Is baseball a monopoly... If so is baseball exempt from US monopoly laws... If so why?

Answer 1

"Baseball is the only major sport with an antitrust exemption. In fact, as I understand it, it is virtually the only business with an exemption to the Sherman and Clayton acts, which regulate interstate commerce. Thanks to the 1922 Supreme Court, baseball controls at least the movement of its franchises and is somewhat exempt from labor relation laws. This exemption has been challenged in courts several times, but never repealed.

According to the New York Times, "The Court has never delineated what is covered by the exemption. But it has come to embrace a blanket immunity from Federal court action regarding player movement, franchise shifts, expansion, broadcasting, team ownership, the minor leagues and the amateur draft." Although there are real questions about the practical impact of the exemption, it is still in place. It still serves as a partial shield from competition and federal oversight.

Does that put an extra moral burden on MLB? Well, let's compare MLB to legal monopolies for a second. Legal monopolies are often required to allow governments to regulate them to a heavy extent. They have citizen's boards and public hearings. Their prices are set or reviewed by third parties. Theoretically, all major decisions in legal monopolies are made in the public arena, because nothing should be hidden when a single institution has such market power.

Is Major League Baseball a "legal monopoly?" Are they protected by law from competition? No-you've got to say that many sports, such as Basketball and football, are pretty good competitors for the "sporting dollar." (Though Ted Turner's quote still delights: "Gentlemen, we have the only legal monopoly in the country and we're f***ing it up.") But MLB does have a legal advantage over its competitors; no other sport has an antitrust exemption. No other sport has an opportunity to lean on a questionable Supreme Court ruling to protect its interests. No other sport is so protected from the development of a rival league.

So let's call baseball a "legally sanctioned near-monopoly." The next question is, is baseball open the same way legal monopolies are? Is it even close?

No. There is no fan's committee. Ownership meetings are not open to the public. Prices aren't set by a third party. The press only sporadically plays an effective journalistic role. Congress, through periodic hearings, has taken some interest in holding Baseball accountable to the greater good, but not a lot. They have more important matters to attend to.

This lack of transparency and regulation, coupled with the remarkable antitrust exemption, means that everyone involved in Major League Baseball has a unique and particular ethical responsibility. Since there is no competition to keep them honest, the manner in which MLB works with its employees and players, local and national government, other businesses, and with their customers should be held to a higher standard than that of other private enterprises. The antitrust exemption is a privilege, and privileged institutions have higher moral responsibilities.

Do major league owners always live up to those higher standards? No, of course not. We can have reasonable debates about how far they veer from those standards, but that doesn't mean those standards don't exist. They are as "real" as any ethical standards can be, short of law."

from: http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/is-baseball-special/