The O’Bannon Lawsuit began yesterday and was … expectedly uneventful, though nevertheless informative. Whether it was lively or not, it wasn’t going to be the boldest relevant headline of the day. No, that went to the somewhat unexpected $20 million settlement between the NCAA and the plaintiffs looking for their payout from EA Sports games.

Not coincidentally, the start of the trial, and the very day student-athletes won a second battle for the use of their likenesses, saw Oliver Luck take to the athletic department’s homepage to speak to and to caution fans of the Mountaineers.

So what could a decision in favor of the plaintiffs actually mean?  Well, the judge may allow student-athletes to use their own names, images and likenesses for commercial purposes. For example, a WVU student-athlete could arrange with a local automobile dealership or restaurant or dry-cleaner to shoot a commercial in which the student-athlete endorses the dealership. The student-athlete would receive compensation for this appearance, much like a professional athlete would, and analogous to professional sports, the student-athlete would not be allowed to use the marks and logos of his or her school.

Also, a student-athlete may be allowed to sell autographs, pictures or memorabilia or license archival footage and then benefit materially from that activity.

In addition, the student-athlete may be allowed to create merchandise that is specific to the individual, i.e., with the player’s name on the back. Simply put, college student-athletes would be able to do many of the same things that you see from professional athletes and with the same constraints that professional athletes face.

But the more attractive goal for the plaintiffs is to receive a piece of the television pie. The plaintiffs’ argument here is that the name, image and likeness of the student-athlete is also being used without consent by the television networks. Needless to say, the television contracts are the mother’s milk for the conferences and their member schools.