A PYMNTS Company

Disney’s Proposed Antitrust Settlement Triggers Clash Among Plaintiffs’ Law Firms

By  |  July 13, 2025

A proposed antitrust settlement involving The Walt Disney Co. has sparked a legal turf war between competing plaintiffs’ law firms, casting uncertainty over a deal meant to resolve consumer complaints about rising costs in the live TV streaming market.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    According to Reuters, the controversy centers on a class action settlement reached in June between Disney and subscribers of YouTube TV, DirecTV Stream, and FuboTV. These subscribers, represented by the law firm Bathaee Dunne, alleged that Disney stifled competition in the streaming television market through restrictive agreements with providers.

    However, the proposed resolution has prompted objections from other plaintiffs’ firms, including DiCello Levitt and Lite DePalma Greenberg & Afanador. In a court filing on Tuesday, these firms—who also represent FuboTV consumers in a related case—claimed they were excluded from negotiations and criticized the settlement as inadequate.

    Per Reuters, the objecting attorneys accused Bathaee Dunne of enabling a “reverse auction,” a tactic where a defendant shops for the most favorable settlement by negotiating with the firm willing to accept the lowest offer. They argued that the settlement undercuts consumers’ interests and undermines broader litigation efforts.

    Read more: DOJ Probes Disney’s FuboTV Acquisition Over Antitrust Concerns

    Bathaee Dunne, which filed the original lawsuit in 2022, rejected these claims in court filings, asserting that the deal includes financial and non-monetary benefits. The firm maintains that final approval of the settlement hinges on its appointment as lead counsel for the entire class, which includes users of all three streaming platforms. The firm also dismissed the opposing lawyers as latecomers whose efforts to gain influence could jeopardize the agreement.

    Disney, for its part, has denied any wrongdoing. The entertainment giant—owner of Hulu and ESPN—has long required streaming services like YouTube TV to include ESPN in their base packages. The lawsuits allege these practices inflated prices across the market, reducing consumer choice and harming competition.

    As reported by Reuters, the exact terms of the proposed settlement remain confidential. Lawyers from both sides, as well as Disney, have not responded to requests for comment.

    Source: Reuters