Ed O'Bannon plaintiffs propose what NCAA trial win would entail
Plaintiffs file their proposal for what the language would look like of ending the NCAA's rules prohibiting athletes from being paid off names, images and likenesses.
One of the final logistical questions before the Ed O'Bannon trial against the NCAA starts next week was answered Friday when the plaintiffs provided their proposed language for an injunction should they win.
The O'Bannon plaintiffs are seeking an injunction to end the NCAA's rules preventing players from being paid for use of their names, images or likenesses. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken had asked the plaintiffs to provide what they want if they win the antitrust case. Wilken doesn't have to accept the plaintiffs' proposed language, which states:
"1. Defendant National Collegiate Athletic Association ('NCAA'), its respective officers, member institutions, conferences, agents, servants, employees, licensees, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, or any of them who receives actual notice of this judgment by personal service or otherwise, be, and are hereby, permanently restrained and enjoined from following, executing or attempting to execute, enacting, agreeing to, or enforcing or attempting to enforce any constitutional provision, bylaw, rule, regulation, interpretation, policy, or eligibility form to the extent that it fixes or causes to be fixed the price of current or former Division I men's basketball and FBS football athletes' names, images, and likenesses ('NILs') or otherwise forecloses those athletes from being compensated, agreeing to be compensated, or receiving offers of compensation for the use or licensing of their NILs, including by loss or threatened loss of athletic eligibility.
"2. Defendant National Collegiate Athletic Association ('NCAA'), its respective officers, member institutions, conferences, agents, servants, employees, licensees, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, or any of them who receives actual notice of this judgment by personal service or otherwise, be, and are hereby, permanently restrained and enjoined from violating or continuing to violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act (15 U.S.C. § 1).
"3. Any party may seek modification of this Order, at any time, by written motion and for good cause based on changed circumstances or otherwise.
"4. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce this Order. In the event that any part of this Order is violated by the parties named herein or other persons, Plaintiffs may, by motion with notice to the attorneys for the Defendants, apply for sanctions or other relief that may be appropriate."
The O'Bannon plaintiffs wrote that their proposal is based in part on injunctions entered in several cases, including Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma v. NCAA in 1984, and Mackey v. NFL in 1975-77. The trial starts Monday in Oakland and will last up to three weeks.
Sometimes spring practice is about avoiding the negatives as much as it is building moment...
Baylor is moving to dismiss the lawsuit, filed in January, on a two-year statute of limita...
USF senior Hassan Childs was injured in a shooting on Saturday night
It looks like LSU is moving towards having a beer garden for its home games
HB1249 would allow Arkansans with a certain permit to carry guns almost anywhere in the st...
Mark Dantonio answered questions about the suspensions and ongoing sexual assault investig...