Sports

Subscribe to Sports via RSS

In February, McNeese State’s basketball manager, Amir “Aura” Khan, rose to fame when a video featuring him went viral on X/Twitter. In the video, Khan led players out of the locker room with a boombox on his shoulder while rapping along to “In and Out” by Lud Foe. The video garnered millions of views and earned Khan name, image, and likeness (NIL) deals with TickPick, Insomnia Cookies, and others in excess of $100,000. Khan’s moment is emblematic of the new age for college sports, where brands seek to engage with prized demographics and student-athletes have new opportunities to benefit from the use of their NIL.Continue Reading NIL and Sports Representation: The New Wild West

The Past

Every seven years, the National Basketball Association (NBA) and the National Basketball Players Association (NBPA), the labor union representing NBA players, come together to negotiate a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) that sets out the minimum terms and conditions for all NBA players as well as the respective rights and obligations of the league, its teams, and the NBPA. The CBA’s purpose is to govern crucial issues such as salary structure, revenue sharing, free agency rules, player benefits, disciplinary procedures, dispute resolution mechanisms, and more. By collectively bargaining, both sides operate within the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) structure, which grants legal protections for union activities and establishes mechanisms for addressing labor disputes. Equally important, both the NBA and NBPA are required under the NLRA to bargain in good faith. Any disputes regarding the salary cap or apron rules – including their application, exceptions, or alleged circumvention – are subject to the grievance and arbitration process established by the CBA, which helps to ensure predictability in enforcement. Importantly, collectively bargained agreements are generally shielded from antitrust liability under the “non-statutory labor exemption,” allowing the league to impose salary caps and other restrictions that would otherwise be considered “restraints of trade.” But broadly speaking, the CBA establishes uniform employment standards across the NBA and ensures competitive balance across its 30 (and potentially 32) teams.Continue Reading From Soft Caps to Hard Lines: How the NBA’s Latest CBA Reshapes Spending and Teambuilding Strategy

Introduction

The recent decision by U.S. District Judge Karen Marston in MLB Players Inc. v. DraftKings and Bet365[1] represents a pivotal development in the legal landscape surrounding name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights. The ruling explores critical intersections between publicity rights, commercial speech, First Amendment protections, and the legal boundaries of “news reporting.” The implications extend far beyond baseball, potentially affecting companies using athlete or celebrity NIL in commercial marketing across sports betting, digital advertising, and beyond.Continue Reading Redrawing the NIL Playbook: Key Legal Takeaways from MLB Players Inc. v. DraftKings and Bet365

In recent years, the surge in athlete trademarks has marked a strategic shift in how sports personalities approach their personal brands. Having recognized their inherent commercial value, athletes today are viewed as powerful brands with marketable identities.Continue Reading Guarding the Name of the Game: The Role of Lawyers in Safeguarding Athlete Trademarks

Now more than ever, access to quality data translates to monetization opportunities and this is especially true in the world of collegiate and professional sports.  In the past two decades, data analytic tools measuring athlete health and performance have come a long way, and now, it is not just players or teams that stand to potentially profit.  In particular, the advent of wearable technology has produced a sports biometrics boom that could soon become a gold rush for players, teams, universities, and companies looking to use or sell biometric data.
Continue Reading Navigating the Sports Biometrics Boom

Background

The first domino fell in late 2019 when Governor Newsom signed The Fair Pay to Play Act into law.[1]  This was the first statute allowing collegiate student-athletes to profit off their name, image, and likeness (NIL).  Specifically, the statute bars universities, athletic conferences and the NCAA from preventing student-athletes in California from profiting off their NIL.  Despite the NCAA’s vigorous opposition initially, close to 30 states have since enacted similar legislation or have otherwise legalized NIL deals in their own states.[2]  Moreover, last year’s unanimous Supreme Court ruling in NCAA v. Alston may not have reached the issue of NIL, but it did chip away at the NCAA’s ability to regulate student-athlete compensation.[3]  Sensing the inevitably of its waning grip over its NIL policies, the NCAA then committed to a dramatic policy shift within days of the Alston ruling by permitting all student-athletes to begin profiting off their NIL as of July 1, 2021.[4] Even if a state has not yet passed NIL legislation, the NCAA policy change applies nationwide and now brands can partner with student-athletes in every state.Continue Reading What Brands Can Expect from College Sports’ Ever Evolving NIL Landscape

With content distribution methods evolving rapidly, major players within the entertainment industry are looking to mergers and acquisitions (M&A) as a means to strengthen their position and maintain market share. Industry insiders predict a continued increase in M&A activity within the entertainment sector. In light of the likelihood that entertainment companies may be presented with an M&A opportunity, either as a buyer or as a seller, it would serve entertainment companies well to prepare for such an opportunity.
Continue Reading Practical Considerations for Reviewing Entertainment Agreements in M&A Transactions

Live entertainment venues, an economy nearly destroyed by the COVID-19 pandemic, are finally re-opening around the country and must consequently adapt to varying state restrictions for holding indoor events. Despite being able to reopen, many venues will remain closed until regulations and capacity maximums are relaxed, reasoning that such restrictions make reopening financially implausible.
Continue Reading Safe in Sound: A Reopening Checklist for the Live Entertainment Industry

Iowa enacted a sports betting law last May. Section 99E addressed fantasy sports contests and Section 99F addressed sports betting.

Under Section 99E: a “Fantasy sports contest” includes any fantasy or simulated game or contest …” and 99E.2 states: “The system of entering an internet fantasy sports contest as provided by this chapter is legal when conducted by a licensed internet fantasy sports contest service provider as provided in this chapter.”
Continue Reading Is Esports Betting Sports Betting in Iowa?