Research in Disciplines: College!
Professor Goeller
March 3, 2015
Working Title: The Exploitation of the Collegiate Athlete
Topic
This paper will explore the legality of the NCAA and the various ways it and universities use the terms “student-athlete” and “amateur” to exploit athletes for financial gain. The paper will attempt to link the NCAA and universities to the idea that college sports has become a money making business and that the athletes rights are being encroached upon for profit. It will focus on Division 1 sports, in particular large football and basketball programs as they generate the most money.
Research Question
Has collegiate athletics become a for profit enterprise which unlawfully exploits collegiate athletes for economic gains?
Theoretical Frame
The legality of the NCAA has been questioned many times and the practices that it uses to keep players from being compensated can be considered illegal. According to “UNLAWFUL ENCROACHMENT: WHY THE NCAA MUST COMPENSATE STUDENT-ATHLETES FOR THE USE OF THEIR NAMES, IMAGES, AND LIKENESSES” by Erin Cronk, the right of publicity, which states the right of privacy includes “appropriation, for the defendant's advantage, of the plaintiffs name or likeness”, is being broken by the NCAA when they appropriate names and likeness for profit. It is argued that the NCAA forces the athlete to sign over this right as they must if they want to play, which is exploitation. The NCAA principle of amateurism is used keep colligate athletes from profiting off of their image and likeness in order to preserve some kind of fairness. There are many instances where the athletes’ likenesses and names are appropriated for huge profits such as selling jerseys with the numbers of star players. This principle raises a question, is this provision still fair in a world where so many profit from the hard work of unpaid collegiate athletes? College athletics makes so much money and it seems rather unfair that collegiate athletes do not get fair compensation for the risk and effort they put in.
Another issue is that the NCAA fits the description of a cartel, which is illegal. According to Lawrence Kahn in his work “Markets: Cartel Behavior And Amateurism In College Sports”, the NCAA “…has enforced collusive restrictions on payments for factors of production, including player compensation, recruiting expenses, and assistant coaches’ salaries; it has restricted output; and it has defeated potential rival groups” and he states that “…restrictions on payments to players are probably the most important way in which the NCAA acts to restrict competition.” When the NCAA is allowed to operate in this manner, students are being exploited as top athletes are made to accept compensation in the form of scholarships which is well below the amount of money they generate for the NCAA and schools. By controlling prices and putting harsh restrictions and penalties in place for violating for breaking these rules, the NCAA generates massive profits which the athletes never see. Athletes get exploited when there is a restriction on the amount of compensation an athlete can receive.
Case
O’Bannon v. NCAA and EA Sports is a case which deals with the appropriation of collegiate athletes’ likenesses in both video games and the lack of licensing for media broadcasts. This is important because the NCAA and outside companies are profiting off the likeness of collegiate athletes giving absolutely no compensation to players. Collegiate athletes in this case are being exploited and there is nothing they can do as these athletes are forced to sign over their likeness. This, according to Erin Cronk, is a violation of the right of publicity.
There are a few lawsuits that have come about due to the practices the NCAA uses to control collegiate sports that are consistent with that of a cartel. The first is a lawsuit fairly recently in March of 2014 which seeks to change the rule that universities cannot negotiate or give some form of compensation players and that price-fixation is a restraint of trade. Another case is NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma which sought to take control of television rights from the NCAA and give them to universities. This case was successful in taking power away from the NCAA and also stopped revenue sharing from these broadcasts (Branch). The issue that was challenged in this case, NCAA control of televised games, has many similarities to other issues that students currently face. The ruling found that restricting television appearances of schools was a restraint of trade and thus universities were given control. The universities faced restraint of trade from the price fixing which the defendants of the law suit mentioned in the previous case argue they are facing as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment