House v. NCAA

Grant House (plaintiff), who was a swimmer at Arizona State University, filed suit on behalf of a class of athletes who were challenging the rules of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) (defendant), which prohibited student-athletes from profiting off of the athletes’ names, images, and likenesses (NIL). The suit alleged conspiracy to fix prices (at zero) for NIL earnings in violation of Sherman Act § 1, group refusal to deal in violation of Sherman Act § 1, and unjust enrichment. The class-action suit included multiple subclasses, a declaratory- and injunctive-relief subclass, a social-media damages subclass, and a group-licensing damages subclass. The declaratory- and injunctive-relief subclass comprised all Division I athletes from four years prior to filing the complaint to the date of judgment, and this subclass sought injunctive relief restraining the NCAA from restricting the athletes’ NIL earnings. The social-media subclass sought social-media earnings that the same athletes would have earned but for the NCAA’s prohibition on NIL earnings. Finally, the group-licensing subclass sought a share of the game-telecast licensing fees the same athletes would have earned but for the NCAA’s prohibition on NIL earnings. The NCAA argued that NCAA was entitled to dismissal because the complaints were barred under stare decisis, and the group-licensing subclass’s claims failed as a matter of law because the group had no publicity rights in the game broadcasts and failed to allege injury to competition in the “group licensing market,” which was considered in prior cases. The NCAA filed a motion to dismiss on this basis.