Televised baseball consists almost entirely of views of the pitcher and the batter, and only turns somewhere else to show where the ball ended up or to focus on a runner who's doing something.
And that misses out on so much of the actual game. The standard view from center field, looking at the pitcher and the batter, can't show you an infield shift. It can't show you how deep the outfielders are playing. It can't show you players reacting to signs from managers and coaches. It can't show you anything except one tiny portion of what's actually happening on the field.
And so you can't really understand why things happen the way they do -- somebody hit a little bloop single into right field? Maybe it was poor defense that allowed it to happen, but maybe there was a shift on and the outfield was playing deep. You don't know, and won't see, any of that in a televised game.
I agree it's likely that a live stream would be shut down fairly quickly, particularly at scale, but I'm thinking a combination of after-the-fact + some intelligent post-processing might be useful/valuable.
Admittedly, the majority-value is in the real-time production, but, by providing after-the game all-22 videos, you might be able to fly somewhat under the radar.
I've never been asked to stop taking pictures with my (admittedly small) 70-200 lens - and it's usually perched atop a rail for the entire game - I could just as easily have been filming the entire game as snapping pictures.
Looking at various venue's policies - it would be hard to do this on a reliable basis with a larger lens: http://www.coliseum.com/info/prohibiteditems.php
But, the all-22 isn't really a zoom situation anyways...
You got an SLR in, but try "filming" a game with it - you'll be stopped in under 10 minutes, I promise you
Also, that isn't like the streaming sites where you can be at a desk in Sweden and re-broadcasting games fairly anonymously... they'd just walk up to your seat and escort you out.
Regardless, its an awful lot of work which is a) still illegal (therefore risky) b) difficult to market and c) completely obsolete the second the NFL network starts a new TV/online network for it
Um, no? There is nothing copyrighted about the on-field action of a football game. All they can do is kick you out of the stadium.
By your logic, If Fox has the superbowl, NBC could sit above an open stadium in a helicopter and broadcast the whole game - I don't think thats the case, but I don't have the laws to back it up.
That is exactly what he just said....
The NFL leases exclusive rights to TV stations to broadcast the action.
Anyone else who broadcasts the action will get sued and shut down.
As far as I know I am allowed to record anything I want. Perhaps not with audio, but I am not aware of any law that gives someone the right to prevent video recording.
They have the right to kick you out (if they catch you), but not to prevent recording.
If you know of such a law, please post it.
2007 the 2nd circuit upheld an anti-bootlegging law, that prevents people from selling unauthorized recordings of live concerts.
I don't agree with it, but I think that under the law an NFL "performance" might be covered.
Of course the concert is a performance of a copyrighted work so who knows unless the teams are merely "performing" copyrighted written plays?