NFL Defeats $27 Million Antitrust Lawsuit Over Packers Songs

Why It Matters

The ruling reinforces the NFL’s ability to control its intellectual property through exclusive deals and confirms that states can operate lotteries without antitrust exposure, setting a clear precedent for future sports‑marketing disputes.

Key Takeaways

• Judge dismissed $27 M lawsuit, favoring NFL's exclusive licensing.
• Court affirmed states' antitrust immunity for state-run lotteries.
• Short phrases like “Go Pack Go” cannot be copyrighted.
• NFL can grant licenses to single partners without violating antitrust law.
• Plaintiffs must prove actual copyright registration to succeed.

Pulse Analysis

The NFL’s business model relies heavily on exclusive licensing agreements that turn team logos, mascots and slogans into high‑value assets. By granting a single partner the right to use its trademarks in a state lottery campaign, the league maximizes revenue while maintaining tight brand control. McMillan’s claim that the league’s refusal to work with him constituted an illegal monopoly runs counter to decades of sports‑industry practice, where exclusivity is prized for its premium pricing power and fan‑engagement consistency.

Judge Byron B. Conway’s opinion draws on well‑established antitrust principles, emphasizing that a trademark holder may choose whom to license without violating competition law. Moreover, the ruling cites Supreme Court precedent that states enjoy broad immunity from antitrust suits when operating public lotteries. This legal backdrop means the Wisconsin Department of Revenue could award exclusive rights to a single vendor without exposing the state to liability, reinforcing the notion that exclusive licensing is a rational, market‑driven strategy rather than a restraint of trade.

For creators and small rights holders, the case highlights the narrow scope of copyright protection for short phrases, titles or slogans. Courts consistently reject claims that such elements are original works eligible for exclusive rights, leaving musicians and marketers to focus on more substantive content. The decision sends a clear signal to the sports and entertainment sectors: while the NFL can continue to monetize its intellectual property through selective licensing, individuals seeking protection for brief taglines must meet stringent registration standards and demonstrate genuine originality.