Law Enforcement against Illegal Contacting of Amateur Athletes - Coursework Example

Federal trade commission law enforcement against illegal contacting of amateur athletes by sports agents Introduction Sporting has become a lucrative business in the current world because of its numerous profitability it is associated with. This current trend has led to the rise of attorney agents and non-attorney agents such as individuals, organizations and companies acting as sports agents hence there is a great and notable competition between these individuals for the clients (Ruxin 2009). They look for clients to represent them in the sporting events taking care of all signings; salaries and the overall welfare of the athlete sporting issues, the clients for these representations are mainly students and professional athletes. There has been preference of attorney agents in athlete representation because of their nature of their practice which is characterized with professionalism, accountability and the rule of ethics that are regulated by professional bodies associations thus this is an advantage to the athletes because of the assurance that their rights are not violated and the protection from exploitations (Ruxin 2009). This safeguard is further enhanced by the experience of the attorney’s in drafting of contracts, professional malpractice insurance retention, suitable bargaining agreement skills and negotiations (Wong, 2010). Non-attorney agents have completely brought a new picture in sporting representation whereby they have posed a great competition to the attorney agents attributed by its simplicity in terms of procedures and legal requirements thus luring many athletes mainly amateur ones into signing with them. These imprecise and quick sign in contracts with some incompetent agents have resulted into clients finding themselves at the disadvantage end. Because of the inadequate uniform professional set of ethical policies and rules attribute by no set regulation body these agents have sometimes resulted in engaging on unethical practices such as illegal signing of clients so as to increase their profitability gained from the high compensations of the athletes thus violating the rights of the athletes. This has resulted into lower levels of ethical representation; expertise and client safeguard in the representation issues. These trends has resulted into the need impose regulations on these agents to enhance fair competitions in the contract signings of the athlete clients between the attorney agents and non-attorney agents and to ensure that the rights and the welfare of the athletes are not violated more specifically on the amateur athletes who are not yet exposed and familiarize themselves on how these agents go about with their signings (Ruxin 2009). The alarming increase trend of sport impropriety mainly the illegal signing of athlete clients and the unethical malpractices has resulted into the congress responding by enacting legislations across the country and thus stern actions on these unscrupulous agents has been put in place (Masteralexis 2011). These regulations have affected many amateur athletes mostly in colleges and major universities who have received a significant amount of money from the various agents in the exchange of signing for their representation. The congress has responded to this issue by the enactment of the Sport Agent Responsibility and Trust Act (SPARTA) whereby this enacted law will act as a regulating rule and policy regarding the signings and the recruitment of student athletes majorly in colleges and local universities (Mitten 2011). This law enactment has provided four major agent practices and conducts that are considered to being a malpractice, deceptive and unethical acts, this law was to be policed and enforced by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act (Shropshire 2008). The four major agency practices that were identified by the act to being illegal are as follows; the first one is the falsification of the information that are contained in the contract to be signed by an agent to the student athlete or any other amateur athlete, this act regulated the conduct of the unscrupulous agents who are common in taking advantage of the innocent and naive athletes who are not familiar with the representation signing agreements; secondly is the agents acts of inducing the athletes into signing the contract agreements also known as induced signature, these inducements included the provision of anything valuable to the athlete in the exchange of the signature and these valuables includes money, gifts, vocational trips and any other forms of value with the capability of inducement; the third one is the ignorance of the agencies in advising the student athletes on the consequences of signing the contract, these consequences are dire to the student because it may lead to total expulsion from the school as well a termination of the academic scholarship (Ruxin 2009). This act has been considered to be very important because of the significant impact it has been able to make from the time it was enforced by the Federal Trade Commission, there has been a reduction in prevalence of the reported cases of college students are dismissed from college as a result from these signings; the fourth one concerns about the practices of predating and postdating the agency contracts, there alterations has been common in some agents in order to have their clients eligible in participating in some specific events which have tough regulations hence it is considered a malpractice (Mitten 2011). Federal Trade Commission by way of enforcing the laws and acts provided by SPARTA has treated all the agents to be the same without differentiating the attorney-agents and the non-attorney agents. This has become an advantage to the attorney agents who before were characterized with the competitive disadvantage in comparison with the non-attorney agents thus implying that most of the regulations of the SPARTA will be act as a complementary to those which have been complied with the attorney agents. The implementation of these attorney like regulations based on the above four described malpractices and unethical issues will enhance the federal crackdown of the unscrupulous agents. These regulations will further enhance the fairness in the competitions pertaining contract signing and representation of sporting athletes as well as changing and transforming the unorganized and sector of the sporting agency thus bringing positive effects thus ensuring effectiveness and efficiency in the word of sporting agency (Mitten 2011). In order to analyze how the Federal Trade Commission should it is important to look at the laws and policies that existed before the enactment of the SPARTA acts and policies. These laws and cause of actions will be analyzed; this will provide the reason why it was not able to prevent sports agents from continuing in their engagement with the illegal conduct and malpractices, these laws which existed before the enactment of the SPARTA are as follows. Federal laws There were a number of established criminal laws that existed which regulated issues concerning agency activities, these laws imposed heavy penalties including jail terms but had little influence in preventing the sports agencies in engaging with illegal practices in the representation of athletes. Notably is the case of United States vs Walters where this case was considered to be a revolutionary case, this case involved a mail conspiracy of a mail fraud (Pittman 2010). The two Walter and Blooms were both sports agents whom illegally represented football players who were college students and inducing them to these deals (Mitten 2011). The college students were forced to lie that they had their contracts registered with the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) which was a requirement so as to continue getting scholarship while they continue representing their school playing football, the two sports agents committed the malpractice by inducing the students with values such as cars, cash, loans and other gifts for signings and they also postdated the already signed contracts so as to facilitate the retain of the scholarships (Wise 2003) . After the completion from college of all the fifty-eight players they has signed only two of the athletes were able to signed with the two agents, As a result the two agents tried to enforce the contracts by threatening the athletes instead of suing them for the valuables they had offered the players in return of signing the contracts. The judgment was that the two were found guilty of the several counts of mail fraud, conspiracy of committing mail fraud and RICO violations and Bloom was sentenced for three years and five years’ probation and Walters five years prison sentence and five years probation (Mitten 2011). The two appealed the case and the court of appeal reversed the case and the on the basis of the existence of procedural errors this proved the inefficiency of federal laws in addressing the sport agency because the jail time could not serve as an effective way of punishing those sport agents who engaged in malpractice activities. There are also investigations that were carried out to find out if the sports agents were illegally acting as financial advisers for their signed athletes (Mitten 2011). Civil statutes These statutes were the state legislatures which provided remedies for athletes, colleges, universities who had been subjected to injury by the unscrupulous sport agents. These statutes involve civil provision of punishment to sporting agents and the punishments includes nullification of the sports agent license of operation, suspension of the license as well as total revocation. This was successfully adopted in the various states thus gaining popularity while other states had also provisions that any of the agent contracts that had been considered to violate the laws of the state were considered void. The civil statute also provided that those agents who had committed malpractice of offering gifts and values to the amateur athletes had no right to demand for the repayment of its value (Shropshire 2008). All of these civil statutes varied from one federal government to another and its advantage was that it provided for the private causes of action for the individual injured parties these variation therefore provided the loophole these unscrupulous sports agents in engaging in illegal practices in some states hence there was a need to establish an independent overall policy marker and regulator across all the federal states hence SPARTA was initiated (Pittman 2010). Administrative and state criminal statutes Among other existing statutes for punishing unethical and unscrupulous sport agents, there are other state statutes that are aimed at monitoring the conduct and the practices of the agents. One of the main reasons why the states protect the athletes is because of the economic value of them, it is speculated that through the programs of NCAA regarding football, basketball and other sporting events the state governments gain a lot of money therefore any instability within these programs the economic effects will be felt. The significance of these effects is of great importance to the society and that the governments have the incentive to establish statutes that will be able to protect all the groups of interest in sporting agencies. Most of the states had enacted the various state agent laws and regulations thereby creating restrictions and regulation of the agent activities (Wong, 2010). Most of these laws were similar with those of the SPARTA though it made an insignificant breakthrough in addressing the athlete-agent conflicts. However the big penalties that are involved with these statutes there has been minimal cases that have been prosecuted and the subjected agents put into jail as well as the fines details. There are increased instances where it has become unenforceable to implement the identified criminal conduct because of the lack of vagueness and lack of personal law on these matters (Ruxin 2009). There was a massive recruitment of agents mostly are those who were associated with the malpractices issues such as the robbery and unlawful signings. In general there is still tendency of the of unethical sport agents that have caused the athlete and most of the school to violated the NCAA rules. This acted as a proof that these administrative statutes were ineffective and had no strong capability in protecting the rights off amateur athletes as it is projected to do so giving rise into the need of the establishment of SPARTA which is expected to address this issues appropriately (Congress 2011). State common law There are existing common regulations and policies that are ought to be followed by the sport agents, college based athletes and the various universities in order to meet the requirements of the NCAA .These common laws provides the remedy for the various injured parties in the case of the failure of the state laws enforcement. An example is a case is where there are contracts that exists between the student athlete and the college or a university and a situation may occur where one of the parties may bring a course of action against one another and in this case the courts will base on the common law that the financial benefits of the student are valid and that there is a valid contractual relationship between the two parties. This is evident in the case of Taylor v Wake Forest University Where the court held that there a contractual agreement between the university and the father of the student athlete (Pittman 2010). The contract was start the student will follow and stick to the NCAA regulations as well as all the training sessions of the university football team, maintaining the average grade and other basic requirement for the case of the scholarship. The conflict came along when the university decided to terminate the scholarship because Taylor was adjusting some of the training rules in order to maintain a reasonable academic performance grade (Wong, 2010). As a result of this scholarship termination Taylor and father sued the University, the court decision was that there was a contractual relationship between the university and the two parties and as a result the lawsuit was dismissed on the grounds that Taylor had violated the contractual agreement for he did not comply with the training rules and the physical requirement eligibility complement by the fact that the athlete had failed to comply with the NCAA eligibility requirement which had also the elements of contractual agreement (Wong, 2010). Because of the shortcomings of that were attributed by these federal and state laws there was the establishment of SPARTA Act which has been able to make a significant progress in ensuring that the correct cause of actions are taken in the case of the breach of contractual agreements mainly involving the sport agents and the professional as well as the student athletes. The SPARTA Act has been established under the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) as its regulating body and they are responsible for the punishment of all those who engage in unethical and practices concerning the contractual agreements on sporting. The following are the ways in which SPARTA should punish the illegal contract agents to enhance and safeguard the rights of the amateur athletes in the federal states (Pittman 2010). Penalties and Civil Causes of Actions This should come along as a remedy of the failure of the federal and state laws in from preventing the sports agents from violating the set laws by the NCAA. It is notable that the main reason for the failure of these laws concerns mainly its applied methods of penalties, and the remedies that it tries to employ (Shropshire 2008). The Federal Trade Commission will try as much as possible to enforce SPARTA Act by ensuring that there is a uniform accepted code of conduct and sport agent procedures that all the parties that are involved in the contractual agreements are expected to meet and should adhere to them to the latter (Congress 2011). These regulations policies as well as the law provided by this act should be adopted and enforced in all of the federal states including those which had no such regulations before (Wong, 2010). This will also ensure that all of the agents are equal and have equal chances and opportunities of exploiting specific new states where the sport agency is taking its root and effects. The fairness in competition as well as the uniformity created will enhance the punishment of the various non-attorney sport agents who have been engaging on illegal contracts benefiting unfairly from such contracts leaving the other parties injured. These regulations and the establishment of the civil cause of action for universities, student athletes and the sport agents and the penalties that should be appropriately imposed by the Federal Trade Commission will significantly punish those illegal sport agents that are taking advantage of the naïve athletes (Congress 2004).The deceptive acts that by the sport agents that affect the commerce will trigger the FTC to issue directions for such acts to be ceased and that if there is continued violations acts the violating party should be subjected to a significant heavy penalty that will ensure that the vice is fully controlled and those who would like to engage are deterred from doing these vices (Shropshire 2008). Criminal and Civil penalties The main reason why the previous legislations failed to prevent these illegal activities was due to the gains they obtained from the signing of superstars therefore they could pay all the due fines and penalties at any costs. SPARTA will ensure that it enhances its penalties capabilities by ensuring that they are very heavy, to accomplish this they should be able to regulate and determine the salaries of the athletes and the net potential gains that the sport agents are enjoying (Mitten 2011). FTC should also ensure that the regulations are complied in all the states because of the tendency of these illegal sports agents mushrooming in those states with little or no governing laws regarding the athlete-agent laws. The SPARTA’s FTC constantly increase of penalties most preferably doubling the existing value will ensure and deters any of these agents engaging on these illegal activities to stop from such vices as well as those who wish to enter this agency industry (Shropshire 2008). Enhance the Federal Civil Causes of Action capabilities The federal causes of actions for the universities against the athletes’ sports agents should be fully implemented to prevent agents from engaging in such illegal activities. This will enhance the universities to sue the sports agents under the various established laws and statutes. Through this the federal trade Commission will have enhanced their mechanisms of regulating illegal sport agency (Thornton 2011). Conclusion There is increased demand on the demand of the athlete representation therefore prospective agents are entering the market to gain from these opportunities (Congress 2011). This has elicited tough competitions among these actors thereby triggering some of them to engage on illegal agency activities which in turn inducing the universities and the athletes in engaging on the in these illegal activities thus violating the rules and regulations of the NCCA (Mitten 2011). The congress efforts of regulating these activities through the Sports Agent Responsibility Trust Act has done a lot in ensuring that all the parties are protected from any possible injuries resulting from these illegal activities. There are also notable challenges in the implementations of these regulations which should be addressed by making changes on the methods of the implementations used by the Federal Trade Commission. To ensure the above changes are implemented the congress should establish a federal registry or licensing system for sports agents this will ensure that athletes will only sign contracts from registered sport agents and declaring the nullification of all the contracts signed by the unregistered agents. Penalties should also be heavily imposed involving suspension and revocation of the licenses. Finally is to make major amendments on the SPARTA’s acts to ensure that they adapt to the current trends in the sporting agency (Thornton 2011). Competition in the sporting industry attributed by its attractiveness has fostered these illegal ways of getting clients (Congress 2011). The federal government should ensure that the there are tougher penalties are awarded to those who engage in these violations and more important is to narrow down these penalties to the unscrupulous agents who are the main perpetrators of these illegal activities (Shropshire 2008). Reference Kenneth L. Shropshire, T. D. (2008). The Business of Sports Agents. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Masteralexis, L. (2011). Principles and Practice of Sport Management. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Mitten, M. J. (2011). Sports Law in the United States. Vatican: Kluwer Law International. Pittman. (2010). Case Studies in Sport Law. New York: Human Kinetics. Robert H. Ruxin, D. H. (2009). An Athlete's Guide to Agents. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Thornton, P. K. (2011). Sports Ethics for Sports Management Professionals. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. U S Congress. (2009). Congressional Record, V. 150, Pt. 13, July 22, 2004 to September 14, 2004. New York: Government Printing Office. United States. Congress. House. (2011). Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act: Report . Memphis: General Books LLC. Wise, A. N. (2003). International Sports Law and Business. Memphis: Kluwer Law International. Wong, G. M. (2010). Essentials of Sports Law. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. Read More