The jury in the class-action lawsuit filed by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL is anticipated to begin deliberations on Wednesday after both sides concluded their cases on Monday. This legal battle, marked by complex antitrust issues and the economic implications of sports broadcasting rights, could potentially reshape the landscape of televised sports.
Final Preparations Before Deliberation
U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez is scheduled to hold a conference with attorneys from both sides on Tuesday morning to finalize jury instructions. This meeting sets the stage for a crucial session on Tuesday afternoon, where Gutierrez might entertain a motion from the NFL to grant judgment as a matter of law to the league, arguing that the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence.
On Wednesday morning, the judge will present the final instructions to the jury, comprised of five men and three women, paving the way for closing arguments. Each side is allocated 1 hour and 10 minutes for their closing statements, with plaintiffs having an additional 20 minutes reserved for rebuttal.
Competing Economic Testimonies
The NFL's final witness, Stanford economics professor B. Douglas Bernheim, concluded his testimony on Monday after beginning last Thursday. Bernheim supported the NFL's stance that selling out-of-market Sunday afternoon games on Fox and CBS to DirecTV from 1994 to 2022, and subsequently to Google YouTube TV, benefits fans and ensures competitive balance on the playing field.
Countering Bernheim, Harvard professor Einer Elhauge, the plaintiffs' rebuttal witness, argued that there are no significant links between the league's constraints to make "Sunday Ticket" a premium package and fostering competitive balance. Elhauge testified that the approximately $62.5 million each team receives annually from "Sunday Ticket" would not dramatically impact the league's salary cap or individual teams' operating budgets.
Adding more weight to the discussion, Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones testified last week, stating he wouldn’t support a salary cap if he could sell his out-of-market rights independently.
The Core of the Lawsuit
This class action represents 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses that purchased the out-of-market games package from the 2011 through 2022 seasons. The plaintiffs claim that the NFL violated antitrust laws by selling its package of Sunday games aired on CBS and Fox at inflated prices while limiting competition by exclusively offering "Sunday Ticket" through a satellite provider.
The NFL contends that it retains the right to sell "Sunday Ticket" under its antitrust exemption for broadcasting. However, the plaintiffs argue that this exemption only applies to over-the-air broadcasts, not pay TV. If found liable, the jury could award damages of $7 billion, a figure that could triple to $21 billion due to the antitrust nature of the case.
A Long Road to Trial
Originally filed in 2015 by the Mucky Duck sports bar in San Francisco, the lawsuit faced initial dismissal in 2017. However, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, with jurisdiction over California and eight other states, reinstated the case two years later. Judge Gutierrez sanctioned the proceeding as a class action last year, allowing the trial to move forward.
Regardless of the decision, the losing side is expected to appeal the verdict, potentially escalating the case to the 9th Circuit and possibly the Supreme Court. This ongoing legal saga has significant implications for the future of sports broadcasting and the legality of exclusive distribution deals.
A Pivotal Moment in Sports Broadcasting
The upcoming deliberations mark a critical juncture in this long-standing legal battle. As the jury prepares to deliberate, all eyes remain focused on the courtroom, eagerly awaiting a verdict that could reshape the landscape of televised sports. The outcome could influence how sports leagues negotiate broadcasting rights and distribute their content to audiences, either fostering more competition or reinforcing current exclusive agreements.
The decision reached in this case will set a precedent for future legal considerations surrounding antitrust laws and broadcasting rights in sports. As stakeholders across the industry watch closely, the ramifications of this case will likely reverberate through the world of sports and entertainment.