The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals essentially issued a split decision on a District Court ruling in the Ed O’Bannon case, upholding the initial finding of antitrust violations while dismissing a potential solution. The three-judge panel was divided when it came to the payments, with one judge dissenting from the majority opinion that the deferred compensation idea should be thrown out.
MORE: 10 greatest Maryland players of all time
The immediate effect is colleges will not have to budget up to $5,000 annually for football and men’s basketball players as compensation for use of their likenesses in video games and other commercial products. That measure emerged from Judge Claudia Wilken’s 2014 ruling that NCAA regulations “unreasonably restrain trade” when it comes to athletes.
In upholding the thrust of Wilken’s ruling, the appeals court Wednesday agreed that the NCAA was not exempt from antitrust laws, but the panel called allowing the extra payments “erroneous” and vacated that part of Wilken’s decision.
In his dissent, Judge Sidney R. Thomas wrote that he saw no reason to overturn the District Court ruling on deferred compensation, based on the testimony presented in the original case.
“After an extensive bench trial, the district court made a factual finding that payment of $5,000 in deferred compensation would not significantly reduce consumer demand for college sports,” Thomas wrote. “This finding was supported by extensive testimony from at least four expert witnesses. There was no evidence to the contrary.”
The NCAA offered this comment on the court’s findings on Wednesday morning:
