Part I of this Note explains the relevant law governing In re NCAA Student-Athlete Name & Likeness Licensing Litigation, followed by a summary of the factual and procedural history of the case. Additionally, Part I summarizes how the majority opinion of the Ninth Circuit followed case precedent to apply the five-factor “transformative use” test. Part II explains the dissenting opinion and argues why it should have been the opinion adopted by the court. Additionally, Part II asserts that the majority decision hampers free speech in sports entertainment and places an unnecessary cap on creativity
For over a century, the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s concept of amateurism prohibited ...
While student-athletes are the backbone of the $11 billion college sports industry, they do not curr...
Nico Chapman - Money for Nothing (I Want Publicity) - Amateurism is Dead and Fair Pay to Play Could ...
In 2013, two U.S. Courts of Appeals ruled that NCAA athletes could maintain right of publicity claim...
In O’Bannon v. NCAA, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California entere...
When Electronic Arts Inc. (Electronic Arts) launched its video game series NCAA Football in June 199...
The right of publicity provides protection to an individual and prevents another individual or corpo...
The NCAA has experienced controversy for many years now, but it may have another issue to grapple wi...
For the past seventy years, intellectual property law’s right of publicity has allowed for celebriti...
Two circuits in one summer found in favor of college athletes in right-of-publicity suits filed agai...
Following a unanimous defeat at the Supreme Court in National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)...
This Comment discusses renewed support for challenging the National College Athletic Association (NC...
The right of publicity is the right of an individual to control the commercial use of her name, imag...
The recent O\u27Bannon v. NCAA decision, which gave student athletes a right in products that exploi...
The NCAA is facing liability for eligibility rules that violate the Sherman Antitrust Act. Student-...
For over a century, the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s concept of amateurism prohibited ...
While student-athletes are the backbone of the $11 billion college sports industry, they do not curr...
Nico Chapman - Money for Nothing (I Want Publicity) - Amateurism is Dead and Fair Pay to Play Could ...
In 2013, two U.S. Courts of Appeals ruled that NCAA athletes could maintain right of publicity claim...
In O’Bannon v. NCAA, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California entere...
When Electronic Arts Inc. (Electronic Arts) launched its video game series NCAA Football in June 199...
The right of publicity provides protection to an individual and prevents another individual or corpo...
The NCAA has experienced controversy for many years now, but it may have another issue to grapple wi...
For the past seventy years, intellectual property law’s right of publicity has allowed for celebriti...
Two circuits in one summer found in favor of college athletes in right-of-publicity suits filed agai...
Following a unanimous defeat at the Supreme Court in National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)...
This Comment discusses renewed support for challenging the National College Athletic Association (NC...
The right of publicity is the right of an individual to control the commercial use of her name, imag...
The recent O\u27Bannon v. NCAA decision, which gave student athletes a right in products that exploi...
The NCAA is facing liability for eligibility rules that violate the Sherman Antitrust Act. Student-...
For over a century, the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s concept of amateurism prohibited ...
While student-athletes are the backbone of the $11 billion college sports industry, they do not curr...
Nico Chapman - Money for Nothing (I Want Publicity) - Amateurism is Dead and Fair Pay to Play Could ...