For reference, let’s reread our description of the “Type 5 editorial” :
5. The Unintentionally Hilarious (or Just Plain Sad). The Type 5 editorial adopts a ludicrous, counterfactual or illogical line of argument which then has the actual, unintended effect of showing that the editorial writers — had they gone to law school — would have become very, very bad lawyers…
Today’s editorial (it’s a Type 5) laments a decision by Federal Appeals Court (Circuit 7) which prevents newspapers from providing (without licensing) live, online streaming of high school tournament and playoff games. The Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association (WIAA) licenses that right, as do all professional and college sports. The Appleton Post-Crescent newspaper, which had no licensing deal, was sued by the WIAA when it went ahead and streamed four high school playoff games. Days ago, the Court of Appeals ruled for the WIAA, and against the [now larger group of] newspapers who claimed a First Amendment right to live-stream these games without a licensing agreement.
The State Journal writes,
Judge Diane Wood wrote that news organizations can cover such events “to their hearts’ content. What they cannot do is to appropriate the entertainment product that the WIAA has created without paying for it.”
They then blunder on,
Show of hands: who thinks it’s a good idea to consider high school football and basketball games as “entertainment product,” in the same way that college and pro sports are viewed?
Hey, it was a “legal” question, not a “show-of-hands” question, but any honest show- of-hands would also go against the State Journal. Ask those fans: Were you there primarily for fun and entertainment? Or were you there as citizens, informing yourselves of game results, as guaranteed under the 1st Amendment?
And, furthermore, the entertainment IS like college and pro sports.
Never, dear editors, ask a question in court if you don’t already know the answer.
The State Journal continues,
In contrast, many would argue that very thing is at the core of big problems in college athletics today.
Unfortunately, major reform of college athletics is not in the scope of this suit.
Then the State Journal delivers this:
So pushing that notion down to the high school level feels like the wrong thing to do.
It “feels“ like the wrong thing to do? Seriously? Where? In the stomach? In the heart? Does it make your heart sad? 🙁 Is it some vague thing in the brain that’s had to express?
And what is “pushing a notion down to high school”? What does that even mean? Applying consistent rules across high school, college, and beyond? If you want different rules, you haven’t even begun to make a single argument as to why.
Really, you are silly, silly boys. We can’t have our legal disputes settled in our courts by silly-boy ‘feelings’ and arguments that are never made out loud.
Case closed. This is the sound of a gavel — “tappity tap”