NFL entrepreneurs are probably on the hook to spend as much as$ 14.1 billion in damages—about$ 1 billion more than the NFL’s national income in 2023—in the continued In Re: NFL’s” Sunday Ticket” Antitrust Litigation. U.S. District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez’s Los Angeles courtroom did hear that chance on Wednesday.
More than 2.4 million personal clients and more than 48, 000 restaurants, bars, and other industrial establishments that purchased Sunday Ticket anywhere between 2011 and 2023 are being squaring off with the NFL and a group activity. A judge will examine the merits of a jury’s finding that the NFL violated antitrust laws by using the 32 teams ‘ collective broadcasting rights to charge higher prices. The jury awarded$ 4.6 billion and$ 97 million to the residential users and commercial establishments, respectively.

The NFL has requested a new test or a view on Gutierrez.
A case of law may require Gutierrez to come to the conclusion that no other acceptable jury could have reached the same conclusion, requiring the NFL to prevail. Because a judge would need to invalidate a jury’s verdict, these movements are rarely granted. Gutierrez would have to point out that the jury ended up with an absurd result despite the 27 testimony being heard over a three-week trial that included 82 admitted displays. Even with Gutierrez’s apparent doubt of the plaintiffs ‘ situation during the test, that is a challenging task for the NFL.
The chances of being granted a new test prosecution may be a little higher, though. The NFL would need to persuade Gutierrez that the conviction reflected an error-filled judge procedure or was unsupported by the evidence and could lead to a systemic miscarriage of justice. One ground that would n’t merit a new trial: Gutierrez simply disagreeing with the jury.
In an effort to convince Gutierrez to reject the jury’s verdict, the NFL has made many claims.
Foremost, the group insists the defendants failed to prove any competitive infraction. The NFL views its broadcasting provisions as both legal and convenient for consumers. These tactics are possibly “better” than those employed by various professional leagues and their teams.
That is, for local enthusiasts.
Local MLB, NBA, and NHL groups can enjoy their games openly and over-the-air while local MLB, NBA, and NBA fans pay for registration sports programming. It’s amazing that fans can enjoy free NFL games in today’s world, where so much of broadcasting and streaming material is expensive. Given that NFL games last season accounted for 93 of the year’s 100 most-watched TV channels in the U. S., it’s glad people truly want.
But for out-of-town NFL followers, it’s a unique story. They need to pay$ 349/year ( or less with a discount or promotion ) for the Sunday Ticket, which also contains games of other NFL teams—teams those fans might not care about and do n’t want to pay to watch.

The NFL warns that modifying this design might have undesirable and unexpected effects. Some viewers may have to pay more to watch certain sports, or they might make others ‘ games unavailable. The defendants disagree and contend that NFL games may be broadcast on a combination of free TV and standard cable channels without the current configuration of the Sunday Ticket.
The group also wants to persuade Gutierrez to hold a do-over because the jury mistaken an overcharged for a discount. According to the NFL, this admitted error caused jurors to overlook the competitive aspects of the case and increase damages.
The NFL believes that in order to calculate what they perceived as an overcharge of$ 91.26, jurors took the average actual price paid by Sunday Ticket customers ($ 102.74 ) from the list price ($ 294.80 ) to determine the actual cost. Jurors next multiplied that amount by the total amounts of residential and commercial clients, leading to the multibillion-dollar prize.
The NFL argues this mathematics equation is “irrational” since jury would have calculated a discount—the variation between what fans really paid and the roster price—not an charge. However, the NFL was punished by the jury for offering a discount to its supporters. The defendants disagree with that description and insist the NFL has unfairly tried to “reverse-engineer” judge discussion.
If Gutierrez is persuaded the judge effectively determined that the NFL had violated antitrust legislation but also that the jury had incorrectly calculated the damages, he may get a new trial or reduce the damages figure.
Speaking of problems, Gutierrez has the authority under competitive rules to triple the$ 4.7 billion number to$ 14.1 billion. Some people have argued that competitive law’s trebling makes it the most dangerous section of the law outside of judicial law, one of the reasons it is so dangerous. Trebling is justified on the grounds that it prevents wrongdoing due to imposing for a severe punishment. Likewise, it undoubtedly provides an unearned windfall to defendants and their lawyers, since they get paid for injuries that were n’t suffered.
The NFL’s ability to file an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is also crucial in terms of how to handle the case if Gutierrez declines to uphold the decision or give a new trial. The NFL did uncontestedly have the right to appeal, but it would probably need to post a bond in order to do so. Before a plaintiff uses the relationship to pursue an appeal and/or go bankrupt, plaintiffs who win their trials are required to be paid.
The NFL certainly has a lot of money and wo n’t be going bankrupt anytime soon, but judges often set the value of a bond to the value of the damages —here,$ 4.7 billion or possibly$ 14.1 billion if the damages are tripled. Yet the NFL’s businessman owners may consider pauses for such exorbitant sums. But if bond is n’t posted, the NFL could be ordered to pay damages, and the plaintiffs could attempt to collect as soon as 30 days thereafter.
Does Guiterrez purchase the NFL to alter its current broadcasting arrangements, according to Guiterrez’s request to the hearing? The plaintiffs seek injunctive ( non-monetary ) relief, but Gutierrez has n’t indicated what measures, if any, the NFL must take and by when. For instance, the group might be ordered to disband the Sunday Ticket so that subscribers may instead purchase less expensive packages that include games played by fewer teams, such as those in a department or event.
Gutierrez had issue decisions on these subjects “from the bench” Wednesday. He is more likely to inform the events that he will consider their submissions, prepare papers, and matter written requests over the coming months.
There’s also a wild-card situation: The NFL and the defendants reach a settlement where the club agrees to pay some amount of money that is less ( perhaps a lot less ) than$ 4.7 billion and in exchange forgo an appeal. In a negotiation, the NFL might agree to make the Sunday Ticket more affordable and sturdier but that out-of-town fans can choose which games.