Tag Archives: antitrust

Judge Preliminarily Approves NCAA’s $209 Million Antitrust Settlement

A U.S. District judge has granted preliminary approval for a $208.7 million settlement in the antitrust lawsuit between student-athletes and the NCAA/eleven athletic conferences. The approval came after revisions were added to exclude claims in other athletes’ suits and to modify class definitions. As background, the student-athletes’ original complaint, filed in 2014, challenged the NCAA’s rules prohibiting universities from paying students a larger sum than a full grant-in-aid — which covers the up to the full cost of university attendance. Not only did the…

Continue Reading....

Show Me the Money: NCAA Agrees to Pay Over $200 Million to Former Student Athletes

In a historic moment, the NCAA agreed to settle a portion of a massive class-action lawsuit earlier this month. The total amount — $208.7 million — was agreed to by the NCAA to remedy student athletes who competed prior to January 2015, when the five major college athletic conferences, including the ACC, SEC, Big Ten, Pac-12, and Big 12, voted to increase the amount of an athletic scholarship to cover the cost of attending a university. The settlement requires the payment of roughly $6,700 dollars…

Continue Reading....

The NCAA Continues to Block Student-Athletes From Transferring Universities: Protecting Fair Play or Violating Antitrust Laws?

Former Northern Illinois University football player, Peter Deppe, filed suit against the NCAA in which he alleged that the NCAA’s “year-in-residence” rule violates antitrust laws. NIU recruited Deppe as a walk-on punter, but designated him as a red shirt player for his first year. In August 2014, the special teams coach told Deppe that beginning in January 2015, he would receive an athletic-scholarship and take over as the starting punter. However, the special teams coach transferred schools, and NIU’s head coach informed Deppe that…

Continue Reading....

Desperate Attempt From Caddies to Reverse Antitrust Class Action Dismissal

The Professional Golf Association (PGA) Tour caddies are taking another swing at gaining revenue for advertisements on a caddy’s bib. The class action antirust case, of which over 150 caddies are involved, filed an appeal with the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. They are requesting the court to overturn the district court’s dismissal of their complaint concerning advertising logos and abuses made by the PGA Tour. This appeal stems from a lawsuit filed in January 2015. The caddies claim the PGA Tour violated and…

Continue Reading....

Texas Basketball Referee Fights Back in Antitrust Suit

Charles Brasier, a former high school basketball official, is suing Wichita Falls Area Basketball Officials Association (WFABOA), alleging deprivation of property without due process and various antitrust violations including the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, and Texas antitrust law. In February, Brasier claimed to have been unlawfully stripped of his certification, preventing him from refereeing the 2015-16 high school boys and girls basketball season. Brasier alleges that he attempted but failed to create a rival referee association within the University Interscholastic League (UIL). As a result,…

Continue Reading....

NCAA Victory: Order to Post $42 Million Bond Lifted

On Friday, May 23, 2016, California U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken ruled in favor of the NCAA’s fee bond appeal, granting the organization’s request to not post bond while it appeals the O’Bannon decision. The NCAA filed the fee bond appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court on May 10, 2016, arguing that it was unnecessary to reserve more than $42 million in attorneys’ fees and costs associated with the O’Bannon case. The NCAA claimed that the fee bond would place undue detriment on the organization,…

Continue Reading....

NCAA Conferences Deny Withholding Documents in Athletes Antitrust Lawsuit

Former student-athletes who filed antitrust claims against the NCAA for compensation beyond the costs of attending college have accused the NCAA conferences of unreasonably withholding documents during discovery. The lawsuit challenges bylaws that prevent universities from paying athletes beyond the costs of attending college. In 2014, a California federal judge refused to dismiss the suit; however, it ruled that this matter should be handled separately from the suit over the athletes’ likeness. On March 11, 2016, the athletes filed a motion for a discovery…

Continue Reading....

Recent Antitrust Settlement a Win-Win for MLB and Sports Fans

Joseph Hanna, Chair of Goldberg Segalla’s Sports and Entertainment Law Practice Group, weighed in on a recent settlement between Major League Baseball and sports fans over territorial blackouts and high prices for sports packages. The settlement came just moments before a trial was set to begin on Tuesday, January 19, 2016. As Joe concludes in the article for Law360, “They could have gone to trial, and who knows how it would have been decided. The opportunity to settle a case and have what…

Continue Reading....

Amazon Investigated For E-Book Antitrust Violations

Oh how the tables have turned for retail giant Amazon.com.  Three years ago, Amazon pushed for an antitrust investigation of Apple for e-book price fixing.  Now, however, regulators in the European Union have opened an e-book anti-trust investigation into Amazon. On June 11, 2015 the European Commission announced that it was formally investigating Amazon’s business practices related to its e-book business.  Of particular focus are Amazon’s contracts with European publishers.  Under the terms of those agreements, publishers are required to inform Amazon if the publishers…

Continue Reading....

Flag on the Play: NFL, AP Urge Court to Close Book on Photographers’ Antitrust Suit

On Friday, May 29, the National Football League and the Associated Press told a New York federal court that the seven photographers bringing a copyright and antitrust suit had lost their right to file a revised complaint.  In March, U.S. District Judge Robert Sweet dismissed the photographers’ claims, but gave them twenty days to file a new complaint.  The parties then agreed to a three-week extension for the amended pleadings to be filed, but the photographers failed to meet the May 11 deadline. Rather…

Continue Reading....