12 Civ. 01817

Subscribe to 12 Civ. 01817 via RSS

Shortly before a nine-day bench trial was scheduled to start this morning, Major League Baseball settled an antitrust suit alleging it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball broadcast out-of-market games only as part of a allegedly overpriced all-or-nothing packages.  As part of the settlement, MLB will offer reduced price packages for fans to stream out-of-market…

The plaintiffs and Major League Baseball yesterday exchanged briefs in anticipation of a January 18 trial before Judge Scheindlin in a case alleging it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball to divide the market for broadcasting games into various territories exclusive to the local teams, while allowing the broadcast of out-of-market games only as part of a allegedly overpriced all-or-nothing packages.  (A companion case relating to National Hockey League games was recently settled.)
Continue Reading Parties File Pretrial Briefs in Antitrust Challenge to Baseball’s “Territorial” Broadcast Structure

In an opinion today, Judge Schiendlin certified a Rule 23(b)(2) injunction class in a case alleging that it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball and the National Hockey League to divide the market for games into various territories exclusive to the local teams, while allowing the broadcast of out-of-market games only as part of all-or-nothing packages like MLB Extra Innings or NHL Center Ice. The defendants’ primary argument against class certification was that the class would impermissibly consist of those would benefit from a dismantling of the existing structure — e.g., a Yankee fan in Iowa who would prefer to be able to buy a package of just Yankee games — and those who would be harmed — e.g., a Yankee fan in Iowa who would in all events buy the full MLB Extra Innings package but, if a-la-carte options were available, might not have the package option or might have to pay more.  According to the defendants, these “winners” and “losers” cannot form a cohesive class.  Judge Scheindlin concluded that this argument “fails three times over”:
Continue Reading Judge Scheindlin Certifies Injunction Class in Antitrust Challenge to “Territorial” Structure of Sports Broadcasts

In an opinion issued on Friday, Judge Scheindlin denied the summary judgment motion of MLB, the NHL, Comcast and DirectTV on antitrust claims rising out of the territorial distribution of television rights the sports leagues have arranged with regional sports networks.  Under the current system, fans are able only to watch a team’s games if it is available from their specific regional network, or if they are willing to pay for the right to watch every team’s games league-wide. Judge Scheindlin, after recounting the nearly century-long history of the “so-called ‘baseball exemption’” to the antitrust laws, formulated by the Supreme Court in Federal Baseball Club of Baltimore v. National League of Professional Baseball Clubs in 1922 and revisited several times by the Court and Congress, ruled that the exemption does not apply to territorial broadcasting restrictions.
Continue Reading Judge Scheindlin: MLB, NHL Television Deals Not Exempt from Antitrust Laws

In a pair of consolidated cases alleging that it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball and the National Hockey League to divide the market for games into various territories exclusive to the local teams, while allowing the broadcast of out-of-market games only as part of all-or-nothing packages like MLB Extra Innings or NHL Center Ice (see our prior posts here and here), the MLB and NHL moved (see here [MLB] and here [NHL]), in papers filed online last night, for summary judgment. MLB’s motion argues:
Continue Reading MLB and NHL Move for Summary Judgment in Antitrust Cases Over “Territorial” Broadcast Structure