The Premier league season might be due to start this coming weekend, but for some media organisations things have already kicked off in a fairly major way.
You may have noticed when you picked up the papers over the last few days that pictures and copy from football league matches has been a bit thin on the ground. Your eyes do not deceive you: It's because of a dispute over the terms and conditions for coverage of live matches that newspapers, websites and wire agencies have been asked to sign up to.
The previous agreement, set up six years ago, has now expired, and rather a lot has changed since then in terms of platforms, available content and customer expectations: In 2005, 'Twitter' was what birds did outside your bedroom window of a morning.
The media world has marched on and, so says everyone involved, must this new agreement.
The trouble is deciding just how far it should go. The Premier and Football leagues say they are in favour of the new deal removing some of the existing reporting restrictions, but their view of the world isn't as radical as the papers, agencies and websites would like.
What's developing is something of a Mexican stand-off, with on the one hand the vast majority of clubs locking out those media organisations who're in dispute, and on the other, the papers withholding coverage.
The clubs like the publicity their sponsors get via the papers and websites reportage of matches, and the brilliant eye catching pictures that draw us in.
What they don't want is their commercial revenues being hit by the availability of free content, like live text updates, interactive services and photos that compete with their own offers, and those of their partners.
The News Media Coalition, which represents many of those currently locked out in this dispute, makes a manifesto pledge to, 'ensure that the right and duty of the News Media to report any and all matters of public interest, freely and without interference, is guaranteed and defended at all times.'
So this dispute could be presented as a press freedom issue. In reality, it's a negotiation, and heels are firmly dug in: In a joint statement last week, the Leagues gave a cuffing to the news organisations over their reluctance to sign the deal offered, describing this as, 'unfortunate,' and, 'serving no-one's interests.'
They did however say they were open to further discussions, which of course is the reality: The Leagues and the clubs they represent need the media just as much as the media need them. What they're arguing over is the equivalent of the pre-nuptial agreement. The desire for marriage is a foregone conclusion.
In the meantime, if you find yourself short of a match report and some pictures, might I make so bold as to point you in the direction of the BBC Sport football page.