In June 2025, a landmark settlement in the House v. NCAA antitrust litigation ushered in a new era for collegiate athletics. Beginning July 1, Division I institutions can now directly compensate student‑athletes for their Name, Image, and Likeness (“NIL”), a departure from the prior model relying solely on third-party booster-funded NIL deals. This article explores the legal and compliance landscape in light of this seismic development.
The House v. NCAA Settlement: A Fuel for Change
- Direct Revenue Sharing
On June 6, 2025, Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement resolving three major antitrust cases (House, Carter, and Hubbard), allowing schools to distribute up to $20.5 million annually in NIL-related compensation to athletes, with the cap increasing over the next decade.
- Regulatory Oversight via Clearinghouse
A clearinghouse, managed by Deloitte and the Power Four conferences, will evaluate NIL and revenue-sharing agreements exceeding $600, ensuring fair market value and compliance.
- Equity and Legal Challenges
Female athletes have filed appeals invoking Title IX, alleging that the settlement disproportionately benefits men’s high-profile sports, potentially shortchanging female athletes by over $1 billion based on existing distribution formulas. This appeal has delayed fund disbursement and raises equity concerns.
- Emerging Federal Guidelines
Recently, President Trump signed an executive order to regulate NIL activities, aiming to standardize practices, safeguard scholarships, and clarify athlete employment status.
New NIL Dynamics and Institutional Strategy
- Evolving Compensation Ecosystem
With schools now able to pay athletes directly, the traditional dominance of booster collectives is being recalibrated. Schools are ramping up revenue-generating ventures to support compensation models, such as enhanced fan engagement, sponsorships, and premium offerings, all while observing a $20.5 million cap.
- Legal Exposure for Schools
Institutions must now navigate:
- Strict compliance with clearinghouse oversight;
- Title IX obligations, ensuring fair distribution across genders; and
- Risk management concerning roster sizes, scholarship limits, and potential pressure on smaller programs.
Law Firm Role: Advising in a Shifting NIL Landscape
- Establish and Oversee Compliance Programs
Develop structured internal systems for reviewing, approving, and documenting NIL and revenue-sharing agreements, and ensure all deals subject to clearinghouse review are properly filed and compliant.
- Conduct Title IX Audits and Equity Reviews
Advise institutions on equitable distribution models and preemptively address disparities through policy design and documentation to withstand Title IX scrutiny.
- Template Contracts and Education
Draft standardized contracts, aligned with NCAA guidelines, and conduct education sessions for athletes, staff, boosters, and collectives to ensure transparency and understanding.
- Monitor Legislative and Regulatory Landscape
Track federal initiatives and state-specific NIL statutes (e.g., Texas’s HB 2804, California’s proposals), and guide institutions on legal alignment across jurisdictions.
- Defend Litigation and Navigate Appeals
Represent schools or athletes in current or emerging litigation, such as the Title IX appeal, and manage risk stemming from antitrust and employment litigation.
Conclusion
The shift to direct NIL compensation by schools marks a fundamental transformation in collegiate athletics. While this change unlocks significant opportunities, it introduces complex legal obligations from fair market valuation to compliance, equity, and federal oversight. To succeed, colleges must proactively develop robust legal frameworks, and law firms are uniquely positioned to guide them through this new and evolving NIL era.
Follow WeAreNIL to stay up to date on the latest House settlement news.