Background and Context
LOS ANGELES -- The federal judge presiding over the class-action lawsuit filed by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL voiced his frustrations Tuesday with how the plaintiffs' attorneys are handling their side of 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 the case's premise was straightforward.
The class-action lawsuit, covering 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses, seeks redress for those who paid for the package of out-of-market games from the 2011 through 2022 seasons. Plaintiffs claim that the NFL violated antitrust laws by selling its Sunday games aired on CBS and Fox at an inflated price, and by restricting competition through offering "Sunday Ticket" exclusively via a satellite provider.
Judge Gutierrez's Frustrations
Judge Gutierrez's remarks on Tuesday were not his first expression of dissatisfaction. On Monday, he admonished the plaintiffs' attorneys for repeatedly dwelling on past testimony, which he found to be a waste of the court's time. The judge emphasized that the frustrations of a Seattle Seahawks fan living in Los Angeles, who cannot watch their favorite team without locking into a subscription for all the Sunday afternoon out-of-market games, formed a simple and understandable basis for the case.
The plaintiffs argue that the NFL’s right to sell "Sunday Ticket" under its antitrust exemption for broadcasting only pertains to over-the-air broadcasts and not pay TV. If the NFL is found liable, the jury could award up to $7 billion in damages, a figure potentially tripling due to the nature of antitrust law.
Testimonies and Key Witnesses
Before Jones resumed his testimony, Gutierrez questioned the relevance of Jerry Jones' previous lawsuit against the NFL in 1995, which challenged the league’s licensing and sponsorship procedures, before it reached an out-of-court settlement.
During the testimony, Jones maintained that the selling of out-of-market television rights by individual teams would undermine the free TV model the NFL currently enjoys. Supporting this sentiment, retired CBS Sports chairman Sean McManus reiterated his long-standing opposition to "Sunday Ticket" and the NFL's Red Zone channel, asserting that "Sunday Ticket" infringed on CBS's exclusivity in local markets.
McManus disclosed that during negotiations, CBS and Fox had requested for "Sunday Ticket" to be marketed as a premium package. It was DirecTV, not the NFL, that set the prices during the class-action period. Since last year however, Google's YouTube TV acquired the "Sunday Ticket" rights for seven seasons.
Evolving Commercial Landscape
DirecTV marketing official Jamie Dyckes testified that Major League Baseball (MLB), the National Basketball Association (NBA), and the National Hockey League (NHL) all had suggested retail prices for their respective out-of-market packages. Additionally, there was revenue sharing between these leagues and their carriers, given that their packages were distributed across multiple platforms. The NFL, on the other hand, had exclusive agreements ensuring that "Sunday Ticket" was marketed specifically as a premium product for avid league fans, which also restrained individual game sales on a pay-per-view basis.
Future Directions and Potential Outcomes
As the case moves forward, all eyes remain on the courtroom, eagerly anticipating whether the plaintiffs' attorneys can articulate a compelling argument that aligns with the straightforward premise Judge Gutierrez insists upon. Closing arguments are scheduled for early next week, with testimony set to continue on Thursday. Meanwhile, Judge Gutierrez has indicated he will consider invoking a rule that allows the court to conclude a jury lacks sufficient evidence to rule in favor of a party in a case.
In candid comments, Gutierrez admitted, "I'm struggling with the plaintiffs' case." He further expressed his mounting frustrations, stating, "The way you have tried this case is far from simple." The judge's growing impatience was clear when he 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."
The case's outcome remains uncertain, but the legal intricacies and high stakes involved ensure that it will remain a high-profile matter in the sports and broadcast industries.