Image rights and player data - who owns what we see?
Image rights have been the subject of legal wrangling and contract negotiation for decades, but there was a time when this kind of caveat wasn't something considered by agents or sports stars. A time when a budding young star wouldn't have had the legal nous to consider including a clause to provide renumeration whenever their picture was used to promote the team.
Perhaps a less litigious time, or possibly the reason was the use of player images and likenesses was not so common. Certainly with larger budgets, bigger marketing teams and a whole host of mediums, sports teams now can interact with fans in countless different ways and all the time putting the players - the stars of the sport - front and centre.
But as the platforms teams use to promote themselves evolve, so has the opportunity for 3rd party businesses to make use of the data collated about individual players and teams. While some of this is used in a licensed manner, with video games - such as the FIFA series occasionally having to remove or rename teams who have pulled out of their licensing agreements - there are other industries where this is not the case.
The "Project Red Card" lawsuit - in the ultimate GDPR case - sees a growing group of football players looking to sue companies who are using [and profiting from] use of their own "personal data". From statistics and data analytics companies who provide stats during games such as "times this player has been booked this season" or "percentage of freekicks this player has scored from this range" to sports betting companies who use the data to set odds, entice punters in and ultimately make more money.
This lawsuit, if successful could herald a new age of accountability, sending a shockwave throughout every aspect of sport, with companies having to consider the use of all data pertaining to the stars on show. What isn't clear right now is the specifics around what will be considered "personal data" and I believe this to be the single most important point in the case.
After all, a player scoring a goal may be considered personal data, but a team winning 1-0 wouldn't be. So does team data get treated differently? Also, reporting facts from an event would come into question; if a reporter from a local paper writes what they saw and includes a number of "personal data" points - where would this lie legally? Would they be exempt because the reporter was attending and transcribing what they saw, and using their own personal knowledge of previous results to give their own "stats" e.g. "Player X was sent off, bringing his tally to 4 red cards for the season, he seems to have an issue with temperament"?
And what of spectator rights? Having paid to view the match are they also liable for any details they divulge? Arsenal Fan TV has 1.2m subscribers on YouTube, will "Troopz" and co. be liable for any content that includes "player data"?
There are many issues that will need to be considered when this legal battle concludes as it will have a direct bearing on the other sports who will doubtless follow suit. In a world where data is king it seems a wise move from a group not usually considered the smartest.