While relatively rare, negotiating battles between Regional Sports Networks (RSNs)—who presumably have exclusive rights to content for a team or a group of teams—and broadcast distributors can be very frustrating for fans. And, when it does happen, we in the antitrust bar find ourselves fielding the question “isn’t that an antitrust violation to refuse to supply or carry, depending on where the offer is directed?” Two recent disputes offer a window into whether and when antitrust regulators will police negotiations between RSNs and distributors to protect downstream consumers.
The first dispute involved SportsNet LA, the exclusive live broadcasting partner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, and multichannel video programming distributors in the Los Angeles area, including DirecTV, Cox Communications, Charter Communications, and now-parent AT&T. After each of the multichannel video distributors failed to reach an agreement with SportsNet LA, the Department of Justice brought suit, alleging that the distributors had unlawfully exchanged bargaining information to increase their leverage in negotiations. The second dispute involved YES, the Yankees Entertainment and Sports Network, and Comcast. In contrast to the SportsNet LA conflict, the DOJ did not step in when negotiations between the parties broke down. Comcast did not carry the YES network during the 2016 season, and the parties reached an agreement in January 2017, just in time for the 2017 season.
