Mega-Event Rights Protection and Competition (Antitrust) Laws

  • Andre M. Louw
Part of the ASSER International Sports Law Series book series (ASSER)


This chapter continues the more specific evaluation of the nature and effects of special anti-ambushing laws, by focusing on the potential competition law (or anti-trust) implications of such laws. Chapter 2 examined how the mega-event sponsorship model functions, and hinted at the fact that the modern sports mega-event is a commercial monopoly through which event organisers (and sponsors) pursue excessive market control in interests of the pursuit of profit. This chapter will continue this examination and will include consideration of the (potential) role of competition law in this context.


Olympic Game National Football League Event Organiser Anticompetitive Effect Dominant Undertaking 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


All internet-based sources referred to, were last visited in or before December 2011.

  1. Andreff W, Szymanski S (2006) Handbook on the economics of sport. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnett M, Smith S, Horvitz S (2007) Expanding exclusivity: AT&T v Sprint, NASCAR. Competition Law 360. Portfolio Media Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Barney RK, Wenn SR, Martyn SG (2004) Selling the five rings. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake CityGoogle Scholar
  4. Bently L, Davis J, Ginsburg JC (eds) (2008) Trade marks and brands: an interdisciplinary critique. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Blackshaw I, Cornelius S, Siekmann R (eds) (2009) TV rights and sport: legal aspects. T.M.C. Asser Press, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  6. Blanpain R (2003) The legal status of sportsmen and sportswomen under international, European and Belgian national and regional law. Kluwer Law International, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  7. Cobbs J (2011) Legal battles for sponsorship exclusivity: the cases of the World Cup and NASCAR. Sport Management Review 14(3):258–268Google Scholar
  8. Corbett S, Van Roy Y (2010) Events management in New Zealand: one law to rule them all? J Bus Law 4:338–362Google Scholar
  9. Ducrey P, Ferreira C, Huerta G, Marston K (2004) UEFA and Football Governance: a new model. Int Sports Law J 1–2:85Google Scholar
  10. Elhauge E, Geradin D (2007) Global competition law and economics. Hart Publishing, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  11. Fetter FA (1904) The Principles of Economics with Applications to Practical Problems. The Century Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Fortunato JA, Martin SE (2011) American Needle v NFL: Legal and Sponsorship Implications. Univ Denver Sports Entertain Law J 9:73Google Scholar
  13. Fortunato JA, Richards J (2007) Reconciling sports sponsorship exclusivity with antitrust law. Texas Rev Entertain Sports Law 8:33Google Scholar
  14. Frontier Economics Pty Ltd, Melbourne (2007) Ambush marketing legislation review, a report prepared for IP Australia and the Australian government’s department of communications, information technology and the arts (October 2007)Google Scholar
  15. Gardiner et al (2006) Sports law, 3rd edn. Cavendish Publishing Ltd, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Harrison B, Smith C, Davies B (1992) Introductory economics. McMillan Press Ltd, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. Jennings A (2006) Foul! the secret world of FIFA: bribes, vote rigging and ticket scandals. Harper Sport, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelbrick R (2008) Ambush marketing and the protection of the trade marks of international sports organizations—a comparative view. CILSA 41(1):24–48Google Scholar
  19. Kishner IA, Albinsky J (2011) Very much ado about… nothing: an analysis of the impact of American Needle v NFL on collective bargaining and merchandising in professional sports. Entertain Sports Lawyer 29(1):3Google Scholar
  20. Kobel P (2007) International report on question B: ambush marketing too smart to be good? Should certain ambush marketing practices be declared illegal and if yes, which ones and under what conditions? International report to the international league of competition law, Catania CongressGoogle Scholar
  21. Lewis A, Taylor J (2007) Sport: law and practice. Tottel Publishing, Haywards HeathGoogle Scholar
  22. Louw AM (2007) An anomaly tolerated by the law: examining the nature and legal significance of the international sports governing body. S Afr Public Law 1:211–255Google Scholar
  23. Marcus JT (2010) Ambush marketing: an analysis of its threat to sports rights holders and the efficacy of past, present and proposed anti-infringement programmes. Sport Law J 18(1):25Google Scholar
  24. McCann MA (2009) American Needle v NFL: an opportunity to reshape sports law. Yale Law J 119:101Google Scholar
  25. McKelvey S, Grady J (2008) Sponsorship program protection strategies for special sport events: are event organizers outmaneuvering ambush marketers? J Sport Manag 22:550–586Google Scholar
  26. Miller RL (1999) Economics Today. Addison Wesley Longman Inc, BostonGoogle Scholar
  27. Monti G (2007) EC competition law. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Phillips J (2006) ‘Play the game, kill the competition’, an editorial regarding anti-ambush marketing protection as contained in the London Olympic and Paralympic Games Act, 2006. J Intellect Prop Law Pract 1(2):79Google Scholar
  29. Pound RW (2006) Inside the Olympics. Wiley, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  30. Rousseva E (2010) Rethinking exclusionary abuses in EU competition law. Hart Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  31. Sarantakes NE (2010) Dropping the torch: Jimmy Carter, the Olympic boycott and the cold war. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Scaria AG (2008) Ambush marketing: game within a game. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  33. Schulz-Herzenberg C (ed) (2010) Player and referee: conflicting interests and the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ monograph 169, South African institute for security studies, April 2010Google Scholar
  34. Schwab F (2006) FIFA’s trademark tactics. World Trademark Rev 3:6Google Scholar
  35. Seferidis E (2006) Exclusive rights under article 86(1) EC. Masters thesis in European community law, faculty of law, university of Lund (Spring 2006).
  36. Taylor PL, Pinguelo FM, Cedrone TD (2010) The reverse-morals clause: the unique way to save talent’s reputation and money in a new era of corporate crimes and scandals. Cardozo Arts Entertain Law J 28:65Google Scholar
  37. Wise AN, Meyer BS (1997) International Sports Law and Business, vol 3. Kluwer Law International, CambridgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author(s) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Law, Howard College CampusUniversity of KwaZulu-NatalDurbanSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations