Panini vs Fanatics antitrust dispute

This dispute matters because Fanatics did not just buy a card company, it tried to lock up the sports card supply chain at the license level. The core fight is over exclusive deals with leagues and player unions that decide who can print official NFL, NBA, and MLB cards. A New York federal judge ordered Fanatics to hand over unredacted versions of six key licensing agreements to Panini, which keeps the market power question alive even as a separate consumer antitrust case was thrown out on standing grounds.1 2 3

• Fanatics changed the market by pairing Topps, which it acquired in 2022, with new long term exclusive rights deals. That combination matters because cards are only valuable at scale if they carry official team logos, league branding, and player likeness rights, so control of licenses can matter as much as control of manufacturing or distribution.4 5
• Panini's case is a rival suit, not a consumer suit. That makes it more durable. A direct competitor can argue that Fanatics used exclusive rights and contract tactics to squeeze it out of the market over many years, which is why discovery into the underlying league and union contracts is so important.1 2 6
• The dismissal of the separate buyer case does not remove the main exposure. In September 2026, a federal judge dismissed trading card customers' monopoly claims because they lacked standing, but that ruling did not end Panini's own antitrust and contract fight with Fanatics in the Southern District of New York.3 6

The next phase is about whether exclusive sports rights become a permanent moat for Fanatics Collectibles or a limit courts are willing to police. If Fanatics keeps the licenses and avoids structural remedies, the sports card business will likely look more like licensed sports merchandise, where a few contracts determine who gets to participate at all.1 2 4