The NFL has found that just as game rulings can be overturned, so can multi-billion-dollar court rulings.
The Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated a jury verdict finding the NFL liable in an antitrust lawsuit over its Sunday Ticket package. In doing so, it overturned a lower court decision that wiped out a $4.7bn award.
However, the ruling, made on 30 October, doesn’t reinstate the original damages figure. The appeals court ordered the lower court to restore the jury’s liability finding and hold a new trial to decide how much the NFL may owe.
Where did the lawsuit come from?
Stakeholders and supporters new to the NFL who have followed the league’s global expansion efforts in recent years likely aren’t familiar with the original case, which was filed in 2015 by a bar in San Francisco.
The Mucky Duck alleged the NFL’s agreements with broadcasters restricted competition and prevented fans from accessing out-of-market games through more affordable alternatives.
Before long, it was turned into a class action representing around 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses that purchased Sunday Ticket through DirecTV between 2011 and 2022.
Sunday Ticket is the NFL’s out-of-market subscription package, allowing fans to watch games that aren’t available through local television broadcasts. DirecTV distributed it before moving it to YouTube in 2023 under a seven-year deal.
In June 2024, a jury sided with subscribers, awarding $4.6bn to residential customers and a further $96.9m to commercial subscribers. Under federal antitrust laws, these damages can be trebled, potentially leading the NFL to pay more than $14bn.
However, US District Judge Philip Gutierrez overturned the ruling, saying the plaintiffs’ expert testimony was unreliable and the jury’s decision therefore couldn’t stand.
Why is it being looked at again and what comes next?
Coincidentally, the announcement came a day before Halloween, with the multi-billion-dollar lawsuit seemingly rising from the dead. However, it didn’t come out of nowhere.
The overturned ruling was appealed, with the argument that the judge overstepped by dismissing expert evidence the jury had already considered.
“Opinions are neither unfounded nor unreliable merely because they are impeachable,” said Circuit Court Judge Anthony Johnstone. “Such opinions are for the jury to weigh at trial. Once a jury does so, its verdict must stand unless it is clearly not supported by the evidence.”
Johnstone went on to say that the jury could debate whether college and professional football broadcasts were comparable and how out-of-market games might have been distributed without the NFL’s arrangements.
He also ruled that the amount owed by the NFL, which stood at $4.7bn, would need to be recalculated because it was not properly worked out to begin with.
In response to the news, the league said it was disappointed with the decision and is considering its options for further court review.
In a statement, the NFL said: “We continue to believe that our media distribution strategy — which features 100% of NFL games broadcast on free over-the-air television in the markets of the participating teams and national distribution of our most popular games, supplemented by many additional choices including RedZone, Sunday Ticket and NFL Plus — is by far the most fan-friendly distribution model in all of sports and entertainment.”
