Judge Expresses Frustration in NFL 'Sunday Ticket' Antitrust Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES -- The federal judge overseeing the class-action lawsuit by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL expressed his frustrations on Tuesday with the plaintiffs' attorneys' handling of the case.
The Case's Straightforward Premise
Before Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones resumed his testimony for a second day, U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez emphasized that the case's premise was straightforward.
He noted the clear frustration of a Seattle Seahawks fan living in Los Angeles who cannot watch their favorite team without purchasing a subscription for all the Sunday afternoon out-of-market games.
The lawsuit encompasses 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses who paid for the package of out-of-market games from the 2011 through 2022 seasons.
The plaintiffs claim the league violated antitrust laws by selling its package of Sunday games aired on CBS and Fox at an inflated price. Additionally, the subscribers argue that the league restricted competition by exclusively offering "Sunday Ticket" through a satellite provider.
The NFL maintains that it has the right to sell "Sunday Ticket" under its antitrust exemption for broadcasting. The plaintiffs counter 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. This figure could balloon to $21 billion, as antitrust cases can result in triple damages.
Judge Gutierrez’s Repeated Frustrations
Tuesday was not the first time Judge Gutierrez expressed his disdain with the plaintiffs' side. On Monday, he admonished their attorneys for repeatedly describing past testimony, which he considered a waste of time. Before Jones resumed his testimony, Gutierrez expressed doubts about the relevance of the plaintiffs' attorneys citing Jerry Jones' lawsuit against the NFL in 1995, which challenged the league's licensing and sponsorship procedures. Eventually, both sides settled out of court.
Jones filed the 1994 lawsuit against the NFL, stating that while he supported the league's model for negotiating television contracts and the revenue-sharing agreements, he contested its licensing and sponsorship procedures. When asked on Tuesday if teams should be able to sell their out-of-market television rights, Jones replied they should not, as it "would undermine the free TV model we have now."
Testimonies Add Further Insight
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 has in local markets. CBS and Fox both requested during negotiations that "Sunday Ticket" be sold as a premium package. DirecTV, not the NFL, set the prices during the class-action period. The league has language in its television contracts with CBS and Fox 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 a rights fee 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 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.
Anticipation Builds as Case Progresses
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 find that a jury lacks sufficient evidence to rule for a party in a case.
Judge Gutierrez's Quotes Reflect His Frustration
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 remain on the courtroom, eagerly anticipating whether the plaintiffs' attorneys can present a compelling argument that aligns with the straightforward premise Judge Gutierrez initially outlined.