15 U.S.C. § 1291

Exemption from antitrust laws of agreements covering the telecasting of sports contests and the combining of professional football leagues

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

The antitrust laws, as defined in section 1 of the Act of October 15, 1914, as amended (38 Stat. 730) [15 U.S.C. 12], or in the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended (38 Stat. 717) [15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.], shall not apply to any joint agreement by or among persons engaging in or conducting the organized professional team sports of football, baseball, basketball, or hockey, by which any league of clubs participating in professional football, baseball, basketball, or hockey contests sells or otherwise transfers all or any part of the rights of such league’s member clubs in the sponsored telecasting of the games of football, baseball, basketball, or hockey, as the case may be, engaged in or conducted by such clubs. In addition, such laws shall not apply to a joint agreement by which the member clubs of two or more professional football leagues, which are exempt from income tax under section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 [26 U.S.C. 501(c)(6)], combine their operations in expanded single league so exempt from income tax, if such agreement increases rather than decreases the number of professional football clubs so operating, and the provisions of which are directly relevant thereto.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 36 cases, 1967–2019 · leading case: Ninth Inning, Inc. v. Directv, LLC, 933 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2019).
Ninth Inning, Inc. v. Directv, LLC, 933 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2019). · cites it 5× “15 U.S.C. § 1291 . Thus, the SBA provides a tailored exemption for “professional team sports” to sell their rights to “sponsored telecasts” through a joint agreement.”
Philadelphia Eagles Football Club, Inc. v. City of Philadelphia, 823 A.2d 108 (Pa. 2003). · cites it 4× “" [13] 15 U.S.C. § 1291 (emphasis added). In granting the *119 NFL the ability to enter into pooled-rights agreements with the networks, Congress clearly stated that such agreements involve the transfer of exclusive broadcasting rights from the NFL members to the networks.”
Connecticut Ironworkers Employers Ass'n v. New England Reg'l Council of Carpenters, 869 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 2017). “Some are express, such as statutory carve-outs for sports broadcasting, 15 U.S.C. § 1291 , or the business of insurance, 15 U.”
Norman F. Hecht, Harry Kagan, Marc A. Miller, Washington Federals, Inc., Etal. v. Pro-Football, Inc., 444 F.2d 931 (D.C. Cir. 1971). · cites it 3× “The Federal Aviation Act requires the CAB to weigh the antitrust considerations, and hence this court reviewed the record supporting the Board’s findings that the contract would not create a monopoly in violation of the national antitrust policy.”
United States Football League v. Nat'l Football League, 634 F. Supp. 1155 (S.D.N.Y. 1986). · cites it 4× “732 (codified as amended at 15 U.S.C. § 1291 ) (“1961 Legislation”). This statute now provides in relevant part, for the following.”
Mid-South Grizzlies v. Nat'l Football League, 720 F.2d 772 (3rd Cir. 1983). · cites it 4× “732 (1961), 15 U.S.C. § 1291 . Section 1291, enacted in 1961, granted to certain professional sports leagues a limited exemption from the antitrust laws with respect to the joint sale of television broadcast rights for league games, and the 1966 amendment permitted “a joint…”
Am. Fed'n of Musicians v. Carroll, 391 U.S. 99 (1968). · cites it 2× “1515 , 15 U. S. C. § 1291 (1964 ed., Supp. II) (joint agreements by professional football clubs).”
James McCoy (Yazoo) Smith v. Pro Football, Inc., a Maryland Corp., A/K/A Washington Redskins & the Nat'l Football League, (Two Cases), 593 F.2d 1173 (D.C. Cir. 1979). “732 ); 15 U.S.C. § 1291 . The antitrust limitations were also waived in 1966 by Congress to permit the merger of the National and American Football Leagues.”
Mid-South Grizzlies v. Nat'l Football League, 550 F. Supp. 558 (E.D. Pa. 1982). · cites it 2× “Each proposed owner or holder of any interest in a membership, including stockholders in any corporation, members of a partnership and all other persons holding any interest in the applicant must be individually approved by the affirmative vote of not less than three-fourths or…”
Chicago Prof'l Sports Ltd. P'ship & Wgn Cont'l Broad. Co. v. Nat'l Basketball Ass'n, 961 F.2d 667 (7th Cir. 1992). “II As a basketball league, the NBA claims the protection of the Sports Broadcasting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1291 : The antitrust laws ...”
Schwartz v. Dallas Cowboys Football Club, Ltd., 157 F. Supp. 2d 561 (E.D. Pa. 2001). “Appeal to Third Circuit On October 15, 1997, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that under the Sports Broadcasting Act (the “SBA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1291 , that (1) the pooled sale of all the regular season games to DirectTV is a sale of “residual” rights in a…”
Donald F. Nichols v. Spencer Int'l Press, Inc., & the Crowell-Collier Publ'g Co., 371 F.2d 332 (7th Cir. 1967). · cites it 2× “such restraining order or injunction shall prohibit any person or persons * * * from ceasing * * * to employ any party to such dispute, or from recommending, advising, or persuading others by peaceful and lawful means * * Reliance is principally placed on the last clause of this…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.