All-Star Get Our Sport Back: Flocheer And Varsity Video Policy

[TealArmySparkle]

I don't think thats a proper comparison. In your analogy of the NHL and sports networks, the league would be the equivalent to EP's/Varsity and the Fox Sports/Sportsnet would be Flo. Both the league and the networks have agreements that claim rights to content, especially for marketing (which would include YouTube clips posted to network and league channels).

Gyms, in this analogy, would be the person who is not allowed to record at the game or the person who records the televised event and uploads it to YouTube. They are not part of the agreement between the service and the provider. Gyms are the consumer and have no rights here. (EDIT: Or you could argue the gyms are the hockey players on the teams, who still have little to no rights to content.)

Leagues and networks go after people on Youtube, Twitter, other media outlets, etc all the time. It does happen in other sports, it happens everywhere.

As much as I adore the idea of gyms having their own media channels so their fans can cheer on teams rather than recording, I'm doubtful Flo is going to reconsider their policy. Flo has nothing to gain and everything to lose from allowing that.

Thanks for calling me out on it. What I was meaning was teams using their own recorded footage from their own streaming services as they can do this.

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

I guess I would say there is no league in cheer that functions similarly to professional leagues. I wouldn't compare pro sports to youth sports. They are way too different.

My response wasn't meant to compare pro sports to cheer but to compare the analogy of professional sports coverage to competition coverage. In the analogy that was presented, the professional league (NHL) would be equivalent to Varsity/EPs.




USASF and USA Cheer are governing bodies. In my very own personal opinion, I don't think the governing body should be involved with stuff like that unless its directly harming athletes. I think they should be involved with rule and safety regulations and creating/upholding a universal scoring system and that's it.

If gyms want an organization that they feel will protect them from predatory behavior in the "free market", they can create one themselves, separate from the governing body.

What’s lost in this whole portion of the discussion is that rights to the footage of the games in professional sports is actually owned by the franchise (ie. Team). I’m not sure when they do it in other sports but somewhere around the 7th inning of every Major League Baseball game I have ever watched, there was a reminder that all footage from that contest was the property of “The St Louis Cardinals and any use without the express written consent of the St Louis Cardinals is strictly prohibited.”

This means the team can do whatever they wish with it, and they sell licenses to that footage to those other entities mentioned.

In my (admittedly limited) understanding of what is being discussed here, the issue seems to arise from the rights to footage of performances being owned by someone who is not affiliated with the team doing the performance.

 

[Eyes On The Prize]

What’s lost in this whole portion of the discussion is that rights to the footage of the games in professional sports is actually owned by the franchise (ie. Team). I’m not sure when they do it in other sports but somewhere around the 7th inning of every Major League Baseball game I have ever watched, there was a reminder that all footage from that contest was the property of “The St Louis Cardinals and any use without the express written consent of the St Louis Cardinals is strictly prohibited.”

This means the team can do whatever they wish with it, and they sell licenses to that footage to those other entities mentioned.

In my (admittedly limited) understanding of what is being discussed here, the issue seems to arise from the rights to footage of performances being owned by someone who is not affiliated with the team doing the performance.

I see what you're saying. In the original analogy, the pro teams have rights to the videos of their performances while in cheer, teams don't have rights to the videos of their performances. Easy to see the connection.

But when you look at the entire industry of pro sports and youth cheer, the analogy falls apart. When you bring in the structure and functions of each industry, cheer teams and the franchises are not even at the same level and you can't compare the two. You're better off comparing Varsity with the leagues, Varsity's competition brands with the franchises/teams, and the gyms with the professional players or even the attendees, depending on how you view the role of gyms in the analogy.

Then it's easy to see why gyms don't get to claim copyright to their own performance videos and why professional teams do. Sport franchises are a part of the league and 99.9 times out of 100, the league negotiates media coverage for their teams.

FWIW, I don't think comparing professional franchises to youth sports clubs is a fair comparison. I only corrected the analogy to help the overall discussion of how the video policy negatively affects gyms.

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

I see what you're saying. In the original analogy, the pro teams have rights to the videos of their performances while in cheer, teams don't have rights to the videos of their performances. Easy to see the connection.

But when you look at the entire industry of pro sports and youth cheer, the analogy falls apart. When you bring in the structure and functions of each industry, cheer teams and the franchises are not even at the same level and you can't compare the two. You're better off comparing Varsity with the leagues, Varsity's competition brands with the franchises/teams, and the gyms with the professional players or even the attendees, depending on how you view the role of gyms in the analogy.

Then it's easy to see why gyms don't get to claim copyright to their own performance videos and why professional teams do. Sport franchises are a part of the league and 99.9 times out of 100, the league negotiates media coverage for their teams.

FWIW, I don't think comparing professional franchises to youth sports clubs is a fair comparison. I only corrected the analogy to help the overall discussion of how the video policy negatively affects gyms.

I don’t think I was contradicting you. I was attempting to add strength to your argument. I agree, the comparison between professional sports and youth activities is nominal at best.

 

[DonnaM]

I would accept being able to pay $29 for the season so my parents could watch CP perform at the competitions she does. Or paying .99 for a single, high quality video stream of one routine. But $29 month is more than I can justify paying for my parents to be able to watch what will be a total of under 30 minutes of video total of their granddaughter being mostly invisible, since she’s a backspot/front spot.

 

[Lisa Seye]

Girl even HULU doesn't cost that and you get a LOT more content. Try 5.99 a month FloCheer.......

 

[dat.jpp]

Am I the only one who never used Flocheer?

 

[KPep]

Am I the only one who never used Flocheer?

Same here.

 

[SthrnCheerMom]

Am I the only one who never used Flocheer?

No. I’ve never used it.

 

[Lisa Seye]

Am I the only one who never used Flocheer?

Never

 

[dat.jpp]

The more people buy Flocheer, the more support for Flocheer… js

 

[tojofasho]

I would accept being able to pay $29 for the season so my parents could watch CP perform at the competitions she does. Or paying .99 for a single, high quality video stream of one routine. But $29 month is more than I can justify paying for my parents to be able to watch what will be a total of under 30 minutes of video total of their granddaughter being mostly invisible, since she’s a backspot/front spot.

Honestly this could be a smart business model if FloCheer wanted to be practical instead of greedy. Something along the lines of .99 per routine per month that you have it in your "watchable" videos (so if you want to be able to watch your child's first competition at the end of the season, you'd just keep paying the .99 per month for that bideo). And then for those who want to watch everything all the time, have the monthly model for paying and give those customers unlimited access. I've only used FloCheer once for worlds, where I feel it was worth the cost, but I can't imagine ever spending the money just to watch one team per competition.

 

[Lisa Seye]

I cant justify paying 29 a month because that's how much a tank of gas costs me to get my kiddo to practice and back just once. I already spend too much lol. I'm crazy enough to drive that far for her but not crazy enough to get a flocheer account, then if I want to rewatch, no sound. It's like watching only half the routine. If we aren't using real music anymore, why can't they have sound back on playback again?

 

[SL&AM]

I have only done a FloCheer account for worlds and I did a trial the first time and I think I paid the second but immediately cancelled after Summit.

 

[kayemm]

I haven't ever bought flocheer and I purchased the Worlds video feed for years before it went to Flocheer from around 2008 onwards. I just don't feel it's good value. I'm not in the US and with the time difference watching the live stream is hard. I would maybe pay it just for that month if I knew I would have the time to sit and watch it, but I never do. It's not worth paying it to watch the routines on demand with no music.