Attorneys for Fanatics have asked a judge to dismiss its antitrust case against the company over Fanatics’ push to move deeper into the sports trading card space ahead of its upcoming control of the NFL and NBA card markets.
The company filed the motion in a Tampa, FL U.S. District Court, saying Panini hasn’t met the standards that would define antitrust actions.
“Panini alleges that obtaining exclusive intellectual property licenses from sports leagues and players associations a practice that Panini itself engaged in for more than a decade—violates the antitrust laws. That is both hypocritical and wrong,” Fanatics lawyers wrote in a 35-page document.
“Panini achieved a prominent position by entering into exclusive, multi-year IP licenses and, in turn, displaced previously well-established trading card companies—precisely what Fanatics did here. If Panini is a victim of anything, it is a victim of competition: the leagues and PAs preferred Panini until Fanatics offered them innovative new ways to deliver the best collectibles to consumers.
“Panini had a decade-plus long advantage that it squandered—it is anything but the struggling dynamic entrant foreclosed by an incumbent behemoth that one normally sees as an antitrust plaintiff. It is exactly the opposite.”
Panini had argued that Fanatics’ efforts two and three years ahead of its eventual takeover of NBA and NFL licenses had stepped over its legal boundaries and accused Fanatics of “anticompetitive conduct.” In 2021, Fanatics stunningly acquired future exclusive licenses with the NBA, NFL and MLB. Fanatics claims that gaining those licenses was simply a matter of competition.
“Panini does not allege that Fanatics coerced the leagues or PAs not to solicit bids from Panini. Nor does it allege that Fanatics leveraged power from some other product market to strong-arm the leagues or PAs. That is because neither took place.”
In its motion, Fanatics says Panini didn’t prove it was a victim of violations cited in the antitrust suit filed last month.
Fanatics was also sued by Panini in a Texas state court after over three dozen Panini employees, including brand managers and other key workers abruptly left the company to join Fanatics. Fanatics also made a substantial investment in the printing company that produces Panini’s cards and has signed at least three top young players from this year’s NFL Draft class to exclusive autograph deals, meaning their signed cards won’t appear in Panini’s NFL products.
“Once Fanatics rightfully won the future licenses to manufacture cards for the MLB, NBA, and NFL, and in order to support its efforts to improve the collectibles industry/collector experience, Fanatics began competing for other trading card inputs, including employees, printing services, and player autographs,” Fanatics argued.
“Panini does not allege that any employee breached a specific term in any employment contract, but only that some employees decided to accept higher-paying jobs with Fanatics,” court documents state.
“it is not unlawful or malicious for Fanatics to enter exclusive autograph agreements with college players expected to be star ‘rookies’ in the professional leagues; those types of agreements are valuable to Fanatics and its ability to serve its licensing partners and create new categories of trading cards, and therefore could not be for the sole purpose of harming Panini.”
Related Stories:
Collectibles Attorney Weighs In On Panini-Fanatics Legal Squabbles, NFLPA Move
Notes: NFLPA Mum; Judge Rules Against Fanatics’ Stay Request; WNBC Story on Hobby; 1920 Ruth Photo; More
Panini Still Selling Football as Uncertainty Prevails for Retailers
NFLPA Tells Agents It’s Terminating Contract with Panini, Moving to Fanatics
Mint Condition: A Brief Look at the Panini vs Fanatics Cases
Panini, Fanatics Agree To Temporary Restraining Order In Employee Departure Lawsuit
Panini Settles With Pennsylvania Man Over ‘Rated Rookie’ Trademark Infringement Case
Panini America Files Third Trademark Infringement Lawsuit
