Sports Law Blogger Mark Conrad Chosen to Direct New Sports Business Program at Fordham

Fordham University’s Gabelli School of Business announced the creation of a new undergraduate program focusing on the sports business. Called the Sports Business Specialization, the program will provide students first-hand knowledge of the business of professional and amateur sports. As part of the business program, all students are required to take foundation courses in accounting, finance, marketing, management and communications before they are eligible to take the sports-specific business classes. Students will also be required to complete an independent studies component, which will include an internship.

I was honored to be chosen to direct that program by Donna Rapaccioli, the dean of the Gabelli School of Business. The program will also offer the opportunity for guest speakers to come to campus or to speak to students via Skype. Speakers from the NBA and Major League Baseball have addressed our students. The state-of-the-art facilities at the Gabelli School of Business will also allow out-of-town speakers to address students and faculty via Skype or other online video service. Symposia will also be planned.  If anyone is interested in coming to the Bronx campus to speak about legal issues involving social media in sports, please drop me a message at Conrad@fordham.edu.

For more information on the specialization, please visit:

http://www.gabelliconnect.com/sports-business

Will Florida Atlantic Football Partner With the Immoral Private Prison Industry?

The GEO Group, one of two nationally prominent private prison corporations in America has just signed an agreement with Florida Atlantic University to "name" the football stadium at FAU.  Understandably, this has caused an uproar from many on the faculty and in the student body at Florida Atlantic.  "The GEO Group Stadium" at Florida Atlantic University immediately conjures up images of the now retired "Enron Stadium" where the Houston Astros used to take the field, except that The GEO Group is undoubtedly more sinister and harmful to United States citizens than Enron ever was (a fact absolutely lost on FAU President Mary Jane Saunders until student and faculty protests erupted).

The GEO Group is a private prison company.  As I have written about extensively, private prison corporations essentially collect taxpayer funds from federal and state governments (a "per diem" or per bed fee) in order to house prisoners on behalf of these governments and do so with an immoral profit maximization motivation. Private prison companies profit on human misery.  Shareholders of  GEO Group stock expect the board of directors and executives to return handsome profits from imprisoning United States citizens (and increasingly illegal aliens).  The perversity in this arrangement, of course, is that in order to increase profits for shareholders, private prison companies, including the Corrections Corporation of America (the other prominent U.S. private prison company), seek to aggressively imprison more Americans by lobbying legislatures to increase sentencing laws, divine new laws/ways to imprison individuals, and even engage in drafting model legislation like SB 1070 (Arizona's "show me your papers" law) and three-strikes laws.  In "All Eyez on Me: America's War on Drugs and the Prison Industrial Complex," I describe the perverse incentives that motivate the private prison industry by examining the immorality attendant in leadership of private prison companies debating successful ways to increase profit by incarcerating more United States' citizens.

Private prison companies have flourished in recent years based upon the increasingly dubious claim that they provide prison services for less cost than do governmental agencies.  While numerous studies dispute this assertion, the bottom line economic transfer is that taxpayer funds are being funneled to private prison companies (and its executives and shareholders) without those companies providing any genuine public good or manufacture of product.  Indeed, recent reports indicate that private prison companies engage in gross human rights and constitutional violations, more egregious than government run prisons.

And now, FAU has signed an agreement to partner with The GEO Group allowing GEO to prominently appear on the facade of its' football stadium and increase its corporate branding.  FAU's President appears to have not engaged in any due diligence when signing the naming right, relying singularly upon the fact that the GEO Group Chair is a proud alumnus of FAU.  This is particularly egregious in Florida, where private prisons have attempted to seize on opportunities to stealthily motivate state legislators to sanction massive expansion of the private prison industry.  Students recently orchestrated a "sit-in" where President Saunders was forced to speak to the group, though she claims the naming agreement is a "done deal."  Whether students protests will lead to a repudiation of the agreement remains to be seen.  Sans repudiation, Florida Atlantic University may go down as one of the first American Universities to openly celebrate the incredibly perverse and immoral private prison industry and lobby.


(hat tip to Dave Zirin at The Nation)
cross posted on the Corporate Justice Blog

Idaho Rejects the "Baseball Rule"

In an under-the-radar opinion issued last month, the Idaho Supreme Court allowed a fan injured by a foul ball at a minor league baseball game to proceed with a negligence suit against the franchise.  Specifically, the court refused to adopt what it called the "Baseball Rule," in which most courts have held that baseball teams are generally not legally liable to fans for injuries caused by foul balls hit into the stands, so long as they have provided protective netting for the most dangerous seats in the stadium (i.e., those immediately behind and around home plate).  Click here for Sports Law Blog's prior coverage of this topic.

The court's opinion - available here - indicates that the plaintiff, Bud Rountree, was hit by a ball while standing in the Class-A Boise Hawks' "Executive Club," apparently the only area in the stadium that is not covered by protective netting (Rountree ended up losing an eye as a result of the injury).  In light of the area of the stadium in which the injury occurred, along with the fact that the team went to greater than normal lengths to protect most of the stadium from foul balls (pictured), Rountree's case may be stronger case than that of the typical fan hit by a foul ball in unprotected seating.  Indeed, his attorneys apparently argued to the Idaho Supreme Court that while the so-called "Baseball Rule" may be justified in normal bleacher settings, it was not appropriate for multi-purpose areas of the ballpark (such as in-stadium, sit-down restaurant seating). 

Whether the opinion will have a broader impact on baseball teams outside of Idaho remains to be seen, but given the number of jurisdictions that have adopted the majority rule it is unlikely that this latest decision will have a significant impact nationwide.

Lance Armstrong & Michael McCann (No, really)

Our own Michael McCann goes one-on-one with Lance Armstrong in Austin, Texas for CNNSI!  As Mike tells the story:

"A few weeks ago, I discovered I had a new Twitter follower: Lance Armstrong. I thought it was a little odd because I don't cover cycling and the times I've written about Armstrong's legal issues I've often sharply criticized him. Nonetheless, I was intrigued. Soon we began corresponding privately and last week Armstrong invited me to his house in Austin for an interview."

To read today's teaser from CNNSI you can go here.  For the entire, groundbreaking story, you'll need to go purchase this week's Sports Illustrated.  Have no fear, you can purchase a digital version here.

Congratulations Mike on a tremendous job--both in getting Lance's attention and becoming a relevant contributor to the development of this international strory.  While Mike won't display any braggadocio, allow me to do so.  Huzzah Mike!  [Now if he had interviewed Lance for The Sports Law Blog we might get a few more followers.....]

DePaul Sports Law Symposium: Fri. March 8

DEPAUL JOURNAL OF SPORTS LAW & CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 2013 SYMPOSIUM

HURDLES:

 

LEGAL ISSUES A MODERN ATHLETE MUST OVERCOME

Friday, March 8, 2012
10:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.
DePaul University,
DePaul Center Room 8005, 1 E. Jackson Blvd, Chicago, IL 60604

Panel I: Physical Issues Athletes Must Overcome
10:05 - 10:50 AM
Moderated by Professor Michael S. Jacobs (DePaul College of Law)

1. Darren Heitner, Professor of Sport Agency Management at Indiana University Bloomington

   * Discussing the helmet manufacturer component of NFL concussion litigation

2. Scott Andresen, Partner, Andresen & Associates, P.C.

  * Discussing brain injuries and psychological damages resulting from participation in contact sports

Panel II: Moral Issues that Athletes Must Overcome

10:55 – 11:40 AM
Moderated by Professor Michael S. Jacobs (DePaul College of Law)

3. Chris Deubert, Associate Attorney, Peter R. Ginsberg Law, LLC

*Discussing arbitration strategies used as counsel for Johnathan Vilma during Bountygate Scandal

4. Robert Raiola, CPA, Sports and Entertainment Group Manager

   *Discussing contractual payment provisions and responsible investing for athletes such as RGIII

Panel III: Bureaucratic Issues Athletes Must Overcome
12:00-1:00 PM
Moderated by Professor Wayne Lewis (DePaul College of Law)

5. Prof. Marc Edelman, Professor of Law, Barry University Dwayne O. Andreas School of Law

   * Discussing anti-trust issues and the NCAA, focusing on pay-for-play and age requirements

6. Cari A. Stern, Associate Attorney, Chapman & Cutler LLP

   * Discussing Title IX issues schools face with respect to participation, eligibility, and sexual harassment

DePaul Law Students: FREE General Admission (including CLE credit for lawyers): $60 DePaul Law Alumni: $30 Other DePaul (non-law school) Students, Faculty, & Staff: $15 Other Law Students (non-DePaul): $20

Regulating MMA

This op-ed appeared on Fightland, a blog devoted to MMA; the author is the newly appointed commissioner/executive director of the fledgling state commission to regulate combat sports in Wyoming. One interesting point in the piece is how state regulation is necessary not so much for high-level competition (the author is not necessarily expecting UFC to come to Wyoming anytime soon), but for low-level amateur competitions among weekend athletes.

An Open Letter to College Athletes

Dear College Athletes:

You are obviously well aware of NCAA rules that prohibit you from advertising, recommending, promoting or endorsing the sale of commercial products and services.

Five years ago when Tim Tebow won the Heisman Trophy, I wrote him a letter on Sports Law Blog suggesting that he might consider suing third parties who profit from the use of his identity in commercial products without his permission.   By filing a lawsuit an athlete is not accepting payment for advertising, recommending, promoting or endorsing the sale of a product; rather the athlete would be protecting the property right in his identity from theft, which he has every legal right to do.

You may have heard that Heisman Trophy winner Johnny Manziel just recently filed a trademark lawsuit against someone for selling "Johnny Football" T-shirts without his permission.  As this is the first athlete with college eligibility to file a lawsuit asserting a trademark or right of publicity violation, the NCAA had no choice but to rule that Manziel can keep any money received from the litigation without it affecting his eligibility.

But the NCAA also clarified that any "loophole" created by Manziel's lawsuit is "closed" because they would consider it an NCAA violation if a lawsuit was an "orchestrated event" between the athlete and a booster to intentionally violate amateurism rules.

Putting aside the NCAA's conspiracy theory paranoia, here is the more likely scenario:

(1) Third party uses your identity in a product;

(2) Third party receives a cease and desist letter from your university which states that third party is violating NCAA amateurism rules and has no right to use your identity; and

(3) Third party throws the letter in the trash because (a) it is not bound by NCAA rules, (b) it is not using the university's intellectual property, (c) the university has no legal claim against it, and (d) it might even be willing to pay you a licensing fee absent your university's interference with its ability to obtain a license from you.

You see, Manziel's lawsuit exposes a dilemma that has always confronted the NCAA but which is no longer one of its best kept secrets.

The dilemma is that although the NCAA can prevent you from licensing (i.e. authorizing) the use of your identity to third parties for commercial purposes, it cannot and never could legally prevent you from receiving damages in a court of law through the enforcement of your legal rights against third parties who use your identity without your permission.  And you don't need to have a trademark because there are right of publicity laws in most states that protect you.

Manziel's lawsuit also exposes the fact that neither the NCAA nor your university has the legal right or authority to prevent, or interfere with, a non-member third party's use of your identity because that property right is yours and it is your property right that is being stolen.  Keep in mind that as your identity increasingly becomes more valuable for use in commercial products, third parties likewise become more willing to bear the cost of the licensing fee awarded to you in your lawsuit against them.

Manziel's lawsuit puts a spotlight on an NCAA rule that, unfortunately, not only interferes with a non-member's ability to enter a legal transaction with you but also burdens you with unnecessary and circuitous litigation that requires you to share one-third of the award with your lawyer.

Sincerely,

Rick Karcher
Sports Law Professor