IBJNews

EA Sports to settle with NCAA athletes for $40 million

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A $40 million settlement has been completed that will pay college football and basketball players dating to 2003 for the use of their likenesses in NCAA-branded video games.

The payouts could go to more than 100,000 athletes, including some current players, who were either on college rosters or had their images used in videogames made by Electronic Arts featuring college teams. Lawyers for the plaintiffs say it would be the first time college athletes will be paid for the commercial use of their images.

Depending on how many athletes apply for the settlement, the payments could range from as little as $48 for each year an athlete was on a roster to $951 for each year the image of an athlete was used in a videogame.

"We're incredibly pleased with the results of this settlement and the opportunity to right a huge wrong enacted by the Indianapolis-based NCAA and EA against these players and their rights of publicity," said Steve Berman, one of the lead attorneys in the case. "We've fought against intense legal hurdles since filing this case in 2009 and to see this case come to fruition is a certain victory."

The settlement is with Electronic Arts and Collegiate Licensing Co., which licenses and markets college sports, and does not include the NCAA. The case against the NCAA is scheduled for trial early next year.

Plaintiffs in the case, which dates to 2009, contend the NCAA conspired with Electronic Arts and Collegiate Licensing Co. to illegally use their images in videogames.

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken still must approve the proposed settlement, which comes on the eve of a major antitrust trial against the NCAA that could reshape the way college sports operate. That case, featuring former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon and others as lead plaintiffs, goes to trial June 9 in Oakland, California.

According to documents filed with the court late Friday, attorneys for O'Bannon and 20 other plaintiffs say they have already run up legal fees exceeding $30 million and expenses of more than $4 million in pressing their case. They are seeking an injunction that would stop the NCAA from enforcing rules that prohibit athletes from profiting from their play in college.

O'Bannon, who led UCLA to a national title in 1995, is also part of the group settling with EA Sports and Collegiate Licensing Co. Also covered by the settlement are suits brought by former Arizona State quarterback Sam Keller, former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston and former Rutgers player Ryan Hart.

According to the filing, a pool of money will be available to players after attorneys take 33 percent of the proposed settlement and up to $2.5 million in expenses. Named plaintiffs like O'Bannon and Keller will receive $15,000, while others who joined the suit later would get $2,500 or $5,000.

The majority of the money, however, will go to athletes who file for claims, a group that attorneys say could contain between 140,000 and 200,000 players who were on football and basketball rosters from 2003 on. The final payouts will depend on how many of those athletes file claims in the class-action case.

EA Sports announced last year it would stop making the long-running NCAA football videogame series because of the litigation and other issues in securing licensing rights.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I took Bruce's comments to highlight a glaring issue when it comes to a state's image, and therefore its overall branding. An example is Michigan vs. Indiana. Michigan has done an excellent job of following through on its branding strategy around "Pure Michigan", even down to the detail of the rest stops. Since a state's branding is often targeted to visitors, it makes sense that rest stops, being that point of first impression, should be significant. It is clear that Indiana doesn't care as much about the impression it gives visitors even though our branding as the Crossroads of America does place importance on travel. Bruce's point is quite logical and accurate.

  2. I appreciated the article. I guess I have become so accustomed to making my "pit stops" at places where I can ALSO get gasoline and something hot to eat, that I hardly even notice public rest stops anymore. That said, I do concur with the rationale that our rest stops (if we are to have them at all) can and should be both fiscally-responsible AND designed to make a positive impression about our state.

  3. I don't know about the rest of you but I only stop at these places for one reason, and it's not to picnic. I move trucks for dealers and have been to rest areas in most all 48 lower states. Some of ours need upgrading no doubt. Many states rest areas are much worse than ours. In the rest area on I-70 just past Richmond truckers have to hike about a quarter of a mile. When I stop I;m generally in a bit of a hurry. Convenience,not beauty, is a primary concern.

  4. Community Hospital is the only system to not have layoffs? That is not true. Because I was one of the people who was laid off from East. And all of the LPN's have been laid off. Just because their layoffs were not announced or done all together does not mean people did not lose their jobs. They cherry-picked people from departments one by one. But you add them all up and it's several hundred. And East has had a dramatic drop I in patient beds from 800 to around 125. I know because I worked there for 30 years.

  5. I have obtained my 6 gallon badge for my donation of A Positive blood. I'm sorry to hear that my donation was nothing but a profit center for the Indiana Blood Center.

ADVERTISEMENT