The Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) is taking legal action against prominent sports betting platforms, including DraftKings, FanDuel, Underdog, and bet365, for what it claims is the unauthorised use of players’ images and likenesses. This lawsuit centres around a critical debate about player rights in the increasingly lucrative sports betting and fantasy sports. The players’ union, through its business arm, MLB Players Inc., has filed separate lawsuits in New York and Pennsylvania, alleging that these companies are using MLB player images for prop bets without a licensing agreement.
This legal conflict raises questions about how sports betting companies operate within the framework of name, image, and likeness (NIL) rights, especially when navigating different sports and their respective agreements.
Double standard in player treatment
The lawsuit highlights what MLB Players Inc. calls a double standard in how sports betting platforms treat baseball versus football players. According to the suit, DraftKings and bet365 do not feature player images for NFL prop bets, despite the NFL being the most popular sport to bet on in the U.S. The companies, however, have opted to feature MLB player images on their platforms to promote their offerings, an act the lawsuit describes as using MLB player images “for their own commercial advantage.”
This discrepancy suggests that these platforms are deliberately associating their brands with MLB players to lure users into placing bets, potentially reaping significant financial benefits in the process. By featuring MLB player images, these companies blur the line between marketing and gambling, raising ethical and legal questions about how they leverage player identities.
Such a manoeuvre could be seen as a calculated risk—while NFL players, under different legal or licensing agreements, may be off-limits, MLB players seemingly represent an untapped opportunity for these companies to push their betting platforms. However, this strategy has now sparked a legal backlash.
Wider implications for NIL in sports
The lawsuit against DraftKings and its peers is not an isolated case. This is the second time in a month that the MLBPA has taken legal action over NIL issues. In August, the union sued the Pittsburgh Pirates and the gas station chain Sheetz for similar violations, though that case was settled out of court relatively quickly. The MLBPA has also recently aligned itself with Japan’s professional baseball union on NIL matters, signalling a growing determination to protect player rights across borders.
These lawsuits reflect a broader shift in how sports leagues and unions are handling NIL rights, especially in a world where sports betting is on the rise and generating billions in revenue. With more states legalising sports betting, the market for player-related wagers has exploded, turning individual athletes into valuable commodities for companies looking to enhance user engagement. However, this also puts players’ rights at the forefront of legal battles, as companies attempt to monetise their names and likenesses without proper agreements.
The use of player images without consent or compensation brings to light the ongoing tension between the commercialisation of sports and the protection of individual athlete rights. While sports betting companies might view player images as simply part of their marketing arsenal, unions like the MLBPA see it as an infringement on players’ legal rights and a violation of their NIL protections.
Potential fallout
The implications of this lawsuit are significant. If the courts rule in favour of the MLBPA, sports betting companies could face stricter guidelines on how they can use player likenesses, leading to more stringent licensing agreements across the industry. Companies like DraftKings and FanDuel could be forced to pay substantial fines or settlements, while other platforms might reassess their marketing strategies to avoid similar legal entanglements.
For MLB players, a victory in this case could mean greater control over how their images are used and more opportunities to benefit financially from their NIL rights. It could also set a precedent for other sports leagues and unions to follow suit, especially as NIL rights become a hot-button issue in the rapidly evolving sports betting landscape.
In the end, this lawsuit highlights the complexities of navigating player rights in the age of legalised sports betting. As companies look to cash in on the growing sports wagering market. It is clear that athletes and their unions are asserting their right to a share of the profits and seizing the opportunity to capitalise on the growing sports wagering industry. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching consequences, not just for MLB players, but for athletes across all professional sports.
Unlock winning moments: Discover the best odds on SiGMA Play.
