While sitting in front of the tube watching Olympic canoeing (or Greco-Roman water polo, it's all a blur), I began to wonder about why ABC had been granted exclusive rights to televise the Olympics. The owners of the "Olympics" brand name could have sold the television rights in numerous ways. Why did they choose to have a single network provide all the coverage? Further, I mused, how did they get away with it? If the NCAA's football package violates the antitrust laws, how does the Olympic package remain within the law? It struck me that a paper speculating on the motives of the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee (LAOOC) might be in order. A second paper regarding the legality of the contract is also probably in order, but I am not going to write it.
Antitrust and Trade Regulation | Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law | Law
Center for Contract and Economic Organization
Center for Law and Economic Studies
Victor P. Goldberg,
Television and the Quest for Gold: The Unofficial Paper of the 1984 Olympics,
Nw. U. L. Rev.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/684