Several drinking establishments intercepted St Louis Cardinal football games within the "blacked out" area. U.S Code Title 15, Chapter 32 outlines the telecasting of professional sports contests; Section 1291 prohibits the broadcasting of a game in the home territory (within 75 miles of the home stadium)if the game is not sold out 72 hours prior to kickoff. This section was created to encourage fans to buy tickets instead of just enjoying a free broadcast at home.

The businesses in question used satellites to receive games in the St Louis area which clearly Section 1291. The NFL sued and won against most of the alleged infringers on the basis of the Homestyle Act. The satellites were deemed not to be commonly found in private homes and the bars were prohibited from continuing this practice. Oddly enough, one bar was not found liable because he had closed the bar and just invited a handful of friends to watch the game; this was ruled a "reasonable circle of social acquaintances".

As stated above, Section 1291 is in place to ensure fans attend home games. When a bar steals the signal of a blacked out game and broadcasts it to attract customers (and thus increase business), they are denying the copyright holders, the NFL, their entitled compensation. The actions of these proprietors rob the NFL of ticket revenue, so Section 1291 was created. The FMLA prevents gatherings at bars large enough to lower the Nielsen ratings and deprive the NFL of advertising revenue. It is reasonable that fans of the Eagles should go to Eagles games; they can not all be free riders. However, fans of all teams watch the Super Bowl and it is a trend that they watch it in large gatherings; it is unreasonable to maintain a policy that supports a flawed ratings system while denying consumers their right to be social.

This is a class action suit brought against the NFL for violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. The Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 (SBA) exempted professional sports leagues from the Sherman Act and allowed them to collectively sell their broadcasting rights. The NFL agreed to sell broadcasting rights to DirectTV so they could sell NFL Sunday Ticket packages to the public. This package is considered "all or nothing" for you either purchase the ability to view all games, or you are limited to only the 2 games in your region. Shaw argues that this limits options for the public while creating artificially high and non-competitive prices. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's decision that the NFL's actions did not fall within the bounds of the SBA. The NFL already received an exemption to the Sherman Act and that exemption must be narrowly construed according to the Court; after already being granted an exemption it would be wrong for the NFL to be allowed so much latitude.

After reading the Fenwick article, I had sympathy for the NFL, actually believing they were being deprived of their due "piece of the pie". However, I find it improbable that the NFL believed that their contract with DirectTV was fair to the consumer population. If Direct TV is the only provider and offers only one option, they essentially hold a monopoly on the market. If a compromise is to be made between the NFL and their fans, each group needs to be conscious of each other's well being. The consumer can not be held responsible for a ratings system that does not properly reflect viewership; the NFL should, and was held responsible for taking advantage of their fans. Is the NFL acting as a typical capitalist profit seeking firm? To a point yes, but Shaw reveals some greed on their part. The Nielsen ratings already limit consumers' options on the Super Bowl, now the NFL Sunday Ticket limits their options every Sunday. The latter action leads to me to stop giving the NFL the benefit of the doubt.