Is Milwaukee Light playing the players?

[shaniac]

In their new ad campaign, Milwaukee Brewing (that is the product, right?) uses 3 actors, Chris Ferguson, and 2 players from that nigths' ESPN WSOP episode to make a clever little commercial and sell beer to college students.

I assume Chris and the actors (and Norm and Lon) are getting paid for their participation, do you figure the random players are too?

[tipperdog]

I doubt it highly. The WSOP players agreement (which everyone signs when they get their players card), expressly allows the use of your image for any promotional purpose.

[MrMon]

My guess would be no, but I have no direct knowledge of that. The WSOP probably had them sign a release when they signed up to play that allowed them to use images of the tournament in any way they saw fit. Having never played in a WSOP event, does anyone recall signing such a release?

This is where the players need to get together and organize. If this were MLB, no way the MLBPA would let them get away with this.

[Kevmath]

I'd assume Miller (who owns Milwaukee's Best Light) paid Jesus and the actors only.

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt it highly. The WSOP players agreement (which everyone signs when they get their players card), expressly allows the use of your image for any promotional purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the tricky part. The commercial is not a "promotional purpose". It's a commercial for a product. Depending on the wording, some lawyer may have fun here. I know an excellent one who litigates in this area of law if anyone needs one.

[shaniac]

I assumed that agreeing to allow ESPN the use of your image for promotional purposes meant something more like 'promotional purposes related to the WSOP/ESPN' and NOT 'promotional purposes of any product we decide to allow the use our brand in its marketing.'

It's seriously messed up if Milwaukee light gets to use the images of two random players per episode with no compensation for those players.

[TomCollins]

ESPN owns the video of these players. They can show them in commercials, sell them, air it at 4am, it doesn't matter. CAUSE EVERY PLAYER SIGNED A RELEASE FORM. ESPN owns the video, plain and simple.

[TheJunkyardGod]

It sucks that the beast is doing this years promotion. I miss the High Life.

[tipperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
I assumed that agreeing to allow ESPN the use of your image for promotional purposes meant something more like 'promotional purposes related to the WSOP/ESPN' and NOT 'promotional purposes of any product we decide to allow the use our brand in its marketing.'

It's seriously messed up if Milwaukee light gets to use the images of two random players per episode with no compensation for those players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have the agreement in front of me, but I remember reading it before signing up for my player card (the long line behind me sure appreciated that I took the time to read it through /images/graemlins/smirk.gif). I remember at the time thinking, "geez, this is among the widest 'blanket releases' I've ever read." I work with such releases in my day job, and I audibly laughed at the scope of the WSOP release. Of course, that didn't stop me from signing it.

Is it "seriously messed up" as you post? Perhaps, but I'm pretty sure it's allowed. Two big disclaimers: 1) I threw away the release long ago, so I'm not looking at it now; and 2) even if MB wasn't required to pay, they may have decided to throw a few bucks the players way to guard against any dispute (I thought the release was so broad that it could be subject to legal challenge).

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I assumed that agreeing to allow ESPN the use of your image for promotional purposes meant something more like 'promotional purposes related to the WSOP/ESPN' and NOT 'promotional purposes of any product we decide to allow the use our brand in its marketing.'

It's seriously messed up if Milwaukee light gets to use the images of two random players per episode with no compensation for those players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have the agreement in front of me, but I remember reading it before signing up for my player card (the long line behind me sure appreciated that I took the time to read it through /images/graemlins/smirk.gif). I remember at the time thinking, "geez, this is among the widest 'blanket releases' I've ever read." I work with such releases in my day job, and I audibly laughed at the scope of the WSOP release. Of course, that didn't stop me from signing it.

Is it "seriously messed up" as you post? Perhaps, but I'm pretty sure it's allowed. Two big disclaimers: 1) I threw away the release long ago, so I'm not looking at it now; and 2) even if MB wasn't required to pay, they may have decided to throw a few bucks the players way to guard against any dispute (I thought the release was so broad that it could be subject to legal challenge).

[/ QUOTE ]

i remember thinking the same thing. I thought that it was funny that you were not allowed to disclose the results of the tournament prior to the airing on espn.

[Kevmath]

[ QUOTE ]
i remember thinking the same thing. I thought that it was funny that you were not allowed to disclose the results of the tournament prior to the airing on espn.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe they gave you a leftover release from the TOC.

Kevin...

[MrMon]

I'll have to ask, but if you have no idea what you signed, and it was a non-standard use, it may not be a valid contract. Trust me, a blanket release that somehow wound up with the players in a porno video would probably not be valid.

Someone really needs to post this release.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it "seriously messed up" as you post? Perhaps, but I'm pretty sure it's allowed

[/ QUOTE ]

What I should have said, is that it's at least a little disturbing that WSOP players are asked and willing to sign such a broad release. Not only is there no money added to these tournaments (we're putting up the prize money and generating content for ESPN) but now it seems that another company can come in and use your image for profit without any kind of direct compensation.

[tipperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
it's at least a little disturbing that WSOP players are asked and willing to sign such a broad release. Not only is there no money added to these tournaments (we're putting up the prize money and generating content for ESPN) but now it seems that another company can come in and use your image for profit without any kind of direct compensation.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think that's disturbing? Imagine this ad:

Video: Shaniac squirms in his chair at the WSOP, contemplating an all-in bet from his opponent. He looks uncomfortable in the extreme. He agonizes, contorting his face and shifting in his chair.
Audio: Shaniac has been sitting at this table for 12 hours. He needs relief...from the worst hemorrhoids ever.
Video: Tube of Preparation-H. Audio: Preparation H. The favorite hemorrhoid treatment of poker players. At the WSOP, we're "all in."
Video: Shaniac pushes his chips in, stands, and smiles. Audio: He shouts "Yes! Ship it!"
Audio: You got it Shaniac, we'll ship a case of Preparation-H to your house today. Preparation-H, you can bet on us.

Under the terms of the WSOP players agreement (IIRC...not looking at it now, etc.) this type of use is entirely permitted. No compensation, no consent required.

[gumpzilla]

I take it you're not looking forward to being in an advertisement for Beast Light, then?

[ClaytonN]

Fold'Em.

Hey, do you have a jacket?

I love that /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[shaniac]

llol. Yeah, but they could just as easily grab me for an ad for Trojan Magnums or something and it'd be fine.

In all seriousness, players really need to figure out a way to gain some leverage in the battle for media rights. Even extras with SAG cards get some minimum benefits.

There have been a few high-profile players who have managed to cross over into media success in a meaningful way, but considering that poker has become full-on show-business, it seems that the 'talent' in this context is not being rewarded apropriately.

I'm not saying that players should receive compensation every time to reach the final table and/or their episode reruns (although that would be nice and not an entirely crazy concept); but when Milwaukee Light gets to use Alex Prendes and Prahlad Friedman's moment of stress (a moment both players paid $10,000 to enjoy) as a creative element in their marketing campaign, something's got to give.

[ClaytonN]

This argument is very similar to that of my query regarding 2+2 publishing's responsibility towards compensation of players who make mention of 2+2 products during WSOP events. In that case, their mentioning of 2+2 was totally voluntarily and thus 2+2 did not need to compansate the said player.

However, in your case Shane, you play on a TV final table and you feel like you should be compensated in some way shape or form should one of your hands be put in the Milwaulkee Best.

For now, I would not speculate unless you are certain to a degree that Prahlad and whatshisname did not get contacted by Milwaulkee Light.

Just curious, how would your hand during the hold'em or fold'em Jesus commercial be any different from two players in the Degree all-in moment?

At some point you're going to have to come to grips with the fact that the gross sum of money you are making from getting on the final table of a WSOP event should far outweigh the minimal (and I mean really minimal) money you could deserve from being a part of an ad.

In other words, I wouldn't put too much weight into it.

[Kevmath]

The problem is that the poker professional community is too fragmented. Take Poker Superstars II for instance, there was a group of pros scheduled to appear that decided not to appear unless certain concessions were made (I'd assume logos and similar objections). While some agreed, they then changed their mind and their slots were taken. I'm sure FSN would have taken Negreanu and Lindgren over Hoff and Wang. Regarding the Milwaukee's Best commercials, they've already made their money, they're at the final table. Unless a large majority of the pros can form some sort of union, this "abuse" will continue, as there's going to be a large number of lesser pros and amateurs who will gladly take their place for some TV time.

Kevin...

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
...but if you have no idea what you signed...it may not be a valid contract.

[/ QUOTE ]

If he is of legal age, not retarded and doesn't have a gun to his head, then it is up to him to know or seek advice on a contract he is contemplating signing.

[Tyler Durden]

Can we please call it Beast Light? Nobody calls it Milwaukee's Best Light.