Student-athlete to NCAA: ‘Show me the money’
February 22, 2010 by Taylor HanniganPosted in: From the Courts, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views
It could end up being a monumental case against the NCAA — and it just cleared a big initial hurdle.
Ed O’Bannon was a star basketball player at UCLA between 1991 and 1995. He led the team to a national championship in his final year, but a pro career fizzled.
O’Bannon says he and all other student-athletes were forced to sign forms giving up all rights to the commercial use of their images, even after graduation.
Now O’Bannon is suing the NCAA for using his image without providing him compensation. His federal lawsuit alleges an antitrust claim and a claim of unjust enrichment.
O’Bannon received some good news when the court rejected the bid of the NCAA and co-defendant Collegiate Licensing Company to have his main claims dismissed. The court said he has pleaded facts sufficient to avoid dismissal with respect to his claims.
It’s still early in the proceedings – but the case has the potential to forever change the way collegiate licensing fees relating to athletics are distributed.
Cite: O’Bannon v. National Collegiate Athletic Association.
Should college athletes receive a portion of licensing fees? Tell us what you think in the comments section below.
HigherEdMorning delivers the latest HigherEd news once a week to the inboxes of over 200,000 HigherEd professionals.
Click here to sign up and start your FREE subscription to HigherEdMorning!
Tags: athletics, licensing fees, National Collegiation Athletic Association
Loading ...
February 24th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
Seems to me that once the student graduates, his image should belong to him and him alone and I would question any contract in which a young, college-age individual can sign away their rights in perpetuity.
February 24th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
If big-time athletic programs are about making money for the university, was Mr. O’Bannon paid a fair wage?
February 25th, 2010 at 10:27 am
It seems that this is only the tip of the iceberg.
March 1st, 2010 at 11:51 am
In Div I schools now with education costs where they are… they might be “paid a fair wage”. the prices in the mid and early 1990s? I doubt.
But what about the Div I, II and III students that are not on athletic scholarship? They aren’t “paid a fair wage” in terms of their education — they are there on spec.
My photographers don’t like shooting on spec, and the NCAA takes 50% royalty on photos sold of mine at their events (i.e. Postseason tournaments, not regular season); Then they take my license, my photos, and sell them privately to schools and I never see another penny. This very reason I am not licensing my work through the NCAA any longer. They make the experience of the event and the student athlete a painful migraine that pops up every 3-4 months for a few weeks nonstop.