This study examines the remaining options for sport managers to balance the interests of college athletes and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in regulating college athlete name, image, and likeness (NIL). The paper is divided into six substantive sections. The first section, “Background: The NCAA’s Defense of NIL Restrictions,” provides a brief history of the NCAA’s legal defense to challenges against its NIL regulations. The second section, “U.S. Congress Is Unlikely to Regulate College Athletes’ NIL Rights,” addresses proposed federal legislation and Congress’ willingness to regulate the use of NIL by college athletes. The third section, “The Impact of O’Bannon and Alston on NCAA’s NIL Restraints,” examines controlling case law, specifically O’Bannon v. NCAA and NCAA v. Alston, and how current antitrust law precedent shapes the scope by which the NCAA can regulate college athletes’ NIL. The fourth section, “State Laws Regulating the NIL Marketplace,” addresses state legislation regulating college athlete NIL use. The fifth section, “The Applicability of Labor Law to Regulating College Athletes’ NIL,” discusses the current college athlete NIL marketplace and analyzes whether labor law presents an optimal way forward for the NCAA to regulate NIL post-Alston. The sixth section, “College Athletes’ Employee Status as a Pathway to Redefine the NCAA’s Amateurism,” concludes by examining the law’s role in regulating NIL and discussing stakeholder implications.

本研究探讨了体育管理者在规范大学运动员姓名、形象和肖像 (NIL) 方面平衡大学运动员和美国大学体育协会 (NCAA) 利益的剩余选择。本文分为六个实质性部分。第一部分“背景：NCAA 对 NIL 限制的辩护”简要介绍了 NCAA 对针对其 NIL 规定的质疑进行法律辩护的历史。第二部分“美国国会不太可能监管大学运动员的 NIL 权利”，讨论拟议的联邦立法以及国会监管大学运动员使用 NIL 的意愿。第三部分“奥班农和阿尔斯通对 NCAA 的 NIL 限制的影响”审查了控制判例法，特别是奥班农诉 NCAA和NCAA 诉阿尔斯通案，以及当前反垄断法先例如何确定 NCAA 监管大学运动员 NIL 的范围。第四部分“规范 NIL 市场的州法律”涉及规范大学运动员 NIL 使用的州立法。第五部分“劳动法对规范大学运动员 NIL 的适用性”讨论了当前大学运动员 NIL 市场，并分析劳动法是否为 NCAA 规范后阿尔斯通 NIL 提供了最佳途径。第六部分“大学运动员的雇员身份是重新定义 NCAA 业余主义的途径”，最后探讨了法律在规范 NIL 方面的作用并讨论了利益相关者的影响。