IBJNews

Lawsuit could bring NCAA financials to light

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The NCAA on Monday lost its battle to dismiss a class-action lawsuit led by former UCLA basketball player Ed O’Bannon that could have far-reaching ramifications on the not-for-profit association’s business practices.

O’Bannon seeks to be compensated for the use of his name and likeness in NCAA officially licensed products.

Judge Claudia Wilken, presiding over a district court in San Francisco, denied the NCAA’s dismissal motion. That means the NCAA’s licensing contracts—which contain sensitive financial information—could become public as O'Bannon's legal team proceeds with the discovery process.
 
Sports business and legal experts think the case will be followed by members of Congress interested in the NCAA’s tax-exempt status. The NCAA’s licensed business has a value estimated by sports marketers at $4 billion.

The NCAA argued O’Bannon and other college athletes forfeited their commercial rights when they signed a form permitting the organization to use their images to promote NCAA activities.

“The court’s … rulings at this preliminary stage of the cases do not diminish the NCAA’s confidence that we will ultimately prevail on all of the claims,” said a statement from the NCAA.

Milt Thompson, an attorney and president of an Indianapolis-based sports marketing firm, said the NCAA may be facing an uphill battle.

“Clearly, the lower court thinks the NCAA has a case against it,” Thompson said. “It’s my view that if you’re exploiting someone’s image, and they’re not getting a royalty, that doesn’t seem right. I’m a firm believer that those that help generate revenue should share in that revenue.”

In July, O’Bannon filed an antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA, stating former college athletes should be compensated for the use of their images and likenesses in television ads, video games and on apparel.

O'Bannon, 37, who led UCLA to the 1995 NCAA national championship, was particularly annoyed by the use of his likeness in a video game licensed by the NCAA without his permission.

“They literally played me on a video game,” he told Yahoo Sports. “You could play the ’95 (UCLA) Bruins. It didn’t have my name, but it had my number, left-handed, it looked like me. It was everything but the name. My friend kind of looked at me and said, ‘You know what’s sad about this whole thing? You’re not getting paid for it.’ I was just like, ‘Wow, you’re right.’ It just kind of weighed on me.”

This isn't the first time that the NCAA has been sued by a former player. Sam Keller, 25, filed a lawsuit against the organization last year for using his likeness as quarterback for the University of Nebraska.

Former Rutgers University quarterback Ryan Hart, 25, is also suing EA Sports—which produces NCAA-licensed video games—for using his image.

Judge Wilken combined O’Bannon’s case with Keller’s. O’Bannon’s attorney, Jon King, said in an email that he expects various players from different eras to be added to the class-action suit within a month.

King said in an email that he will soon begin taking depositions and collecting evidence to uncover financial information the NCAA has sought for years to hide from the public and current and former NCAA athletes.
 
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Difference between promotion and profit
    I don't know much about the particulars of this case, but I do know there is a difference between "promoting" a program or event and selling merchandise for a profit. The NCAA shouldn't be allowed to recreate a player's likeness without compensating them (especially if that player is no longer a part of the NCAA system).

    While NCAA athletes are compensated/rewarded for their participation with scholarships, and a very select few will ever be prolific enough to have this be an issue, the days of merely selling a team jersey with a popular player's number on it disappeared with the introduction of the digital/gaming age.
  • NCAA LAWSUIT
    I agree with Marv. There is a definitely a line that is crossed when the video game portrays his likeness. The coaches make BIG bucks off the shoe companies and the universities make BIG bucks off the players - but if someone buys an athlete a Big Mac and fries -- it's an NCAA violation! I'm a huge college basketball fan but some of the rules are absurd
  • NCAA Lawsuit
    I am supportive of Ed O'Bannon's lawsuit. The NCAA takes advantage of college players. These kids do not forfeit their names and images to the NCAA. The NCAA uses these talented athletes for their own benefit. The same can be said of colleges and many high schools. The idea of the student athlete is an oxymoron. I hope he wins.

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. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT