»ÆÉ«µçÓ°

In the O'Bannon antitrust case against the National Collegiate Athletic Administration, federal courts rules that the NCAA's restrictions on compensating student-athletes for the use of their names, images and likenesses were an illegal price-fixing agreement among horizontal competitors. This essay summarizes the economic arguments and evidence that were presented by both sides in the case, and explains how and why the O'Bannon decision did not fully resolve the issue of the limitations to the scope of the NCAA's ability to regulate compensation of athletes in intercollegiate sports.