7 Players Vs The Wpt

[DanielNegreanu 141]

This lawsuit is more than about these 7 players against the WPT, their position, despite the fact that they think they are doing it for "ALL PLAYERS," is something none of the players are asking for. The "players" are not for this lawsuit. Not one person I asked outside of the 7 thinks this lawsuit is a good idea. Not one. How quickly people forget what poker was like before the WPT. Man, oh man, how quickly y'all forget. Players would have signed their life away back then for a chance at bigger prize pools and television exposure. People quickly forget how fortunate we are that poker has boomed so much over the last few years. Before Moneymaker, before ESPN, it was the WPT that was responsible for making stars of the players. The WPT gave several players an opportunity to sell books, games, and DVD's. That's a fact no matter how they try to spin it. How quickly they forget...

[gilbertology 0]

yes!

[CardWarfare 4]

I know very little of the details of this lawsuit, and of the opposing stance, but it is hard to deny how much the WPT has not only broadened, but completely changed the horizons of poker as we know/knew it. It went from a dirty, poorly percieved form of gambling, to a glamorous sport, with a cleaner image and completely new audience. With the new audience, comes new players. With the new players comes more money, and I don't see how anyone could argue with more money.

[matt21sz 0]

This Negreanu guy knows what he's talking about.

[pckt10s 0]

that's right SON!!!!!!!

[FourFlusher 0]

I'm staying out of it...I don't want Raymer talking smack about me.

[GeneralGeeWhiz 0]

FYP

I know I'm new, but can someone update me on this lawsuit?

[CardWarfare 4]

I know I'm new, but can someone update me on this lawsuit?

See DN's Vblog. Not sure which, but it's in there.

[pckt10s 0]

I know I'm new, but can someone update me on this lawsuit?

check the search function... there should be a thread with more info...

[GeneralGeeWhiz 0]

See DN's Vblog. Not sure which, but it's in there.

Thanks man.

[mgils 0]

published on: Wednesday Jul 19, 2006Players File Antitrust Lawsuit Against WPTSeeks to Open Up Competition and End WPT's Control of Players' LikenessesSeven poker players have joined together and filed a lawsuit against World Poker Tour Enterprises today, claiming that the company behind the World Poker Tour has violated antitrust laws by demanding players sign away the rights to their likelinesses before taking part in WPT events.The lawsuit also claims that WPTE and casinos that host WPT tournaments have unlawfully conspired to eliminate competition and opportunities for the world’s top poker players because casinos that host WPT events are not allowed to host other large-scale tournaments for broadcast.Howard Lederer, Annie Duke, Andy Bloch, Phil Gordon, and past World Series of Poker champions Chris Ferguson, Greg Raymer, and Joe Hachem filed the lawsuit in Federal court in Los Angeles Wednesday, July 19. “We have seven players here standing up without a union, and they’re standing up for all the players,” said Jeffrey Kessler, lead lawyer for the players. “It is about setting up a fair system and the players here are prepared to back up this case until a fair system is set up.”Image and IntellectAt the root of the lawsuit is the release form that all players who compete in WPT sponsored events must sign. The form gives WPTE the right to use the likeliness of the players in any way WPTE chooses for free. No matter how WPTE uses players’ images, players receive no monetary compensation. The release gives WPTE the rights to use players’ images and likenesses in everything from books to video games, which it has done. “This is about the control of your own name and likeness and in poker that’s all we have,” Lederer said. “You could find yourself endorsing products you don’t believe in. I should be able to make that decision. I don’t want the WPT deciding for me.” All the players involved in this suit have contracts with other companies that already give the companies exclusive rights to their names, images, and intellectual property rights. For example, Ferguson has a contract with Activision to exclusively appear in the “World Series of Poker Tournament of Champions” video game. He says if he signed the release form to play in a WPT event, it would violate the contract that he has with Activision and all the other companies that he has chosen to work with. All the players involved with this suit believe this. “I’ve been trying very hard to get a fair release,” Ferguson said. “Sometimes this release conflicts with deals you already have.”Therefore, the seven players have not been participating in WPT events. As people who make their living playing poker, they claim that the release stops them from playing in some of the most lucrative tournaments.“We all want to play, but we can’t play right now because of the nature of the release,” Gordon said. “We want to compete in the biggest and best tournaments in the world.”The lawsuit seeks to have this practice stopped, seeks compensation for the players, and asks that all the releases previously signed by the players be voided. A Question of Fair CompetitionThe lawsuit notes that at least 11 casinos that host WPT events have signed written agreements not to compete with each other. The contract is set to expire in 2009. Because of this contract, the casinos are prohibited from hosting any non-WPT tournaments. This contract applies to all the properties in a casino chain, as well.The suit claims that this eliminates competition between the casinos. If the casinos were able to compete with each other, everything from tournament structure and prize pools would naturally change to make it better for the players, the players say.Because of the popularity of the WPT and the WSOP in recent years, many of the WPT casinos have been approached by outside companies to host other high-stakes poker tournaments. The suit claims that due to this agreement, tournament poker players have fewer opportunities to ply their trade because, through the exclusive contract, WPTE has artificially restrained the number of televised high-stakes poker tournaments that can enter the marketplace. The contract — and the nature of WPTE’s filming schedule — also affects the quality of poker that’s being played and broadcast because WPTE has the final say in how the blind structure of the tournament take place, said Duke.She pointed to how the blind structure of WPT events are changed once the final table is decided, and then it’s changed again once play goes to heads-up.Before the final table, blinds are 90 minutes, which is standard for most high-stakes poker tournaments. Once the final table is established, blinds go up every hour and once it gets down to two players, blinds go up every hour “when two people might be playing for a $1 million,” Duke said. “It takes the skill out of the game just when the money really matters.” Since the lawsuit was only filed today, WPTE has yet to see it and won't comment on the lawsuit until then.

[CardWarfare 4]

She pointed to how the blind structure of WPT events are changed once the final table is decided, and then it’s changed again once play goes to heads-up.Before the final table, blinds are 90 minutes, which is standard for most high-stakes poker tournaments. Once the final table is established, blinds go up every hour and once it gets down to two players, blinds go up every hour “when two people might be playing for a $1 million,” Duke said. “It takes the skill out of the game just when the money really matters.”

Am I missing something here?

[GeneralGeeWhiz 0]

Wow, that's crazy. Thanks mgils

[Kurtman213 0]

“We have seven players here standing up without a union, and they’re standing up for all the players,” said Jeffrey Kessler, lead lawyer for the players. “It is about setting up a fair system and the players here are prepared to back up this case until a fair system is set up.”Poor choice of wording

[wsox8 10]

They should drop it before it wrecks more than the the WPT.

[ChrisRichey 1]

Does anybody else feel like if they don't feel comfortable signing the agreement, then they just shouldn't play. It's not like they have a right to play in these tourneys. Isn't entrance still optional?

[CardWarfare 4]

Does anybody else feel like if they don't feel comfortable signing the agreement, then they just shouldn't play. It's not like they have a right to play in these tourneys. Isn't entrance still optional?

Yeah, that's basically the arguement. If you don't like the rules, don't play.

[zoo 0]

hmmm...after reading this press release I am curious to know something. Let me preface this by saying I do not know enough about this lawsuit to have an opinion either way. What I would like to know is what Daniel's stance would be if the WPT turned around one day and sued him and other pros for putting thier likeness on products like FCP after having signed the WPT release? It probably will never happen, but because of the nature of the release, is it totally out of the realm of possibility?

[cuddlemonkey 0]

Does anybody else feel like if they don't feel comfortable signing the agreement, then they just shouldn't play. It's not like they have a right to play in these tourneys. Isn't entrance still optional?

That's one of the main points of their argument. They claim that by not playing in WPT events, they are being prevented from plying their trade and earning a living.

[wsox8 10]

That's one of the main points of their argument. They claim that by not playing in WPT events, they are being prevented from plying their trade and earning a living.

because there aren't a bunch of other casinos in Vegas and around the US?

[cuddlemonkey 0]

because there aren't a bunch of other casinos in Vegas and around the US?

I think it's pretty asinine myself.

[lenoph 0]

part of the argument sounds legit, although didn't daniel have a similar problem with wpte that was handled outside a courtroom, least of all involving his attorney. it seems being that it is seven, not seventy, or seven hundred, that the problem could be resolved in a similar manner.the thing is these are pros who play poker for a living, not the 9 to 5er looking to get lucky beyond thier tuesday night game, and live out some delusion of granduer(?) and then never to be heard of afterwards.i mean let's be honest, some of us like one, two, maybe all of the seven, and would'nt mind seeing them at a wpt final table. it be better television having one of them make it on instead of six no names. we've seen it... as fans of wpt it's hard to invest in watching it.NOW, that being said, i'd imagine wpt could potentially have a positive turn-around in having them (seven) in thier tournaments than not. then again it's only seven...either way...we'll see

[blueodum 0]

This lawsuit CAN NOT be bad for poker. At worst nothing will change and we have the same sorry status quo. Whatever the WPT did for poker in the past is the past. What matters now is getting the best possible deal for poker players for the present and future. And striking down anti-competitive agreements and pernicious release forms is a step in that direction.I wonder why Daniel is so active in trying to change the WSOP to include more non-HE events even though the NLHE events are what the large majority of the players want (see number of entrants for each event), while at the same time criticising other players for trying to get a fairer deal (and yes, they are doing it on behalf of all players; e.g. if this causes the release to be rewritten or another competing tour to spring up, thereby increasing competition and leading to lower juice, IT HELPS ALL PLAYERS).If the WPT dies it will be because its lame poker show is drawing lower and lower ratings.

[blueodum 0]

Not one person I asked outside of the 7 thinks this lawsuit is a good idea. Not one. Who exactly did you ask, and how many?I can recall Lederer on "The Circuit" saying that players he talked to sympathised with them, but were not willing to rock the boat personally with the WPT because it could potentially take a chunk out of their livelihood.I think the majority of players, if they fully understood all the issues at stake, would give at least tacit support to this lawsuit. And I'm not talking about "superstar" players, but rather the "rank-and-file".It reminds me a little bit of the very early days of the MLB baseball players union. Most big leaguers of the 50s ridiculed the handful of activists that were trying to form a union to protect their interests. But as years went by more and more players understood what was really happening and got on board.

[Zeatrix 0]

This lawsuit CAN NOT be bad for poker. At worst nothing will change and we have the same sorry status quo. Whatever the WPT did for poker in the past is the past. What matters now is getting the best possible deal for poker players for the present and future. And striking down anti-competitive agreements and pernicious release forms is a step in that direction.I wonder why Daniel is so active in trying to change the WSOP to include more non-HE events even though the NLHE events are what the large majority of the players want (see number of entrants for each event), while at the same time criticising other players for trying to get a fairer deal (and yes, they are doing it on behalf of all players; e.g. if this causes the release to be rewritten or another competing tour to spring up, thereby increasing competition and leading to lower juice, IT HELPS ALL PLAYERS).If the WPT dies it will be because its lame poker show is drawing lower and lower ratings.

Allthough I fully understand DN (he's afraid FCP will be brought down with the new internet gambling laws) you have some really good points too. In my book, none of the sides are absolutely right.I can only speak for myself, and I find WPT shows boring nowadays because all they do is go all in...