Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> Antitrust Commentary
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Corporate & Securities Law
: Antitrust CommentaryFTC and DOJ Urge Reversal in American Needle v. NFL
By Matthew S. Wild
As noted in the June 29, 2009 Post, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Seventh Circuit’s decision in American Needle v. Nat’l Football League. As explained in the September 4, 2008 Post, American Needle applied the Copperweld doctrine to a sports league’s joint licensing scheme for the first time. In so doing, it affirmed summary judgment in favor of the NFL, its teams and Reebok in an antitrust challenge to an exclusive license of team names and logos to Reebok for use on headwear. (The decision is linked to the September 4 Post). As explained in Wild, et al., ?Private Equity Groups Under Common Legal Control Constitute a Single Enterprise Under the Antitrust Laws,? 3 NYU Journal of Law and Business 231, 237 and n.31 (attached under articles above), that doctrine treats two or more firms that are under common ownership or have a unity of interest in a common course of action as a single firm incapable of conspiring or otherwise acting collectively under the antitrust laws.
In their amici curiae brief, the government urges reversal. It argues that the Seventh Circuit extended the Copperweld doctrine in a manner inconsistent with prior precedent — e.g., Texaco Inc. v. Dagher, 547 U.S. 1 (2006), in which the Supreme Court applied the rule of reason to a price-setting joint venture and NCAA v. Board of Regents, 468 U.S. 85 (1984), in which the Supreme Court applied a “quick look” to a NCAA restriction on each individual college’s right to broadcast their football games. While the government conceded that the league should be entitled to Copperweld immunity under circumstances in which the teams need to cooperate such as to produce games, the licensing of NFL team logos is not one of them. Indeed, the government observed that the NFL joint licensing scheme was similar to the type of scheme under review in Broadcast Music, Inc. v. CBS, 441 U.S. 1 (1979). In BMI, the Supreme Court applied the rule of reason to a joint venture in which composers created a clearinghouse to sell a blanket license to works by more than one of them. The American Antitrust Institute and Consumer Federation of America also filed a brief as amici curiae urging reversal. Their brief and the government’s brief are linked below. DOJ and FTC Brief; AAI Brief
Full post as published by Antitrust Commentary on September 30, 2009 (boomark / email).
American Airlines Settles Price Fixing Class Action
American Airlines Settles Price Fixing Class Action
American Corrective Counseling Services to Pay $2.55 Million In Pennsylvania Class Action
American Corrective Counseling Services to Pay $2.55 Million In Pennsylvania Class Action
First American Corporation
NYSE: FAF
American International Group, Inc.
AIG
First American Corporation
401k / ERISA Stock Fraud
American International Group, Inc.
401(k) / ERISA Stock Fraud

First Merits Brief Filed in American Needle
McCann on American Needle v. NFL
Together Again: The FTC and DOJ Join Forces in American Needle v. NFL
American Needle Throws Downfield in NFL Licensing Dispute
"Continued discharges anger 'don't ask, don't tell' critics; Gay-rights groups urge reversal now"
Threading American Needle: Could It Destroy Free Agency in the NFL
American Needle Cert Granted - Some Initial Thoughts








