So they object to the collection and use of data to evaluate their performances for various reasons and want paying for it?

That's going to be interesting as many of them only manage to get certain transfers due to the availability of said data.

So if this case is won it’ll give me the right to charge my work to do an annual performance review!

martin_p wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:01 am

So if this case is won it’ll give me the right to charge my work to do an annual performance review!

But if there was a third party making lots of money from your performance review, I think you the right to know how they got your data and if you gave them permission to use it.

claptrappers_union wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:46 am

But if there was a third party making lots of money from your performance review, I think you the right to know how they got your data and if you gave them permission to use it.

But that’s different isn’t it, I’m not ‘performing’ in front of the public. If I was they could all measure my performance and there’s nothing I could do to stop it. I don’t think footballers are wondering how companies got their data. If they are I suggest they look to the stands. It’s not as if performance data for footballers even existed before theses companies started compiling it anyway.

The players' difficulty is the very public nature of what they are doing. They appear in public and charge the public to watch them. I doubt they have any right thereafter to object to the public counting the number of passes and the distance they run, and using the information. If their own employer is selling that information then they may have a chance of sharing the profit, but it sounds like they are sueing third parties.

claptrappers_union wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 12, 2021 10:46 am

But if there was a third party making lots of money from your performance review, I think you the right to know how they got your data and if you gave them permission to use it.

I would agree, that seems to be the point being made.

'players want compensation for the trading of their performance data over...'

I wonder how this will pan out.

It could end up with a PRS style agency where there's a collections agency that adminsters it on behalf of the players (like with music with streaming, radio, etc) or it may be that the leagues or clubs will share the revenue that they have earned from these types of deals (e.g. the Premier League/Football League agreements with FIFA).

There's also the risk that they have already inadvertently signed the rights away. There's a lot of this in music about how artists/writers/etc are being exploited with digital distribution.

I also see that the lawyer is involved is Chris Farnell who has obviously been discussed extensively on here.

It depends on how the data was acquired and whether the acquirer followed the necessary steps to establish a lawful basis for processing the data. You don't necessarily need consent of data subject to process personal data (consent is one lawful basis, but there are others, such as "legitimate interest") - but if the person collecting the data wishes to rely on legitimate interest he/she/it must provide certain information to the data subject to tell them what they are doing with the data (usually via privacy notices) - within a month of collecting from third party source. Also,

The first part is the purpose test, which helps you decide whether the processing can be considered a legitimate interest. It’s comprised of the following questions:

Why do you want to process the data? What are you trying to achieve?
Who benefits from the processing? In what way?
Are there any wider public benefits to the processing?
If so, how significant are those benefits?
What would the impact be if you couldn’t process this information?
Would your use of the data be unethical or unlawful in any way?
The second part is the necessity test, which helps you decide whether legitimate interest is the most appropriate lawful basis. It’s comprised of the following questions:

Does this processing help further your interests?
Is processing this information a reasonable way of securing those interests?
Is there a less intrusive way to achieve the same result?
The final part is the balancing test, which helps you decide whether the data subject’s interests override the legitimate interest. It’s comprised of the following questions:

What is the nature of your relationship with the data subject?
Is any of their personal data sensitive or private?
Would people expect you to use their data in this way?
Are you happy to explain it to them?
Are some people likely to object or find it intrusive?
What is the possible impact on the individual?
How big an impact might it have on them?
Are you processing children’s data?
Are any of the individuals vulnerable in any way?
Can you adopt safeguards to minimise the impact?
Are any of the individuals vulnerable in any way?

I KNOW, BIT OF BRAIN XXXX ISNT IT. But seriously, I think this one could go either way - ie it would be possible to establish a legitimate interest, but it is a close call. I doubt privacy notices were given to data subjects, so that would play into the hands of the players for retrospective activity (where data could not be used) but the gap could be plugged going forward.

I’m just worried about how much it’ll add to the cost of a Rothman’s Football Yearbook!

BillyIngham'sShorts wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 12, 2021 12:20 pm

[clipped for space]

Would grandfather rights come into this? It's been widely accepted for well over a century that player info is freely in the public domain. Goalscorers and all aspects of play have been freely reported on and data (obviously far less than today) has been collated as well. No doubt scouts have taken note of other factors like tackling success and passing numbers as well.

I wonder if to some extent the principle of football data collection being already established, will hurt the players' cause.

Seems intrinsically silly to claim the players own this data rather than the companies who go to great lengths to collect and compile the data.

That's not to say data protection policies and implementation aren't important, simply that the balance of ownership as inferred by this claim is way off.

Very glad we won't need to rely on a foreign court to rule on this kind of thing anymore.

Interesting situation.

There are firms that produce data relating to the financial markets, including commodity prices. There are other firms who use the data these "data reporting" firms produce to enter into financial transactions, including, to be topical, providing energy price hedges to firms who's businesses are exposed to energy prices. My understanding is that the "data using "firms enter into licenses with the "data reporting" firms so that the later are paid for reporting the data. However, the entities that are active in the financial markets that results in the data from their activities being reported on by the "data reporting" firms do not get paid for their activities being reported on. (But, none of this is personal data under the terms of GDPR).

Imagine if the following post triggered a payment to the person concerned:

“Drinkwater 3”

They want paying for use of data on their performances.


Edited report from BBC:
Hundreds of footballers have threatened legal action against the data collection industry, which could change how information is handled.

Led by former Cardiff City, Leyton Orient and Yeovil Town manager Russell Slade, 850 players want compensation for the trading of their performance data over the past six years.

They also want an annual fee from the companies for any future use. Data ranges from average goals-per-game for an outfield player to height - however, Mr Slade has previously expressed concern this is sometimes wrong. Slade's legal team said the fact players receive no payment for the unlicensed use of their data contravenes General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that were strengthened in 2018.

Link

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-58873132

See link http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboa ... =2&t=57597

See link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETxmCCsMoD0

So we’re not going to be able to do the rate the players thread?

Surprised no one has mentioned anything about the lawyer.

Pretty sure it was the guy who was linked to the other interested party for our takeover