MLB Players Union and DraftKings Settle Player Image Lawsuit, What It Means

MLB Players Inc. — the business arm of the Major League Baseball Players Association — and DraftKings Inc. settled a right of publicity lawsuit on April 7, 2026, after nearly 19 months of litigation. The case accused DraftKings of using the names, images, and likenesses of hundreds of MLB players on its sports betting platform without permission or payment. The court dismissed the case with prejudice in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Settlement terms are confidential.

Quick Facts

Field	Detail
Plaintiff	MLB Players Inc. (MLBPI) — business arm of the MLBPA
Defendant	DraftKings Inc.
Court	U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Case Number	24-04884
Filed	September 16, 2024
Settled	April 7, 2026
Legal Claims	Right of publicity, unjust enrichment, negligence
Settlement Amount	Confidential
Settlement Status	Dismissed with prejudice — fully resolved

Where Things Stand Right Now

• The Pennsylvania federal case against DraftKings is fully resolved and dismissed with prejudice as of April 7, 2026.
• MLBPI also dismissed its claims against bet365 separately in April 2025.
• The separate New York lawsuit involving Underdog Fantasy remains ongoing.
• FanDuel settled its portion of the original litigation in November 2024 in a confidential licensing deal.

What Was the Lawsuit About?

When you open the DraftKings app to place a bet on a baseball player hitting a home run, you typically see that player’s photo alongside the betting line. MLB Players Inc. argued that DraftKings had no legal right to use those photos commercially without a licensing agreement — and without paying the players for it.

Calling online sports betting “big business,” MLB players accused the defendants of “flagrant” violations of state laws protecting the right of publicity, saying nearly every active player’s image appears on their websites and mobile apps.

The players drew a sharp distinction between information and promotion. They said the only reason to treat baseball players differently was to increase “consumer appeal” and draw more bets, given that the “core information” bettors need is statistical data — not what players look like. Users could bet that a player hits two home runs in a game without ever seeing that player’s face.

Related article: 17 Year Old Weslaco Cheerleader Larissa Rodriguez, Family Sues Over Alani Nu Energy Drink Death

The players also noted that keeping control of their image helps them avoid being perceived as supportive of companies and products they dislike. For a professional athlete, appearing to endorse a gambling platform without consent has real reputational and commercial consequences.

How Did This Lawsuit Come Together?

The MLBPA filed the case against DraftKings and bet365 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on September 16, 2024. The union filed a separate but related lawsuit in New York state court against FanDuel and Underdog Fantasy on the same day. Both cases involved the same core allegation: sports betting platforms used player images in their apps and promotional materials to drive betting activity without any authorization or compensation.

The lawsuits came three weeks after the NFL Players Association, represented by the same law firm, sued DraftKings over a different NIL dispute involving non-fungible tokens.

DraftKings and bet365 tried to kill the Pennsylvania case early. Both argued their use of player images fell under a “newsworthiness” exemption — essentially claiming that displaying player photos in the context of sports betting was similar to news reporting, and therefore protected.

The judge rejected that argument. In a decision released in March 2025, Judge Karen Marston wrote that MLBPI made plausible claims for violation of the common law right of publicity and unjust enrichment, finding that the platforms used player NIL without authorization and for their own commercial gain. The court kept three of MLBPI’s four original legal claims alive and allowed the case to proceed into discovery.

By that point, FanDuel had already settled its part of the dispute in November 2024. With the motion to dismiss denied and discovery looming, DraftKings faced the prospect of expensive depositions, document production, and a likely trial. The parties chose to settle instead.

Why Did DraftKings Lose Its “Newsworthiness” Argument?

DraftKings’ central defense was that displaying player images alongside betting lines resembles a news publication — informational rather than commercial. The argument had worked in some earlier fantasy sports cases in other states.

MLBPI argued that all prior fantasy sports cases DraftKings cited were from outside Pennsylvania, making them irrelevant. Pennsylvania’s right of publicity law has its own “associated with a news report or news presentation” exemption, and the judge declined to stretch that language to cover a for-profit gambling platform.

The judge noted that some of the posts in question were “interwoven into advertising” — not pure information — and that unique betting odds appearing alongside player images raised questions about whether that content truly constituted “news.” She also questioned whether DraftKings, which does not present itself as a media company, could credibly claim the protections typically afforded to journalists and news organizations.

What This Settlement Means for Sports Betting and Player Rights

This settlement — combined with the earlier FanDuel deal — signals a clear shift in how sports betting platforms must operate. For years, sportsbooks displayed player photos freely, treating them as general sports information. Players’ unions across multiple sports are now asserting that this commercial use requires a licensing agreement and compensation.

FanDuel’s settlement with MLBPI came in the form of a licensing deal — meaning FanDuel now pays for the right to use player images in the way it previously used them for free. DraftKings’ confidential settlement likely follows a similar pattern, though the specific terms remain sealed.

DraftKings also faces other related legal challenges, including NCAA trademark litigation over March Madness, reflecting growing pressure across the sports industry on how betting platforms use athlete and league intellectual property.

For MLB players, this outcome reinforces that their names and faces have measurable commercial value — and that value belongs to them, not to any platform that chooses to display it.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did MLB Players Inc. sue DraftKings over?

 MLB Players Inc. sued DraftKings for displaying the names, photos, and likenesses of hundreds of MLB players on its sports betting app and promotional materials without permission or payment. The union argued this violated Pennsylvania’s right of publicity law and constituted unjust enrichment.

What is the right of publicity? 

The right of publicity is a legal right that lets individuals — including professional athletes — control how their name, image, and likeness are used for commercial purposes. It prevents businesses from profiting off a person’s identity without that person’s consent.

How much did DraftKings pay to settle? 

The settlement amount is confidential. Neither DraftKings nor MLB Players Inc. disclosed the financial terms of the agreement. The court dismissed the case with prejudice on April 7, 2026, confirming both sides reached a resolution.

Did FanDuel also settle a similar lawsuit? 

Yes. FanDuel settled its portion of the related NIL litigation with MLB Players Inc. in November 2024. That settlement was structured as a confidential licensing agreement, meaning FanDuel now pays for the right to use player images on its platform.

Is the lawsuit over for all defendants? 

No. The DraftKings case in Pennsylvania is resolved. MLBPI also separately dismissed its claims against bet365 in 2025. However, the New York lawsuit against Underdog Fantasy remains active and ongoing.

Does this affect DraftKings users or bettors?

 Not directly. Bettors will still see player images on the DraftKings platform. The settlement likely means DraftKings now pays a licensing fee to use those images — a business cost that will not change the user experience.

What is NIL and why does it matter in sports? 

NIL stands for Name, Image, and Likeness. It refers to a person’s ability to profit from their own identity. In sports, NIL rights determine who gets paid when a company uses an athlete’s face or name to attract customers. This case is part of a broader wave of NIL enforcement by professional players’ unions across the NFL, NBA, and MLB.

Could other sports betting platforms face similar lawsuits? 

Yes. The legal theory here — that using player images to promote betting lines is commercial, not informational — applies equally to any platform that displays athlete photos to draw users to their product. The outcomes of these settlements are sending a clear market signal to the entire sports betting industry.

Last Updated: April 9, 2026

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Legal claims and outcomes depend on specific facts and applicable law. For advice regarding a particular situation, consult a qualified attorney.