Judicial Frustrations Surface in NFL 'Sunday Ticket' Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES -- The federal judge presiding over the class-action lawsuit brought by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL voiced significant frustrations Tuesday with how the plaintiffs' attorneys are managing their arguments in the case.
Before Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones took the stand for a second day of testimony, U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez made it clear that, in his view, the case's premise was straightforward.
The Plaintiffs’ Argument
The 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, is evident, Judge Gutierrez noted.
The class-action lawsuit represents 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses that paid for the "Sunday Ticket" package of out-of-market games from the 2011 through 2022 seasons. The lawsuit claims that the NFL violated antitrust laws by selling its package of Sunday games, aired on CBS and Fox, at inflated prices.
Additionally, the subscribers argue that the league restricted competition by offering "Sunday Ticket" exclusively through a satellite provider.
The NFL argues it has the right to sell "Sunday Ticket" under its antitrust exemption for broadcasting. However, the plaintiffs counter that this exemption only applies to over-the-air broadcasts and not pay TV.
Potential Consequences
If the NFL is found liable, it could face up to $7 billion in damages. Given that antitrust cases can result in triple damages, this figure could escalate to $21 billion.
Tuesday was not the first time Judge Gutierrez expressed frustration with the plaintiffs' side. On Monday, he admonished their attorneys for repeatedly describing past testimony, which he deemed a waste of time.
Jerry Jones’ Testimony
Before Jones resumed his testimony, Gutierrez expressed doubts about the plaintiffs' attorneys' decision to cite Jerry Jones' 1994 lawsuit against the NFL, which challenged the league's licensing and sponsorship procedures. Eventually, both sides settled out of court.
Jones' 1994 lawsuit claimed that while he supported the league's model for negotiating television contracts and revenue-sharing agreements in place, he was contesting its licensing and sponsorship procedures.
On Tuesday, when asked if teams should be able to sell their out-of-market television rights, Jones replied that they should not, stating it "would undermine the free TV model we have now."
Network Concerns
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 maintains in local markets.
During negotiations, both CBS and Fox requested that "Sunday Ticket" be sold as a premium package. It was DirecTV, not the NFL, that set the prices during the class-action period. The league has language in its television contracts with CBS and Fox stipulating that "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."
Additionally, the contracts prohibit selling individual games on a pay-per-view basis. From 1994 through 2022, the NFL received a rights fee from DirecTV for the package. Starting last year, Google's YouTube TV acquired "Sunday Ticket" rights for seven seasons.
Market Comparisons
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.
Final Stages
Testimony will continue Thursday, with closing statements scheduled for early next week. Judge Gutierrez mentioned he would consider invoking a rule allowing the court to determine that a jury lacks sufficient evidence to rule for a party in a case.
Judge's Frustrations
Throughout the proceedings, Judge Gutierrez admitted, "I'm struggling with the plaintiffs' case." 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.