SAN JOSE, Calif. -- A federal magistrate ruled Thursday that multimedia rights companies that represent university athletic departments can continue to be subject to the same rules governing millions in third party name-image-likeness payments to players that are reshaping college sports.
Northern District of California Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins, who was appointed to hear disputes related to the landmark House settlement, denied a request to rule that MMRs should not fall under the same reviews by the College Sports Commission as do collective and booster deals.
"This ruling affirms that the CSC has been correctly applying the language of the settlement as written," said College Sports Commission CEO Bryan Seeley in a statement. "Our enforcement of the rules has been, and will continue to be, fact-based and consistent with the settlement that plaintiffs' lawyers negotiated and was agreed to by all parties."
Cousins heard arguments on the request on June 10.
Many schools have arrangements with MMRs to act as the marketing arms for their athletic departments and arrange third-party NIL deals with athletes.
In the hearing on June 10, plaintiffs attorney Jeffrey Kessler argued that boosters and booster collectives, which have in some cases been replaced by MMRs as the key NIL negotiators, should be deemed associated entities but not the MMRs themselves.
With Cousins ruling the MMRs are "associated entities," the deals they make remain subject to the College Sports Commission's review. The College Sports Commission was formed to analyze NIL contracts to make sure they conform with the guidelines set up by the House settlement.
If Cousins had ruled the MMRs are not "associated entities" as requested by the plaintiffs, then their deals would not have been subject to the same scrutiny by the College Sports Commission. That could have set a course for more spending.