Judge Approves $375 Million UFC Antitrust Settlement

In a historic moment for sports law and antitrust litigation, a federal judge has granted final approval to a $375 million UFC antitrust settlement. The deal resolves a decade-long class action lawsuit filed by a group of professional mixed martial arts fighters, who accused the UFC of fighter wage suppression through monopolistic market control. Reaching this settlement was a life-changing victory for the fighters and a watershed moment for future antitrust lawsuits across the sports and entertainment industries.

The Allegations

The UFC antitrust lawsuit was filed in 2014 by a group of fighters led by well-known names such as Cung Le, Nate Quarry, and Jon Fitch. They accused the UFC’s parent company, Zuffa LLC, of engaging in anticompetitive conduct resulting in fighter wage suppression and the elimination of rival promotions.

According to the plaintiffs, the UFC maintained its dominance by locking fighters into long-term, exclusive contracts and buying out competitors, thus consolidating market control and suppressing the labor market for MMA fighters. They argued that this prevented fighters from negotiating fair pay or pursuing more lucrative opportunities with other organizations.

The fighters also alleged that the UFC’s dominant position in the MMA market allowed it to dictate terms to athletes, leading to wage suppression. The case gained traction in 2020 when a judge certified the class, opening the door for thousands of fighters who competed in UFC events between 2010 and 2017 to join the lawsuit.

What the Settlement Says

U.S. District Judge Richard Boulware gave final approval to the $375 million settlement. In his ruling, Judge Boulware acknowledged the significant relief the settlement provides to class members, while recognizing the complexity and risks of continuing to trial. The settlement terms include the $375 million payout as well as non-monetary provisions intended to improve contract transparency and limit restrictive practices in fighter agreements. Public reaction to the settlement has been generally favorable, with some commentators praising it as a much-needed correction to the power imbalance between promoters and fighters. Others argue that the deal is a step in the right direction, but that it falls short of fundamentally changing UFC’s business model.

What This Means for Antitrust Law: New Paths Forward

Similar to the wave of scrutiny facing tech companies and gig economy employers, this case demonstrates how labor-focused antitrust claims are gaining momentum. Following the UFC settlement, courts may be more receptive to claims that plaintiffs in sports leagues industries can show that an employer controls the market and uses that control to suppress wages or restrict mobility. Moreover, the legal theories advanced in this case—including the argument that monopsony power harms labor markets—can serve as a blueprint for future actions against monopolistic behavior in sports leagues, entertainment contracts, and other talent-driven sectors.

What This Case Means Moving Forward

At Miller Shah LLP, we’ve built a reputation for taking on powerful companies in complex antitrust and class action cases. From recovering $33 million in the Norwegian Salmon case to leading litigation involving reverse payment schemes, wage suppression, and price-fixing conspiracies, our team is well-versed in helping workers and businesses challenge unfair practices. We’ve successfully litigated cases alongside agencies like the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission, and we know how to hold employers accountable — whether in sports, pharmaceuticals, or global financial markets.

The UFC antitrust settlement sends a message to every industry that monopolistic power can be challenged. The fighters in this class-action case stood up against a system that they believed was suppressing their wages and limiting their freedom as employees, and they won a life-changing settlement. For anyone facing similar wage suppression or antitrust misconduct, we at Miller Shah proudly stand with those who are ready to hold powerful organizations accountable.