New eras bring new questions. The dot.com era is no different. In sports, some of those questions are now in court or being bandied about around bargaining tables.

Some NFL coaches, including former head coach Buddy Ryan of the Philadelphia Eagles, have filed suit against a Web site that was selling college and pro football playbooks. The coaches suing say they put those playbooks together and have the rights to the contents. Those selling the books said they were just trying to get books into the hands of coaches who did not have access to decent playbooks.

The issues reflect those in the music industry where there are Web sites that allow anyone to download just about any music ever recorded. The issue is, should people be allowed to do so without having to pay for it?

Sports radio and television leaders are extremely concerned about what might happen to all those sporting events that are now on Web sites. There is a concerted effort to ensure the Web sites are under the control of the teams or leagues that have the rights to the games.

Nevertheless, the ability to take the audio and video of sports events and place them on a Web site with universal access is there. Teams and stations are vigilant in guarding their sites from raids. They mean it when you hear that “disclaimer” read during games: “The pictures, descriptions and accounts of this game may not be retransmitted or reproduced in any way without the express written consent of the rights holder.”

Yet, at the same time, the teams, leagues, and networks want to be able to take a sports broadcast and sell it as many times as possible. That means selling separate rights and/or commercials for use on the Internet, numerous Web sites, international radio and TV feeds, and any other outlet you can imagine.

That brings a trickle-down argument from the people who work the shows, from announcers to camera people to producers and directors. If the program is to be used for other than the original broadcast site, should the workers be paid additional sums? They argue they have as much right to compensation for the additional use as do the rights holders.

In the broadcast industry there is historical support for such a position since residuals have long been a part of the business. That means that if a commercial, movie, or program is aired more times than the original agreement, those in the program receive a set sum for each additional airing.

We are all familiar with the enormous amounts made by those involved in the TV shows that go into syndication. Money was paid when the programs were originally done and more is made each time the show is rerun in syndication.

In this dot.com world, one doesn’t have to wait for syndication for reuse of a program, including sporting events. Instead, the live broadcast can appear of an infinite variety of sites. Who has the use rights to these broadcasts and who should be paid for their participation, are questions of the dot.com world.

Log on, Scotty, and we’ll try and find the answers.

NEWS columnist Gary Thorne, an Old Town native, is an ESPN and CBS broadcaster.