The NCAA doesn’t need to compensate college athletes beyond paying for the cost of their attendance, a federal court ruled Wednesday. In a mixed ruling for both college athletes and the NCAA, the court also found that the NCAA had violated antitrust laws by limiting what student athletes may receive while playing college sports.
The ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit comes more than five years after former UCLA basketball star Ed O’Bannon sued the NCAA for using his name and face on television and in video games without compensation. The NCAA argued that providing players with a share of that compensation would be antithetical to its mission of fostering amateur sports.
Last year, a federal judge suggested that players should be able to receive up to $5,000 a year in deferred compensation. Wednesday’s judgment overrules last year’s outcome, but supports the charge that the NCAA violated antitrust laws.
“The NCAA’s rules have been more restrictive than necessary to maintain its tradition of amateurism in support of the college sports market,” the ruling read.
In a statement, NCAA representatives said they ARE still assessing the impact of the ruling.
More Must-Reads From TIME
- Meet the 2024 Women of the Year
- Greta Gerwig's Next Big Swing
- East Palestine, One Year After Train Derailment
- In the Belly of MrBeast
- The Closers: 18 People Working to End the Racial Wealth Gap
- How Long Should You Isolate With COVID-19?
- The Best Romantic Comedies to Watch on Netflix
- Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time
Write to Justin Worland at email@example.com