Ryan M. Cassidy’s Post

US Antitrust Law: Class Action-Damages to College athletes: The deal covers three antitrust cases — including the class-action lawsuit known as House vs. the NCAA — that challenged NCAA compensation rules dating back to 2016. The plaintiffs claimed NCAA rules denied thousands of athletes the opportunity to earn millions of dollars off the use of their names, images and likenesses. The NCAA lifted its ban on athletes earning money off their fame through endorsement and sponsorship deals in 2021. #competitionlaw #antitrustlaw https://lnkd.in/g3pNVEiC

Today is the day many have been waiting for in the ongoing #HousevNCAA settlement discussions. 🏈 🏀 ⚽ ⚾ 🎾 🏑 🏐 👟 ⛳ 🏊♂️ At 2:30pm PT/5:30pm ET, U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken, will hear arguments from attorneys for the NCAA, Power 5 Conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12, & SEC), & athletes represented as part of the House, Hubbard & Carter antitrust litigations. They are seeking preliminary approval of the proposed settlement agreement. 📝 Terms of the proposed settlement agreement would completely reshape college sports. Among other changes, it allows revenue sharing starting in 2025-26 school year. It also obligates the NCAA and member schools to pay $2.8 billion in damages over 10 years ($500 million of which would go to Plaintiffs' attorneys). 👩⚖️ During the hearing, Judge Wilken will have the opportunity to question parties about the settlement terms. She must determine if the settlement is “fair, reasonable and adequate,” and has wide discretion. 📆 It will likely take at least several days, weeks, or even months for her to consider the proposed settlement terms and grant or deny the motion (or recommend changes). The decision can be appealed to the Ninth Circuit, and possibly to the U.S. Supreme Court. If settlement is preliminarily approved, there are more steps before any final approval is granted: 1️⃣ Affected athletes will be notified of settlement through postcard mailings & website (which will allow athletes to determine eligibility & amount they may receive. 2️⃣ Athletes have several months to opt out or raise further objections (if a redacted # of athletes opt out, it kills the deal) 3️⃣ Fairness hearing will be scheduled for athletes and others to raise objections to Judge before she grants final approval Formal objections have been submitted by plaintiffs in Colorado cases (Fontenot & Cornelio), current and former Division I women's athletes (rowers), Ivy league athletes, and the NCPA (objected after the deadline). HCU also attempted to intervene on the basis that schools in conferences not parties to the settlement (non P5) will likely foot a disproportionate amount of the bill for the damages, but it was rejected by the Court. Criticisms of the proposed settlement include: ❌not collectively bargained for by athletes ❌unfairly restricts future athletes (10 years into future) ❌far beyond the scope of underlying cases ❌conflicts of interest with attorneys bargaining for different groups of athletes ❌discrimination against women❌ #TitleIX implications ❌immigration law issues ❌attys' fee arrangements. Though one of the NCAA's goals for the proposed settlement was to avoid further litigation against the NCAA, this will not insulate NCAA from pending antitrust litigation, won't bar potential claims from future athletes and those who opt out, and will likely create more legal issues for the NCAA. Stay tuned for more #HouseSettlement updates as today’s hearing gets underway. 📷Photo Source: NCAA.org

I recently spoke with CBS Sports on #NIL. Here are the items I said to keep an eye on: (1) Does Congress ever pass legislation on the subject and will it include a section that affirmatively labels college athletes as not being employees? (2) What happens with the appeal on the Dartmouth basketball players' effort to unionize and collectively bargain for working conditions? (3) What will be the NLRB's decision in the pending action concerning UCLA and USC athletes? (4) Does Charlie Baker's proposal to allow colleges to directly compensate athletes for their NIL rights ever get passed? (5) How many states decide to follow in Virginia's footsteps and modify their NIL laws to allow schools to directly compensate athletes for their NIL rights despite an NCAA prohibition on same? (6) Will any pending lawsuit lead to a court's determination that athletes have been misclassified as not being employees, and what will be the economic consequences? Thoughts? #LinkedInSports https://lnkd.in/ej4XrRyz

The NCAA's transfer rule has never been a "hot button" issue for me because college athletes don't have "free agency" rights even if there are no transfer restrictions and the transfer rule has its pluses and minuses. Nevertheless, here are my questions about this lawsuit: 1. Is this lawsuit about college athletes' rights or is it about, as the Ohio AG says, college sports being "treated under the same kinds of laws and competition requirements other businesses have to live by"? If it's the latter, then getting rid of the transfer rule certainly wouldn't be accomplishing that objective whatsoever because other businesses have to live by a free market compensation system and they don't sell a product of league sports competition [are there any league sports that don't have a transfer rule in some shape or form?]. 2. How does the outcome of this lawsuit affect transfer rules at the high school level? And this is why the answer to the first question matters. If it's about athletes' rights then there really is no justification for high school athletic association rules either. If the state legislatures and AGs think high school athletes have "NIL" rights like the college athletes, then why not transfer rights too? #ncaa #transferstudents #highschoolsports https://lnkd.in/gPD2hqsg

With collegiate name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights becoming more prevalent, legal questions on how athletes' freedom to exploit those rights, and how regulation of those freedoms work, are also on the rise. Allison First discusses how the Transfer Rule works in this new era of athlete freedom, the Department of Justice's involvement in regulating athlete transfers, and if the Transfer Rule can survive an antitrust challenge. https://lnkd.in/gZ5h7-K7

New details continue to emerge on the potential settlement of the House v NCAA case. As has been discussed, the settlement would include an annual cap on revenue sharing payments to a school’s athletes of around $20 million (20% of the average Power 4 school’s athletics revenue). Capping these payments for athletes that aren’t class members in the lawsuit has antitrust issues. To try and address this, a process is being discussed where athletes who aren’t class members (current HS athletes, for example) could annually opt in or object to the revenue sharing terms. Putting aside whether this novel approach solves the antitrust issues, it seems the new athletes would need to be organized to effectively opt into or object to the settlement’s rev sharing terms in an annual basis. Otherwise, this process seems like a disaster waiting to happen. The approach seems designed to avoid athletes having to collectively bargain the revenue sharing terms. But that issue (which includes employment of college athletes) will continue to be litigated in federal court and won’t be solved by this settlement. #ncaa #collegeathletes #collegeathletics #sportslaw #LinkedInSports https://lnkd.in/gpb8JQnV

This will be interesting to watch, though not sure the ramifications beyond college sports. Regardless of the outcome, one important subtext will be compliance with Title IX! https://lnkd.in/g5idpNp7

Several states are challenging an NCAA rule that unjustifiably restrains the ability of college athletes to engage in the market for their labor as NCAA Division I college athletes. Clark Hill Law provides the details. #sportslaw #ncaa #collegeathletics

Boil this down to the basics: (1) A lot of revenue is being generated by revenue generating sports in college athletics; (2) For years, schools, conferences, and the NCAA have hid behind the notion of "amateurism" to not compensate the athletes (product) generating the revenue; (3) Smart athletes and lawyers figured out that what the schools, conferences and NCAA were doing was a clear antitrust violation; (4) the athletes that are generating the revenue should receive compensation for their production. How we get there is a challenge. But, congressional involvement seems like a bad idea. Letting the free market decide seems like a much better solution than congressional interference. My $0.02. #sportsbiz #collegesports https://lnkd.in/ew2f682n

👨⚖️ Wow! This seems kind of personal, or maybe not! But the fact remains that courtrooms are playing an important role in reshaping the sports industry with decisions that challenge powerful interests. ⚖ From dismissing a $4.7 billion NFL case to blocking UFC and NCAA settlements, judges are wielding significant influence over league operations, antitrust disputes, and athlete rights. Unlike commissioners, judges don't cater to specific stakeholders, making their decisions unpredictable yet pivotal in transforming how sports are governed and consumed. This trend of courtrooms becoming arenas for sports governance is intensifying! As the saying goes, 'That government is best which governs least,' but judges are playing a surprisingly significant role in regulating sports governance today! #SportsLaw #SportsBusiness #JudicialImpact #AthleteRights #SportsGovernance #CourtroomDecisions #AntitrustLaw #SportsIndustry #LawAndSports #ChangingTheGame #LegalTrends #SportsLitigation