'Who do you Play for?' How the Ninth Circuit's Rejection of U.S.A. Swimming's Motion to Dismiss Protects the Integrity of Sport and Stimulates Technological Development

Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Journal, Vol. 20, No. 3, p. 47, Fall/Winter 2009

10 Pages Posted: 2 Aug 2010  

Tara L. Bhupathi

University of North Carolina School of Law; Georgetown University

Date Written: October 1, 2009

Abstract

This article argues that the Ninth Circuit acknowledged the risk of financial interests influencing decisions to ban certain equipment because of the broad economic scope of the sports industry, governing bodies' unchecked authority over said market, and the sentiment that, in light of each governing body's heavy reliance on sponsorships, complete disregard of financial motives in governance is no longer appropriate.

Further, courts should continue to implement the Ninth Circuit's policy of increasing scrutiny of governing body financial interests in rule-making for two reasons. First, shedding light on the complex and competing financial interests among industry players, including fans, athletes, teams, leagues, communities, media, and sponsors, should enhance confidence in the purity of a governing body's decisions. Second, abandoning complete deference in governing bodies could ease manufacturers' fears of investing in technology only to be subsequently banned due to collusion between market competitors and the governing bodies. This in turn would mitigate the stifling effect the latter have had on technological developments in sports equipment.

Keywords: Law, Sport, Antitrust, Sponsorship, Olympic, TYR, Speedo, Technology

Suggested Citation

Bhupathi, Tara L., 'Who do you Play for?' How the Ninth Circuit's Rejection of U.S.A. Swimming's Motion to Dismiss Protects the Integrity of Sport and Stimulates Technological Development (October 1, 2009). Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Journal, Vol. 20, No. 3, p. 47, Fall/Winter 2009. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1652215

Tara Bhupathi (Contact Author)

University of North Carolina School of Law ( email )

Van Hecke-Wettach Hall, 160 Ridge Road
CB #3380
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3380
United States

Georgetown University ( email )

Washington, DC
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
66
Rank
275,761
Abstract Views
535