Jury Deliberations Begin in NFL 'Sunday Ticket' Class-Action Suit
As the long-running class-action lawsuit filed by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL reaches a crucial juncture, the jury is expected to begin deliberations on Wednesday. This follows both sides presenting their closing arguments on Monday.
The Case Against the NFL
In U.S. District Court, Judge Philip Gutierrez is set to hold a conference with attorneys from both sides on Tuesday morning to finalize instructions for the jury. The case pivots around allegations that the NFL violated antitrust laws by selling out-of-market Sunday afternoon games through the "Sunday Ticket" package at inflated prices while limiting competition by exclusively offering the package through a satellite provider.
The plaintiffs, representing 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses, claim that this exclusive package limited their options and forced them to pay higher prices. The lawsuit contends that the NFL's antitrust exemption for broadcasting does not apply to pay TV, only to over-the-air broadcasts.
Arguments from Both Sides
On Tuesday afternoon, Judge Gutierrez might hear a motion from the NFL to grant a judgment as a matter of law, arguing that the plaintiffs have failed to provide sufficient evidence. Stanford economics professor B. Douglas Bernheim, the NFL’s final witness, concluded his testimony on Monday. Bernheim reinforced the league's argument, stating that selling out-of-market games to DirecTV from 1994 to 2022, and subsequently to Google YouTube TV, benefits fans and maintains competitive balance on the playing field.
Countering Bernheim's testimony, Harvard professor Einer Elhauge, serving as the plaintiffs' rebuttal witness, stated that there are no significant links between the league's constraints making "Sunday Ticket" a premium package and fostering competitive balance. Elhauge testified that the $62.5 million each team receives annually from "Sunday Ticket" would not significantly impact the league's salary cap or individual teams' operating budgets. Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones also testified last week, admitting he wouldn’t support a salary cap if he could sell his out-of-market rights independently.
Potential Consequences
If the NFL is found liable, the jury could award damages of $7 billion, which could potentially triple to $21 billion due to the antitrust nature of the case. This possibility has significant implications for sports broadcasting and the legality of exclusive distribution deals. Such a verdict could force a reevaluation of how televised sports packages are marketed and sold, potentially opening the market to more competition and lower prices for consumers.
Originally filed in 2015 by the Mucky Duck sports bar in San Francisco, the lawsuit faced an initial dismissal in 2017. However, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which has jurisdiction over California and eight other states, reinstated the case two years later. Last year, Judge Gutierrez certified the proceedings as a class action, allowing it to move forward on behalf of millions of subscribers and thousands of businesses.
Next Steps
The upcoming deliberations will be closely watched as they represent a critical point in this long-standing legal battle. The jury, composed of five men and three women, will receive their final instructions from Judge Gutierrez on Wednesday morning before making their final arguments, with each side given 1 hour and 10 minutes for their closing statements. The plaintiffs have an additional 20 minutes reserved for rebuttal.
Regardless of the jury's decision, the losing party is anticipated to appeal the verdict, which could escalate the case to the 9th Circuit and possibly the Supreme Court. This process could significantly prolong the dispute and its resolution, leaving the sports broadcasting landscape in a state of uncertainty.
Conclusion
As the jury prepares to deliberate, the legal and sports worlds remain focused on the courtroom, awaiting a verdict that could potentially reshape the future of sports broadcasting and the legality of exclusive distribution deals. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications, affecting not only how sports packages are sold but also the broader market dynamics of televised sports.