Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

4088Re: [baseball-databank] Digest Number 1186

Expand Messages
  • F. X. Flinn
    Apr 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Commercial licenses are negotiated uniquely each time.

      That said, commercial-use license whose intent was to put everything out there for public use without restriction wouldn't make any sense; that would not be a commercial use. Commercial use implies use for the purpose of generating revenues.

      But beyond that conceptual problem, the entities which SABR represents when making such a license available would almost certainly veto that type of deal.

      FXF

      P.S. I would also point out that a lot of the data in the recent ESPN baseball encyclopedia was created by 24/7, not Pete. So when you look at a baseball encyclopedia from the 21st century you are not just looking at SABR Bio Committee + Pete Palmer + Retrosheet, you are looking at a considerable amount of value add from 24/7 and other sources like Stats Inc.

      It's a really complicated area and Alan Schwarz's great book about baseball stats is a must read for anyone trying to understand just how messy it all is.



      On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Tangotiger <tom@...> wrote:
       

      > You know, in thinking about BDB, I realize now that the existence of BDB
      > has
      > allowed SABR to deprioritize discussions around making data downloads
      > available. Oddly enough, if BDB had formed within SABR instead of outside
      > of
      > it this probably would have happened long ago -- 800 members clamoring for
      > the functionality would have made an impression. Instead the board looks
      > at
      > the landscape of how baseball researchers needs are met and unmet and sees
      > that BDB exists, so why replicate it? As was pointed out earlier, the fact
      > that the Palmer data in BDB is circa 1993 and lacks a lot of corrections
      > Pete's made since then just doesn't make that much difference to most BDB
      > users.
      >

      I agree that the existence of BDB has the impact that FX cites.

      But if you have 800 BDB members who had no previous desire to join SABR
      then decide to join SABR (for really the express purpose of accessing the
      BDB), and generating 40,000$ in dues, then, yeah, that'll get attention.

      Setting that aside, what is the budget required to get a commercial
      license from SABR to make available a "gold standard" database? Would 200
      people contributing 5$ each be enough? Do we need 500 people doing so?
      1,000 people?

      And what would it take to get a commercial license of JUST the bio data?
      Since a bio committee already exists, what is the impediment of making
      THAT available next week?

      A minor league committee already exists. What is the commercial license
      for that, and what would it take to make that available next week?

      Tom




      --
      F. X. Flinn
      FXFlinn@gmail | 802-369-0069

    • Show all 12 messages in this topic