NAB President and CEO Curtis LeGeyt testified Wednesday before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust. His message was direct: Congress should enforce the existing Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961, not expand it.
What We Know: The hearing, titled “Examining the Sports Broadcasting Act,” explored how sports distribution has shifted since the SBA passed 65 years ago. LeGeyt says the law’s antitrust exemption was always intended to cover broadcast television negotiations — not streaming deals. Critically, no league representatives appeared to testify. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell was invited but declined. Leaving broadcasters as the dominant voice before the subcommittee.
NAB President/CEO Curtis LeGeyt calling on Congress to enforce the language of the current Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961: “Live sports on free broadcast television has served the American public for generations. Together, we have built shared national moments, strengthened communities, expanded fan bases and supported local journalism. But that model is now at risk. Fans are paying more and receiving less. Meanwhile, local stations are competing against global technology platforms that can subsidize sports rights with revenue from entirely different businesses. In 1961, Congress was right to put fans first, and NAB is not asking to eliminate the Sports Broadcasting Act. But this Committee should reaffirm that the SBA applies only to league-wide negotiations with media companies. Ones that will distribute games through broadcast television, not lock games behind streaming paywalls.”
Curtis LeGeyt says the NAB’s position is not to scrutinize how the NFL does business: “The committee needs to reaffirm the scope of this act which was enacted by Congress. We’re not here to scrutinize the NFL’s business practices. We’re here to affirm that if they want to take advantage of an antitrust exemption granted to them by this body. There are certain public interest obligations that went along with that. There’s a clearly defined scope [to live up to the spirit of the law]. I believe that this committee is uniquely positioned to deliver that message. I believe that the law needs to be properly enforced.”
Curtis LeGeyt on how the NFL could be violating the anti-trust exemption they’ve been given: “As the NFL is now looking ahead to maybe a more global marketplace, they are clearly diversifying their the options that they’re going to use to reach other consumers. I would just affirm for this committee that they’re making that business determination. But this antitrust exemption, which was granted to them. It enables them to pool rights in a way that would clearly be a violation of our antitrust laws, but for Congress’s action was intended only to govern those negotiations with broadcasters. The benefit to fans was that free access. The balance is off if suddenly that act is going to be misused. In order to enable negotiations with Amazon, Netflix, or YouTube.”
Curtis LeGeyt believes streaming platforms don’t have constraints that broadcast networks do: “By expanding the pool of media entities negotiating for these rights, the sports leagues are creating a broadened marketplace. We know that these global streamers, who have a number of other businesses as well, don’t have the same financial constraints when it comes to bidding for sports rights. So, that’s driving up the price for everyone.”
What Remains Unclear: Whether the subcommittee will act on LeGeyt’s recommendations remains uncertain. Furthermore, with no league representation present, Congress heard only the broadcast perspective Wednesday. Congress is also examining whether the NFL stretched the SBA’s antitrust exemption beyond its original purpose, to the detriment of American consumers.
What It Means: The hearing reinforces that the NAB is mounting a focused, strategic campaign. Not seeking repeal, but demanding enforcement. If Congress reaffirms the SBA’s original scope, leagues could potentially lose antitrust protection for streaming-only rights deals. For fans, the implications are significant. More games may return to free, over-the-air television — or the pressure on Washington grows considerably louder.
The SBA does not clearly protect cable, satellite, streaming, or subscription products. In addition, the rising costs of which have drawn consumer complaints and government scrutiny. Currently, the DOJ, FCC, and Congress all examining the league’s broadcast practices simultaneously. The stakes of this fight extend well beyond just this hearing.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
John Mamola is Barrett Media’s sports editor and daily sports columnist. He brings over two decades of experience (Chicago, Tampa/St Petersburg) in the broadcast industry with expertise in brand management, sales, promotions, producing, imaging, hosting, talent coaching, talent development, web development, social media strategy and design, video production, creative writing, partnership building, communication/networking with a long track record of growth and success. He is a five-time recognized top 20 program director in a major market via Barrett Medi’s Top 20 series and has been honored internally multiple times as station/brand of the year (Tampa, FL) and employee of the month (Tampa, FL) by iHeartMedia. Connect with John by email at John@BarrettMedia.com.
