Bsuiness Law Paper

Should N.C.A.A. Student-Athletes be Entitled to Compensation?

Article Summary

There presence of gray areas regarding eligibility of National Collegiate Athletic Association athletes significantly affects the lives of thousands of student-athletes throughout the United States every year. As Joe Palazzolo reports in The Wall Street Journal on May 21, 2013 “a federal appeals court said former Rutgers University quarterback, Ryan Hart, can try to collect some of the profits Electronic Arts made from the 2004, 2005, and 2006 installments of the video game E.A. Sports N.C.A.A. Football.” The N.C.A.A. strives for the education of student athletes to be of the utmost importance, and imposes many rules upon the athletes, which if broken may terminate their eligibility as athletes. To date the N.C.A.A. prohibits student-athletes from accepting benefits from outside sources as the benefits may jeopardize the student-athlete obtaining an optimal educational experience (“Amateurism”). Additionally, loss of student-athlete eligibility may result in sanctions against their institution, which can range from the loss of scholarships to the death penalty, which prohibits a school from participating in a sport for at least one year.

The article stated, “Mr. Hart won a 2-1 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit which reversed the lower court’s findings that the depiction of college players in the videogame is protected by the First Amendment right to free speech” (Palazzolo). Judge Thomas Ambro stated Electronic Arts did not modify the appearance to a significant degree, and thus did not earn the protection of the First Amendment. The findings by the U.S. Court of Appeals will allow for Hart to collect damages, but current N.C.A.A. bylaws prohibit athletes from receiving salary or bonuses from on-field participation, prize money above actual and necessary expenses, or bonuses from prospective agents (“Amateurism”). Essentially the N.C.A.A. has...