June 16, 2014

In re Student Athlete Name and Likeness Litigation – Recap Of The First Week Of Trial

By David Scupp

The participants in the highly anticipated, and potentially transformative, antitrust trial In re Student Athlete Name and Likeness Licensing Litigation spent their first week of trial grappling with the myths and realities of college athletics.

Plaintiffs, led by former UCLA basketball star Ed O’Bannon, challenge the NCAA’s rules denying compensation to college athletes for use of their name and likeness in television broadcasts, rebroadcasts, game clips, and video games. To win, plaintiffs will have to overcome the NCAA’s “amateurism” justification for restricting its athletes’ compensation – a defense that the NCAA has employed successfully for decades. This will be one of, if not the, primary battlegrounds in the case. Much of the testimony heard during the first week of trial focused on this issue.

click here for more »

Leave a comment »

Categories: Antitrust Litigation

    June 16, 2014

    EU General Court Upholds Record 1.06 Billion Euro Antitrust Fine Against Intel

    A View from Constantine Cannon’s London Office

    By Irene Fraile

    The General Court of the European Union has dismissed Intel’s appeal of the European Commission´s decision fining the computer chip manufacturer a record 1.06 billion euros for breaching EU competition law.

    The European Commission imposed the fine on Intel in May 2009, after finding that Intel abused its dominant position in the x86 CPU microprocessors market by attempting to foreclose Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), its main rival, between 2002 and 2007.

    click here for more »

    Leave a comment »

    Categories: Antitrust Enforcement, Antitrust Litigation, International Competition Issues

      June 6, 2014

      District Court Rejects “Double Counting” Attack On Damages Theory In Meritor’s Exclusive Dealing Case

      By Matthew L. Cantor and Allison F. Sheedy

      Judge Sue L. Robinson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware has denied a motion for summary judgment on damages in ZF Meritor LLC and Meritor Transmission Corporation v. Eaton Corporation, setting up the long-running antitrust case for a trial on damages that is slated to start on June 23, 2014.

      Plaintiffs are now free to seek the full $800 million they claim as damages, which, after trebling, would total $2.4 billion.  Plaintiffs have already won a jury verdict on liability that found that Defendant Eaton Corporation, an electrical and hydraulic systems maker, violated Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by entering into unlawful exclusive dealing agreements.

      The plaintiffs are Meritor Transmission Corp. and an extinct joint venture between Meritor and a German manufacturer, which sold manual transmission systems to truck manufacturers.  Plaintiffs claimed that Eaton excluded their joint venture from the market by entering into long-term arrangements with major American truck manufacturers.  Plaintiffs alleged that these long-term arrangements—which included loyalty “discounts” that plaintiffs claimed were pricing penalties—were actually unlawful exclusive dealing agreements.

      click here for more »

      Leave a comment »

      Categories: Antitrust Litigation

        May 22, 2014

        $20 Million Settlement Domino Falls In High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation, With More On The Brink

        By David Golden

        The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has granted the motion of plaintiffs in In Re: High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation for final approval of class action settlements with Pixar, Lucasfilm, and Intuit for $20 million.

        The court’s final approval of these settlements follows the recent announcement of another, much larger, proposed settlement in the same lawsuit with tech heavyweights Google, Apple, Intel, and Adobe Systems.  That settlement is reported to total $324 million.

        The class action complaint alleges that several high-profile companies conspired to fix wages and eliminate competition for workers in high-tech industries.  The case has received considerable media attention because of allegations that Steve Jobs, the late CEO of Apple, was centrally involved in the conspiracy at both Pixar and Apple.  In an unusual twist, one of the named class representatives recently objected to the proposed settlement with Google, Apple, Intel, and Adobe.  The court has scheduled a hearing regarding preliminary approval of that settlement for June 19, 2014.

        click here for more »

        Leave a comment »

        Categories: Antitrust Litigation

          May 16, 2014

          Two Calls Go Against The NCAA In Student-Athletes’ Name and Likeness Litigation

          By David Scupp

          The NCAA was on the losing end of two orders entered this week in the In re NCAA Student Athlete Name & Likeness Licensing Litigation.

          The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied the NCAA’s motion for leave to file a motion for partial reconsideration of the court’s order denying the NCAA’s motion for summary judgment on antitrust claims of current and former student-athletes who were denied compensation for the commercial use of their name, image, and likeness. The NCAA had argued that the court should reconsider its finding that providing financial support to women’s sports and less prominent men’s sports is not a legitimate procompetitive justification for the NCAA’s challenged restrictions on student-athlete pay.

          In its summary judgment decision, the court held that the market for women’s sports and less prominent men’s sports is separate from the market for Division I men’s football and basketball, and found that it would be “improper to validate a practice that is decidedly in restraint of trade simply because the practice produces some unrelated benefits to competition in another market.” The court also found that this procompetitive justification failed because the record contained undisputed evidence that the NCAA could support women’s sports and less prominent men’s sports through less restrictive means.

          click here for more »

          Leave a comment »

          Categories: Antitrust Litigation

            « Previous Entries  






            © 2009-2014 Constantine Cannon LLP. Attorney Advertising. Disclaimer.