Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) said Friday he does not understand Goodell's reasons for destroying evidence and is considering asking theSenate Judiciary Committee, of which he is the ranking minority member, to look into the issue.
As is always the case when Congress looks into sports leagues, Specter raised the issue of the NFL's antitrust exemption and said at a news conference the topic "has been on my mind for a long time."For those not in the know, in 1961, Congress granted the NFL an exemption from antitrust laws to allow the league to enter into contracts with the television networks to broadcast their games. The NFL gets to negotiate for huge broadcast fees, but it's ok because everyone benefits from being able to watch the games on their over-the-air TV.
This is in contrast to professional baseball, which has a much broader exemption thanks to a 1922 Supreme Court decision. This became inconvenient this past fall when the Patriots were fast approaching the win-loss record held by the 1972 Miami Dolphins, but were scheduled to break the record in a game restricted to the NFL Network, which, being unavailable on the basic cable tiers of some cable systems, would have meant that some in-market viewers would not be able to watch the game even if they wanted to.
Under pressure, the NFL Network agreed to allow a simulcast of the game rather than have millions of angry fans calling their Congresspeople on a Monday morning.Having dodged a bullet on that one, and having an angry Senator on your case about a cheating scandal (and it was cheating,) how could Super Bowl Sunday go any worse for the NFL?
Oh, right. They could go after a church for hosting a Super Bowl party. I am not kidding, folks.
Immanuel is among a number of churches in the Washington area and elsewhere that have been forced to use a new playbook to satisfy the NFL, which said that airing games at churches on large-screen TV sets violates the NFL copyright.Let me get this straight. It's ok for a sports bar to show the game while charging patrons for liquor, beer and junk food, but Churches aren't...kosher? (sorry, I couldn't resist)
The league bans public exhibitions of its games on TV sets or screens larger than 55 inches because smaller sets limit the audience size. The section of federal copyright law giving the NFL protection over the content of its programming exempts sports bars, NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said.Last time I checked, churches were private, tax-exempt, not-for-profit institutions. Is there anyone with a brain at the NFL's legal department? There are lots of legitimate ways to protect your copyrights, and lots of things that the NFL can conceivably be unhappy about. They put the kibosh on a movie theater in Madison, WI showing Packer games and charging admission, thankfully preventing massive public Brett Favre exposure (an unintended consequence, I know) and enforcing their copyrights. Not a problem. Attacking a church? You're going to get some pushback:
John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, a Charlottesville civil liberties group that focuses on religious freedom issues, is threatening to sue the NFL on behalf of an Alabama church that wants to host a big-screen Super Bowl party. He is also seeking sponsors for federal legislation to exempt churches from the ban.Normally, when someone wants an exemption for churches it's so they can discriminate. This isn't one of those times. I'm with the churches on this one, and I suspect if the NFL fights it, many in Congress will, pardon the expression, give them hell.
Leave a comment