Judge Critiques Attorneys in NFL "Sunday Ticket" Antitrust Case
LOS ANGELES -- The federal judge presiding over the class-action lawsuit filed by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL expressed significant frustration this Tuesday regarding the plaintiffs' attorneys and their handling of the case.
Frustrations in the Courtroom
Before Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones took the stand for a second day of testimony, U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez emphasized the case's straightforward premise. He acknowledged the palpable frustration of a Seattle Seahawks fan living in Los Angeles who cannot watch their favorite team without purchasing a subscription for all Sunday afternoon out-of-market games.
The class-action lawsuit represents 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses that paid for the package of out-of-market games from the 2011 through 2022 seasons. The plaintiffs allege that the league violated antitrust laws by selling its package of Sunday games aired on CBS and Fox at an inflated price. They also argue that the league restricted competition by offering "Sunday Ticket" exclusively through a satellite provider.
NFL's Defense
The NFL firmly maintains its right to sell "Sunday Ticket" under its antitrust exemption for broadcasting. However, the plaintiffs contend 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, a figure that could potentially triple to $21 billion due to the nature of antitrust cases.
This was not the first instance of Judge Gutierrez expressing dissatisfaction with the plaintiffs' side. On Monday, he reprimanded their attorneys for repeatedly reciting past testimony, which he deemed a waste of time. Before Jones resumed his testimony, Gutierrez voiced doubts about the relevance of Jones' 1995 lawsuit against the NFL, which challenged the league's licensing and sponsorship procedures. Both sides eventually settled out of court.
Key Testimonies
Jones had filed the 1994 lawsuit against the NFL, stating that while he supported the league's model for negotiating television contracts and revenue-sharing agreements, he contested its licensing and sponsorship procedures. 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."
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. Both CBS and Fox had requested during negotiations that "Sunday Ticket" be sold as a premium package. However, it was DirecTV, not the NFL, that set the prices during the class-action period.
The NFL's contracts with CBS and Fox include language stipulating 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 rights fees from DirecTV for the package. Starting last year, Google's YouTube TV acquired the "Sunday Ticket" rights for seven seasons.
During a deposition, DirecTV marketing official Jamie Dyckes stated that MLB, the NBA, and the NHL had suggested retail prices 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.
Case Progression and Future Steps
Testimony will continue Thursday, with closing statements scheduled for early next week. Judge Gutierrez noted he would consider invoking a rule allowing the court to determine that a jury lacks sufficient evidence to rule for a party in the case.
Quotes from the Courtroom
Judge Gutierrez candidly admitted, "I'm struggling with the plaintiffs' case." Throughout the proceedings, his comments have reflected his mounting frustrations, stating, "The way you have tried this case is far from simple." He also remarked, "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, anticipating whether the plaintiffs' attorneys can present a compelling argument that aligns with the straightforward premise Judge Gutierrez initially outlined.