How NCAA Athletes and Brands Can Avoid Big Mistakes In NIL Influencer Agreements
Thousands of college athletes are entering the influencer marketplace for the first time. College athletes now find themselves attractive candidates in the fast growing influencer marketing arena. With the FTC Commissioner taking a closer look at the use of influencers for marketing, student athletes and brands should take care when entering into the influencer marketing arena.
April 28, 2022 at 02:59 PM
14 minute read
in March, Kansas University and the University of South Carolina won national championships in men's and women's college basketball, respectively, in what has become not only the biggest event of the year in college sports, but of the sports year. Now, thousands of college athletes are entering the influencer marketplace for the first time. College athletes now find themselves attractive candidates in the fast growing influencer marketing arena. Industry experts estimate that this market grew to a $13.8 billion industry in 2021, with NCAA athlete advertising alone predicted to grow to $1 billion a year within five years. With influencer marketing potentially providing a 5x return on investment, many brands are eager to get into the industry, but it doesn't come without risks. With the FTC Commissioner taking a closer look at the use of influencers for marketing, student athletes and brands should take care when entering into the influencer marketing arena. See, "Statement of Comm'r Rohit Chopra Regarding the Endorsement Guides Review," Comm'n File No. P204500 (Feb. 12, 2020).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLife, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
8 minute readJustices Consider Scope of Corporate Remedies for Trademark Infringement
OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
- 2Foreign-Company Lobbyists Would Need to Register Under Proposed DOJ Regulation
- 3'Fancy Dress': ERISA Claim Accuses Plan Administrator and Cigna Affiliates of Co-Pay Maximizer Scheme
- 4The American Lawyer's Top Stories of 2024
- 5Semiconductor Component Maker Accused of Deceiving Investors About Market Downturn, Export Curbs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250