What up MLB?

[LaBombo]

Gleeman has tweeted "Stink successfully raised. Good job everyone". Here's a link with more info about MLB's policy and Apple's actions.

[Steven Buhr]

So MLB went overboard in their police action, ticked off a significant portion of their most deeply invested fans, and then backtracked and blamed it all on someone else.

 

Shocking.

[diehardtwinsfan]

If MLB really wanted to do this, they could have simply bought talk to contact, GATG, and a bunch of other pod costs and simply licensed it as MLB extra or something like that...

 

Besides, doesn't Gleeman work for NBC? Given that they do have those rights, this gets somewhat interesting.

[TheLeviathan]

Because MLB sells access to internet radio broadcasts to consumers. They don't want their local broadcast affiliates giving it away for free

 

Nothing is for free as long as there is advertising. I don't want to pay for listening to the local radio service I can hear for free and may be in a scenario when my phone would work best to get it. That's what bugs me.

 

MLB Gameday audio might be only 20 bucks but if feels like an extra painful cost given the medium I'm using. It feels like I'm handing them 20 dollars and getting the middle finger for my efforts.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Nothing is for free as long as there is advertising. I don't want to pay for listening to the local radio service I can hear for free and may be in a scenario when my phone would work best to get it. That's what bugs me.

 

MLB Gameday audio might be only 20 bucks but if feels like an extra painful cost given the medium I'm using. It feels like I'm handing them 20 dollars and getting the middle finger for my efforts.

 

I guess I am lucky that my phone has a built-in FM transmitter!

 

I understand the point of Gameday Audio -- baseball is certainly the most popular major sport on the radio, so there are more listeners (and more servers needed), and MLB doesn't want local affiliates to control game distribution online. Also, MLB can apply their own ads, branding, and tracking to the broadcasts through Gameday Audio (otherwise, the regional/local ads lose a lot of value in online broadcasts anyway). So they package it and sell it for a nominal fee.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Gleeman has tweeted "Stink successfully raised. Good job everyone". Here's a link with more info about MLB's policy and Apple's actions.

 

Call me crazy, but I actually believe MLB's explanation here. I don't think even they would try to shut down fan podcasts, although they probably gave overly broad instructions to Apple about ferreting out copyrighted material in iTunes.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Call me crazy, but I actually believe MLB's explanation here. I don't think even they would try to shut down fan podcasts, although they probably gave overly broad instructions to Apple about ferreting out copyrighted material in iTunes.

 

What did they expect iTunes staff to do? Negotiate with the podcasters to change their names to something more suitable?

 

Of course iTunes is just going to delete the podcasters. They're not MLB's lawyers.

[Mike Sixel]

I guess I am lucky that my phone has a built-in FM transmitter!

 

I understand the point of Gameday Audio -- baseball is certainly the most popular major sport on the radio, so there are more listeners (and more servers needed), and MLB doesn't want local affiliates to control game distribution online. Also, MLB can apply their own ads, branding, and tracking to the broadcasts through Gameday Audio (otherwise, the regional/local ads lose a lot of value in online broadcasts anyway). So they package it and sell it for a nominal fee.

 

 

If I subscribe to gameday audio, can I listen to Twins games? If not, then it doesn't work. If I can't get reception on free radio, and I can't listen on line, something is wrong. But, then, I've never checked because someone told me the Twins would be blacked out for me.

[Brock Beauchamp]

If I subscribe to gameday audio, can I listen to Twins games? If not, then it doesn't work. If I can't get reception on free radio, and I can't listen on line, something is wrong. But, then, I've never checked because someone told me the Twins would be blacked out for me.

 

No radio blackouts... Those only apply to video.

[Mike Sixel]

Good to know....now I have to figure out if I'm giving them my money or not.....

[Paul Pleiss]

The new description for the Talk to Contact podcast will look something like this "We run a podcast that features discussion of professional baseball played by a team whose stadium has been paid for in large part by the people of Minnesota, and is played in a league for which there is no higher. We also discuss the minor league affiliates of said team, but in no way to we have an endorsement of or by said team or league." We're keeping it classy.

[Thrylos]

Probably a single overzealous person who woke up on the wrong side of the bed made a bad decision.

 

They realized that it was a bad decision and they reversed it. A simple declaimer that each of those podcast do not reflect the opinion of the MLB or the Minnesota Twins should probably be in order. Even the MLB.com hosted blogs have it...

[Brock Beauchamp]

The new description for the Talk to Contact podcast will look something like this "We run a podcast that features discussion of professional baseball played by a team whose stadium has been paid for in large part by the people of Minnesota, and is played in a league for which there is no higher. We also discuss the minor league affiliates of said team, but in no way to we have an endorsement of or by said team or league." We're keeping it classy.

 

Well done.

[snepp]

Am I going to have to start inserting *Trademark* every time I say the word Twins in conversation?

 

Yes.

 

 

alt 0153

[DaveW]

I actually ran into this problem with itunes in the past as well for an app, you just have to take the words MLB/ Minnesota Twins out of the meta data...it sucks especially for the search in itunes but MLB/Minnesota Twins are indeed trademarked. It is annoying, but it is what it is, if they allowed everyone to use those terms in the metadata the searches would be a disaster to navigate.

 

However it is pretty damn annoying that they simply remove all of the podcasts from itunes completely, they easily could have just removed all references to MLB/Twins etc in the meta data, while allowing people who already know the podcast/search for the podcast to find it.

[Paul Pleiss]

The podcasts are back on iTunes. I made sure all Minnesota Twins references were taken out of Talk to Contact, and people searching for us should still be able to find us, just going to be harder to find us if they don't. I even added a disclaimer.

 

Not sure that using Minnesota Twins or MLB in meta data is trademark infringement, nor do I even really know what meta data is, but mentioning them shouldn't be a problem, if it was I would have expected a cease and desist order.

[Thrylos]

The podcasts are back on iTunes. I made sure all Minnesota Twins references were taken out of Talk to Contact, and people searching for us should still be able to find us, just going to be harder to find us if they don't. I even added a disclaimer.

 

Not sure that using Minnesota Twins or MLB in meta data is trademark infringement, nor do I even really know what meta data is, but mentioning them shouldn't be a problem, if it was I would have expected a cease and desist order.

 

Like those twin female pro-wrestlers?

 

Maybe you and Eric should invite them to your show to talk about that

[old nurse]

You can talk about the Minnesota Twin study done by the University of Minnesota. It was the largest research project done on Twins

[Brandon]

I think MLB's issue was more with iTunes profiting from the Podcasts talking about baseball and MLB copyrighted material then their fans Podcasting about it. While MLB had to stop trying to force iTunes to license with MLB so their fans can keep podcasting but iTunes is basically stealing intellectual property by allowing fans to podcast and iTunes profits from it.

 

iTunes should just pony up and license and force advertising into the podcasts to help support the licensing fees.

 

If the issue is that fans are talking about MLB and MLB copyrighted material then fans should provide a bibliography to give them credit as podcasts are nothing more than a vocalized paper.

 

Those 2 things should solve all problems MLB has with podcasting if not shame on them.

[Brock Beauchamp]

How does iTunes profit from podcasts?

[Highabove]

Keith Olbermann defends Gleeman and the Geek

 

(Originally posted by Arron Gleeman.)

[Brandon]

How does iTunes profit from podcasts?

 

I don't know exactly. but they are the gatekeepers of podcasting through iTunes (their company). I am not an expert on what all iTunes is or does but the issue MLB should have is with iTunes (if they are not licensed by MLB) and not the podcasters as iTunes stand to benefit from having more listeners or traffic through their product.

 

Since I am not in this field I can not get into specifics I do not know if other media outlets pay for access or licensing fees for using the MLB logo. I just don't know.

[Brock Beauchamp]

To answer your question, iTunes doesn't make money from podcasts. It's a service provided by Apple to keep people using iTunes and getting their money through other iTunes services.

 

In short, Apple would probably get a good laugh if MLB asked for a slice of podcast revenue.

[Thrylos]

To answer your question, iTunes doesn't make money from podcasts. It's a service provided by Apple to keep people using iTunes and getting their money through other iTunes services.

 

In short, Apple would probably get a good laugh if MLB asked for a slice of podcast revenue.

 

That would be similar to a movie star asking for a slice of revenue from a paparazzi.

 

First amendment anyone?

[Wookiee of the Year]

This whole story is bizarre to me. If anyone at MLB really did think it was a good idea to remove the podcasts, surely they anticipated there would be a backlash? But given how fast MLB caved in rather than attempt to weather the backlash, maybe it really was a misunderstanding with Apple--as hard as that is to swallow.

 

The new description for the Talk to Contact podcast will look something like this "We run a podcast that features discussion of professional baseball played by a team whose stadium has been paid for in large part by the people of Minnesota, and is played in a league for which there is no higher. We also discuss the minor league affiliates of said team, but in no way to we have an endorsement of or by said team or league." We're keeping it classy.

You should just describe it as, "An official Minnesota twins podcast." You and Eric are twins--and officially so--born in Minnesota (I assume?). Could be a fun court case.

 

Even moreso that they have no legal right to stop people from talking about their product, provided no copyrights or trademarks are being infringed upon.

and

First amendment anyone?

It might be worth acknowledging that MLB does claim extremely sweeping copyright protection. As we hear in every broadcast,

This copyrighted telecast is presented by authority of the Office of the Commissioner of Baseball. It may not be reproduced or retransmitted in any form, and the accounts and descriptions of this game may not be disseminated, without express written consent.

(Emphasis mine)

They certainly don't have a Constitutional leg to stand on there, but MLB does assert the legal right to anything you or I say about what happens during a baseball game.

 

Anyway, I'm glad all the podcasts are back.

[70charger]

There's no possible way the 1st Amendment could apply to these circumstances.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

MLB claims to own the descriptive rights to the games, but why would they want to stop anyone from talking about the teams, or the games (provided it's not a rebroadcast.) I fully support their wish to sell internet radio broadcasts or subscription TV broadcasts. But if you want people to buy such services, there needs to be reason to. Hype about teams is free advertising.