Hamilton signs deal with EA

Soldato
Joined
5 May 2006
Posts
9,201
Location
PSN
Thats because in 99 or whenever that game came out JV wasn't in the GPDA, you know the safety working group that apparently deals with driver image rights.
:D

Jarno clearly is deluded too....

"Jacques Villeneuve has decided that the decision of the GPDA to allow Michael to continue as president after the Monaco incident is not good, and to voice his protest decided to resign from the organisation.

Trulli had this to say, “He left because he has a point of view and is free to do whatever he wants. The GPDA is not there to judge a driver, it is there to assure that all drivers and teams and circuits have got enough safety.”


Oh and image rights Jarno?
:p

GPDA organised fund raisers for the dead marshalls, The main role of the GPDA is to have safety issues, but you are really getting off the point and being rather silly, where did I say the GPDA decides on image rights? your wandering a little. Fact is Bizarre done a blanket deal with all GPDA members for F197, deal with it.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Jan 2005
Posts
8,538
Such as?

Another made up fantasy, Zzzzzzzzzzz

Link?, other than internet rumour, would imagine if EA had it then they would have done a press release boasting about it. If they have the F1 licence then why would they pay this money just for Lewis Hamilton, when he would come with the F1 deal anyway. Paying twice for the same thing?
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.

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....
 
Caporegime
Joined
9 May 2005
Posts
31,703
Location
Cambridge
GPDA organised fund raisers for the dead marshalls, The main role of the GPDA is to have safety issues, but you are really getting off the point and being rather silly, where did I say the GPDA decides on image rights? your wandering a little. Fact is Bizarre done a blanket deal with all GPDA members for F197, deal with it.

Yet you still cannot offer up any evidence to back up this statement...

"I am 99% sure the game manual in F1 97 gives the GPDA a mention, I will hunt it out and serve it to you with some nice hot steaming humble pie"

So when are you going to eat the humble pie yourself. Simple question, is the GPDA creditted in the manual or not? All I require is a yes or a no. Especially as you are 99% sure.

As for your comment on bizarre doing a deal with the GPDA, I guess you have evidence of this to back that up? After all you required evidence of the EA deal. Where's yours for bizarre.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Posts
13,958
havent been in console section much recently but seems your all just out to get mr men

what hes been saying mostly makes perfect sense and then you twist what he says (that has little relevance to the thread anyway) just to start an argument or make him look worse :/

id still love to see something saying that EA have the f1 rights.... i dont believe they do at all , not yet anyway
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Mar 2003
Posts
6,231
Location
West Lothian
Haven't really read the whole thread, the debate got a bit tiresome.

Could be a Karting game I suppose? That would almost make as much sense as a F1 game..

It is very strange that no one knows who has the F1 license. I would have hoped that an F1 game would have been coming out in time for the next championship which isn't that far away.
 
Caporegime
Joined
11 Nov 2002
Posts
83,075
Location
Barcelona
havent been in console section much recently but seems your all just out to get mr men

what hes been saying mostly makes perfect sense and then you twist what he says (that has little relevance to the thread anyway) just to start an argument or make him look worse :/

id still love to see something saying that EA have the f1 rights.... i dont believe they do at all , not yet anyway

Agreed.

What he says kind of makes sense (if you don't use comparisons to football games, which I agree are probably a different kettle of fish). It would not surprise me if Bernie owns all image rights helmet rights and even shoe size rights to sell to games makers!!!

How hard is it for someone to show a link showing EA have the F1 license and prove him wrong, rather than further derailing the thread and resorting to personal insults? If it is common knowledge then show us some internet article or something.

Whilst I do not always agree with what he says, what he has sad in this thread, seemed fair, till people baited him, he took the bait, and it all got out of hand.


rp200
 
Caporegime
Joined
1 Oct 2004
Posts
26,316
Location
Redcar
The problem is the assumption EA have it. There have been strong rumours they have it, others that Sony still have it.

Aside from that, games can use a sports stars image ingame for any purpose they wish (within reason), what they cannot do irregardless of sport, is use a stars image to sell a game by featuring a star on the front cover or in adverts.
 
Caporegime
Joined
9 May 2005
Posts
31,703
Location
Cambridge
Agreed.

What he says kind of makes sense (if you don't use comparisons to football games, which I agree are probably a different kettle of fish). It would not surprise me if Bernie owns all image rights helmet rights and even shoe size rights to sell to games makers!!!

How hard is it for someone to show a link showing EA have the F1 license and prove him wrong, rather than further derailing the thread and resorting to personal insults? If it is common knowledge then show us some internet article or something.

Whilst I do not always agree with what he says, what he has sad in this thread, seemed fair, till people baited him, he took the bait, and it all got out of hand.


rp200

Pardon, I have neither baited him or resulted to any form of personal insult or attack. Feel free to prove me otherwise.

He said JV wasn't in the game because he wasn't a member of the GPDA. Which is not the reason at all. He said a deal was done with the GPDA and he was 99% sure they were credited in the manual. Which they are not.

He said he would provide that proof to ram me some humble pie of which he hasn't done. If he does that I will freely admit I was wrong, another person on here has checked theirs as well and no GPDA creditation.

As for your own comments about Bernie owning image rights to drivers helmets well thats way off. They are their own designs in a lot of cases. JV made his own design and copyrighted it. Bernie cannot sell that image right to anyone without consent.

If not being part of the GPDA was the reason JV wasn't in F1 97, well he was in 98 and 99 and wasnt part of the GPDA then either.

Lewis Hamilton is being paid for that image right, his father is carefully controlling any deals and although F1 can sell the game rights to any maker they choose they cannot sell or use Lewis Hamilton without his consent and probably a heap of money.
 
Caporegime
Joined
1 Oct 2004
Posts
26,316
Location
Redcar
Lewis Hamilton is being paid for that image right, his father is carefully controlling any deals and although F1 can sell the game rights to any maker they choose they cannot sell or use Lewis Hamilton without his consent and probably a heap of money.

Which is the exact point people have been trying to make the whole time, irregardless of EA having the F1 licence or not.
There has been no baiting, just this point being made time and time again so I don't see where rp2000 and andy are coming from, though andy openly admits to being new to the consoles section.
 
Caporegime
Joined
11 Nov 2002
Posts
83,075
Location
Barcelona
Pardon, I have neither baited him or resulted to any form of personal insult or attack. Feel free to prove me otherwise......

This was not aimed at you individually. I guess the bone of contention is that no-one knows for a FACT that EA does have the F1 license. So, regardless of deals in past games etc, it is plausible that EA don't have the F1 deal next year and they have paid Hamilton this money for some other sort of deal (some F1 or related game). I believe that was his original point (unless I am misreading it).

Possibly the comparison with Jacques Villneavue and a game that was released 10 years ago may not be the most relevant.
Which is the exact point people have been trying to make the whole time, irregardless of EA having the F1 licence or not.
There has been no baiting, just this point being made time and time again so I don't see where rp2000 and andy are coming from, though andy openly admits to being new to the consoles section.
Perhaps "baiting" is the wrong term (it is more a case of people pushing him on a point they know he may not have proof on to make him dig a bigger hole), but I would imagine even you would agree that resorting to terms such as "complete muppet" are not conducive to making this thread constructive. I was unaware that personal insults were permitted in forum discussions on this forum.


rp200
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
9 May 2005
Posts
31,703
Location
Cambridge
This was not aimed at you individually. I guess the bone of contention is that no-one knows for a FACT that EA does have the F1 license. So, regardless of deals in past games etc, it is plausible that EA don't have the F1 deal next year and they have paid Hamilton this money for some other sort of deal (some F1 or related game). I believe that was his original point (unless I am misreading it).
Possibly the comparison with Jacques Villneavue and a game that was released 10 years ago may not be the most relevant.


rp200

No for me he said "But if they have the F1 deal then they can put whoever they want on the front cover as they would have rights to all teams and all drivers, think Montoya was the last front cover and they never had a deal with him. If EA only has a deal with Lewis then they won't be making a F1 game"

Thats all I took issue with. They cant regardless of if they own an f1 game or not put lewis on the cover to market it without his consent. I do agree though they could sign lewis but not make an F1 game.

f197 is still the best f1 game anyway :p
 
Associate
Joined
25 Jan 2006
Posts
70
Location
Newcastle
No for me he said "But if they have the F1 deal then they can put whoever they want on the front cover as they would have rights to all teams and all drivers, think Montoya was the last front cover and they never had a deal with him. If EA only has a deal with Lewis then they won't be making a F1 game"

Thats all I took issue with. They cant regardless of if they own an f1 game or not put lewis on the cover to market it without his consent. I do agree though they could sign lewis but not make an F1 game.

f197 is still the best f1 game anyway :p

Totally agree
 
Caporegime
Joined
1 Oct 2004
Posts
26,316
Location
Redcar
even you would agree that resorting to terms such as "complete muppet" are not conducive to making this thread constructive.
What do you mean by even you? See, the littlest comments can be taken either way, it's a problem of the Internet. :p.
I do agree that the term 'muppet' wasn't exactly a great thing to say, but when you see the constant nonsense Mr Men has posted against me in recent times in threads, then turning around to make himself look the victim (a la this thread) it becomes tiresome.

I'll appologise for that comment though.
 
Caporegime
Joined
9 May 2005
Posts
31,703
Location
Cambridge
I do agree that the term 'muppet' wasn't exactly a great thing to say, but when you see the constant nonsense Mr Men has posted .....

Nah Nokkon he's MrMen this is Mr Nonsense...

:p

200pxmrnonsenseun8.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom