Federal Judge Expresses Frustration Over NFL 'Sunday Ticket' Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES -- The class-action lawsuit filed by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL saw an unexpected twist on Tuesday, as U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez voiced his frustrations with the plaintiffs' attorneys' handling of the case. The lawsuit, representing 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses, claims that the NFL broke antitrust laws by selling its package of Sunday games aired on CBS and Fox at an inflated price. Additionally, the subscribers argue that the league restricted competition by offering "Sunday Ticket" only through a satellite provider.
Judge Gutierrez's Frustrations
Before Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones took the stand for a second day of testimony, Judge Gutierrez made it clear that the case's premise was straightforward. He noted the understandable frustration of a Seattle Seahawks fan living in Los Angeles who cannot watch their favorite team without buying a subscription for all the Sunday afternoon out-of-market games. He expressed his dissatisfaction with how the plaintiffs' attorneys presented their case, stating, "I'm struggling with the plaintiffs' case."
On Monday, Judge Gutierrez admonished the attorneys for repeatedly describing past testimony, which he deemed a waste of time. "The way you have tried this case is far from simple," he remarked, adding, "This case has turned into 25 hours of depositions and gobbledygook." His stern words underscored the mounting pressure on the plaintiffs' attorneys to present a compelling argument that aligns with the straightforward premise he initially outlined.
Jerry Jones and Licensing Dispute
As Jones resumed his testimony, Gutierrez expressed doubts about the plaintiffs' attorneys citing Jerry Jones' 1994 lawsuit against the NFL, which challenged the league's licensing and sponsorship procedures. Jones filed the lawsuit asserting that while he supported the league's model for negotiating television contracts and revenue-sharing agreements in place, he contested its licensing and sponsorship procedures. Eventually, both sides settled out of court.
When asked if teams should be able to sell their out-of-market television rights, Jones replied that they should not, as it "would undermine the free TV model we have now."
Sean McManus's Stance
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 the exclusivity CBS has in local markets. Both CBS and Fox 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 has language in its television contracts with CBS and Fox that stipulates 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.
DirecTV and Revenue Sharing
From 1994 through 2022, the NFL received a rights fee from DirecTV for the package. Last year, Google's YouTube TV acquired "Sunday Ticket" rights for seven seasons. During a deposition, DirecTV marketing official Jamie Dyckes stated that MLB, the NBA, and the NHL had a suggested retail price for their out-of-market packages. Dyckes added that there was revenue sharing between the leagues and the carriers, as their packages were distributed across multiple platforms.
Potential Consequences
Should the NFL be found liable, a jury could award up to $7 billion in damages. This figure could balloon to $21 billion because antitrust cases can result in triple damages. Judge Gutierrez mentioned he would consider invoking a rule allowing the court to find that a jury lacks sufficient evidence to rule for a party in a case. Testimony will continue Thursday, with closing statements scheduled for early next week.
As the case progresses, all eyes will remain on the courtroom, anticipating whether the plaintiffs' attorneys can present a more compelling argument. The stakes are high, and the outcome of this lawsuit could have significant implications for the way sports broadcasting rights are handled in the future.