Livvy Dunne speaks, objects to House v. NCAA settlement during final approval hearing

Speaking via Zoom during Monday’s final approval hearing, LSU gymnast Livvy Dunne explained her objections to the House v. NCAA settlement. Dunne was one of three unrepresented objectors to speak, but the lone to do so via Zoom.

While speaking before Judge Claudia Wilken of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Dunne confirmed she is the highest-earning female athlete of the NIL era. Her $4.1 million On3 NIL Valuation ranks No. 1 in the Women’s NIL 100 and No. 4 in the On3 NIL 100, the first of its kind and de facto NIL ranking of the top 100 high school and college athletes ranked by their On3 NIL Valuation.

Live updates: House v. NCAA final approval hearing

Dunne spoke about her experience filing a claim for back damages, particularly about the issues with the website to do so. She also pointed out issues with the formula in place to determine how much she and other athletes would receive under the terms of the settlement.

“The damages formula is unclear,” Dunne said. “… The link just kept looping. … We were told to trust the system, but the system did not communicate. Athletes like me still don’t know if their data submissions were considered.”

One of the most visible athletes in college sports, Dunne is a pioneer in the NIL space. With 13.5 million social media followers, she has NIL deals in place with notable brands such as SI Swimsuit, crocs and Vuori. She also secured a multi-million dollar agreement with Passes as part of her impressive portfolio.

But when she filed her claim for damages, Dunne argued the projections “underestimated my actual earnings” while speaking during Monday’s hearing. She also said it “doesn’t come close to recognizing the value I lost.”

Livvy Dunne: ‘NIL isn’t just about income’

If the House v. NCAA settlement receives full approval – a decision Wilken said would not come Monday – it would usher in the revenue-sharing era in college athletics. Schools will be able to directly share up to $20.5 million with athletes in the first year under the agreement, and that figure goes up 4% each following year.

But when she initially filed her objection to the House v. NCAA settlement in January, Livvy Dunne pointed out issues with the clearinghouse that would be in place under terms of the agreement. The settlement would require NIL deals worth more than $600 to be approved by a clearinghouse that will vet contracts. Dunne also objected to that part of the agreement, citing confidentiality issues.

As she looked at her time in college athletics, though, Dunne pointed out the opportunities NIL presented. She summed up the impact it made away from the playing field.

“NIL isn’t just about income,” she said. “It’s about fairness, independence and the freedom to create a future beyond sports.”