The first athlete objections to the House v. NCAA proposal have been filed, less than a month after the 300-page document—that would pave the way for revenue-sharing—was submitted to the court. A trio of objections argued a wide range of grievances, from gender equity to antitrust issues.

House v. NCAA, first filed in 2020, argues that athletes deserve damages for losing out on NIL (name, image, and likeness) opportunities before 2021, and that the definition of NIL should be expanded.