Judicial Frustrations Emerge in NFL "Sunday Ticket" Antitrust Case
LOS ANGELES -- The federal judge overseeing the class-action lawsuit filed by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL displayed evident frustration on Tuesday with the handling of the case by the plaintiffs' attorneys.
Judge Takes Issue with Plaintiffs' Approach
Before Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones took the stand for a second day of testimony, U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez emphasized the straightforward nature of the case. He pointed out the understandable frustration of a Seattle Seahawks fan living in Los Angeles who cannot watch their favorite team without purchasing a subscription for all the Sunday afternoon out-of-market games.
The class-action lawsuit represents 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses who paid for the package of out-of-market games from the 2011 through 2022 seasons. The lawsuit claims that the NFL violated antitrust laws by selling its package of Sunday games aired on CBS and Fox at an inflated price. Furthermore, subscribers argue that the league restricted competition by offering "Sunday Ticket" exclusively through a satellite provider.
NFL's Stance
The NFL firmly maintains that it has the right to sell "Sunday Ticket" under its antitrust exemption for broadcasting. However, the plaintiffs counter that this exemption only applies to over-the-air broadcasts and not pay TV.
If the NFL is found liable, a jury could award up to $7 billion in damages. This figure could triple to $21 billion, typical in antitrust cases where triple damages can be imposed.
Tuesday marked another instance of Judge Gutierrez expressing frustration with the plaintiffs' side. On Monday, he reprimanded their attorneys for repeatedly describing past testimony, which he deemed a waste of time.
Jones' Testimony and Legal History
Before Jones resumed his testimony, Gutierrez expressed doubts about the plaintiffs' attorneys referencing Jerry Jones' 1995 lawsuit against the NFL. This lawsuit challenged the league's licensing and sponsorship procedures, a case that eventually settled out of court. Jones had asserted that while he supported the league's model for negotiating television contracts and revenue-sharing agreements, he contested its licensing and sponsorship practices.
When asked if teams should be able to sell their out-of-market television rights, Jones responded that they should not, as it "would undermine the free TV model we have now."
Broadcast Executives Weigh In
Retired CBS Sports chairman Sean McManus also took the stand, reiterating his long-standing opposition to "Sunday Ticket" and the NFL's Red Zone channel. McManus believes that "Sunday Ticket" infringes on CBS's exclusivity in local markets. CBS and Fox both requested during negotiations that "Sunday Ticket" be sold as a premium package.
DirecTV, not the NFL, set the prices during the class-action period. The league's contracts with CBS and Fox include stipulations that the "resale packages (Sunday Ticket) are to be marketed as premium products for avid league fans that satisfy complementary demand to the offering of in-market games." Additional language prohibits selling individual games on a pay-per-view basis.
From 1994 through 2022, the NFL received a rights fee from DirecTV for the package. Starting last year, Google's YouTube TV acquired "Sunday Ticket" rights for seven seasons.
Contrasting Approaches from Other Leagues
During a deposition, DirecTV marketing official Jamie Dyckes noted that MLB, the NBA, and the NHL had suggested retail prices for their out-of-market packages. Dyckes added that revenue sharing existed between the leagues and the carriers, as their packages were distributed across multiple platforms.
Testimony is scheduled to continue on Thursday, with closing statements expected early next week. Judge Gutierrez mentioned he might consider invoking a rule that allows the court to find that a jury lacks sufficient evidence to rule for a party in a case.
Quotes Reflecting Growing Tensions
Gutierrez candidly admitted, "I'm struggling with the plaintiffs' case." His comments throughout the proceedings have reflected his mounting frustrations. He remarked, "The way you have tried this case is far from simple." He also noted, "This case has turned into 25 hours of depositions and gobbledygook," adding, "This case has gone in a direction it shouldn't have gone."
As the case progresses, all eyes will remain on the courtroom. Many are anticipating whether the plaintiffs' attorneys can present a compelling argument that aligns with the straightforward premise Judge Gutierrez initially outlined.