Phil Gordon Makes A Good Point About The Wpt Lawsuit, Don't Be Bias, Read

[CrazyJoe 0]

The WPT has done NOTHING like that... ever! They have NEVER used a players name and likeness inappropriately to sell products. Not once.

wrong. wrong. wrong. In EVERY SINGLE ONE of the threads that YOU have started about this subject someone has brought up the cases of the WPT inappropriately using likenesses of players, in EVERY ONE. Do you choose to ignore them, have you not read them? What is the problem here? I have personally posted several times about a commercial for WPT Online which contains footage of YOU! You haven't said anythinga about it, I was contacted by Andy Bloch personally for more information about the commercial, but you seem to ignore what continually stares you in the face. THE WPT IS USING FOOTAGE OF PLAYERS FOR OUTSIDE PRODUCTS.so once again, MAYBE Daniel will see them this time....57. For example, WPTE markets the "World Poker Tour" video game which competes with, among other things, the "World Championship Poker" line of video games co-Plaintiffs Howard Lederer, Annie Duke and Greg Raymer each have licensed to Crave Entertainment, Inc - which manufactures and sells the "World Championship Poker" video games - the exclusive right to use their names, likenesses, images in conjunction with Crave video games. WPTE, however, upon information and belief, has used video footage of Messrs. Lederer and Raymer and Ms Duke playing in the WPT tournament as part of its "World Poker Tour" video game. The co-Plaintiffs were never notified by WPTE of this fact, nor did they receive any compensation for WPTE's coercive use of their intellectual property rights.58. Another example is provided by WPTE's exploitation of the intellectual property rights of co-Plaintiff Phil Gordon, who is the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Expert Insight, a company which markets instructional poker DVD's and books among other things. In connection with Expert Insight, Mr. Gordon and co-Plaintiff Andrew Bloch run the "Las Vegas Academy" poker fantasy camp, where interested poker and blackjack players can pay for instruction from Messrs. Gordon and Bloch. WPTE runs its own poker fantasy camp - "World Poker Tour Boot Camp" - which is a head-to-head competitor with the Las Vegas Academy. Upon information and belief, WPTE has used video footage of Mr. Gordon playing in WPT tournaments - without his prior knowledge or any compensation - to promote its World Poker Tour Boot Camp.ALSOWPT Online has a commercial which uses footage from WPT tournaments featuring several players INCLUDING Daniel Negreanu himself. WPT Online isn't available to US players, so the commerical doesn't air there.

[Joom26 0]

Bottom line is......Who gives a crap? Really? I am willing to bet that the majority of us in these threads don't play on that level (big buy in events). So, we're spinning our wheels over something outside our realm. I'm a big fan of Daniel's for sure. I also like Phil very much. I have lost enormous respect for Raymer. The actions he took were childish, in my opinion. Everyone in here is on this side of the imaginary line and ready to do battle with those on the other side. Why?

[ogmaster 0]

Here's the two things I'm just not getting. First off, regarding the release, yes it does suck that they have the rights to use your image, name and so on. However, isnt this a typical release for almost any non-pro sports event? I mean dont you have to sign something just like this when you get onto a damn gameshow?? To me, this is more of a "diva" attitude that WPT is making money off their "image" even though they're themselves are not getting paid which is a valid reason to be upset considering how well poker is doing overall. If this is the case, coming to the WPT as a whole with other players and trying to come up with a better contract would be more ideal, not a lawsuit.As for the anti-trust part, again, I dont see the merit of the lawsuit here. WPT nor MGM Mirage are monopolies or even have a large hold of whole poker business. A business like WPT has a right to make an agreement with another business to accomodate their needs of a place to hold their events. I mean what's next? Suing Poker Superstars for having their event only at the Golden Nugget?

[Stylin_Fish 0]

What this all comes down to. Anything that has Annie Dyke involved in it is stuipd.Phil Gordon needs to go back to not winning anything.Annie Dyke needs to go back to kicking Howard's ass at boggle.Joe Hachem needs to go back to Australia.Greg Raymer needs to go back to KFC.Jesus and Howard, I don't have a problem with.

[CrazyJoe 0]

Here's the two things I'm just not getting. First off, regarding the release, yes it does suck that they have the rights to use your image, name and so on. However, isnt this a typical release for almost any non-pro sports event? I mean dont you have to sign something just like this when you get onto a damn gameshow?? To me, this is more of a "diva" attitude that WPT is making money off their "image" even though they're themselves are not getting paid which is a valid reason to be upset considering how well poker is doing overall. If this is the case, coming to the WPT as a whole with other players and trying to come up with a better contract would be more ideal, not a lawsuit.As for the anti-trust part, again, I dont see the merit of the lawsuit here. WPT nor MGM Mirage are monopolies or even have a large hold of whole poker business. A business like WPT has a right to make an agreement with another business to accomodate their needs of a place to hold their events. I mean what's next? Suing Poker Superstars for having their event only at the Golden Nugget?

Game show is different, the show itself is putting up prizes, WPT puts up sweet jack all for the players to win. Also, I assume the release for game shows is different, there wouldn't be the auxillary products to shill like the WPT is doing.

What this all comes down to. Anything that has Annie Dyke involved in it is stuipd.Phil Gordon needs to go back to not winning anything.Annie Dyke needs to go back to kicking Howard's ass at boggle.Joe Hachem needs to go back to Australia.Greg Raymer needs to go back to KFC.Jesus and Howard, I don't have a problem with.

sigh, you bring so much insight to the discussion

[AngloBoy 0]

If you don't like the release don't sign it.If you don't like something you don't have to sue someone. Why can't you just move on to something else. It's not for the good of all players. Alot of players don't care in the slightest what the WPT do with their image.If you don't like the WPT, start your own tour. Go Global. Do something except whining, and getting lawyers involved. There are more important things in the world to think about that bobble head dolls.If the little guy wins a WPT event he's not gonna give a single thought to the bobble head they make of him, he's gonna be too busy having fun with all of his money.

[mhoward29 0]

I feel that the WPT release is a little on the extreme side to "use the players likeness for anything." I feel that they could just stick to showing them play on TV. DN said that the CURRENT WPT staff hasnt used the players for advertising yet. Well staff changes, who knows what the next person to run advertising for the WPT will do.However, I do feel that DN is right and this will be very, very bad for poker... more specificly online poker, seeings how it is technically illegal.Therefore I think both sides are right on some issues.Also I hate Annie Duke, she used to live in my town... and I have seen her cheat in the WSOP, but thats another story for another thread.

[mike76s 0]

have you noticed that daniel hasnt responded again

[Kid_Poker824 0]

have you noticed that daniel hasnt responded again

he sleeps to u know prolly tired of all this garbage

[Alina 0]

DN's position that the seven don't have a shot is ill-thought through. His basic contention is that freedom of contract should prevail, but the rationale of anti-trust law is that this should not be the case in all circumstances. The legal issue is whether anti-trusts should trump contract here. It would be interesting to see if the WPT used DN's image to promote a poker game which outsold Stacked without giving him his cuit whether DN would take a different view on the merits of the case.

[Scriptdude 0]

Are you all so bored that you suddenly decided "Hey, I'm gonna give a sh!t about this WPT lawsuit thing".So a bunch of over-the-top players sued a pokercompany. Who cares. There's only 1 winner: the lawfirm.

[fckthis 0]

Umm, can someone explain to me what the 7 will accomplish if they win?

I feel that the WPT release is a little on the extreme side to "use the players likeness for anything." I feel that they could just stick to showing them play on TV. DN said that the CURRENT WPT staff hasnt used the players for advertising yet. Well staff changes, who knows what the next person to run advertising for the WPT will do.However, I do feel that DN is right and this will be very, very bad for poker... more specificly online poker, seeings how it is technically illegal.Therefore I think both sides are right on some issues.Also I hate Annie Duke, she used to live in my town... and I have seen her cheat in the WSOP, but thats another story for another thread.

fck that, spit it SON.

[Alina 0]

have you noticed that daniel hasnt responded again

He realises that he's been caught out after shooting from the hip after donking out of the ME.

[Alina 0]

Why doesn't Full Tilt and Pokerstars change their contracts to allow their high profile players the ability to promote the sites on the WPT. Why don't they take legal action against FTP. If that happened then maybe everyone could shut the **** up on this topic. This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard of. If you want to do something (play in WPT) and they have rules .... follow them or don't play. Nowhere on the Bill of Rights or Constitution does it say that : "someday there will something called television, and on this device people will be able to watch televised tournaments of a game called poker. These games will be run by a company known as the World Poker Tour. An all Amercans shall have the right to play". Don't want to sign it ... fine don't play. I'd like to play in those events too. But they have a rule I can't abide by. They require you to fork over $10K and I can't do that. (I only have $200).Should I call my attorney (from the legal hut at the mall) and have legal action taken against the WPT because they are discriminating against the poor? No. I wouldn't. because that would be retarded.

You are retarded if you think that is a correct analogy. I concede you are entilted to your (wrong) opinion.

[superleeds 0]

If the WPT has never taken advantage of their "in perpetuity throughout the universe" clause, and never intends to, then why have the clause? Why is it even available to them if they don't plan to use it at some point?Isn't that the real issue? Daniel goes to great lengths to explain that there is "no smoking gun", but does there need to be? I can't understand why he would defend the WPT's stance so vehemently with regard to the "player's likeness" clause. If it's written into the contract, it's available. So why is the WPT so adamant about keeping it if they never intend to use it?They're willing to go to court to defend it. One would think there must be an underlying reason.

There is an underlying reason. That clause if it could be legally enforced would greatly increase the value of the company. And Daniel, why won't you respond to CrazyJoe

In EVERY SINGLE ONE of the threads that YOU have started about this subject someone has brought up the cases of the WPT inappropriately using likenesses of players, in EVERY ONE. Do you choose to ignore them, have you not read them? What is the problem here? I have personally posted several times about a commercial for WPT Online which contains footage of YOU! You haven't said anythinga about it, I was contacted by Andy Bloch personally for more information about the commercial, but you seem to ignore what continually stares you in the face. THE WPT IS USING FOOTAGE OF PLAYERS FOR OUTSIDE PRODUCTS.so once again, MAYBE Daniel will see them this time....57. For example, WPTE markets the "World Poker Tour" video game which competes with, among other things, the "World Championship Poker" line of video games co-Plaintiffs Howard Lederer, Annie Duke and Greg Raymer each have licensed to Crave Entertainment, Inc - which manufactures and sells the "World Championship Poker" video games - the exclusive right to use their names, likenesses, images in conjunction with Crave video games. WPTE, however, upon information and belief, has used video footage of Messrs. Lederer and Raymer and Ms Duke playing in the WPT tournament as part of its "World Poker Tour" video game. The co-Plaintiffs were never notified by WPTE of this fact, nor did they receive any compensation for WPTE's coercive use of their intellectual property rights.58. Another example is provided by WPTE's exploitation of the intellectual property rights of co-Plaintiff Phil Gordon, who is the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Expert Insight, a company which markets instructional poker DVD's and books among other things. In connection with Expert Insight, Mr. Gordon and co-Plaintiff Andrew Bloch run the "Las Vegas Academy" poker fantasy camp, where interested poker and blackjack players can pay for instruction from Messrs. Gordon and Bloch. WPTE runs its own poker fantasy camp - "World Poker Tour Boot Camp" - which is a head-to-head competitor with the Las Vegas Academy. Upon information and belief, WPTE has used video footage of Mr. Gordon playing in WPT tournaments - without his prior knowledge or any compensation - to promote its World Poker Tour Boot Camp.ALSOWPT Online has a commercial which uses footage from WPT tournaments featuring several players INCLUDING Daniel Negreanu himself. WPT Online isn't available to US players, so the commerical doesn't air there.

[PairTheBoard 0]

"QUOTE(DanielNegreanu @ Tuesday, August 8th, 2006, 11:53 AM) The WPT has done NOTHING like that... ever! They have NEVER used a players name and likeness inappropriately to sell products. Not once."wrong. wrong. wrong. In EVERY SINGLE ONE of the threads that YOU have started about this subject someone has brought up the cases of the WPT inappropriately using likenesses of players, in EVERY ONE. Do you choose to ignore them, have you not read them? What is the problem here? I have personally posted several times about a commercial for WPT Online which contains footage of YOU! You haven't said anythinga about it, I was contacted by Andy Bloch personally for more information about the commercial, but you seem to ignore what continually stares you in the face. THE WPT IS USING FOOTAGE OF PLAYERS FOR OUTSIDE PRODUCTS.so once again, MAYBE Daniel will see them this time....57. For example, WPTE markets the "World Poker Tour" video game which competes with, among other things, the "World Championship Poker" line of video games co-Plaintiffs Howard Lederer, Annie Duke and Greg Raymer each have licensed to Crave Entertainment, Inc - which manufactures and sells the "World Championship Poker" video games - the exclusive right to use their names, likenesses, images in conjunction with Crave video games. WPTE, however, upon information and belief, has used video footage of Messrs. Lederer and Raymer and Ms Duke playing in the WPT tournament as part of its "World Poker Tour" video game. The co-Plaintiffs were never notified by WPTE of this fact, nor did they receive any compensation for WPTE's coercive use of their intellectual property rights.58. Another example is provided by WPTE's exploitation of the intellectual property rights of co-Plaintiff Phil Gordon, who is the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Expert Insight, a company which markets instructional poker DVD's and books among other things. In connection with Expert Insight, Mr. Gordon and co-Plaintiff Andrew Bloch run the "Las Vegas Academy" poker fantasy camp, where interested poker and blackjack players can pay for instruction from Messrs. Gordon and Bloch. WPTE runs its own poker fantasy camp - "World Poker Tour Boot Camp" - which is a head-to-head competitor with the Las Vegas Academy. Upon information and belief, WPTE has used video footage of Mr. Gordon playing in WPT tournaments - without his prior knowledge or any compensation - to promote its World Poker Tour Boot Camp.ALSOWPT Online has a commercial which uses footage from WPT tournaments featuring several players INCLUDING Daniel Negreanu himself. WPT Online isn't available to US players, so the commerical doesn't air there.

Is Daniel ever going to respond to these points?

[WVUCarter 0]

Phil is well spoken in his arguments but does not change the fact that the law suit is wrong and bad for poker.

[Alina 0]

Is Daniel ever going to respond to these points?

Of course not. Everything he has said so far on the topic has made him look ignorant, except to his cheerleaders.

[fckthis 0]

Of course not. Everything he has said so far on the topic has made him look ignorant, except to his cheerleaders.

lol

[majorleag 0]

Wow what a long thread!Bottomline I think the entire issue is not really about whether or not the suit is good or bad for Poker. It is simply about an individidual's rights to protect his image or brand.The release allows the WPT to use their image. Everything is all well and good IF they don't.What if they do use their image for a produt that they find objectionable? They need each other, many of these players would not exist as celebrities and the WPT would not exist without many of these players.It is easy to say well if you don't like this highly restrictive rule then don't play, however not so easy to practice. If you are already a very wealthy Poker player then maybe you can afford to pass on all the WPT events and just market your brand or play in cash games, WSOP and other tournaments.What if though you are a regular guy like I suspect most of the people on this forum are and you are lucky enough to satellite in to a WPT event and then lucky enough to make a final table and you have to sign this release? Then you start to establish some noteriety yourself and all of a sudden a product is released that has your image implying to the public that you endorse it when in fact you have no knowledge of this product and you in fact find the product and or the company objectionable?I will give you a real world example, I like many others on this forum have tried or will try to enter WPT events. If and yes I know it's a BIG if I am ever so fortunate to enter let alone final table at a WPT main event I can tell you that I will have issues with the release. The reason for this is that there is a company that HAS already been given rights by the WPT to use players images which I have a specific objection to, and if my image were to be used in this company's products I would have issues with this.I will not go into what the company is or the product nor my specific reasons but suffice it to say that I would really be in a difficult position where either I would have to forfeit a huge amount of money that would be very signifcant to me or I would be forced to give up my rights and see my image used in a product for a company which I have specific issues with.So while an established wealthy Poker player at least has an easier time making that choice, although they should not be forced to make that choice either, an as yet unknown player like you or I cannot so easily throw away a chance for potentially life changing money.Respectfully,majorleag

[Alina 0]

Wow what a long thread!Bottomline I think the entire issue is not really about whether or not the suit is good or bad for Poker. It is simply about an individidual's rights to protect his image or brand.The release allows the WPT to use their image. Everything is all well and good IF they don't.What if they do use their image for a produt that they find objectionable? They need each other, many of these players would not exist as celebrities and the WPT would not exist without many of these players.It is easy to say well if you don't like this highly restrictive rule then don't play, however not so easy to practice. If you are already a very wealthy Poker player then maybe you can afford to pass on all the WPT events and just market your brand or play in cash games, WSOP and other tournaments.What if though you are a regular guy like I suspect most of the people on this forum are and you are lucky enough to satellite in to a WPT event and then lucky enough to make a final table and you have to sign this release? Then you start to get establish some noteriety yourself and all of a sudden a product is released that has your image implying to the public that you endorse it when in fact you have no knowledge of this product and you in fact find the product and or the company objectionable?I will give you a real world example, I like many others on this forum have tried or will try to enter WPT events. If and yes I know it's a BIG if I am ever so fortunate to enter let alone final table at a WPT main event I can tell you that I will have issues with the release. The reason for this is that there is a company that HAS already been given rights by the WPT to use players images which I have a specific objection to, and if my image were to be used in this company's products I would have issues with this.I will not go into what the company is or the product nor my specific reasons but suffice it to say that I would really be in a difficult position where either I would have to forfeit a huge amount of money that would be very signifcant to me or I would be forced to give up my rights and see my image used in a product for a company which I have specific issues with.So while an established wealthy Poker player at least has an easier time making that choice, although they should not be forced to make that choice either, an as yet unknown player like you or I cannot so easily throw away a chance for potentially life changing money.Respectfully,majorleag

Good post.Not raised by you, but the argument that if you don't like the release then don't play is intuitively appealing, but cannot be determinative. Otherwise, any exercise of monopoly power would go unchecked and there would be no anti-trust law. It's analogous to Microsoft bundling software into windows to shut out competition.

[CrazyJoe 0]

If you don't like the release don't sign it.If you don't like something you don't have to sue someone. Why can't you just move on to something else. It's not for the good of all players. Alot of players don't care in the slightest what the WPT do with their image.If you don't like the WPT, start your own tour. Go Global. Do something except whining, and getting lawyers involved. There are more important things in the world to think about that bobble head dolls.If the little guy wins a WPT event he's not gonna give a single thought to the bobble head they make of him, he's gonna be too busy having fun with all of his money.

the players aren't just fighting for themselves. It's been said that these players are only complaining now that there is value to their likeness and that they are famous, which is true. Phil has stated that they aren't just fighting for themselves, they are fighting for the players that haven't become famous yet, who may win their first WPT event and find their fact plastered all over boxes of WPT cereal or WPT tampons without prior knowledge.I am so sick of if you don't like the release don't sign it, do you REALLY think there would be this much debate on a subject if it were that simple?

Phil is well spoken in his arguments but does not change the fact that the law suit is wrong and bad for poker.

lawsuit is right.lawsuit is only bad for poker if the WPT chooses to go below the belt and ignore the actual issues of the lawsuit.

he sleeps to u know prolly tired of all this garbage

if he's tired of all this garbage, he should stop making new threads and polls about it every other day, then leaving without responding to valid points and starting a new thread so the other ones get buried.

[bengy3 0]

the players aren't just fighting for themselves. It's been said that these players are only complaining now that there is value to their likeness and that they are famous, which is true. Phil has stated that they aren't just fighting for themselves, they are fighting for the players that haven't become famous yet, who may win their first WPT event and find their fact plastered all over boxes of WPT cereal or WPT tampons without prior knowledge.

Personal opinions about the suit set aside, what gives seven people the right to fight for present and future poker players?

[Alina 0]

lawsuit is right.lawsuit is only bad for poker if the WPT chooses to go below the belt and ignore the actual issues of the lawsuit.

That can't be the case, because blessed DN said it isn't.

[CrazyJoe 0]

Personal opinions about the suit set aside, what gives seven people the right to fight for present and future poker players?

they are standing up to the WPT with their own money to try and change something that does/will negatively impact all present/future players of WPT. How can you say what gives someone the right to fight for someone else, whether Daniel agrees with the "timing" of it or not, even he has to agree that if the players force the WPT to change the release, it's a good thing for all players.