The Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) has initiated legal action against four gaming companies, including Bet365 and DraftKings, alleging unauthorized use of players’ names, images, and likenesses in advertisements and betting platforms. In filings with the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the MLB players union seeks both compensation and punitive damages from Bet365 and DraftKings. Concurrently, separate litigation in the New York State Supreme Court, New York County, targets FanDuel and Underdog Fantasy. The union labeled the alleged misuse of player images as “flagrant,” suggesting it could harm the athletes’ long-term earnings potential.
The union emphasized the importance for professional athletes to control the commercial use of their personal attributes, which is a critical return on their significant career investments. While it is common for MLB players to be featured in advertisements for various companies, they are usually compensated for these endorsements. Some athletes have even appeared in commercials for sportsbook operators. However, the MLBPA argued that not all its members are comfortable being perceived as endorsing wagering, a perception that could arise when their images are prominently displayed on gaming websites or mobile apps.
This lawsuit marks the second time DraftKings faces legal challenges from a players union. Last month, the NFL Players Association (NFLPA) sued the Boston-based company, alleging it owes up to $65 million over a failed nonfungible tokens (NFTs) deal. The NFLPA claimed that DraftKings didn’t meet its financial obligations after using players’ names, images, and likenesses in its NFT marketplace and an NFT-based fantasy game called Reignmakers. The MLBPA is represented by the New York-based law firm Inston & Strawn LLP, which is also handling the NFLPA’s case.
The MLBPA stated that the gaming companies don’t utilize NFL players’ images on their platforms and suggested that the use of MLB players’ images is purely to entice bettors. “Defendants’ use of player images within their sportsbook platforms is not merely informational—it is promotional,” the union’s lawyers asserted in the complaint. They argued that bets could be placed on outcomes like the Phillies beating the Marlins or Bryce Harper hitting more than two home runs without using Harper’s valuable image, noting that similar bets are offered in other sports without employing player images.
Athlete images, particularly those of professional sports figures, have become increasingly valuable, both to the leagues and the players themselves. Promotional activities, including cash or free bet incentives, are crucial strategies for sportsbook operators like DraftKings and FanDuel to attract new bettors. These companies are known for their prolific use of celebrity endorsers, including compensated appearances by current and retired athletes.
The lawsuits underscore the financial stakes involved. Although assessing the worth of an individual athlete’s name and image can be complex due to varying profiles, companies often pay significant amounts for the rights to use pro athletes’ personal attributes. For instance, the MLBPA and NFLPA generate hundreds of millions annually from licensing deals with video game publishers, while trading card companies pay tens of thousands of dollars per player in major sports.
The legal battles between the MLBPA and these gaming companies underscore the broader issue of how valuable athlete endorsements have become in the age of digital and legal sports betting.
