Los Angeles, CA — In a landmark ruling, the NFL has been directed by a Los Angeles jury to pay approximately $4.7 billion in damages for breaching antitrust laws in connection with its DirecTV “Sunday Ticket” service. This decision arrived after allegations that the league had improperly collaborated with DirecTV and broadcast partners CBS and Fox, to inflate the service’s pricing.
The unanimous conclusion by the jury, reached after around five hours of deliberations spread over two days, concluded the three-week trial featuring high-profile testimony from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and Cowboys owner Jerry Jones. The lawsuit was initially filed by a class consisting of over 2.4 million residential subscribers and more than 48,000 commercial entities, such as bars and restaurants that offer game broadcasts.
Under the damages awarded, $96 million is earmarked for commercial businesses, while the vast majority—over $4 billion—is set aside for residential customers who subscribed to the “Sunday Ticket” package.
Responding to the verdict, an NFL spokesperson expressed disappointment, stating, “We continue to believe that our media distribution strategy — integrating free over-the-air broadcasts in team markets, alongside national distribution of marquee matchups, augmented by options like RedZone, Sunday Ticket, and NFL+ — represents the most consumer-centric model in sports and entertainment.” The spokesperson added that the NFL plans to challenge the outcome, maintaining that the claims of the class action were unfounded.
On the other side, Bill Carmody, the leading attorney for the plaintiffs, hailed the judgment as a triumph for consumers across the nation. “This verdict underscores the importance of antitrust laws which safeguard consumers from being overcharged,” Carmody remarked, celebrating the enforcement of these regulations by the jury.
The litigation revealed tensions between maintaining lucrative partnerships with broadcast and streaming services and adhering to legal standards that prevent monopolistic practices. The case’s resolution might prompt a reassessment of how sports leagues package and sell broadcast rights in the era of streaming and digital consumption.
Looking ahead, the NFL faces significant legal hurdles. The league is set to request that Judge Philip Gutierrez dismiss the jury’s ruling as a matter of law in a hearing scheduled for July 31. Should this move prove unsuccessful, the NFL anticipates appealing the decision both to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and potentially, the U-based U.S. Supreme Court.
This judgment could set a precedent for how sports leagues engage in broadcast agreements and manage partnerships with other media entities. Moreover, it puts a spotlight on the balance sports organizations must maintain between maximizing revenue from media rights and adhering to federal antitrust laws designed to protect consumer interests. As the NFL prepares for its next legal moves, the broader implications for sports broadcasting and rights negotiations remain a poignant topic for discussion in legal and sports business circles alike.