Lawyers ask judge to clarify ruling against NCAA

Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Ed O'Bannon antitrust suit against the NCAA on Tuesday asked U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken to make clear that her injunction in the case will apply to all major-college football and men's basketball players, beginning with the 2016-17 school year.

The filing comes amid apparent confusion among attorneys on both sides about how and when additional benefits – including deferred payments to athletes for the use of their names, images and likenesses – can become available under the injunction Wilken issued last week. Wilken ruled that the NCAA's limits on what Bowl Subdivision football players and Division I men's basketball players can receive for playing "unreasonably restrain trade" in violation of antitrust laws.

The NCAA announced Sunday that it would appeal Wilken's ruling. Then, on Monday, the NCAA asked Wilken to clarify that her injunction – and, thus, any additional benefits – would not apply to any athletes enrolled in college before July 1, 2016.

In Tuesday's filing, lawyers for the plaintiffs argued that such an arrangement would be unfair to the athletes already in college by that date. They also said that they and lawyers for the NCAA "continue to meet and confer" about the matter.

At issue is the wording and interpretation of the two-page injunction that Wilken issued in addition to her 99-page ruling on the suit brought on behalf of a group of plaintiffs led by former UCLA basketball player O'Bannon.

In her ruling, Wilken said the injunction will not be stayed pending any appeal of her ruling, but it will not take effect until the start of the next Football Bowl Subdivision and Division I basketball recruiting cycles. In the injunction document she wrote: "This injunction shall not affect any prospective student-athlete who will enroll in college before July 1, 2016."

However, the injunction document refers to payments "for the licensing or use of prospective, current, or former ... players' names, images, and likenesses."

That led the NCAA to say it was concerned that the injunction might "apply immediately to current student-athletes." The NCAA also said it was concerned about the ambiguity of the ruling's reference to the start of the next FBS and Division I basketball recruiting cycles.

The NCAA asked Wilken to sign an order stating explicitly that the start of those recruiting cycles means "Aug. 1, 2015, the date on which written offers can first be sent to student-athletes enrolling in college after July 1, 2016."

The plaintiffs said Tuesday they agree with that, but not with the NCAA's desire to have the injunction be "limited only to prospective student-athletes enrolling in college on or after July 1, 2016."

"That exclusion of thousands of current student-athletes (operating under one-year renewable scholarships or multi-year scholarships) is plainly inconsistent with the Court's injunction," the plaintiffs wrote.

They added that their proposed solution is consistent with Wilken's ruling and still gives the NCAA time to deal with the injunction's implementation.