Marketing Ideaz

New York Law School Third Annual Sports Law Symposium

Tue, 11 Oct 2011 04:30:26 +0000

I look forward to joining many friends and colleagues at New York Law School’s upcoming sports law symposium. It should be an awesome event. Great work by Elliot Solop, founder/EIC of The Sports Tomato, in putting it together.

The New York Law School Institute for Information Law and Policy and the New York Law School Sports Law Society

Presents:

The Third Annual Sports Law Symposium

Date: Friday, November 4, 2011

Location: New York Law School, 185 West Broadway, NY

Rooms: 2nd Floor Events Center, W402, W420

Time: 12:30pm-8pm

Industry leaders will engage in panel discussions involving current legal issues in the sports industry including the legal infrastructure of developing and growing professional sports leagues, amateurism issues in collegiate sports, intellectual property management of sports and entertainments brands, and athlete agent regulation and enforcement. Panelists will also offer perspective on breaking into the legal side of the sports industry. A networking reception will follow the days events.

Panels:

-Panel 1: Overview of Current Legal Developments in the Sports Industry

-Breakout Session 1: Financial and Tax Considerations in Representing Professional Athletes

-Breakout Session 2: Intellectual Property Issues in Sports

-Breakout Session 3: Athlete Agent Regulation and Enforcement

-Panel 2: Legal Infrastructure of Developing and Growing Professional Sports Leagues

-Panel 3: Amateurism Issues in Collegiate Sports

-Panel 4: Breaking Into the Sports Industry

-Networking Reception

Panelists:

Jason Belzer - President, Global Athlete Management Enterprises, Inc.

Andrew Bondarowicz - President, Aregatta Group, Inc.

Allison Cantor - Assistant Counsel, ESPN

Mark Conrad 81 - Associate Professor of Business Law, Fordham University, Adjunct Professor of Sports Law, New York Law School

George Daniel - Commissioner, National Lacrosse League

Marc Edelman – Assistant Professor of Law at Barry Universitys Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law

Dimitrios Efstathiou - Senior Counsel, Major League Soccer

Andrew Fine - Director of Marketing and Broadcasting, RLR Associates

David Fish - NFLPA Certified Agent, Adjunct Professor of Law, New York Law School

David Gross - Commissioner, Major League Lacrosse

Darren Heitner - Founder of Sports Agent Blog, President of Dynasty Sports LLC

David Mayer - Counsel, ESPN

Kevin Matz - Managing Member, Kevin Matz & Associates PLLC

Michael McCann – Sports Illustrated Legal Analyst, NBATV Legal Analyst, Professor of Law, Vermont Law School

Tim McIIwain 95 – Partner, McKenna McIlwain, LLP

Robert Raiola - CPA, Sports & Entertainment Group Manager at Fazio, Mannuzza, Roche, Tankel, LaPIlusa, LLC

Katherine Salisbury – President, Friedman & Salisbury Sports Management LLC

David Soskin 08 - Assistant Counsel, ESPN

Mike Zarren - Assistant General Manager and Associate Team Counsel, Boston Celtics

Warren Zola - Chair, Professional Sports Counseling Panel, Boston College

CLE credits will be offered.

For more information on the event, please contact Elliot Solop at essolop@gmail.com.

Raiders owner Al Davis dies at 82

Sun, 09 Oct 2011 04:30:17 +0000

Al Davis, the owner of the Oakland-Los Angeles-Oakland Raiders, has died, ending one of the more remarkable careers in sports _ and sports law. He was a mixture of George Steinbrenner (who was also born on the Fourth of July), Mark Cuban, Charlie Finley and Vince Lombardi — a coach, owner, businessman, general manager and fan with an insatiable desire for winning. But he was also a little bit Curt Flood (or at least Andy Messersmith) who was willing to take on his fellow owners in court, suing for the right to move his team from Oakland to L.A. and back, as told in this obituary by my AP colleague Josh Dubow, who covers the team.

Davis was also the AFL commissioner before the merger that helped shape the modern NFL. So I ask: Is another figure who is responsible for as much sports jurisprudence?

The "Karen Murphy Case" – European Soccer, Television Broadcasts, Competition Law, and Decoder Cards

Fri, 07 Oct 2011 17:30:06 +0000

Below is a guest post by Tassos Kaburakis.

On October 4, 2011, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) delivered an important decision in a consolidated case dealing with broadcasting rights, competition, and European Union (EU)-wide intellectual property issues [Football Association Premier League and Others (C-403/08 and C-429/08) a.k.a. the Karen Murphy case].

Several pub owners in the United Kingdom (UK) have been circumventing the exclusive license, which the Football Association Premier League (FAPL) has signed with BSkyB and ESPN (1.78 billion for the rights to broadcast Premiership matches in the UK from 2010 to 2013). A Sky subscription that would allow public viewing of FAPL games would cost approximately 700*. The pub owners (including Karen Murphy) opted not to pay the high fees and instead purchased foreign satellite decoder cards and individual subscription cards from Greece, for a fraction (10%) of the Sky subscription cost.

Regardless of the fact UK pub owners utilized these foreign decoding devices in unauthorized fashion, breaching terms of use by submitting false residence addresses, the ECJ focused on European consumers preemption from freely engaging in the purchase of goods and services across state borders, thus declaring that restrictions on the territorial range within which one would have to use a certain subscription service were in violation of EU Law. Namely, any exclusive licenses, as well as national legislation protecting such licenses, are found in violation of the freedom to provide services and fair competition rules, if they create artificial trade barriers, fix prices by creating national borders EU Law abolishes, and prevent consumers from using a service beyond certain national borders. The EU Satellite Broadcasting Directive and the Television without Frontiers Directive in particular declare that broadcasts across state borders and a common market distribution are key avenues toward the realization of European integration.

Importantly, the ECJ found no justifications on grounds of public policy for such restrictive practices. On one hand, the Court found no intellectual property rights by means of EU-wide Copyright for football matches themselves (albeit still protectable under member state law), rather only found particular aspects of the broadcasts copyrightable, e.g. the FAPL anthem, highlights, and various graphics. For such protectable aspects of a broadcast, one still needs to seek permission from the rights owner prior to public viewing. On the other hand, such restrictive practices were not justified either on grounds of protecting sporting interests, such as attracting game attendance, as other means (i.e. closed periods during which contracting parties would not broadcast Premiership games to encourage attendance) may accomplish such goals in less restrictive fashion than complete preemption of cross-border services utilization.

The Courts use of the specificity of sport Art. 165 of the Treaty establishing the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) is significant. Practices in favor of sport organizations should not go beyond what is necessary to accomplish the goals pursued, and in any event the Court assumes a position where the balance generally should lean in favor of upholding fundamental EU Law principles.

Talking NBA Lockout

Fri, 07 Oct 2011 04:30:07 +0000

Tired of the NBA lockout? If so, you probably won’t enjoy my interview with Chris Townsend of 95.7 FM San Francisco. But if not, please check it out.

Rain Delays and "the Integrity of the Pennant Race"

Fri, 30 Sep 2011 11:30:14 +0000

An interesting side-note from Wednesday night, which is becoming widely accepted as one of the best nights of baseball ever.

The Red Sox game against the Orioles in Baltimore was delayed by rain for about 90 minutes in the seventh inning with Boston leading 3-2. This is not an inordinately long delay, but it’s much more than the minimum (30 minutes) required for the umpires to decide to call the game. If they had, the Red Sox would have won, and presumably would be in a one-game playoff with Tampa Bay for the AL wild-card spot. But the generally accepted practice is that a game that important should not be called because of “the integrity of the pennant race.” (Most agree that if the game had been between two non-contenders, it would have been called.)

I am not saying the game should have been called (or that it shouldn’t). But I don’t agree that the integrity of the race is best protected by changing the rules in the interest of the integrity of the race. Much like basketball referees who swallow their whistle at the end of the game in the mistaken belief that they are allowing the players to determine the result, deciding not to enforce a rule is as much an example of referees determining the outcome as overzealously enforcing one. In either case, one team is given an advantage it wouldn’t have at another point in the game or season.

In this example, it worked out well for the Orioles, and through them the Rays. And it worked out well for baseball, which had a much more interesting outcome than it would have with a rain-shortened game. (Although had Boston won there would have been a one-game playoff on Thursday.) I’m just not sure that having different rules for “important” games is something baseball should be promoting.

New Sports Illustrated Column: Court ruling keeps Mets owners in limbo regarding Madoff lawsuit

Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:30:04 +0000

I have a new column for SI on a key decision today by U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff to permit the two most serious claims against Mets owners Fred Wilpon and Saul Katz, who are facing a $1 billion lawsuit over whether they fraudulently earned money through investments with imprisoned Ponzi scheme artist Bernie Madoff. Rakoff dismissed nine of the lawsuit’s 11 counts, but refused to dismiss the most damaging counts: that Wilpon and Katz earned $295 million in fictitious profits through investing in a scheme that they knew to be too good to be true — that is, they knew to be fraudulent — and that they should return their $700 million principal, as well.

Could Major League Baseball take over the team? Here are my thoughts:

Wilpon and Katz also have to worry about Major League Baseball’s interest in the matter. Commissioner Bud Selig has already taken over the Los Angeles Dodgers this season from Frank and Jamie McCourt because of the team’s financial woes. The commissioner is armed with several legal weapons — the best interests of the game clause, which provides Selig with wide discretion to regulate any aspect of the game, including ownership interests; the waiver of recourse clause found in ownership purchase agreements, which nominally prevents owners from suing Major League Baseball; and the historical exemption enjoyed by Major League Baseball under federal antitrust law — that make it possible for him to wrestle control of privately-owned teams from their owners. Although Selig has a much better relationship with Wilpon than with the McCourts, he cannot ignore the potential fallout of the Mets mired in a $1 billion lawsuit.

To read the rest of the column, click here.

Zelinsky on The Supreme Court (of Baseball)

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:30:10 +0000

Aaron Zelinsky, who has blogged here and written on aspects of the judge-as-umpire metaphor, has a new piece, The Supreme Court (of Baseball), at Yale Law Journal Online, that continues his argument that the Supreme Court and the Justices are analogous to the Commissioner of Baseball.

Worth a read.

University of Maryland School of Law Symposium on Intersection of Sports and Business in Today’s Legal Arena

Tue, 27 Sep 2011 04:30:19 +0000

I look forward to participating in next Monday’s sports law symposium at the University of Maryland School of Law — this event is open to the public; hope to see Sports Law Blog readers there.

University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

Upcoming Symposium

“The Intersection of Sports and Business in Todays Legal Arena.”

Journal of Business & Technology Law Fall Symposium, Co-Hosted by the Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Association

Monday, October 3, 2011, 9:30 a.m. 5:30 p.m.

Ceremonial Moot Court Room, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, 500 West Baltimore Street, Baltimore, MD 21201

Distinguished speakers will take part in panel discussions on stadium development, the legality the Bowl Championship Series, and athlete images/media rights. A highlight of the event will include a speech by Ed Durso, Executive Vice President, Administration for ESPN, who is currently scheduled to give a luncheon keynote address. Additionally, Jay Bilas, ESPN commentator and analyst, will also speak and moderate a panel discussion. Other recognized speakers include Irwin Kishner, a Partner at Herrick, Feinstein and lead counsel for the new Yankee Stadium transaction, Alan Fishel, a Partner at Arent Fox and supporter of the Bowl Championship Series, and N. Jeremi Duru, Associate Professor of Law at Temple University Beasley School of Law and author of the book, Advancing the Ball: Race, Reformation, and the Quest for Equal Coaching Opportunity in the NFL.

RVSP HERE or reply by email to ngrim004@umaryland.edu.

Schedule of Events

9:30 9:35	Welcome from JBTL/EASL members
9:35 10:20	A discussion with N. Jeremi Duru, visiting Associate Professor of Law, University of Maryland School of Law, about equal opportunity in sports.
10:20 11:00	Opening Remarks from moderator Jay Bilas, ESPN commentator and analyst
11:00 12:30 p.m.	Complex Sports Transactions: Stadium Development Panel Stan Kasten, Former President of the Washington Nationals, Atlanta Braves and Atlanta Hawks Irwin Kishner, Partner, Herrick, Feinstein Irwin Raij, Partner, Foley & Lardner Paul Tiburzi, Partner, DLA Piper
12:30 1:00	Lunch and message from Dean Phoebe Haddon
1:00 2:00	Keynote speech by Edwin Durso, Executive Vice President, Administration for ESPN
2:15 2:30	Introduction to the afternoon panels from moderator Dionne Koller, Associate Professor of Law, University of Baltimore School of Law
2:30 4:00	Bowl Championship Series Panel Alan Fishel, Partner, Arent Fox Philip Hochberg, Law Offices of Philip R. Hochberg Josephine (Jo) Potuto, Professor, University of Nebraska College of Law Robert Wierenga, Principal, Miller Canfield
4:15 5:15	Athlete Images/Media Rights Panel Ronald Katz, Partner, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips Michael McCann, Director of the Sports Law Institute and Professor of Law, Vermont Law School Stuart Paynter, Partner, Paynter Law Firm. Lead plaintiff’s counsel in Sam Keller v. Entertainment Arts
5:15 5:30	Closing Remarks from Dionne Koller

The future of GLBT athletes

Sun, 25 Sep 2011 04:30:20 +0000

Ari Waldman has a short post at PrawfsBlawg discussing the new NFL CBA which prohibits discrimination because of sexual orientation. Waldman describes this as an important next step in the slow acceptance of homsexuality in sports (especially male sports), along with numerous athletes speaking out on marriage equality and anti-gay bullying.

Family of hockey scout settles last remaining 9/11 lawsuit

Fri, 23 Sep 2011 04:30:20 +0000

The family of Mark Bavis, an LA Kings scout who died aboard United Flight 175 when it crashed into the World Trade Center during the Sept. 11 attacks, has settled its lawsuit against the airline and its security company. See the AP story here

Bavis’ family, including his identical twin brother Mike, a BU assistant coach, had insisted that they would not settle (see my earlier story here) because it was more important to them to investigate and expose the failures of airline security. They had hoped to house their findings at the 9/11 memorial at ground zero. But the family, and its lawyers, say U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein gutted its case, limiting the amount of time for the trial to three weeks. He also kept much of the information under seal, for national security reasons.

The family explained its change of heart this way:

“This change is the result of a recent ruling by the Honorable Judge Alvin Hellerstein. With the stroke of his pen, Judge Hellerstein very cleverly changed this lawsuit. The lawsuit was about wrongful death, gross negligence and a complete lack of appreciation for the value of human life. He instead made it a case about a federal regulation. He ignored 100 years of aviation law and relied on an environmental case to apply federal preemption. He essentially gutted the case so that the truth about what led to the events of Sept. 11, 2001, would never be told at trial.”

The amount of the settlement has not been disclosed. I would be interested in seeing whether it came in higher than the average $2 million payment from the Victims Compensation Fund, and higher than the $5.5 million average from the other cases that went to court before settling.