Judge rejects DraftKings’ motion to dismiss MLB players’ union lawsuit
A U.S. district court has denied DraftKings’ attempt to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Major League Baseball 바카라ers, Inc. (MLBPI), which alleges that the sportsbook unlawfully used players’ names, images, and likenesses (NIL) without permission. The decision, issued on 17 March 2025 by Judge Karen Marston of the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, allows the case to move forward, marking a major development in the ongoing debate over athletes’ publicity rights in sports betting.
Court rules in favour of MLB players’ union
Judge Marston ruled that MLBPI had plausibly alleged that DraftKings violated state right-of-publicity laws by featuring MLB players’ NILs on its sportsbook platform and advertisements without authorisation. , initially filed in September 2024, also named bet365 as a defendant, though FanDuel, which was previously included in the suit, settled with the union by signing a licensing agreement in November.
In her ruling, Judge Marston acknowledged the evolving legal landscape around sports betting and player publicity rights, stating:
“Baseball may still be America’s favourite pastime, but sports gambling has become a serious threat to baseball’s crown. Here, the two collide in a case where the law is as uncertain as a Phillies playoff run.”
Following extensive legal briefings and oral arguments held on 18 February 2025, the court determined that MLBPI’s claims met the necessary legal threshold to proceed.
Key legal arguments in the case
MLBPI’s lawsuit is centred on three primary claims:
- Unauthorised commercial use – The union contends that DraftKings and bet365 exploited players’ NILs for financial gain without obtaining proper licensing, violating Pennsylvania’s right-of-publicity statutes.
- Unjust enrichment – The complaint argues that the sportsbooks unfairly profited by leveraging MLB players’ identities in promotions and betting odds without compensating them.
- First Amendment defence – The defendants counter that their use of player NILs falls under news reporting and public interest exceptions, making it protected speech.
The court sided with MLBPI on the first two claims, finding that player NILs have clear commercial value and were used by the sportsbooks for profit-driven purposes. However, Judge Marston dismissed one aspect of the case, ruling that the claim of identity misappropriation was redundant since it was already covered under the broader misappropriation of publicity claim.
The lawsuit’s outcome could have far-reaching implications for the sports betting industry, as it may set a precedent for how sportsbooks can legally use professional athletes’ NILs. The rise of legal sports betting in the U.S. has fuelled debates over player image rights, with leagues and unions seeking greater control over how betting platforms use their likenesses.
SiGMA News has reached out to DraftKings for comments on the ruling, but the questions remain unanswered until the time of publication. Meanwhile, MLBPI has reiterated its commitment to protecting players’ rights, stressing that athletes should have control over how their identities are used in the commercial betting space.
