## Facts

- Pittsburgh Athletic Company owned the Pittsburgh Pirates and operated home games at Forbes Field, an enclosed ballpark admitting spectators only by paid ticket.
- Admission tickets stated that the ticket holder agreed not to give out any news of the game while it was in progress.
- Pittsburgh Athletic Company sold exclusive radio broadcast rights for Pirates home games to commercial sponsors (General Mills, Socony-Vacuum Oil) and a network (National Broadcasting Co.).
- KQV Broadcasting Co., a Pittsburgh radio station, had no license from the team or the exclusive-rights holders.
- KQV broadcast contemporaneous, play-by-play accounts of Pirates home games and stated an intention to continue.
- KQV obtained the play information by placing observers at locations outside Forbes Field with sightlines into the park, asserting it committed no trespass.
- Plaintiffs alleged KQV’s conduct appropriated the value of the exclusive broadcast rights and interfered with the contractual arrangements supporting that exclusivity.
- In the preliminary-injunction proceedings, KQV disclaimed any intent to broadcast games played outside Pittsburgh for the remainder of the season, so the dispute focused on home games at Forbes Field.

## Issues

1. Whether the team and its exclusive broadcasters had a protectable property or quasi-property interest in contemporaneous, play-by-play descriptions of Pirates home games.
2. Whether KQV’s real-time play-by-play broadcasts based on outside observation constituted unfair competition or misappropriation warranting a preliminary injunction.
3. Whether plaintiffs showed imminent, irreparable harm justifying preliminary relief, and whether any relief should extend beyond home games.

## Decision

- The court granted a preliminary injunction restraining KQV from broadcasting live, play-by-play reports of Pirates home games at Forbes Field in a manner that appropriated plaintiffs’ exclusive broadcast rights.
- The court declined to issue preliminary relief as to games played in other cities due to KQV’s disclaimer and lack of a showing of imminent injury for those games.
- The court treated the contested conduct as unfair competition grounded in misappropriation of the commercial value created by plaintiffs’ enterprise and sold as exclusivity to sponsors.
- The court found that continued unauthorized broadcasts would cause immediate and irreparable injury to the value of the exclusive broadcast contracts, not readily compensable by damages.

## Legal Principles

- A business that expends effort and money to create commercially valuable, time-sensitive content may have a protectable quasi-property interest against a direct competitor’s contemporaneous appropriation for commercial use.
- Unfair competition can include misappropriation of the product of another’s labor and expenditure where the defendant free-rides and destroys the exclusivity sold to paying customers.
- Lack of physical trespass does not bar equitable relief when the defendant’s conduct is designed to circumvent lawful access controls and contractual arrangements supporting exclusivity.
- A defendant’s commercial objective may be shown by audience-building and goodwill intended to generate future advertising value, even absent immediate sponsorship revenue.
- Preliminary injunctive relief is appropriate when the defendant signals intent to continue the challenged conduct and the resulting harm to exclusive commercial rights is imminent and irreparable.

## Conclusion

The court enjoined a competing radio station from unauthorized, real-time play-by-play broadcasts of Pirates home games, holding that the plaintiffs’ exclusive broadcast arrangements were protectable in equity against competitor misappropriation and that continued broadcasting threatened irreparable harm to the value of the exclusivity sold.


Pittsburgh Athletic Co. v. KQV Broad. Co., 24 F. Supp. 490 (W.D. Pa. 1938)