity benefits more and progresses faster when ideas are exchanged freely. I could go into detail, but I'm off topic here, and this is really probably more of a FFA discussion anyway.

 

[TheLastDispatch]

I don't understand why you'd go to a church to watch a football game

VERY

Not really. It's not my cup of tea, but a lot of people don't just go to church to punch a clock for 90-120 minutes every Sunday. They socialize there too. If that's where your friends are, why not watch the Super Bowl "Big Game" with them there?

Your weekly masses are 90-120 minutes??

 

[NinerK]

I'm liking the corporate side of the NFL less and less these days.

Agreed. Especially after I saw the Real Sports piece last week about players trying to get disability benefits.

What are your feelings on the corporate side of church/religion?

to both "corporate" churches and your implication that all churches behave that way.

Give me a break.. it is common sense that churches are businesses. If they don't make money they don't stay open - they have bills just like everyone else.I am not implying, I am saying it directly.No different in that respect than any other instituition or business, including the NFL.

LOL...I'm a real estate appraiser and my boss happens to specialize in appraising churches. Mostly the Pastor's are cool. But it's a weird experience when you are inspecting a church and the pastor is on your nuts asking "how much is it worth?" or "we need the loan to close by this date because our new youth pastor is starting and BLAH BLAH BLAH" and then SOMETIMES they will be calling us like everyday asking if we have any "preliminary findings"..... It really opened my eyes when I started appraising these churches. Most times they are cool but you really get to see the "business" side of it and the reality that if the tithe doesn't cover the bills, they will have to sell the building. And then the buyer will call us to do another appraisal......Still though; I think if a church is going to have a SB party the inspiration would be to provide a family atmosphere (as in this case); not to rake in the dough. I agree 100% that they will accept offerings but it's not the inspiration for the idea.

 

[Bevo]

Copyright law in its current form is ridiculous, odious and completely contrary to the reason the citizens of the U.S. allowed copyright in the first place.This is just yet another disgusting abuse of a right no-one should have to the extent it's now encoded.

Care to give us your reasoning?As someone that makes my living creating intellectual property (mostly software but also photography and computer generated graphics) I like the idea that my work is at least somewhat protected from those that would use it without reimbursing me for it.

Sure. I make my living working in software engineering too - including writing. I get paid for the service I provide - like most other engineers - not for the resale of copies of my labor. It's pretty simple. In an age when producing and distributing copies of executables, music, video, etc. is incredibly inexpensive current copyright laws are debilitating and seem to serve only to make the rich richer at the expense of those who would benefit most from a more open environment for exchanging knowledge, ideas, etc. Copyright is an artificial monopoly on an ephemeral good - an idea. From an economic perspective it's inefficient. From a humanistic perspective I find it oppressive. In total humanity benefits more and progresses faster when ideas are exchanged freely. I could go into detail, but I'm off topic here, and this is really probably more of a FFA discussion anyway.

If the company you work for did not get paid for their software products because most people took them and used them without paying for them how long do you think your company would be paying you for the service you provide?The production and distribution of "executables" is generally only a very small part of the overall cost of bringing a product to market and keeping it there. People (developers, QA, managers, secretaries, and on and on), buildings, PCs, software, insurance (employee and company), advertising, dividends to stock holders where applicalble and much more. The fully loaded costs run to a lot of money just like in almost all other businesses.I am not trying to say copyright law is perfect, it is not, just as most laws are not perfect. I do think that without it we would quite likely see a lot LESS innovation in software and creative works in media like film, video, photography, etc. than we do now instead of more because a lot of people that come up with these works would be forced to move into industries where they could actually make a living instead of being the much talked about "starving artist".

 

[Gr00vus]

If the company you work for did not get paid for their software products because most people took them and used them without paying for them how long do you think your company would be paying you for the service you provide?The production and distribution of "executables" is generally only a very small part of the overall cost of bringing a product to market and keeping it there. People (developers, QA, managers, secretaries, and on and on), buildings, PCs, software, insurance (employee and company), advertising, dividends to stock holders where applicalble and much more. The fully loaded costs run to a lot of money just like in almost all other businesses.I am not trying to say copyright law is perfect, it is not, just as most laws are not perfect. I do think that without it we would quite likely see a lot LESS innovation in software and creative works in media like film, video, photography, etc. than we do now instead of more because a lot of people that come up with these works would be forced to move into industries where they could actually make a living instead of being the much talked about "starving artist".

I disagree with just about everything you've said here and have counterpoints for just about all of it. If you want to open up a thread in FFA I'll gladly debate it there (probably not the best weekend for it, but what can you do?). But I'm done talking about it here in the Shark Pool - it doesn't belong here.

 

[nerangers]

So the NFL is pulling the old 55" TV Rule! That is classic!

As someone stated here, having a party at a chuch is a nice family atmosphere. Our church does not charge for the party...never has. As for Neilson ratings, they can only determine how many TV's are tuned into a channel, and not the number of people. Wouldn't a church show up the same way in the ratings?

Bri, you can come to my church and watch!

 

[cantrell]

I hope the church follows through on the plan and gets sued by the evil NFL suits. That would be a blow to PR having the NFL sue a church, not want the NFL needs I'm sure.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

NFL = The Devil ?

 

[Capella]

The NFL seems to have no legal standing here. The churches should politely tell them to stick it.

 

[knobby]

The NFL seems to have no legal standing here. The churches should politely tell them to stick it.

 

[Sputnikv8]

NFL = The Devil ?

If they made the tv size limit 66.6" then I think you'd be on to something.This is such a stupid move by the NFL. Could very well end up isolating quite a large audience if it gets too ugly. Maybe churches would have access to several 55" tv's. You could have a sweet setup with about 4-6 tv's of that size. Of course, with this late of notice it'd be hard to arrange, etc.

 

[nerangers]

The NFL seems to have no legal standing here. The churches should politely tell them to stick it.

We decided to set a good example, since many knew about this issue. We are limiting all projections of the game under 55" and got a few extra TV's setup.Thanks alot NFL...

 

[AB in DC]

NFL finally backs down

Washington Post article

NFL Reverses Call On Church Parties

Thursday, February 21, 2008; E02

The NFL, which found itself on the receiving end of protests and controversy after it objected to churches showing the Super Bowl on big-screen televisions, has reversed course and will now permit the viewings.

In a letter to Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said the league would not object to "live showings -- regardless of screen size -- of the Super Bowl" by religious organizations.

In response to questions from Hatch, Goodell said in the letter, dated Feb. 19, the NFL will implement the policy starting with next year's Super Bowl.

A story in The Washington Post about churches -- most of them evangelical -- canceling their Super Bowl parties because they were afraid of lawsuits from the NFL if they showed the game on their jumbo screens kicked up a storm of protest on Capitol Hill and among some conservative leaders.

The league has said that organizations that host public viewings of its games on television screens larger than 55 inches violate its copyright. Sports bars are exempted. Last year, the league sent letters to two churches advising them of the policy.

In response, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) proposed legislation that would allow houses of worship to show football games on big-screen televisions and raised the issue with Goodell at a meeting last week. Other congressional representatives threatened similar bills.

In its letter, the NFL said it would not object to big-screen viewings in the churches as long as the showings are free and are on premises that the church uses on a "routine and customary" basis.

 

[redman]

NFL finally backs down

Washington Post article

NFL Reverses Call On Church Parties

Thursday, February 21, 2008; E02

The NFL, which found itself on the receiving end of protests and controversy after it objected to churches showing the Super Bowl on big-screen televisions, has reversed course and will now permit the viewings.

In a letter to Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said the league would not object to "live showings -- regardless of screen size -- of the Super Bowl" by religious organizations.

In response to questions from Hatch, Goodell said in the letter, dated Feb. 19, the NFL will implement the policy starting with next year's Super Bowl.

A story in The Washington Post about churches -- most of them evangelical -- canceling their Super Bowl parties because they were afraid of lawsuits from the NFL if they showed the game on their jumbo screens kicked up a storm of protest on Capitol Hill and among some conservative leaders.

The league has said that organizations that host public viewings of its games on television screens larger than 55 inches violate its copyright. Sports bars are exempted. Last year, the league sent letters to two churches advising them of the policy.

In response, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) proposed legislation that would allow houses of worship to show football games on big-screen televisions and raised the issue with Goodell at a meeting last week. Other congressional representatives threatened similar bills.

In its letter, the NFL said it would not object to big-screen viewings in the churches as long as the showings are free and are on premises that the church uses on a "routine and customary" basis.

Well thank goodness. Now they can watch and see whether the Patriots go 19 . . . and . . . oh . . .

 

[AB in DC]

Well thank goodness. Now they can watch and see whether the Patriots go 19 . . . and . . . oh . . .

Considering that the policy doesn't start till next year, I certainly hope they will have a chance to watch the Patriots go 19-0.

 

[Jules Winnfield]

First Spygate and now this "allowance" by the NFL

Convenient timing