I’ve heard Stanford and Cal are begging for 1/4 shares with the B10 too.
www.tampabay.com
Clemson and the ACC continue their dueling litigation, and the Tigers are now seeking damages from their conference.
Clemson has turned up the heat on its lawsuit against the Atlantic Coast Conference (https://theacc.com/) — litigation that also affects Florida State’s future in the ACC.
The Tigers are now seeking “punitive damages to Clemson for the ACC’s willful and malicious conduct,” including “slander of title.” That request is part of an amended complaint filed last month in Pickens County, South Carolina (https://www.co.pickens.sc.us/), but made public Thursday.
The Tigers, like FSU, are involved in dueling lawsuits with the ACC playing out in their respective home states plus North Carolina (where the conference is headquartered). Many of the arguments have been the same. Both Clemson and FSU want guidance from home courts about the enforceability of a $130 million exit fee to leave the league. They also seek clarity on who owns the TV rights to their home games if/when they join another conference.
Clemson’s tactics generally have been milder than the ones used by FSU. But the Tigers have ramped things up by requesting unspecified damages from the ACC — a point that wasn’t included in the school’s initial March complaint.
Clemson’s argument centers on the interpretation of grant of rights.
That’s the contract where schools (like FSU and Clemson) give, or grant, their TV rights to the conference to sell. The ACC sold them to ESPN, and the league then doles out the money to FSU, Clemson and its peers.
According to the ACC, the conference owns those TV rights until 2036, even if the Seminoles and Tigers are no longer in the ACC. The schools disagree.
Clemson took that disagreement to another level in its updated complaint. The school said the conference knew its claims were false or acted with reckless disregard to their truth. The effect of that “malintent,” the suit said, was “to harm Clemson and deter its exit from the Conference by, among other means, seeking to diminish the value of Clemson’s intangible property.”
The dispute over who owns future TV rights affects hundreds of millions of dollars in future revenue for Clemson (and FSU) and any conference either school would join if they leave the league. Why would the Big Ten or SEC want either program if the TV money from their home games continues to go to the ACC?
“As a result of the ACC’s misstatements, the value of Clemson’s media rights has been diminished in the eyes of these and other third parties,” Clemson’s suit said. “This diminution in value injures Clemson, impedes its ability to negotiate future media rights agreements, and worsens its negotiating position with potential future collaborators.”
Clemson also asked the South Carolina court to weigh in on its sovereign immunity and whether the public school can be sued in another state.
Clemson wants ACC to pay for ‘malicious conduct’ and slander in lawsuit
The Tigers updated their lawsuit against the conference. The litigation affects FSU, too.
Clemson and the ACC continue their dueling litigation, and the Tigers are now seeking damages from their conference.
Clemson has turned up the heat on its lawsuit against the Atlantic Coast Conference (https://theacc.com/) — litigation that also affects Florida State’s future in the ACC.
The Tigers are now seeking “punitive damages to Clemson for the ACC’s willful and malicious conduct,” including “slander of title.” That request is part of an amended complaint filed last month in Pickens County, South Carolina (https://www.co.pickens.sc.us/), but made public Thursday.
The Tigers, like FSU, are involved in dueling lawsuits with the ACC playing out in their respective home states plus North Carolina (where the conference is headquartered). Many of the arguments have been the same. Both Clemson and FSU want guidance from home courts about the enforceability of a $130 million exit fee to leave the league. They also seek clarity on who owns the TV rights to their home games if/when they join another conference.
Clemson’s tactics generally have been milder than the ones used by FSU. But the Tigers have ramped things up by requesting unspecified damages from the ACC — a point that wasn’t included in the school’s initial March complaint.
Clemson’s argument centers on the interpretation of grant of rights.
That’s the contract where schools (like FSU and Clemson) give, or grant, their TV rights to the conference to sell. The ACC sold them to ESPN, and the league then doles out the money to FSU, Clemson and its peers.
According to the ACC, the conference owns those TV rights until 2036, even if the Seminoles and Tigers are no longer in the ACC. The schools disagree.
Clemson took that disagreement to another level in its updated complaint. The school said the conference knew its claims were false or acted with reckless disregard to their truth. The effect of that “malintent,” the suit said, was “to harm Clemson and deter its exit from the Conference by, among other means, seeking to diminish the value of Clemson’s intangible property.”
The dispute over who owns future TV rights affects hundreds of millions of dollars in future revenue for Clemson (and FSU) and any conference either school would join if they leave the league. Why would the Big Ten or SEC want either program if the TV money from their home games continues to go to the ACC?
“As a result of the ACC’s misstatements, the value of Clemson’s media rights has been diminished in the eyes of these and other third parties,” Clemson’s suit said. “This diminution in value injures Clemson, impedes its ability to negotiate future media rights agreements, and worsens its negotiating position with potential future collaborators.”
Clemson also asked the South Carolina court to weigh in on its sovereign immunity and whether the public school can be sued in another state.
