From Field to Finance: The Regulation of Athlete Investing in the NIL Era

Since the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (“NCAA”) 2021 decision, student athletes can monetize their name, image and likeness (“NIL”). NIL agreements, which are subject to contract law, statutes, and university policies, authorize third parties to provide compensation to athletes in return for using their NIL.
As reported by Reuters, “athlete investing” remains controversial. Advocates highlight the importance of providing financial security to young athletes, while critics focus on the exploitative aspect of these agreements, especially for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds who may not have the guidance needed to appreciate the implications.
The agreement between Big League Advantage (“BLA”) and Gervon Dexter Sr., a former University of Florida football player selected in the second round of the 2023 NFL draft, illustrates potential issues with athlete investing. Dexter reportedly challenged the contract in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, arguing that the agreement is void because it violates (i) Florida’s NIL statute that was in effect at the time the contract was executed, and (ii) the University of Florida’s rules surrounding NIL. Notably, the previous statute held that an NIL contract “may not extend beyond [an athlete’s] participation in a [college] athletic program” and may not provide a student-athlete compensation “in exchange for athletic performance”.
The lawsuit raises questions about who, if anyone, should oversee NIL agreements involving amateur athletes. Additionally, it emphasizes the potential injustice of constraining young athletes with contracts that were agreed upon well before their professional careers gain momentum.
The NCAA’s 2021 decision has resulted in varied regulation, and Dexter’s legal challenge also underscores ambiguities in its implementation. The consequences of the Dexter v. Big League Advance Fund II, LP case and whether it will provide clarity on the matter are yet to be determined.
Authors: Kasia Donovan and Emily Groper, 2023/2024 Articling Student-At-Law
Authors
Expertise
Insights
-
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Changes to Trademark Proceedings Coming into Effect April 1, 2025
Amendments to the Trademarks Regulations will take effect on April 1, 2025. These changes are part of broader updates to the Trademarks Act, introduced through the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Heineken Battles Over "La Tropical" Branding
Heineken’s Lagunitas Brewery has reportedly advanced its trademark and copyright claims over its "La Tropical" beer in a legal battle involving Cuban-origin brands. As reported by Bloomberg, the… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Super Loss for Marvel and DC? "Super Hero" Trademark Enters the Public Domain
Marvel and DC have reportedly lost their long-held trademarks for “Super Hero”. For decades, the two comic giants jointly owned the trademark, with DC using it for its DC Super Hero Cafe and… -
Litigation and Dispute Resolution
Is Your Trademark at Risk? Understanding the TMOB’s New Pilot Project
In January 2025, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) is launching a pilot project in which the Registrar of Trademarks will issue 50–100 section 45 notices per month for randomly selected trademark… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Rise of Trademark Phishing Scams
There has been a reported surge in trademark phishing scams. The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (“CIPO”) issued a statement warning of an email phishing scam targeting members of the public by… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
The Return of the Honda Element?
A few recent patent applications reveal that the Honda Element may be making its return to the automotive industry: The first patent application is a “camper for a vehicle”. The second…