NFL Subscriptions Stirs Controversy

The National Football League has privatized much of its viewership, which is drawing criticism from leading lawmakers such as President Donald Trump and Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah.

The controversy comes as NFL fans are now expected to spend up to $1,000 across roughly 10 different subscriptions if they wish to have access to every game, raising questions over whether the league is abusing the Sports Broadcasting Act Congress enacted in 1961.

Viewers would have to purchase individual subscriptions to platforms such as Netflix, Prime Video, ESPN, ESPN+, Paramount+, YouTube TV, Apple TV+, and Peacock, along with the NFL Network and NFL Sunday Ticket.

“I don’t like it… They’re making a lot of money,” Trump said, according to EssentiallySports. “They could make a little bit less. They could let the people see. You have people who live for Sunday.”

Lee expanded on the president’s point in a letter dated March 3.

“In practice, this requires subscribing to multiple streaming services and maintaining high-speed internet in addition to a traditional cable or satellite bundle. The resulting fragmentation has produced consumer confusion and increasing costs for viewers attempting to watch their teams.”

He added that the NFL appears to be abusing the antitrust exemption Congress facilitated in the 1960s.

“In 1961, Congress enacted the law granting limited antitrust immunity to allow professional football teams to collectively license the “sponsored telecasts” of their games to national broadcast networks,” Lee continued. “Courts have recognized that “sponsored telecasting” refers to broadcasts financed through advertising and made available free to the public. Shaw v. Dallas Cowboys Football Club, Ltd., 172 F.3d 299, 301 (3d Cir. 1999).”

Subscription prices, however, are also subject to change. The NFL is currently negotiating with platforms such as Paramount to raise the amount it makes off transmission rights even more.

“The modern distribution environment differs substantially from the conditions that precipitated this exemption,” Lee added. “Instead of a small number of free broadcast networks, the NFL now licenses games simultaneously to subscription streaming platforms, premium cable networks, and technology companies operating under different business models. To the extent collectively licensed game packages are placed behind subscription paywalls, these arrangements may no longer align with the statutory concept of sponsored telecasting or the consumer-access rationale underlying the antitrust exemption.”

The NFL is defending its actions by saying that a vast majority of games are still easily accessible to the public without having to buy individual subscriptions.

“87 percent-plus [of games] are on free television; 100 percent are on in the local markets,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said.

Despite Goodell’s defense, a large number of NFL viewers do not live in the regions where their favorite teams are located, according to Vivid Seats, which limits fans who do not have the subscriptions from viewing games in their local markets.