Justice Department Sues DIRECTV for Orchestrating Information Sharing Agreements with Three Competitors
The lawsuit alleges that DIRECTV unlawfully exchanged competitively-sensitive information with Cox, Charter, and AT&T
The U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ) has filed a lawsuit against DIRECTV and its corporate successor, AT&T Inc., for acting as the ringleader of a series of unlawful information exchanges between DIRECTV and three of its competitors—Cox Communications Inc., Charter Communications Inc. and AT&T—during the companies' negotiations to carry SportsNet LA, which holds the exclusive rights to telecast almost all live Dodgers games in the Los Angeles area.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleges that DIRECTV unlawfully exchanged competitively-sensitive information with Cox, Charter and AT&T during the companies' negotiations for the right to telecast the Dodgers Channel.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that DIRECTV and each of these competitors agreed to and did exchange non-public information about their companies' ongoing negotiations to telecast the Dodgers Channel, as well as their companies' future plans to carry—or not carry—the channel.
The USDOJ's complaint also alleges that the companies engaged in this conduct in order to unlawfully obtain bargaining leverage and to reduce the risk that they would lose subscribers if they decided not to carry the channel but a competitor chose to do so. The complaint further alleges that the information learned through these unlawful agreements was a material factor in the companies' decisions not to carry the Dodgers Channel. The Dodgers Channel is still not carried by DIRECTV, Cox, or AT&T.
"As the complaint explains, Dodgers fans were denied a fair competitive process when DIRECTV orchestrated a series of information exchanges with direct competitors that ultimately made consumers less likely to be able to watch their hometown team," said Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Sallet of the Justice Department's Antitrust Division. "Competition, not collusion, best serves consumers and that is especially true when, as with pay-television providers, consumers have only a handful of choices in the marketplace."