Bloggers beware - if the NCAA has its way, reporting on sporting events still in progress could be a thing of the past.
A reporter for the Louisville Courier-Post, Brian Bennett, was ejected from an NCAA Tournament baseball game between Louisville and Oklahoma State on June 10 after posting live updates of the game on a weblog.
Such "live representations," the NCAA had said in a memo circulated to the local media, are not permitted because of its contracts with television networks and Internet providers that give them the exclusive rights to live coverage.
But the Courier-Post has cast the action as a First-Amendment issue - largely because the University of Louisville, a public institution, both hosted the event and enforced the NCAA's policy.
Now, the paper is weighing a legal challenge to the NCAA in what could become a test case on what sports information is public and what is governed by the law of contracts.
The NCAA's motivations for taking such unprecedented action depend on technology and economics, said Lee Levine, a partner at a media law firm and an adjunct law professor at Georgetown, in a telephone interview yesterday.
"The ability to disseminate information in real time ... has become easier and more prevalent," said Levine, who also advises The Daily Pennsylvanian on legal issues. "And the value of information itself has become a much more serious concern."
So, he said, ambiguities in the law have prompted both sides to stake out their legal claims.
"Once you recognize that there's profit to be made ... then the law has to begin grappling with those issues," Levine said.
Many print journalists - including this reporter and others at the DP - transmit live updates during college sporting events; the industry-wide trend is driven in part by increasing reliance on an online presence amid declines in readership.
But the issue of whether such coverage diminishes the monetary value of the NCAA's contracts is unclear, legal experts have said. And it is also uncertain where the media outlets being protected stand.
When asked about the NCAA's attempt to enforce its contract with ESPN, network spokesman Mike Humes told The New York Times: "To be honest, we didn't ask for it. They didn't consult us."
Absent a solution to the complex legal questions involved, universities and professional teams are left to sort the issue out for themselves. Penn seems to be taking a hands-off approach.
"I was very interested when I saw the NCAA's action," said Mike Mahoney, the head of Athletic Communications at Penn, in an e-mail.
"Obviously the main concern is if the blogger decides not to post about the actual event being covered, or the blog is considered offensive. In such a case action would most likely be taken. However, at this time [Penn Athletics is] not as concerned with protecting the 'property' of our athletic events from bloggers as maybe the NCAA is."
So for now, it appears that Franklin Field and the Palestra may be safe havens for those journalists looking to keep fans and readers updated. But at other events, some may have to settle for just hearing the final score.
