Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

NFL asks Sen. Russ Feingold to stop using ad featuring Randy Moss, others

The National Football League has asked the re-election campaign of Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) to stop using an ad that contains footage from NFL games.

The league, according to NFL spokesman Greg Aiello, did not license the footage, which shows the end zone celebrations of several NFL players. Included is the 2005 incident in which wide receiver Randy Moss, who then played for the Minnesota Vikings, pretends to drop his drawers and moon the crowd after scoring a touchdown.

By Cindy Boren  | October 5, 2010; 2:16 PM ET
Categories:  NFL  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Barry Sanders Jr. looks a lot like Barry Sanders when it comes to playing football
Next: Tiger Woods, Cigar Guy and the greatest sports photo ever (well, almost)

Comments

A democrat breaking the rules? Stunning

Posted by: Barno1 | October 5, 2010 3:18 PM | Report abuse

Among the many things most Wisconsn folks don't know about Ron Johnson is that he is a Minnesota Golden Gopher alum. Remember that this coming Saturday when Russ Feingold's alma matre's team, the Wisconsin Badgers, take on those pesky yellow rodents from the west!

Posted by: giannisaint | October 5, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

So why doesnt the NFL sue the entire US Government, the same way they sue entire churches, bars, restaurants, etc. when they show a fuggin' game?

Posted by: vmrg1974 | October 5, 2010 3:47 PM | Report abuse

So why doesn't the NFL sue the entire US Government?

Because they get an anti-trust exemption.

Posted by: jimward21 | October 5, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Feingold has already used fictitious people in commercials, getting fictitious jobs from the Stimulus Package!

LOSER!

Posted by: theaz | October 5, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

"So why doesn't the NFL sue the entire US Government?

Because they get an anti-trust exemption."

Wrong. The only antitrust exemption the NFL has deals with sharing television income. It does not have an exemption for sharing certain other limited revenues--and, more importantly, enjoys a labor-anti-trust exemption only for so long as there is a certified bargaining agent for players, which is why the NFLPA is so busy going down the road towards decertification; this is exactly what happened in 1989 when the owners made a "final" of either Plan A or Plan B to the then-existing union and informed the players that if Plan A wasn't accepted, then Plan B would go into effect. The players to a man rejected both Plans, allowed the owners to impose Plan B and then decertified. The long-and-short of it was that the players won a jury trial in the Ninth Circuit Court, received trebled damages, and, at the last moment before the trial judge imposed his own "system" a new collective bargaining agreement was reached and that CBA is the one that expires next March and leaves owners without their coveted anti-trust immunity.

Posted by: iliwai34 | October 5, 2010 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company