NFL shuts down church's Super Bowl Bash, ratings to blame

C'mon folks, everyone and their grandmother will likely be watching the Super Bowl this coming Sunday (even across the pond), and even if you have no interest in the Colts, Bears, or large men in awkward suits, someone in your family probably feels otherwise. Nevertheless, the NFL showcased its mighty power (and terrible decision making) by condemning Fall Creek Baptist Church's "Super Bowl Bash," saying that advertising a fee-based party that utilized "license-protected words" was against regulations. Furthermore, ditching the door charge and the taboo language wasn't good enough to solve the problem, as "the law" limits Super Bowl (wait, can we say that now?) party TVs to a quantity of one, and that single set must not be over 55-inches. Needless to say, we don't doubt that good few of you fine, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens will be catching the big game with a couple of your friends on your 60-inch plasma (or 100-inch projection screen), but we'd highly recommend building an underground bunker between now and Sunday to make sure your plans are safe. Of course, bars and other eateries are somehow exempt from this bogus rule, and as expected, all the grumbling stems from Nielsen's obvious inability to estimate just how many folks are watching a single tube on this advertisers' dream night, but ratings drops or not, we wouldn't mess with Touchdown Jesus.

[Jeramy @ Feb 1st 2007 5:03PM]

Go Bears!

[Thomas @ Feb 1st 2007 5:39PM]

Go Colts!

[Greg @ Feb 1st 2007 5:03PM]

Odd thing, I was just outside here in South Bend right in front of "Touchdown Jesus" when you posted this. Looks a lot more snow covered right now.

[Andy @ Feb 4th 2007 9:03AM]

Whay would Engadget's pan-global readers be interest in the politics of sport that's USA-only? Is the population of USA less than 5% of the planet Earth?

[Adam @ Feb 1st 2007 5:14PM]

Err, no. Here in the United Kingdom most of use don't know what the 'Super Bowl' is or when it is on.

[ja$on @ Feb 1st 2007 5:23PM]

You all in the UK don't know what the Super Bowl is? I thought you guys were CRAZY about football...

[wako @ Feb 1st 2007 5:33PM]

LOL....


the UK loves football indeed. But their football is our soccer, and our football is their rugby but with a lot less padding.

[TheWakeUpCall @ Feb 2nd 2007 3:32PM]

Rugby is a completely different game to american football, but you are right about the soccer bit.

[mark @ Feb 1st 2007 5:57PM]

On a side note, the Church just issued a statement barring "all players in the NFL from praying or replicating the act or action of prayer in public or on the field of play in public view before or after a touchdown as celebration." Interesting...

[Wonderboy @ Feb 1st 2007 5:28PM]

God Bless America! Home of the brave! Land where completely obvious patents are granted! And birthplace of insane laws about how big a TV you can use to watch football! (I'm sure this is exactly what those founding fathers had in mind all along).


By the way... if you have a 56+ inch screen and you host a Super Bowl "Gathering" or Super Bowl "Get-Together" are you okay? And what if you have two screens running, but only one of them is showing the game at a time? Is that okay? And what if... oh, I give up.

[Loban @ Feb 2nd 2007 9:22AM]

Well, I don't have $8000 to spend on a 60 inch plasma, so I'll just have to settle for my 50 incher. Or I could just go watch it on my friends 65 inch DLP, but then I would have to sit right in front of the screen to actually see it. Man, I hate projection screens.

[Gary Z @ Feb 1st 2007 5:30PM]

woah woah woah, aren't they quoting an onion article here?
But the NFL objected to the church's plans to use a projector to show the game, saying the law limits it to one TV no bigger than 55 inches.

[Gary Z @ Feb 1st 2007 5:33PM]

my bad, the article i thought of was from bbspot, and unfortunately, it was different, meaning that their claims of laws on the books about this might be true...
http://www.bbspot.com/News/2006/11/home-theater-regulations.html

[Andrew @ Feb 1st 2007 5:50PM]

Why would you try to dismantle an American pastime like Superbowl Sunday parties?! I'm only going to assume this has something to do with their alcohol sponsorships as well.

[andy @ Feb 1st 2007 5:35PM]

Why wouldn't they just do it anyway?

The NFL can sue and get actual damages if they really want to spend ~100k in lawyers fees to rake in 1 dollar (nominal damages).

There's no way the church planned to MAKE money, just to cover the rental of the projector and food. So, net it out and give the NFL their due..... 1 dollar of nominal damages.

I'd flaunt them.

I'm watching at my neighbors house on a 60" rptv. COME AND GET ME!

[Foof @ Feb 2nd 2007 3:04AM]

While I agree the damages likely aren't significant, you'd be wrong to assume they consist only of disgorgement of profit. Maybe the NFL has a $500k licensing fee for larger parties with more (or bigger) TVs, maybe they would have charged per person, maybe there's something to do with advertising if the party holds activities during commercial breaks, etc. It's still pretty ridiculous, but don't think they can't make a colorable claim for a few million dollars, which would definitely get the attention of any church thinking about flaunting the law.

[Hardcore @ Feb 1st 2007 9:19PM]

You're welcome for the tip.

[The Wall @ Feb 2nd 2007 9:31AM]

I was going to leave a smart-ass remark about how you posted a picture of a Library instead of a Church, but then I got to the end of the article and you correctly referenced Touchdown Jesus. Good enough for me.

[Vexorg @ Feb 1st 2007 5:37PM]

The NFL seems ridiculously protective of the "Super Bowl" name for some reason, to the point that when a local radio station was running promos for their Super Bowl contest, they actually had to specify on the promo that "We can say 'Super Bowl' because this contest is sponsored by Pepsi, official soft drink of the Super Bowl". Either way, I'm somehow guessing that the sermon on Sunday isn't going to be about the Fourth Commandment...

[Gary Z @ Feb 1st 2007 5:38PM]

thou shelt not infringe upon trademarks, no matter how common the usage is?

[Garry @ Feb 2nd 2007 9:09AM]

This was originally reported on the Indianapolis Star's website, and as one of the commenters said there:

"The more I think about it, ol' Billy was right. Let's kill all the lawyers, kill em tonight." - Don Henley

All I can say to the lawyer and PR guy quoted in the original article is PICK YOUR BATTLES. Duh.

This is yet another incident of the "content providers" trying to tell us where, when , how, and with whom we can consume. Well, as a consumer, I say this - KISS. MY. ASS.

[Kev50027 @ Feb 1st 2007 5:50PM]

Yes, I do plan to watch it on my 61" Plasma. Just for the commercials though, pro sports are a waste of my time.

[JRA219psu @ Feb 1st 2007 5:50PM]

Two things:
Go Colts

and to the NFL: You can suck my balls and my 65 in. HDTV's balls as well.

[Sandlapper @ Feb 2nd 2007 8:59AM]

The NFL is notorious for going overboard protecting their property. They even have a stupid rule that if a Network is showing an early game but doesn't have a late game scheduled, that they can't continue to show the early game if it goes past 4:15 Crazy I Tell ya!

[Shane @ Feb 1st 2007 6:02PM]

I'm one of the A/V guys at my church.

Our church is doing this as well, as did the last couple of churches I attended...

We never heard anything from the NFL telling us to knock it off despite showing the game on dual projection screens permanently installed in the sanctuary for words and videos during Sunday services.

However, we didn't charge anything as part of the festivities. It was open to pretty much everyone.

A single TV 55" limit is ridiculous. I've never heard of anything like that.

I would also think that there would be some sort of exception for churches and other organizations doing something like this.

Thank you NFL, MPAA, RIAA and everyone else out to "protect the rights and intellectual property" of those poor football players, actors and musicians.

[Luke @ Feb 2nd 2007 11:06AM]

While I can't say for sure exactly how many times the phrase has popped up here, a search of "across the pond" and "engadget" pulls up over 25,000 hits.

[aiken @ Feb 1st 2007 6:08PM]

I really wish that, when people posted articles like this, they'd do a tiny bit of research so they could post in an educated manner about the real issues.

Here's the deal: normal broadcasts of any cable or satellite or OTA company are licensed for personal use only. You can watch it on a 200" screen, for all anyone cares. You can invite your closest 50 friends over, for all anyone cares.

However, if you want to go commercial, you need a commercial license. Ask your local bar how much they pay for Sunday Ticket. It's significantly more than you pay for your own subscription. This is the nature of a commercial license.

Now, I don't know the details of the church issue, but odds are they somehow got caught up in the NFL's protection of its commercial licensees. Right, wrong, I don't know.

However, I do know that it's pretty idiotic to toss of snide remarks about bars being exempt from this issue when that's simply not true, and 30 seconds on google would have made for a much more accurate and topical post.

[LongshotX @ Feb 1st 2007 6:09PM]

Go Jags!

[Dave @ Feb 1st 2007 8:27PM]

psh, that isnt touchdown Jesus. If you want that you need to come to Ohio.

http://www.roadsideamerica.com/attract/OHMONjesus.html

BEAT THAT!

[teodoro @ Feb 1st 2007 10:53PM]

Got one to beat that. Well, it's a song about it. "Big Butter Jesus"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndlsVnV5zVA

[Sammy D Kat @ Feb 5th 2007 12:40PM]

This has nothing to do with MPAA or RIAA. The NFL is nortious for their extortion-like tactics with TV networks, cable operators, and their other "business" partners & are single handedly driving up the cost of pro sports.

[Shane @ Feb 2nd 2007 3:05PM]

I didn't mean to imply that they did...

I was just saying that all three organizations employ similar tactics and show an enormous amount of greed in the name of protecting the artist (or players in this case).

[Brandon @ Feb 2nd 2007 1:17AM]

aiken,

I really wish that, when people posted articles like this, they'd reas the article before making holier-than-thou statements.

From the article:

"NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said the league's long-standing policy is to ban "mass out-of-home viewing" of the Super Bowl. An exception is made for sports bars and other businesses that show televised sports as a part of their everyday operations."

Now, the reporter may be paraphrasing there, but it's from the piece, not commenters here.

[John Doe @ Feb 1st 2007 6:30PM]

Can we PLEASE get the asshat execs from the RIAA, MPAA, the NFL, the NBA, and pretty much every other acronym based conglomerate on the planet into a building and have someone fly a plane into it? Better yet get them ON a plane and fly it into the side of a mountain as fast as possible.
I mean really. I wish fate was more selective with its targeting systems.
Normally I wouldn't say this but I wouldn't shed a single tear if every exec from the above groups up and died tomorrow. Hell I think a national holiday would have to be created to give thanks.
Greedy bastards. As if they aren’t making a complete assload from the Super [Post edited by the NFL. Deposit $10 to complete this sentence.]

[Kent Mackey @ Feb 2nd 2007 9:09AM]

But, have you seen the TRUE touchdown Jesus?

http://www.churchmarketingsucks.com/graphics/2005_01_13giantjesus.jpg

[Andy @ Feb 1st 2007 8:41PM]

So....Much....Stupidity....slowly....melting.....

[Bobo @ Feb 1st 2007 11:19PM]

The guy holding a John 16:9 sign has a whole new meaning now

[Christopher Rogers @ Feb 2nd 2007 3:43PM]

I can't believe the NFL did that. I hope the NFL gets a lot of bad rap and ratings for this one. They deserve it. Greed is a horrible thing and can lead to one's downfall.

[phlavor @ Feb 1st 2007 9:54PM]

Yeah do not mess with the NFL

My Dad has an ad agency and one of his employees ran a small ad in a local paper where a local real estate company was offering Tampa Bay Bucs tickets as a prize in a contest.

The NFL contacted him and said you owe us $80,000 for promoting your client. His lawyer said, "It's the NFL. You pay them and walk away with a lesson learned."

[Charles @ Feb 1st 2007 7:42PM]

I can see that charging admission might be a problem. But simply having a church party is somehow going to bring the mighty NFL to it's knees? Like Elvis, common sense has left the building.

I agree with the poster who said that the RIAA, MPAA, and other acronym autocrats sound more like the KGB everyday...

[Ajax @ Feb 1st 2007 8:40PM]

i worship you "john doe", i couldnt have said it any better!

[Mark 2000 @ Feb 1st 2007 10:38PM]

Said the pastor: "It just frustrates me that most of the places where crowds are going to gather to watch this game are going to be places that are filled with alcohol and other things that are inappropriate for children,"

Inappropriate for children? You mean like two teams of angry, steroid enhanced men beating the living crap out of each other for a ball and a 7 figure salary? That kind of inappropriate for children?

[Dave @ Feb 1st 2007 11:02PM]

haha, I saw the butter sculptures at the state fair. I guess there are some odd benefits to living in Ohio...

[OM @ Feb 2nd 2007 8:48AM]

aiken had the best post.

why is a church exempt from a commercial license. i've seen so many preachers exempt from taxes milking innocent god-fearing people, and not paying a penny in taxes.

now a church wants to broadcast the super bowl to their congregation and charge a fee? why should the NFL allow this? why should the church be exempt from a commercial license?

the difference between this and you having a party in your home is you're not charging people to come into your home.

OM

[HarleyF150 @ Feb 2nd 2007 10:16AM]

I usually dont watch the super bowl but now that the NFL tells me what size TV I can watch it on. OK my 100" projection gets turned on, the 60" DLP in the living room goes on and the 60" Plazma in the bedroom goes full blast + i might as well TIVO it.. SUCK IT NFL!!!!!!!!!!!!

[huygir @ Feb 3rd 2007 9:47AM]

If I had shelled out millions of $$ for an ad spot, I'd pull it... advertisers make the Super Bowl the "media event" that it is. Why in the world would they want to limit who and how it is watched outside of the stadium?

This proves they have grown too big for their own good - time for a serious boycott of NFL games and merchandise - see how they like that.

[AnotherThing @ Feb 2nd 2007 11:29AM]

Think you're safe with your 50" TV? Not if you also have a 7.1 speaker setup on your home entertainment system. That same section of copyright law (the section that defines what a "public performance" consists of) gets you if you have more than 6 loudspeakers in the audio system.

So set up that home entertainment system - just don't make it TOO good, or you're in violation of copyright law.

[Sam @ Feb 2nd 2007 5:58PM]

"Yes, I do plan to watch it on my 61" Plasma. Just for the commercials though, pro sports are a waste of my time."

Uhh ... but you feel your time is spent in a valuable manner by being advertised to? I get enough advertising as it is, and I'm sure coworkers will forward me the "best" superbowl commercials.

Commercials people. Commercials. Why?

[TheWakeUpCall @ Feb 2nd 2007 3:32PM]

I can guarantee that absolutely no one will be watching this in the UK. We don't care about american football.

[KKP @ Feb 3rd 2007 12:15AM]

I wondered just how the NFL would enforce this "request" , without suing the church, so I called the FCC-- Pretty interesting-- PLEASE NOTE: My church singles group is planning on having a party and watching the game on two big screens-- I wanted to call the FCC to see if there was any laws that we would be breaking as the Bible does command "the church" (Christians) to obey the laws of the land-- Anyways...
They wondered the same thing considering that they are the "enforcers" of America’s airwaves-- The FCC lady that I talked to had to confer with her supervisor-- She then asked if we were going to charge people to see the game-- No-- She said she had never heard of this law and wondered (along with me) who made the law—The NFL? I don't think that the NFL can make laws so... The FCC asked us if we were going to tape the game and show it later? Again NO—

The "FCC lady" that I talked to also suggested the reporter check his facts-- I would suggest the same thing-- He might want to call the FCC as it would be a GREAT follow up story-- The big ???
Would the NFL have a leg to stand on if they tried to sue a church, group, etc. for showing the Super Bowl on TVs bigger than 55 inches etc.—How would they plan to enforce “their” law otherwise?

I would like to know, does the NFL plan to sue all churches, groups, families, and bars (that don't pay the "fair) that show the game on any TV bigger that 55 inches? Good luck! I am guessing that all the church would have to do is ask why they are discriminating against them-- I also wonder just what the FCC would do—
May I suggest that you also call the FCC for their comments and send an email to "The Indianapolis Star" paper asking them to do a follow up story--

God Bless and thanks for your time—Also to check out just what motivates Tony and Lovie check out:
(www.BeyondTheUltimate.org)