Regardless of whether the NFL has to compensate more than 2.4 million private individuals and nearly 50,000 businesses in the Sunday Ticket case, the plaintiffs want what is known as a preliminary injunction. In layman’s terms, this is an order requiring the NFL to reject a distribution and pricing model that violates antitrust law.
As explained later Judge Philip Gutierrez’s surprise decision to throw out a $4.7 billion verdict (which would otherwise have been worth $14.1 billion) concluded that there was more than enough evidence in the record to support a finding that Sunday Ticket was an antitrust violation. The judge threw out the verdict because he rejected expert testimony that conjured up a world that would have existed “without” the antitrust problem. The judge did not acquit the NFL.
The plaintiffs now want the judge to tell the NFL to stop what it has been doing for 30 years.
The dispute began after the NFL prepared and filed a draft ruling that, if signed by the judge, would end the case. The plaintiffs, via AJ Perez of FrontOfficeSports.com, Objections to the proposal on the issue of “injunctive, declaratory and equitable relief.” Again, the plaintiffs want the judge to tell the NFL, “Your off-market package violates antitrust law. You have to give it up.” And they believe the jury’s decision justifies that.
Not only is that a fair outcome, it’s the only one that makes sense. Otherwise, we’ll have to see more and more plaintiffs pursue the NFL in court and hope that they can provide a damages calculation based on a hypothetical, made-up universe in which the NFL doesn’t violate antitrust laws with Sunday Ticket.
If the plaintiffs get what they want, the Sunday Ticket will ultimately become more affordable – not just for the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, but for everyone else as well.
