The Jury Deliberates in High-Stakes NFL 'Sunday Ticket' Class-Action Lawsuit
The Jury Deliberates in High-Stakes NFL "Sunday Ticket" Class-Action Lawsuit
The class-action lawsuit lodged by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL has reached a pivotal moment as the jury is slated to begin deliberations on Wednesday. This follows the conclusion of both sides' arguments on Monday.
The legal proceedings are being presided over by U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez, who is scheduled to meet with attorneys from both camps on Tuesday morning to finalize jury instructions. Later that day, Gutierrez is expected to consider a motion from the NFL that argues the plaintiffs have failed to provide sufficient evidence, asking for a judgment in favor of the league as a matter of law.
On Wednesday morning, Gutierrez will present the final instructions to the jury, which is composed of five men and three women. Both sides will then have 1 hour and 10 minutes each to make their closing statements, with the plaintiffs allocated an additional 20 minutes for rebuttal.
Key Witnesses and Testimonies
The NFL rounded off its case with testimony from Stanford economics professor B. Douglas Bernheim, who reiterated the league's stance that selling out-of-market Sunday afternoon games to DirecTV (1994-2022) and more recently to Google YouTube TV, benefits fans and ensures competitive balance in the league.
Professor Bernheim faced counterarguments from Harvard professor Einer Elhauge, who appeared as the plaintiffs' rebuttal witness. Elhauge contested that the league’s constraints to bundle "Sunday Ticket" as a premium package do not significantly foster competitive balance. Additionally, Elhauge argued that the approximate $62.5 million each team receives annually from "Sunday Ticket" does not have a dramatic impact on the league’s salary cap or individual teams' operating budgets.
Last week, Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones also testified, revealing that he would not support a salary cap if he had the opportunity to sell his out-of-market rights independently.
The Legal Battle's Background and Stakes
This class action lawsuit involves 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses who purchased the out-of-market games package from the 2011 through 2022 seasons. The plaintiffs accuse the NFL of violating antitrust laws by monopolizing its package of Sunday games aired on CBS and Fox, selling it at inflated prices and limiting competition by exclusively offering "Sunday Ticket" through DirecTV and later YouTube TV.
The NFL contends its right to sell "Sunday Ticket" stems from its antitrust exemption for broadcasting. However, the plaintiffs argue that this exemption only applies to over-the-air broadcasts, not pay TV.
Should the jury find the NFL liable, the potential damages could be astronomical, possibly reaching $7 billion, a figure that could be tripled to $21 billion due to the antitrust nature of the case.
A Long Road to the Courtroom
Originally filed by the Mucky Duck sports bar in San Francisco in 2015, the lawsuit was dismissed in 2017 before being reinstated by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals two years later. Last year, Judge Gutierrez sanctioned the proceeding as a class action, giving it broader implications for millions of subscribers and thousands of businesses.
Regardless of the verdict, the decision is likely to be appealed by the losing side, potentially escalating the case to the 9th Circuit and perhaps even the Supreme Court.
Implications for the Future
As the jury prepares for deliberation, the anticipation is palpable. The outcome of this trial could not only reshape the landscape of sports broadcasting but also question the legality of exclusive distribution deals struck by professional sports leagues. The final verdict will inevitably set a precedent that could reverberate across the sports industry and beyond.
With all eyes focused on the courtroom, stakeholders from fans to business owners await a decision that could redefine how they experience televised sports. The stakes are high, and the ramifications substantial, as the jury deliberates on a case that has been years in the making.
