C.B.C. Distribution and Marketing Inc. v.

Major League
Baseball Advanced Media, L.P
8th Circuit Court of Appeals
505 F.3d 818 (8th Cir. 2007)

Keywords: fantasy sports, trademarks, licensing, First Amendment,

breach of contract

Facts
C.B.C. Distribution and Marketing Inc. sells fantasy sports products that use
the names, performance statistics, and biographical information of actual
major league baseball players. From 1995 through the end of 2004, C.B.C.
licensed its use of the names and information about major league players from
the Major League Baseball Players Association pursuant to license agreements
that it entered into with the association in 1995 and 2002. The 2002
agreement gave C.B.C. a license to “the names, nicknames, likenesses,
signatures, pictures, playing records, and/or biographical data of each player”
to be used in association with C.B.C.'s fantasy baseball products. In 2005,
after the 2002 agreement expired, the Players Association gave Advanced Media
the exclusive right to use baseball players' names and performance information
“for exploitation via all interactive media.” The Players Association offered
C.B.C. a license to promote the MLB.com fantasy baseball games on C.B.C.'s
website but did not offer C.B.C. a license to continue to offer its own fantasy
baseball products. C.B.C. filed suit alleging that it had “a reasonable
apprehension that it will be sued by Advanced Media if it continues to operate
its fantasy baseball games.” Advanced Media counterclaimed, maintaining that
CBC's fantasy baseball products violated rights of publicity belonging to major
league players and that Advanced Media had exclusive ownership of the
players’ rights of publicity.

Issue
The issue is whether C.B.C. can use the names and information about major
league players for its fantasy baseball products without a license.

Holding
The Eight Circuit held that C.B.C. violated the player’s rights of publicity under
Missouri law by using player’s names as symbols for the identity for a profit.
However, the court went on to find that the use of the information was entitled
to First Amendment protection because it was used in an expressive form,
similar to art and music. Secondly, the court held that the no-use and no-
challenge provisions of contract are not enforceable because the court
determined that the Players Association did not have exclusive rights to the
names and statistics of all major league players.

Summarized By: Matt Boyer