Sports Antitrust

The House v. NCAA private antitrust settlement professionalized collegiate sports by requiring colleges and universities to compensate student athletes. The case has changed the economics of college sports, pushing schools to spend big to pay for top athletes to field teams that compete for championships. New research from the Progressive Policy Institute finds that although the new model has narrowed success to the top programs, the ability for schools to pay for success has now been mostly priced in, writes Diana L. Moss.

Reviewing the literature pioneered by Richard Gilbert and David Newbery, Steven Salop finds that the recent settlement between sports-streaming services Fubo and the Venu...

Jake Goidell argues that the ongoing NCAA lawsuit settlements will not create a lasting solution unless athletes form a players association that is involved in determining industry-wide decisions.

Diana Moss and Jason Gold write that the major private antitrust lawsuit involving how the National Collegiate Athletic Association governs compensation for college student athletes overreaches by remaking the model of college sports in the United States. Instead, the paradigm shift in college athletics should be deliberated and decided through the legislative process.

On March 13, the Ultimate Fighting Championship settled several lawsuits, including Cung Le v. Zuffa, which was scheduled to go to trial in April. The plaintiffs in Cung Le had accused the mixed martial arts organization of several anticompetitive behaviors that led to the suppression of fighter wages. Stephen F. Ross and Gurtej Grewal recount the facts of the case and what the settlement might mean for the industry.