Judge rules against NCAA

[url]http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11328442/judge-rules-ncaa-ed-obannon-antitrust-case[/url]

[QUOTE]What To Know About The O'Bannon Ruling
• This is not about paying college athletes for playing; that is the focus of a different lawsuit.

• This ruling is about removing restrictions on the money college athletes can receive for use of their names, images and likenesses. The judge determined those restrictions violated antitrust law.

• The NCAA can cap payments to football and men's basketball players as long as that cap isn't less than $5,000 a year for every year they compete. The NCAA also cannot stop schools from putting that money into a trust fund, to be held until an athlete's eligibility ends, or he graduates, whichever happens first.

• The NCAA can no longer prohibit schools from paying the full cost of attendance as a scholarship. The limits on aid to athletes are history. Each school may now pay the full cost for an athlete to attend that school, if it wants to.

• The ruling will not affect any recruit enrolled in college before July 1, 2016, and the NCAA can continue to enforce its other rules.

-- ESPN legal analysts Lester Munson and Andrew Brandt[/QUOTE]

It's about time

[QUOTE=kaiteng]Great win for every current and former college athletes. :applause:

I won't mind fake names and appearances in those NCAA video games anyway.[/QUOTE]
What do fake names and appearances have to do with what's in the OP?

Several universities have already announced they'll just stop selling things with players names on them such as jerseys... Which is kind of dumb but oh well..

Some of these colleges should play their cards right, form a partnership with a player and might actually find some of these guys would stay longer than one year

[QUOTE=kaiteng]If I remember right the video game is what the case spawned from. One of NCAA basketball video game, I believe it's from EA Sports, used O'Bannon likeness then he found out and wanted to get a fair share off it.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I know that, but I don't see how anything in the quote in the OP has to do with that.

I thought EA's argument was that the players in the game aren't representative of their real-life counterparts.

'Bout bloody time.