OSC Exclusive | NIL v. Image Rights with Daniel Geey | Presented by ((THIRTEEN.))
Welcome to an OSC Exclusive with British Attorney Daniel Geey, author of "Done Deal" and "Build the Invisible." Geey is an expert on image rights in European Football.
Today’s exclusive is written in partnership with Attorney Daniel Geey. Geey is a partner in the Sports Law Group at Sheridans in the United Kingdom. He has significant experience in European Football, working on club takeovers, high-profile transfers, and commercial endorsement deals. Additionally, he is the author of two books: “Done Deal” and “Build the Invisible.”
This post is brought to you by ((THIRTEEN.)), a clothing line founded by Daniel Geey. All proceeds from the clothing line go towards cancer research conducted by Dr. Jonathan Krell. The ((THIRTEEN.)) website is found HERE.
Image Rights in European Soccer
Image rights in European soccer are primarily concerned with the use of a player's image, name, and other attributes for commercial purposes. The concept of image rights is well-established in the soccer world and allows professional soccer players to profit from their personal brand. This includes endorsements, appearances, and promotional activities that are separate from their club contracts.
European soccer players often have separate image rights contracts with their clubs. These contracts outline the terms under which the club can use the player's image for promotional purposes, such as in advertisements, merchandise, and other club-related activities. Players can also negotiate individual endorsement deals with companies and sponsors outside their club contracts.
The value of a player's image rights is usually determined by their popularity, success on the field, and marketability. High-profile players like Neymar (shown above) and Lionel Messi have lucrative image rights deals that contribute significantly to their overall earnings.
It is important to note that European countries have varying regulations and tax implications concerning image rights. In some countries, income from image rights is taxed at a lower rate than regular income, which has led to controversy and legal disputes over the proper classification of such earnings.
For more information on image rights in UK football, read Geey’s article HERE.
Name, Image, Likeness in Collegiate Athletics
In contrast to European soccer, the concept of NIL in collegiate athletics is a relatively new development. Historically, student-athletes in the United States were not allowed to profit from their NIL due to the amateur status requirements imposed by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). However, this changed in 2021 when the NCAA adopted a new policy permitting college athletes to benefit from their NIL.
Under the new NCAA policy, college athletes can now earn money from endorsements, sponsorships, appearances, and other promotional activities related to their personal brand. This change has opened up new opportunities for student-athletes to generate income while still maintaining their amateur status and eligibility to compete in collegiate athletics.
Despite the NCAA's new policy, there is still a significant level of complexity surrounding NIL in college sports. Individual states have enacted their own NIL laws, which can differ in terms of restrictions and regulations. This has created a patchwork of legislation that student-athletes, universities, and sponsors must navigate in order to ensure compliance with the rules.
Additionally, the NCAA has retained some restrictions on NIL activities, such as prohibiting college athletes from using their school's logo, name, or other intellectual property in NIL-related promotions. Athletes are also required to disclose their NIL activities to their respective schools.
Comparing Image Rights and NIL
Both concepts revolve around the commercial use of an athlete's personal brand and enable athletes to profit from their name, image, and likeness. In both cases, athletes can negotiate contracts with clubs or schools and engage in individual endorsement deals with companies and sponsors.
However, there are also notable differences between the two systems. Image rights in European soccer are a long-established practice, while NIL in college sports is still in its infancy. As a result, the regulatory framework and market for NIL deals in college sports is less developed and more fragmented than in European soccer.
Another key difference lies in the status of the athletes involved. European soccer players are professional athletes who receive salaries from their clubs, while student-athletes in the United States are considered amateurs and do not receive direct compensation from their schools for their athletic performance. This distinction has implications for how image rights and NIL deals are structured, as well as the potential earnings for athletes in each system.
In European soccer, the value of image rights deals is often directly tied to a player's on-field success and overall marketability. High-profile players can command significant sums for their image rights, contributing to their total earnings. Collegiate student-athletes, on the other hand, may have more limited earning potential due to their amateur status and the restrictions imposed by the NCAA and state laws. However, the evolving NIL policy has opened up opportunities for collegiate student-athletes to supplement their scholarships and other forms of financial support with income from their personal brands.
The management of image rights and NIL is another area where differences emerge. In European soccer, clubs and players typically have separate contracts to govern the use of a player's image rights, whereas college athletes are required to disclose their NIL activities to their schools, which may impose additional restrictions to ensure compliance with NCAA rules and state laws. European soccer players often have agents or other representatives to manage their image rights contracts and negotiations, while college athletes may have more limited access to professional representation.
Many of these differences in execution result directly from the classification of European soccer athletes as professionals, which collegiate student-athletes are, by name, amateurs. However, in light of recent court hearings (Johnson v. NCAA) and the possibility of upcoming legislation regarding the status of student-athletes as employees, it is entirely possible that NIL in collegiate athletics will transform yet again. If, and when, that change occurs, the reasonable place to look for guidance is the well established tradition of image rights in European soccer.