A federal appeals court has revived an antitrust verdict against the National Football League over its Sunday Ticket television package, restoring a finding that the league violated competition laws while reopening a financial dispute that could expose it to billions of dollars in damages.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that a federal judge improperly overturned a 2024 jury finding against the NFL, according to ESPN’s reporting on the decision. The appellate panel nevertheless rejected the jury’s approximately $4.7 billion damages calculation, ordering a new trial to determine how much the league may owe subscribers.
The decision represents a significant legal setback for the NFL, whose lucrative television distribution arrangements have become central to its commercial operations. Although the league is not immediately required to pay the original award, the reinstated liability finding leaves it facing substantial potential financial consequences.
Dispute Centers on Pricing and Broadcast Competition
The litigation concerns Sunday Ticket, a subscription service that allows football fans to watch regular-season NFL games broadcast outside their local television markets.
According to ESPN and the Associated Press, the class-action lawsuit represents approximately 2.4 million residential customers and 48,000 commercial subscribers who purchased Sunday Ticket through DirecTV between 2011 and 2022.
The plaintiffs argued that the NFL’s decision to distribute the package exclusively through DirecTV restricted competition and contributed to artificially high subscription prices.
They also contended that the league’s broadcasting arrangements limited the availability of alternative services that could have offered out-of-market games at lower prices.
The NFL has defended its distribution agreements, maintaining that its broadcasting model provides broad access to games while supporting both traditional television audiences and customers seeking additional viewing options.
Read more: Packers Drawn Into Growing Fight Over NFL Antitrust Exemption
The case raises broader questions about how professional sports leagues package and sell broadcasting rights, particularly when exclusive distribution arrangements affect consumer choice and pricing.
Appeals Court Rejects Lower Court’s Liability Decision
A Los Angeles jury found the NFL liable in June 2024 and awarded approximately $4.61 billion to residential subscribers and $96.9 million to commercial customers, according to the Associated Press.
The verdict was overturned the following month by U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez, who concluded that testimony from two economic experts presented by the plaintiffs was unreliable.
Gutierrez determined that methodological problems undermined the evidence used to establish financial harm.
The appeals court disagreed with the decision to exclude the expert testimony, finding that questions about the strength of the experts’ analysis should have been evaluated by jurors rather than used to invalidate the liability verdict.
However, the appellate judges separately concluded that the jury had failed to properly follow instructions when calculating damages.
According to the court’s October 30 opinion, the damages award relied on an improper assessment of the evidence, requiring a new proceeding focused on compensation rather than a complete retrial of the underlying antitrust claims.
The ruling therefore preserves the jury’s finding of liability while leaving the ultimate financial penalty unresolved.
We’d love to be your preferred source for news.
Please add us to your preferred sources list so our news, data and interviews show up in your feed. Thanks!
Billions of Dollars Remain at Stake
The financial implications could be substantial.
Federal antitrust law permits certain damages awards to be tripled, meaning the original $4.7 billion verdict could have resulted in potential liability exceeding $14 billion if upheld and trebled.
That figure is no longer an operative damages award because the appeals court ordered a new trial to determine the appropriate amount.
A future award could differ significantly depending on the evidence presented and the calculation accepted by the court.
The ruling also leaves open the possibility of additional legal challenges as the NFL considers its options.
According to Reuters, the league expressed disappointment with the appellate decision and indicated that it was evaluating further judicial review.
The NFL also reiterated its support for its broadcasting strategy, arguing that the combination of locally available games, nationally televised matchups and subscription services offers consumers extensive viewing choices.
Streaming Transition Adds Broader Industry Significance
The dispute covers an earlier period in the NFL’s television business, when DirecTV controlled Sunday Ticket distribution.
The package moved to Google’s YouTube platform in 2023 under a seven-year agreement, marking a significant shift toward internet-based distribution of professional football programming.
Although the lawsuit focuses on the DirecTV era, its outcome could carry implications for how sports organizations structure exclusive media rights agreements.
Professional leagues increasingly rely on a combination of traditional broadcasters, cable networks and streaming platforms to maximize the value of live sports programming.
Such arrangements generate substantial licensing revenue, but they can also create tensions between commercial exclusivity and consumer access.
Add as Preferred Source