Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="HtownOrange, post: 5044228, member: 622"] ESPN is Not involved with any of the three lawsuits except to inform the court that FSU has violated confidentiality/industrial secrets. FSU KNOWS they cannot sue ESPN even though the GOR is the deal the must be broken for them to move. FSU likely hopes that they can withdraw from the ACC on the cheap and con ESPN to pay them more in the SEC. Yes, FSU's brain trust is as ignorant as this sounds. EDIT: NOTE: While Hoo'sThat and I disagree a little (I think we are closer than it may appear), the point remains that FSU must defeat the GOR. I differ from Hoo's in that ESPN is the practical holder of the GOR rights and they will need to be properly brought in. ESPN is the beneficiary and at some point courts will likely want to know how this affects ESPN. You are correct, FSU must break the GOR but cannot attack ESPN directly so they must do so through the ACC. The intimidation failed. First FSU failed with a low-ball number (the $100MM offer last summer, even though FSU had no money to pay the $100MM floating the concept of paying it out of FSU's new money -assuming they end up in the B1G or SEC). Again, yes, FSU's brain trust is as ignorant as this sounds. Anyway, FSU hopes that they can force their way out of the ACC and leverage ESPN into paying more for the rights ESPN already holds. The opportunity to jump to the B1G is less likely because ESPN would have to give up their rights completely to FSU. Recall, FSU believes the ACC world revolves around FSU, if this is so, ESPN would dump the ACC to keep FSU. ESPN has no duty to do anything to defend their IP rights, they are not a party to any of the lawsuits. Yes, FSU and Clemson will need to bring ESPN into one or more of the lawsuits. U tim then, ESPN isn't wasting time and money worrying about the lawsuits. Most attorneys agree that the lawsuits will likely fail based on contract and IP law. The easier task is to ask an FSU believer to point out two IP cases on point that support FSU. Throw in Clemson for the bonus. You are not likely to find one case directly on point supporting either position. ESPN has a very favorable deal. Yes, it sucks for the ACC. However, most of the ignorant web mouthpieces use old projections to "prove" the Big 12 will receive more money. This while the ACC is receiving more than the projected payouts. And no projection of Big12 payouts shows the Big 12 staying ahead of the ACC. Many "factor" in FSU and Clemson bringing more money to the Big12. Like OU and UT did to the SEC, but miss the point that the Big 12 has a clause that any new teams will only receive a pro rata share, there will not be an increase. Thus, FSU and Clemson are leaving the ACC for a pay cut. Stop me if you have heard this: The Big 12 trolls are as ignorant as this sounds. Finally, I have yet to see a business entity destroy a profit center, especially when only one division is profitable for the parent corporation. Bonus: Now that two states, possibly soon to be three, are hearing the same issue, unless they agree, the chances are that this will end up in Federal court, where most IP matters belong, and it is not likely to go well for FSU and Clemson. Contract law and IP law are fairly well settled. Law must be stable for business to continue. This is not political, this is reality. Apologies for the worst response. Hope it helps a little. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?