•  
  •  
 
Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Authors

Sophie Zelony

First Page

899

Abstract

Title IX was enacted to eliminate sex-based discrimination in educational programs receiving federal funding, including intercollegiate athletics. While the law has successfully increased female participation in sports, disparities in the treatment of male and female athletes persist, particularly in the context of publicity and promotional resources. The rise of name, image, and likeness (NIL) opportunities has further widened this gap, as universities and their affiliated collectives disproportionately promote male athletes, enhancing their marketability and NIL earning potential. Schroeder et al. v. University of Oregon presents a novel legal issue—whether Title IX applies to NIL deals when universities provide unequal publicity resources to male and female student athletes. This Note examines how Title IX’s equal treatment mandate extends to NIL promotional efforts, arguing that when institutions directly or indirectly facilitate NIL opportunities in a manner that disproportionately benefits male athletes, they risk violating federal law. Furthermore, the entanglement between universities and NIL collectives raises critical questions of agency law, suggesting that collectives function as promotional arms of institutions rather than independent third parties. Without regulatory intervention, these inequities will continue to undermine Title IX’s purpose.

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS