1
American Football League v. National Football League
Introduction
The ASL v. NFL presents another legal tussle to be settled in the Courts regarding the
violation of the Sherman antitrust laws. The plaintiff is trying to make accusations of the
monopolistic behaviors of the defendant, thus causing an anti-competitive environment. The
Court is, therefore, tasked with investigating the claims and weighing them concerning the
defense offered by the defendant. If it is true that the defendant's action is unhealthy and
compromises competition, the Court will offer further direction to ensure that both parties can
trade competitively in the market.
What the case is about
The case is about the plaintiff, AFL, accusing the defendant, NFL, of trying to
monopolize, attempting to monopolize, and conspiring to monopolize the football league
competition through actions that are termed anti-competitive. The NFL was established in the
1940s, whereas the AFL only got formed after the competitor was formed. Initially, the NFL was
the only competing team in the All-American Football Conference, AAFC. It even had teams
drawn from different cities in America, excluding the team of Chicago Bears and Chicago
Cardinals, which were from the same city. Due to the prolonged financial crisis that affected
NFL, the management decided to franchise and transfer the ownership to other clubs and also
seek to control the tv rights so that the team could get some revenues to help run the football
league. The case revolves around the competition in selling radio and TV rights. In selling the
TV rights, the competition starts from the attendance of the fans at the games, the telecast of the
game on the channels of the sponsors, and the playing field in the city from which the games will
be played. There is also the competition of the metropolitan areas franchisee so that the NFL can
get some income from them. AFL had not curved into the franchise needed to have till not
having such plans.
First, the plaintiff accuses the defendant of monopolizing the metropolitan areas of
Dallas and New York. These metropolitan areas constitute the operations of the members of AFL
and NFL; NFL preceded to grant franchises to these metropolitan areas. This was highly
condemned by AFL as it could result in market power, thus increasing dominance in the market.
Another claim is that defendant was monopolizing the tv and radio rights, thus enabling NFL to
have more power in controlling the streaming and broadcasting rights, thus reducing revenues to
AFL (American Football League v. National Football League, 1962). Finally, the plaintiff also
decried the acquisition of a group of players contrary to the antitrust rules as it paved the way for
the defendant to have more control when it comes to signing of players; this is anti-competitive
as it denied the plaintiff the opportunity to get the players at their will.
The law that the courts base their ruling on
Since this case involves the violation of the antitrust policies, the courts decided to apply
the principles stated in Sherman's antitrust laws. This law regulates the restraint that influences
the competition. The act is significant as it will help evaluate the effectiveness of the actions of
the competitors and test whether they promote healthy competition with competitors, thus not
promoting any monopoly by a single business entity (James, 2021). In the above case, the
antitrust laws will act as the legal reference that will be used to judge the claims that NFL is
American Football League v. National Football League
Introduction
The ASL v. NFL presents another legal tussle to be settled in the Courts regarding the
violation of the Sherman antitrust laws. The plaintiff is trying to make accusations of the
monopolistic behaviors of the defendant, thus causing an anti-competitive environment. The
Court is, therefore, tasked with investigating the claims and weighing them concerning the
defense offered by the defendant. If it is true that the defendant's action is unhealthy and
compromises competition, the Court will offer further direction to ensure that both parties can
trade competitively in the market.
What the case is about
The case is about the plaintiff, AFL, accusing the defendant, NFL, of trying to
monopolize, attempting to monopolize, and conspiring to monopolize the football league
competition through actions that are termed anti-competitive. The NFL was established in the
1940s, whereas the AFL only got formed after the competitor was formed. Initially, the NFL was
the only competing team in the All-American Football Conference, AAFC. It even had teams
drawn from different cities in America, excluding the team of Chicago Bears and Chicago
Cardinals, which were from the same city. Due to the prolonged financial crisis that affected
NFL, the management decided to franchise and transfer the ownership to other clubs and also
seek to control the tv rights so that the team could get some revenues to help run the football
league. The case revolves around the competition in selling radio and TV rights. In selling the
TV rights, the competition starts from the attendance of the fans at the games, the telecast of the
game on the channels of the sponsors, and the playing field in the city from which the games will
be played. There is also the competition of the metropolitan areas franchisee so that the NFL can
get some income from them. AFL had not curved into the franchise needed to have till not
having such plans.
First, the plaintiff accuses the defendant of monopolizing the metropolitan areas of
Dallas and New York. These metropolitan areas constitute the operations of the members of AFL
and NFL; NFL preceded to grant franchises to these metropolitan areas. This was highly
condemned by AFL as it could result in market power, thus increasing dominance in the market.
Another claim is that defendant was monopolizing the tv and radio rights, thus enabling NFL to
have more power in controlling the streaming and broadcasting rights, thus reducing revenues to
AFL (American Football League v. National Football League, 1962). Finally, the plaintiff also
decried the acquisition of a group of players contrary to the antitrust rules as it paved the way for
the defendant to have more control when it comes to signing of players; this is anti-competitive
as it denied the plaintiff the opportunity to get the players at their will.
The law that the courts base their ruling on
Since this case involves the violation of the antitrust policies, the courts decided to apply
the principles stated in Sherman's antitrust laws. This law regulates the restraint that influences
the competition. The act is significant as it will help evaluate the effectiveness of the actions of
the competitors and test whether they promote healthy competition with competitors, thus not
promoting any monopoly by a single business entity (James, 2021). In the above case, the
antitrust laws will act as the legal reference that will be used to judge the claims that NFL is
