On August 8, 2014, in O’Bannon v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California held that the NCAA’s restriction on compensating student-athletes for the use of their names, images, and likenesses violated the Sherman Act. The court ruled against the NCAA despite a long history of judicial deference grounded in preserving the amateur and educational nature of the NCAA. The NCAA has appealed the decision. Despite annual revenues approaching $1 billion, the NCAA claims its amateur and educational fundamentals distinguish its product from commercialized professional sports. This Comment argues that the O’Bannon decision must be upheld because it correctly identified the contradiction of the NCAA’s amateurism antitrust defense.