Judge Criticizes Plaintiffs' Attorneys in NFL "Sunday Ticket" Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES -- The federal judge overseeing the class-action lawsuit filed by "Sunday Ticket" subscribers against the NFL expressed his frustrations Tuesday with the plaintiffs' attorneys, criticizing how they are handling their side of the case.
U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez did not mince words before Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones resumed his testimony for a second day. He emphasized that the case's premise is straightforward and easy to understand. Judge Gutierrez noted the apparent frustration of a Seattle Seahawks fan living in Los Angeles who cannot watch their favorite team without purchasing a subscription for all the Sunday afternoon out-of-market games.
The Basis of the Lawsuit
The class-action lawsuit encompasses 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 businesses that paid for the package of out-of-market games from the 2011 through 2022 seasons. The lawsuit alleges that the NFL violated antitrust laws by selling its package of Sunday games aired on CBS and Fox at inflated prices. Additionally, the plaintiffs argue that the league restricted competition by offering "Sunday Ticket" exclusively through a satellite provider.
The NFL maintains that it has the right to sell "Sunday Ticket" under its antitrust exemption for broadcasting. However, the plaintiffs counter that this exemption only applies to over-the-air broadcasts and not to pay TV. Should the NFL be found liable, a jury could award up to $7 billion in damages, a figure that could triple to $21 billion due to the nature of antitrust cases.
Judge Gutierrez's Frustrations
This is not the first instance of Judge Gutierrez expressing his displeasure with the plaintiffs' side. On Monday, he admonished their attorneys for repeatedly discussing past testimony, which he viewed as unnecessary and time-wasting. Before Jones resumed his testimony, Gutierrez expressed doubts about the relevance of including Jones' 1995 lawsuit against the NFL, which contested the league's licensing and sponsorship procedures. Although that lawsuit was settled out of court, Jones had asserted a disagreement with the league's model for negotiating television contracts and revenue-sharing agreements.
When questioned on Tuesday if teams should be allowed to sell their out-of-market television rights, Jones flatly replied that they should not, as it "would undermine the free TV model we have now."
Testimonies and Opposition
Retired CBS Sports chairman Sean McManus also took the stand, affirming his long-standing opposition to "Sunday Ticket" and the NFL's Red Zone channel. McManus believes that "Sunday Ticket" infringes on CBS's exclusivity in local markets. Both CBS and Fox had requested during negotiations that "Sunday Ticket" be sold as a premium package.
It was noted that DirecTV, and not the NFL, set the prices during the class-action period. The league's contracts with CBS and Fox included language stating that the "resale packages (Sunday Ticket) are to be marketed as premium products for avid league fans that satisfy complementary demand to the offering of in-market games." Additionally, language in the contracts prohibited selling individual games on a pay-per-view basis.
From 1994 through 2022, the NFL received a rights fee from DirecTV for the package. Last year, Google's YouTube TV acquired "Sunday Ticket" rights for seven seasons. During a deposition, DirecTV marketing official Jamie Dyckes stated that MLB, the NBA, and the NHL had suggested retail prices for their out-of-market packages and that there was revenue sharing between the leagues and the carriers as their packages were distributed across multiple platforms.
Looking Ahead
Testimony will continue Thursday, with closing statements expected early next week. Judge Gutierrez mentioned he would consider invoking a rule that allows the court to find that a jury lacks sufficient evidence to rule in favor of a party in a case.
Gutierrez candidly admitted, "I'm struggling with the plaintiffs' case." Throughout the proceedings, his comments have reflected his mounting frustrations. He remarked, "The way you have tried this case is far from simple," and added, "This case has turned into 25 hours of depositions and gobbledygook… This case has gone in a direction it shouldn't have gone."
As the trial progresses, all eyes remain on the courtroom, keen to see if the plaintiffs' attorneys can present a compelling argument that aligns with the straightforward premise Judge Gutierrez initially outlined.