NCAA seeks to delay, split trial over use of player images

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The National Collegiate Athletic Association asked a federal judge to postpone a trial over student athletes’ claims they should be compensated for the use of their images until earlier rulings in the case that have been appealed are decided.

The Indianapolis-based NCAA said a delay is needed unless the judge separates students’ claims that they should be compensated for the use of their images in video games from the trial. Those claims shouldn’t be heard until after the judge has considered a settlement reached with Electronic Arts Inc. and the U.S. Supreme Court has considered whether to hear arguments whether the practice is protected as free speech under the Constitution’s First Amendment, the NCAA said.

“By moving to separate the video game claims from the trial scheduled to begin June 9, the NCAA seeks to prevent a massive and unnecessary duplication and prejudice,” Donald Remy, NCAA’s chief legal officer, said Saturday in an email.

The case was filed by former college basketball and football players challenging the NCAA’s rules of amateurism. It’s part of a movement by current and former college athletes to secure compensation, and greater medical benefits, control over their images and labor protections in a system that considers them amateurs. The athletes aren’t paid despite generating sponsorship, ticket and merchandise revenue in addition to that from TV contracts.

If the U.S. Supreme Court decides that the First Amendment bars the players’ claims, then that part of the case would be dismissed, so it makes sense to wait, the NCAA said in an April 25 court filing. A hearing on NCAA requests is scheduled for June 5 before U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, who will preside over the trial in Oakland, Calif.

The association has also asked the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco to overturn her ruling that allowed thousands of current and former student athletes to seek a court order blocking the the NCAA from stopping them from entering into licensing deals to get paid when they appear broadcasts and other footage.

The Electronic Arts settlement is worth $40 million, players’ lawyers have said. Michael Hausfeld, Steve Berman and Rob Carey, attorneys for the players, didn’t immediately respond to emails yesterday seeking comment on the NCAA’s requests.

College athletes generate more than $16 billion in television contracts for the NCAA and its conferences, as well as revenue from sponsorships, ticket and merchandise sales and payouts for championships, according to another lawsuit alleging antitrust violations by the association.


Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How much you wanna bet, that 70% of the jobs created there (after construction) are minimum wage? And Harvey is correct, the vast majority of residents in this project will drive to their jobs, and to think otherwise, is like Harvey says, a pipe dream. Someone working at a restaurant or retail store will not be able to afford living there. What ever happened to people who wanted to build buildings, paying for it themselves? Not a fan of these tax deals.

  2. Uh, no GeorgeP. The project is supposed to bring on 1,000 jobs and those people along with the people that will be living in the new residential will be driving to their jobs. The walkable stuff is a pipe dream. Besides, walkable is defined as having all daily necessities within 1/2 mile. That's not the case here. Never will be.

  3. Brad is on to something there. The merger of the Formula E and IndyCar Series would give IndyCar access to International markets and Formula E access the Indianapolis 500, not to mention some other events in the USA. Maybe after 2016 but before the new Dallara is rolled out for 2018. This give IndyCar two more seasons to run the DW12 and Formula E to get charged up, pun intended. Then shock the racing world, pun intended, but making the 101st Indianapolis 500 a stellar, groundbreaking event: The first all-electric Indy 500, and use that platform to promote the future of the sport.

  4. No, HarveyF, the exact opposite. Greater density and closeness to retail and everyday necessities reduces traffic. When one has to drive miles for necessities, all those cars are on the roads for many miles. When reasonable density is built, low rise in this case, in the middle of a thriving retail area, one has to drive far less, actually reducing the number of cars on the road.

  5. The Indy Star announced today the appointment of a new Beverage Reporter! So instead of insightful reports on Indy pro sports and Indiana college teams, you now get to read stories about the 432nd new brewery open or some obscure Hoosier winery winning a county fair blue ribbon. Yep, that's the coverage we Star readers crave. Not.