Culture news and discussion on TalkFuse.
NFL to Face New Trial Over ‘Sunday Ticket’ $4.7 Billion Verdict
Developing story first seen 5 days ago
A federal appeals court has revived the NFL Sunday Ticket antitrust case and ordered a new trial on damages, reversing a lower court decision that had thrown out a jury’s verdict for consumers. The ruling does not reinstate the $4.7 billion award, but sends the case back to district court.
The dispute concerns claims that the NFL and its 32 teams breached antitrust laws through exclusive broadcasting deals for out-of-market games. The appeals court said expert Daniel Rascher’s comparison with college football should have been considered by the jury, which could weigh its reliability; it also found the jury’s damages decision had not properly considered the evidence. The NFL said it is considering further appellate review and defended its distribution strategy.
- Sources
- 2
- Outlets
- 2
- Left · Centre · Right
- 0 · 0 · 0
In short
- Appeals court revives the Sunday Ticket case.
- A new trial will reconsider damages.
- The $4.7 billion award remains overturned.
How this story developed
- 2 hours ago A federal appeals court has reinstated the NFL Sunday Ticket antitrust case and ordered a new trial on damages, reviving consumers’ challenge to the league’s exclusive broadcasting arrangements.
- 2 hours ago A federal appeals court has revived the NFL Sunday Ticket antitrust case and ordered a new trial on damages, reversing a lower court decision that had thrown out a jury’s verdict for consumers.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Consumers’ strongest case is that exclusive distribution may have limited competition and left fans with fewer or more costly ways to watch out-of-market games. The appeals court concluded that the jury should have been allowed to consider the expert comparison with college football, and supporters of the claims may argue that a new trial is needed to assess whether the arrangements caused harm and what damages are justified.
The case against
The NFL’s strongest case is that exclusive broadcasting arrangements can be a legitimate way to distribute and market games, and that the claims must prove unlawful harm rather than infer it from exclusivity alone. The appeals court also found the jury’s damages decision had not properly considered the evidence, so a fresh trial can test the reliability of the proposed comparison and whether consumers are owed damages at all.