|
Relay for Life -- Bakersfield a leader Lay off the old people, you NFL bruisers Scratching and rubbing, good feelings Female-only buses in Mexico City, but not Bakersfield A $200,000 ride to space, how nice How healthy are your dogs? Mother gives up newborn to Bakersfield fire station A $2,000 puppy stolen in Oildale How much of a hassle are fog delays? Fog, the thing I like least about Bakersfield July 06 August 06 September 06 October 06 November 06 December 06 January 07 February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 June 06 May 06 April 06 March 06 February 06 January 06 December 05 November 05 October 05 September 05 Blog RollAsk The Californian Editorials Entertainment Eye of Bakersfield Faith Forum Fired Up! Inside Sports Neighbors Right Thinking Sound Off Talk of the Town
RSS 2.0![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
Lay off the old people, you NFL bruisers
Turns out the huge and powerful National Football League pounced on a group of old people in southwest Bakersfield. The Greens at Seven Oaks, a gated 404-home, 55-and-older community, was advertising a Super Bowl party, asking for $6.50 to help pay for food and drink. Well, the NFL has a trademark on "Super Bowl" and it doesn't think kindly of people using that term for commercial gain. So it informed these Seven Oakers they were violating various mandates. The old folks, no match for the monolithic NFL, caved in immediately. They are now calling their party a "football viewing gathering." Betty Moore, a resident of the Greens at Seven Oaks, said, "This is just a bunch of old folks wanting to watch a football game, for crying out loud. And the NFL gets involved. You'd think they'd have bigger fish to fry than with us." Amen, Betty. Have a great time at your football viewing event.
Posted by Steve E. Swenson 13 comments from 8 users
1
posted by
Neverleft
on Feb 1, 2008 at 11:38 AM
One of the most ridiculous things I have heard in my lifetime. How could anyone have a Trademark on Super Bowl? posted by
nooneisabovethelaw
on Feb 1, 2008 at 12:03 PM
How could Disney trademark Mickey Mouse? I mean, come on, these folks were breaking the law. Do you conservative types condone that sort of behavior? posted by
sagefever
on Feb 1, 2008 at 12:05 PM
Remember last year at the Fox? Bound to happen ,they will probably watch this "hot bed" of NFL unrest for years now...what a waste of time on the part of the NFL. posted by
randomfactor
on Feb 1, 2008 at 12:08 PM
posted by
nooneisabovethelaw
on Feb 1, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Yep, and you can't take pictures of said tree for commercial use without paying a fee. They also don't let you play golf on that course unless you pay for it. It's the American way! posted by
johnburnssucks
on Feb 1, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Betty Moore, a resident of the Greens at Seven Oaks, said, "This is just a bunch of old folks wanting to watch a football game, for crying out loud. And the NFL gets involved. You'd think they'd have bigger fish to fry than with us." They were charging a $6.50 fee to watch the football game. That's where they got into trouble. Betty is living proof that "there's no fool like an old fool."
posted by
adampayne
on Feb 1, 2008 at 12:56 PM
The same broadcast rules apply to all home entertainment. You cannot play a dvd, or a cd, and charge admission to see and hear the item. The big media companies and their trade associations like the RIAA and MPAA have gone after the Girl Scouts for not paying fees for singing copyrighted songs and senior citizen organizations for not paying distributor fees to show movies. I am surprised no one at the "Club" didn't think this would be an issue. posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Feb 1, 2008 at 01:04 PM
I think it was last years SB where the NFL discovered that a church was planning a Super Bowl party and was going to charge admission (for food and drinks only, of course) and they were stopped. Anybody that has watched an entire football game should know the rules on broadcasting the game without permission. They say them every time.
Personally, I can't see why anyone would want to watch the game with a lot of people. Most of the time there's too much talking and you can't watch anyway. I plan on recording the game. I hear Tom Petty is going to show a boob. posted by
sagefever
on Feb 1, 2008 at 01:08 PM
Whoohoo! Tom Petty should be good..hope the game is too. Was it at a church...I was mistaken,I thought it was the Fox..oh well.. posted by
johnburnssucks
on Feb 1, 2008 at 01:26 PM
I can't see why anyone would want to watch the game with a lot of people. Most of the time it's an excuse to drink beer, which is perfectly acceptable (I don't drink, but that just leaves more for the other guys).
posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Feb 1, 2008 at 01:52 PM
I remember there was one with the Fox as well. Maybe that's why the NFL is keeping an eye on Bakersfield.
Yo John, I plan on drinking a few beers and being able to hear the game. No drunk driving afterwards either. : ) posted by
Spot
on Feb 1, 2008 at 04:28 PM
The way I understood it was, that the charge was to help cover the booze and snacks... Where's the profit??? Back when I use to drink, $6.50 wouldn't even be a start. LOL posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Feb 1, 2008 at 04:38 PM
Well, when (sports) bars show a pro sporting event, they have to pay way more for the feed than most of us do on our cable/dish. It's a license to show the game to people. When someone has a party and charges a fee to watch and advertises it (like printing fliers), then it undermines the whole licensing process whether or not they say the fee is for food or just admission. I noticed there were a few bars in the paper that advertised Super Bowl parties, but they didn't charge admission and gave away food, but I'm assuming they charged for drinks still. All they have to do is make the food salty and people start spending their money.
1
Our readers recommend: |