Los Angeles — Attorneys representing a class action against the NFL have blasted the league’s attempts to challenge a jury’s decision which ordered it to pay $4.7 billion for alleged antitrust violations connected to its Sunday Ticket package. Lawyers argued that the league is unjustifiably trying to question the integrity of the jury’s calculations and interpretations.
The controversy stems from a case where more than 2.4 million residential subscribers and over 48,000 commercial establishments, like restaurants and bars, claimed that the NFL’s Sunday Ticket service stifled competition and led to overcharges by limiting broadcast options. The plaintiffs argued this configuration prevented a more open distribution similar to that of college football, which predominantly uses free TV and basic cable channels without needing extra subscription fees.
The NFL, on the other hand, has countered this argument by categorizing the jury’s decision as illogical, emphasizing that the economic definitions and calculations were grossly misinterpreted. They contended that the jury wrongly assumed that if not for the Sunday Ticket, NFL games would be available at significantly lower costs or even for free, impacting the jury’s damage calculations.
In a detailed response via a 36-page brief, the class action’s attorneys defended the $4.7 billion verdict, pointing out that it was less than the $7 billion initially sought. They noted the jury awarded $4.6 billion to residential subscribers and $97 million to commercial subscribers, indicating a thorough and considered approach by jurors over the three-week trial, which saw testimony from 27 witnesses and included 82 exhibits.
The plaintiff’s legal team highlighted discrepancies in how the NFL interpreted the jury’s calculation method, refuting the league’s claim that jurors simply subtracted actual average costs from higher list prices to assess damages. They suggested alternative interpretations might have been considered by jurors, including adjustments for various discounts provided to subscribers.
Moreover, the briefing addressed issues raised about the supposed objectivity of the jury, particularly focusing on a dispute over a juror whose household had a subscription to Sunday Ticket. The NFL’s effort to dismiss this juror was previously overridden by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez, who ruled the juror and their spouse were not class members and thus had no financial stake in the outcome.
The NFL’s potential legal remedies could see the league facing even more severe financial consequences. The league has expressed concerns that Judge Gutierrez might triple the damages to $14.1 billion and impose a bond equaling the damages awarded before the NFL could proceed with an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Additionally, the NFL fears it may be forced to overhaul its broadcasting agreements with partner networks.
Judge Gutierrez is scheduled to preside over a hearing on July 31, where further arguments will be heard. This case not only impacts the NFL and its lucrative contracts but could also reshape sports broadcasting and ticket sales dynamics in the U.S., potentially setting a significant legal precedent for how professional sports leagues can package and sell broadcast rights.