Hamilton signs deal with EA
- Thread starter Stanners
- Start date
Link to the announcement they have the rights to F1 please?
So how did they use JPM last time without a 5m deal seriously? When you have the rights to the F1 game you get it all, you get the teams, you get the driver's, you get the track's, you get the tyre's, you get the brake manufacturers, you get the fuel suppliers and the oil suppliers do I need to go on? Could you actually imagine how hard it would be to make a F1 game if the licence was not everthing, all those suppliers, all those different brands you would need permission from and pay money too.
Honestly Nokkon you I guess do not follow F1 in the slightest or how the commercial side of the sport works, why would you feel the need to back yourself into a corner on a subject you clearly know not a lot about? The commercial side of F1 and the way FOM works to promote and protect it's brand is not even close to any sport you probably watch of have a better knowledge about.
If EA has the license then they have the right to use whatever they want from F1 to sell the game.
Last edited:
Ugh. I've had enough of you acting like a complete muppet. You will always fight back against everyone telling you you're wrong, not just here, but in other threads. It's tiresome. I've had enough of trying to 'converse' with you.
So because I am right you spit the dummy and insult me, how novel and unpredictable is that from you 
You are the one telling ME I am wrong, despite you quite clearly not having a grasp of the matter at hand, which to me says a lot about you. But likewise it's tiring having to converse with someone clearly out of their depth and un-willing to accept when they are wrong, as you are here.
So any link to your claim that EA have the licence? no thought not but if you say it enough times then might be true and everyone else wrong....
You are the one telling ME I am wrong, despite you quite clearly not having a grasp of the matter at hand, which to me says a lot about you. But likewise it's tiring having to converse with someone clearly out of their depth and un-willing to accept when they are wrong, as you are here.
So any link to your claim that EA have the licence? no thought not but if you say it enough times then might be true and everyone else wrong....
Last edited:
You're so not right though. That's what's so annoying.
You're totally unaware of image rights or using images for selling items for profit. There's a difference between licensing and image rights.
Why do you think Ronaldo and Owen are on PES2008? Why are Ronaldinho and Rooney on Fifa. Not because EA paid for the licenses in game, but because they were paid for image rights to appear on the cover and on adverts. It's the same for Hamilton on the new F1 game. EA couldn't just pick anyone to appear on their cover because they have the rights to that league.
By buying the rights to the license they are able to use names, teams, image likeness, however they are not able to sell a product using these likenesses on the case without express permission, which is usually granted through payment to do so. Hamilton has signed with EA for such reasons, they are now able to use him on the cover, him in adverts and it's possible he's been hired as a consultant much in the same way SI games hire Ray Houghton as their consultant.
You're totally unable to grasp the differences between these 2 things. I only talk about things I have a clue about, which actually happens to be games or football, so I wouldn't say I'm out my depth at all. Infact, I'd say I'm much more informed than you. The fact you tried to talk down to me as if I'm not aware of what game engines are, what's possible and what isn't etc.. is ludicrous. I suggest you pick your fights more carefully or troll elsewhere.
You're totally unaware of image rights or using images for selling items for profit. There's a difference between licensing and image rights.
Why do you think Ronaldo and Owen are on PES2008? Why are Ronaldinho and Rooney on Fifa. Not because EA paid for the licenses in game, but because they were paid for image rights to appear on the cover and on adverts. It's the same for Hamilton on the new F1 game. EA couldn't just pick anyone to appear on their cover because they have the rights to that league.
By buying the rights to the license they are able to use names, teams, image likeness, however they are not able to sell a product using these likenesses on the case without express permission, which is usually granted through payment to do so. Hamilton has signed with EA for such reasons, they are now able to use him on the cover, him in adverts and it's possible he's been hired as a consultant much in the same way SI games hire Ray Houghton as their consultant.
You're totally unable to grasp the differences between these 2 things. I only talk about things I have a clue about, which actually happens to be games or football, so I wouldn't say I'm out my depth at all. Infact, I'd say I'm much more informed than you. The fact you tried to talk down to me as if I'm not aware of what game engines are, what's possible and what isn't etc.. is ludicrous. I suggest you pick your fights more carefully or troll elsewhere.
So because I am right you spit the dummy and insult me, how novel and unpredictable is that from you
You are the one telling ME I am wrong, despite you quite clearly not having a grasp of the matter at hand, which to me says a lot about you. But likewise it's tiring having to converse with someone clearly out of their depth and un-willing to accept when they are wrong, as you are here.
So any link to your claim that EA have the licence? no thought not but if you say it enough times then might be true and everyone else wrong....
Question is how do you know JPM didnt sign a deal - just because it wasnt announced here (or anywhere else for that matter) doesnt mean EA and JPM didnt cmoe to an agreement
It is illeagal to use someone else's image without their consent - no matter who you are talking about
(Why do you think Rooney has to be signed seperately rather than having all his rights controlled by Man Utd)
I am right, you do not know about F1's commercial deals, I suggest you go read the Concorde Agreement for reference. You have already been told F1 operates very differently commercially from every other sport on the planet, I suggest you stop speaking about football as it is irrelevant.
Not if that person has a deal signed with FOM which gives FOM the right to sell their brand and image to other companies, which errr is what McLaren and their drivers will have had to do, or they would not be in F1.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jan 2005
- Posts
- 214
Just not quite getting it.....
To put it simply, to be in F1 you sign a deal with FOM which gives them the right to your brand, and the right to sell that brand as part of a deal for example the deal to make a F1 game, every team, driver, supplier in the sport will have a deal with FOM. FOM then has the right to sell those rights onto the highest bidder or who they prefer. FOM takes in all revenue from F1, from the tv to ticket sales, this money is then shared out to the teams involved, some teams get more than others. The teams recently all signed new deals with FOM and Bernie to get more money back from the sport.
When EA or Sony gets given the rights to the F1 official licence it covers everything in F1, that is simply a fact and anyone who wants to deny that is more than welcome to do so, but they would be wrong.
When EA or Sony gets given the rights to the F1 official licence it covers everything in F1, that is simply a fact and anyone who wants to deny that is more than welcome to do so, but they would be wrong.
I don't deny they do get all that, they do. However, they cannot use images of these drivers in order to sell a game, advertise a game or become a consultant on the game etc...
It's for one, or several of these reasons why Hamilton has been paid.
It's for one, or several of these reasons why Hamilton has been paid.
I doubt Hamilton is worth 5m just for a face on a box, and I still don't believe they need to pay anything to him to use him on the cover, JPM was used for F1Challenge, Michael and a Ferrari for 2002, can't remember 2001 TBH, seem to remember the PS2 games having Alesi, Schumacher and someone else on the box. I am pretty sure the F1 licence also comes with a deal with the GPDA which covers all drivers, which is now mandatory to be part of and not voluntarily like it was when Jack Newhouse refused to be represented in the PS1 game
ISI for instance got the BMW F1 car in rFactor in return for making them a special version of rFactor to run in their pitlane simulator, they use that as a selling point.
If EA has paid 5M for Hamilton then I doubt its for a boxart, and would bet it's for Lewis Hamilton branded games, not F1. But we shall see won't we, especially when we actually find out who has the new F1 license, if EA has it then it's surprising they have not announced it. I hope EA has got it, but hope they don't ruin the console version and make it as good as they did with F1C for the PC.
p.s still don't know why you feel the need to call me a muppet etc, it really does make me think less of you, you might not care but honestly it just lowers the standards you have set, and also no idea why you and others seem to think I troll, I firmly believe I am right on this, I am not trolling just to cause an argument in the slightest, and I feel my points were made quite maturely and in a correct manner and not insulting or threatening towards you or anyone.
ISI for instance got the BMW F1 car in rFactor in return for making them a special version of rFactor to run in their pitlane simulator, they use that as a selling point.
If EA has paid 5M for Hamilton then I doubt its for a boxart, and would bet it's for Lewis Hamilton branded games, not F1. But we shall see won't we, especially when we actually find out who has the new F1 license, if EA has it then it's surprising they have not announced it. I hope EA has got it, but hope they don't ruin the console version and make it as good as they did with F1C for the PC.
p.s still don't know why you feel the need to call me a muppet etc, it really does make me think less of you, you might not care but honestly it just lowers the standards you have set, and also no idea why you and others seem to think I troll, I firmly believe I am right on this, I am not trolling just to cause an argument in the slightest, and I feel my points were made quite maturely and in a correct manner and not insulting or threatening towards you or anyone.
Last edited:
It's not just based on this thread. You're manner often makes even me look like a saint.
mr men is right thouh , if ea had paid for the F1 license already they wouldnt need a seperate licensce to use any of the drivers , they could have used whoever they wanteds name and image
the only thing they could be paying him for is to act in ads or go to shows etc
the only thing they could be paying him for is to act in ads or go to shows etc
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 837
Maybe EA are paying LH because they *haven't* got rights to F1 but think that loads of people will buy "Lewis Hamilton Racing" instead. BTW, something I read today said that LH plays F1 games with his brother ... and as he's not in any of the game yet he always drives a Kimi Raikonnen.
The GPDA had absolutely nothing to do with drivers rights. Jacques wasn't paid so he blocked them from using his name regardless or them having a licence for an F1 game. All that licence lets them do is have a game that runs with an F1 logo. Nothing more. If Williams want to stop EA using there name they are well within their rights to do so. They don't because of the publicity of running a game with their sponsorship logos. Their sponsor would likely not be happy if williams blocked their participation.
Villeneuve though didnt care less, he wasn't being paid so they couldn't use his name.
EA paid 5 million for lewis because lewis couldve done the same block, they didnt want top risk that.
As for all the talk of Bernie he no longers owns F1 as a majority anyway.
Andy they would still need the drivers agreement if any of them cared about being used in the game. The drivers and drivers image rights do not belong to F1.
This is from Wiki but describes how they couldn't use JV's name in the game...
"the use of the name and image of then Williams F1 driver Jacques Villeneuve, after he had copyrighted both. The game listed him as "Williams Numberone", and had simply a silhouette as the driver's image."
Not only does he own his own name he owns his whole image. Without his permission they couldn't use it.
If you still dont believe that I will put the question to him and see exactly why he wouldn't let them use his name.
"the use of the name and image of then Williams F1 driver Jacques Villeneuve, after he had copyrighted both. The game listed him as "Williams Numberone", and had simply a silhouette as the driver's image."
Not only does he own his own name he owns his whole image. Without his permission they couldn't use it.
If you still dont believe that I will put the question to him and see exactly why he wouldn't let them use his name.