I've watched a few training video's and they never blurr out the SNs of opponents but are using their likeness to make video's. Some use replayers that hide the opponents SN's but some record directly from the pokersites and expose the play of opponent to all the people who see the video.

In the US media entities need to have your permission to use you likeness in their mediums or at least let you know that this is being taped, recorded etc.

Should these training sites be asking permission from opponents to use this session in a training video?

Players who do not want their likeness used can always get up from a cash table but tournament players cannot.

Vote and Discuss......

Some people will huff and puff about this being nitty, but I think doing this would help in the effort to legitimize online poker. I vote yes, players should decide whether they're ok with being used by media to promote a product or service.

I mean if I am used in a video I would expect some portion of the income they make from that video. It takes 2 to tango so shouldn't I get something for my efforts?

Kthx.

It would be nice of them to ask for permission, but anyone who complains after the fact about not getting compensation is a huge nit

If I knew I was being taped I would ask for anonymity and if that could not be provided I would as for compensation immediately.

They are not using your likeness. Without researching the law in all 50 states I can't be sure, but I would fall over dead if a player had a valid legal claim against a training site for recording an online poker session. That being said, I'd be rather pissed off if a detailed analysis of my game and how to play against me was being made available to a wide audience (unless it was totally wrong). I think it's an ethical rather than a legal issue.

Why? Just use it to get better and then own the people who think they are playing the old you

Forget US law, this is an international business ethics question.

I really hope you are in high school or something.

full tilt already asks for your permission.......they have special tables called edu tables, and those are the only tables they record videos on, and when you sit down at such a table it informs you a video may be in progress and that you need to agree to that before it will let you play.

I suppose fogging over the avatar and name would be the easiest way to address keeping the players anonymous. I would think the training sites would use this method if it were ever deterrmined that they had to get permission or pay royalities.

Their is a difference between using someones photo in a tv commericial and their avatar picture in a training video. obv...

Is this for all training sites or just Card Runners?

Who cares, the analysis you get will be worth way more than the money they would be required to pay you - not to mention they dont have to anyway.

You are assuming that people know they are being taped and that they are members of said coaching site.

What about all the players who do not sign up for the site? They don not even know that there are videos of professionals giving strategy and critiquing their play and strategies to exploit them.

It seems like wanting compensation for being a subject in a video your not going to watch is not nitty at all. Maybe offering these players a membership to that site or providing them with a copy of the video would me fair compensation.


Oh, and I am not a high school student or something and as far as I know I have never been a subject to an instructional video.

I want a Tier 1 deal, and I'll have Oliver Tse be my agent.

good idea, what could possibly go wrong

Why guess what the law is when you aren't even sure enough so that you don't need to hedge in the same sentence?

You make it seem like people are buying the videos to learn how to exploit you at a micro table?

Once again I am not in any of these videos I am 100% sure than no videos are being made for $.01/$.02 tables. and tournaments that are $10 and less.

Ok well maybe not because this question struck me today when watching a well known pro talk about how bad the player was playing, why their style was exploitable etc. The screenname was visible and it was a $10 buy in.

I have worked in the media for a number of years and just practiced good ethics to keep myself and the company out of trouble in this area. Many times the permission to use likeness is "assumed" like when someone calls into a radio show or writes a letter to the editor of a local newspaper. Even then the newspaper usually uses first name and last initial.

Here's a brief description of the laws taken from this website: http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-gui...keness-another

Because training sites are new this is a somewhat new area to give consideration to this law. Most of these laws are state laws so they vary from state to state not to mention country to country. I have not read the fine print that the poker sites use in there terms and conditions but maybe it's covered in there.

Just blurr the name or use a replayer to avoid complaints from nits like me

OK stepping down from my soapbox. Thanks for your discussion.

What has happend in the last 30 years in this country to make people think they need to be compensated because somebody else is making money? You didn't earn the money. The poker site wasn't your idea. The poker school wasn't your idea. Not sure but if you read the contract you agreed to when you signed at whatever site you play, I bet you'll find that your online poker name is the property of the site.

I don't understand this new "something for nothing" ideaology that's infecting our society. It's like you think your mere existence qualifies you for wellfare from the poker school.

"Some people will huff and puff about this being nitty, but I think doing this would help in the effort to legitimize online poker."

Lol it wouldn't help jack ****.

I agree with your views on society and the sense of entitlement that people have is at a disgusting level.

Rather than ask for some big check from a site if they were using me in a video. I might ask for anonymity in the video and if that was not possible maybe a subscription to the site to get their perspective on this match as well as my buy in back. Something that is worth my time helping them create the content for their business venture.

Why do the sites feel as if they can just play and record a unknowing participant in their business venture without offering some compensation.

Here's the same link about this law. There is an example of how Virgin Mobil used a picture of someone in their advertising campaign and what grounds that person has in their subsequent lawsuit. http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-gui...keness-another

I guess my argument is kind of dual sided and I should be more specific. I do have an expectation of privacy if they were taping my play. And if that privacy cannot be provided would expect some fair compensation for being used in their business venture.

The whole Idea is ridiculous instead of worrying about silly issues like if someone should be compensated for being video taped playing poker why not just watch the training video learn something and compensate yourself by learning to play better poker!

I would also point out that even though most of the responses are flaming me for asking the question and my view on the matter the Poll is closer than the presidential election.

I have also contradicted myself in posts (forget US law then quoting US law). It's an issue I haven't heard discussion of so I thought I'd start one.

Having thought about it a good portion of my afternoon I think this is where I stand on it: