The Centralisation of Sports Media Rights by International Sports Federations: The Case of DSV v. FIS
By Dr Fabian Masurat, Taylor Wessing, Lawyers, Hamburg, Germany
The commercialisation of sports media rights has become a central instrument of modern sports financing.
The aim is to maximise revenues and increase global reach. At the same time, negotiations with interested parties should be simplified. International Sports Federations, such as the Fédération Internationale de Ski (FIS), have campaigned for the centralisation of these rights. They argue that their sports, as a whole, benefit from the uniform administration and distribution of revenues. However, this approach often leads to tensions with National Sports Federations, such as the German Ski Association (DSV), who wish to pursue their own strategies for monetising events and supporting their athletes.
The recent legal dispute between the DSV and the FIS before the Munich District Court (case number 37 O 7091/24) illustrates the inherent conflicts and complexity of centralising sports media rights.
The Significance of Sports Media Rights
Sports media rights are an important source of revenue for International Sports Federations, including broadcasting, sponsorship, and advertising contracts. These funds support the organisation of sports events, the development of athletes and the promotion of their sports. International Sports Federations, such as the FIS, argue that centralised management of media rights ensures consistent global branding, maximises total revenue and allows for fair distribution to member associations, including those from smaller markets with limited commercial reach.
National Sports Federations, such as the DSV, however, often feel disadvantaged by such arrangements and resist them. They claim that they have a better understanding of their domestic markets and are, therefore, able to negotiate more lucrative agreements with local broadcasters and sponsors, as well as serving their local fans.
The Conflict: DSV v. FIS
The FIS attempted to centralise international advertising and media rights, including those for FIS World Cup events, under its direct control. The FIS claimed that this approach would ensure consistency and fairness across all member nations. By bundling the rights into a global package, it aimed to negotiate better contracts and distribute the resulting higher revenue to its members.
However, the DSV viewed this step as an unjustifiable restriction of competition and sought an injunction against the FIS. The German Federation argued that it should retain the authority to deal directly with domestic broadcasters when organising events in Germany.
The Verdict of the Munich District Court
The Munich District Court (case number 37 O 7091/24), on 9 October 2024, ruled in favour of the DSV. The Court found that the centralisation of media rights by the FIS constituted an intentional restriction of competition prohibited by European Union Competition Law. It emphasised that the FIS, as the world governing body, holds a dominant position in the market for international ski competitions and that its decision significantly infringes the rights of national associations.
The Court also found that the FIS practices create a de facto obligation for national associations to sign contracts assigning their media rights. Without such agreements, the FIS would continue to claim exclusive marketing authority, effectively limiting the autonomy of the national associations. This was considered to be an unjustified competitive disadvantage for the member associations.
Furthermore, the Court issued an injunction preventing the FIS from implementing the centralised marketing of their media rights for the 2026-2027 season.
Legal and Economic Implications
The case highlights the need to balance centralized marketing by International Sports Federations with the rights of their National Federations.
From a legal perspective, the centralisation of media rights could conflict with European Union Competition Law, which aims to prevent monopolistic practices. National Federations argue that the forced cession of media rights to international bodies restricts competition and undermines their independence.
From an economic perspective, the debate revolves around the balance between global efficiency and local market characteristics. Whilst centralised administration by the FIS could maximize total revenue, this could lead to unfavorable outcomes for popular and high-revenue markets, such as Germany. The DSV claims that its direct negotiations in its home country would generate higher revenues than its share of the centrally allocated funds. This tension between solidarity and fairness adds another layer of complexity to the debate.
Potential Impacts
The dispute between the DSV and FIS illustrates the complexity of managing sports media rights in an increasingly globalised sports industry. Whilst centralisation offers advantages in terms of efficiency and solidarity, it must respect the autonomy and financial viability of the National Federations.
The centralisation of media rights has far-reaching consequences for athletes, fans and the general development of their sports. Reduced revenues for the National Federations could mean fewer funds for training programmes. Furthermore, centralised rights could reduce access to broadcasts, as the National Federations often negotiate contracts with ‘free-to-air’ broadcasters to ensure widespread accessibility.
The FIS is expected to appeal this decision. The final German decision is likely to apply to similar situations in other EU Member States and also in other countries, whose National Competition Laws are aligned with EU Competition Law.
It may be added that the final German decision will also apply to sports other than skiing, and will, therefore, set an important and widespread legal precedent in the sporting world for several years to come.
The Author may be contacted by e-mail at ‘
