Los Angeles — In a landmark decision on Thursday, a U.S. District Court jury found the National Football League liable for nearly $4.8 billion in damages for violating antitrust laws with its “Sunday Ticket” service. This ruling could set a significant precedent affecting how professional sports leagues distribute their games.
The legal battle has centered on accusations that the NFL overcharged for the broadcast rights to out-of-market games, available exclusively through DirecTV since 1994 until 2022. The plaintiffs, including 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 business entities, argued that this setup stifled competition and kept prices artificially high.
The damages awarded include $4.7 billion to residential customers and $96 million to businesses. These amounts could triple under federal antitrust statutes, potentially leading to a staggering $14.39 billion liability for the NFL. This would translate into a cost of approximately $449.6 million per NFL team, should the damages be upheld on appeal.
The NFL expressed profound disappointment with the verdict and announced intentions to challenge the decision through the appellate courts. The league’s statement emphasized their belief in a fan-friendly distribution model that combines national broadcast of premier games and local airing of matches involving home teams, with the addition of exclusive content such as NFL RedZone and NFL+.
During the three-week trial, testimonies from high-profile figures including NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones painted a complex picture of the league’s broadcasting strategies. Plaintiffs’ attorney Bill Carmody argued forcefully against the NFL, and at one point, presented a 2017 memo indicating the league considered alternate broadcast models without “Sunday Ticket.”
Deliberations by the jury of five men and three women took nearly five hours before reaching their verdict. U.S. District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez set a date to hear post-trial motions requesting a judicial review on the grounds the plaintiffs had not sufficiently proven their case.
Further complicating matters, payment of damages and any restructuring of the “Sunday Ticket” offerings are on hold, pending the resolution of the NFL’s appeals. This legal battle highlights a broader debate over sports broadcasting rights and the balance between lucrative exclusive contracts and antitrust regulations advocating for consumer-friendly practices.
The repercussions of this case extend beyond football, drawing attention from other leagues like MLB, NBA, and NHL, which also sell out-of-market packages but do so through multiple networks and share revenue with subscribers. These leagues are undoubtedly assessing their practices amidst potential shifts in legal interpretations of competition laws.
As for the NFL’s future distribution strategy, the recent shift from DirecTV to a seven-year agreement with Google’s YouTube TV for broadcasting “Sunday Ticket” starting from the 2025 season signals a transition in how consumers will access their favorite sports content. This evolution might be influenced further depending on the outcome of the NFL’s appeals.
This case initially prompted by a 2015 lawsuit from the Mucky Duck sports bar in San Francisco, and its journey through the legal system underscores ongoing tensions between content providers and consumers, setting the stage for potentially transformative changes in the sports broadcasting landscape. As it progresses, industry insiders and fans alike are poised to see how these legal challenges will reshape their viewing experiences.