In a sealed court filing at a New York trial court Thursday, TBS and Warner Brothers Discovery sued the NBA, NBA Media Ventures and NBA Properties.
“You are hereby summoned to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer,” a summons written attorney David Yohai read. Yohai, a senior partner in the litigation department of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, is representing TBS and WBD.
More from Sportico.com
The complaint for the lawsuit was filed as a sealed document, therefore the legal claims and related allegations are not yet known. However, the nature of the dispute is no mystery: The plaintiffs contend WBD lawfully invoked a matching clause to match an offer by Amazon to broadcast games from 2025-26 through 2035-36, while the NBA says WBD failed to match the terms of Amazon’s offer.
The underlying dispute is what counts as sufficiently “matching” in the context of sports broadcasting where every media company handles the delivery of content differently. As Sportico detailed, matching provisions have previously sparked legal disputes, including one in the mid-2000s involving the Houston Astros and Fox Sports.
“Warner Bros. Discovery’s claims are without merit, and our lawyers will address them,” NBA spokesman Mike Bass said in a statement. In the coming weeks, the league will answer the complaint, deny its allegations and motion for its dismissal. It is also possible the NBA could countersue, depending on the nature of the claims.
Meanwhile, in a statement, WBD says the NBA made an “unjustified rejection of our matching of a third-party offer.” The company added, “We strongly believe this is not just our contractual right, but also in the best interest of fans who want to keep watching our industry-leading NBA content with the choice and flexibility we offer them through our widely distributed WBD video-first distribution platforms—including TNT and Max.”
Although the complaint and six of the seven exhibits were filed under seal, a copy of the 74-page “NBA/TBS Agreement,” dated Oct. 3, 2024, along with some portions of the agreement’s exhibits, were filed without seal. The matching provision is included. The provision contemplates numerous scenarios involving the NBA and its media rights incumbents—listed as TBS, ESPN, NBA TV and ABC—continuing or concluding their relationship to telecast NBA games.
One clause notes that if a third-party offer “includes provisions not relating to the [over the air] rights and/or cable rights, an incumbent may accept such Third Party Offer . . . but shall not be required to accept the provisions not relating to either OTA Rights or Cable Rights (or to pay any portion of the fee or other consideration fairly allocable to any such provisions).”
This language might be at issue in the dispute, since it suggests the incumbent can match an offer without necessarily accepting all of its provisions.
The contract also contemplates the use of arbitration to resolve disputes. That feature could become crucial if the NBA seeks to dismiss the lawsuit to arbitration—and thus keep it out of a public court.
Best of Sportico.com
Sportico
