UC Law SF Communications and Entertainment Journal
Abstract
Sports relocation is traumatic for die-hard sports fans. History and long-standing tradition are often thrust aside in pursuit of lucrative offers of stadium financing. Scholars often cite the leading case on sports relocation, Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum v. National Football League (Raiders I), for the proposition that restrictions on sports franchise relocation are illegal under the Sherman Act. However, since Raiders I, there have been two significant developments in antitrust law: the in-depth rule of reason approach and the "small but significant increase in price" approach. In light of these developments, sports leagues should not blindly rely on Raiders I, and should be more vigilant in restricting franchise relocation to the benefit of home-town fans.
Recommended Citation
Brett Gibbs,
Antitrust and Sports League Franchise Relocation: Bringing Raiders I into the Modern Era of Antitrust Law,
29 UC Law SF Comm. & Ent. L.J. 217
(2007).
Available at: https://repository.uclawsf.edu/hastings_comm_ent_law_journal/vol29/iss2/3
Included in
Communications Law Commons, Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons