Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Student Athletes Try to Form Labor Union
One of the most frequent questions that crosses the plane of sports and employment law, is whether college athletes should be paid. Student athletes contend that they should be treated as "employees" while educational institutions prefer to classify students as merely that, students. The landscape dramatically changed in 2021, when the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) implemented its interim policy on name, image and likeness (NIL), allowing student-athletes to make money from their personal brand.
The NCAA's interim policy has three main parts:
- Athletes can engage in NIL activities if they follow their state's laws where their school is located. Schools must ensure these activities comply with state law.
- Athletes in states without NIL laws can still participate in NIL activities without breaking NCAA rules.
- Athletes are allowed to seek professional service providers for their NIL activities.
The Next College Student Athlete (NCSA) is the largest college athletic recruiting platform connecting high school athletes with college coaches. The NCSA website sets forth examples of the types of things for which student athletes could now be paid. The list includes things such as: autographs and memorabilia, camps and clinics, personal appearances, merchandise, affiliate/ambassador roles, NFTs, blogging, podcasting, public speaking, music, art, etc.
Does the ability to receive remuneration for being a college athlete mean that the students are deemed employees of the university? Do employment laws apply? Are labor laws enforced? Does OSHA enter the equation? What about HIPAA concerns relating to medical conditions and injuries?
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.