Thursday, June 03, 2010

Judge rules against GCI in Wisc. livestreaming case

Delivering a defeat to Gannett in a closely watched lawsuit, a federal judge today upheld the rights of Wisconsin's high school sports governing body to sign exclusive contracts for Internet coverage of state tournaments.

The Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association sued GCI and the Wisconsin Newspaper Association in late 2008, after Gannett's Post-Crescent of Appleton produced live streaming video of four football games without the WIAA’s permission.

The Green Bay Press-Gazette says in a new story that GCI and the newspaper trade group had asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit and affirm their right to livestream postseason tournaments, saying the WIAA is a public institution that's constitutionally required to give access to news organizations.

The WIAA cited a threat to its ability to charge fees for access to tournaments that it says are not public events.

Western District Court Judge William Conley backed the WIAA, writing in his opinion and order that, “ultimately, this is a case about commerce, not the right to a free press.”

Bob Dreps, the attorney who represented Gannett and the newspaper association, said in a written statement that the defendants were disappointed Conley authorized the "continued commercialization of high school sports." The defendants were considering their options, including a possible appeal, according to the Associated Press.

8 comments:

  1. Fantastic news! As a person living in Wisconsin and a supporter of high school sports, I'm glad to see Gannett defeated. I hope Gannett sells all their Wisconsin newspapers and leaves the state for good.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Perhaps it would have looked more like a free speech/freedom of the press case if Gannett was planning on making money off of their live streaming operation.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, 10:36 ... cuz I'm sure if Gannett put their papers on the market someone would come in and make things soooooooooo much better. Get a clue, dude.

    ReplyDelete
  4. From the story: Bob Dreps, the attorney who represented the news organizations, said the contract sets "production goals" to cover 100 percent of tournament finals in all boys and girls sports, 50 percent of sectional events and 25 percent of regional events. In reality, however, only 134 of 3,585 tournament events, or 3.7 percent, were covered in 2008-09, he said.

    "Members of the public who are unable to attend the events suffer because so few events are streamed by the exclusive license holder," Dreps said.

    So they are banning all the media coverage to protect the less than 4% they cover themselves.

    The Gannett papers were covering the games and tournaments that really mattered to our readers. This contractor covers the games in markets where they are likely to get people to pay directly to watch them.

    We better appeal this - because this decision puts us only a half-step away from getting hand-out photos instead of taking our own. "Sorry, we have an exclusive still photo contract. Sure, it's a taxpayer funded school, a public event, and we may not actually show up to cover it - but no media are allowed in."

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Only a half-step away"? Gannett is already there.

    At least two or three Gannett New Jersey dailies print stories about the New Jersey Devils that are submitted by the pro hockey club.

    ReplyDelete
  6. An addition to my original post: Gannett should sell all their Wisconsin papers to an innovative organization that would stop print publications and merge them to an all-inclusive website, covering the news, sports, entertainment, etc. in northeastern Wisconsin. I would pay for a subscription to that kind of website. No more printed newspapers -- they are a dinosaur!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Great news to me. I haven't been on here for a spell. Any updates on the sports guy who filed the OT lawsuit against the miserable company?

    ReplyDelete
  8. 7:39 pm: That OT lawsuit in Montgomery, Ala., is proceeding; at least a couple depositions have been taken.

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.