NIL Rights for Athletes and Creators in California, Explained

“NIL” has become one of the most talked-about phrases in sports and social media, but it is widely misunderstood. It is not a brand-new legal invention created for college athletes. It is a catchy label for something the law has recognized for a long time: your right to control how your identity is used to make money. Here is what NIL actually means in California, how the recent rule changes fit together, and what athletes and creators should watch for before signing a deal.

What NIL means and why it is really the right of publicity

NIL is shorthand for name, image, and likeness. When a company puts your face on a billboard, pays you to post about a product, sells a jersey with your name, or uses your voice in an ad, it is using your NIL. The legal foundation for controlling that use is the right of publicity — the right to decide whether, and on what terms, your identity is exploited commercially.

In California, the right of publicity comes from two sources working together. There is a statute, California Civil Code section 3344, which protects your name, voice, signature, photograph, and likeness from unauthorized commercial use. And there is a separate common-law right developed by California courts that can be broader, reaching uses that evoke your identity even without a literal photo. California also protects the publicity rights of deceased personalities by statute, which is why the state is known for unusually strong publicity law.

The practical takeaway: “NIL rights” and “right of publicity” describe the same underlying legal interest. The NIL label just became popular when college sports adopted it. For a deeper look at how that right works generally, see our guide to the right of publicity in CA.

California’s Fair Pay to Play Act

For decades, NCAA rules barred college athletes from earning money off their NIL. California changed the national conversation. In 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 206, known as the Fair Pay to Play Act. The law was later amended and accelerated by SB 26, with its core provisions becoming operative on September 1, 2021, and extended to apply to California Community Colleges.

At a high level, the Fair Pay to Play Act does a few key things for college athletes attending California schools:

• It lets them earn compensation from the use of their name, image, and likeness — for example, through endorsements, autograph signings, social media promotion, or running their own camps.
• It allows them to hire agents or attorneys to represent them in NIL deals.
• It bars schools and athletic associations from stripping a student’s eligibility or scholarship simply for earning NIL money.

California’s law was the first of its kind, and it triggered a wave of similar statutes in other states, which in turn pressured the NCAA to drop its blanket prohibition nationwide in 2021. Importantly, the Fair Pay to Play Act is about removing a penalty — it confirms athletes can earn from rights they already had as people, rather than creating a brand-new right from scratch.

The current college landscape: revenue sharing and the House settlement

NIL rules did not stop evolving in 2021. The biggest recent shift came from a federal antitrust case, House v. NCAA. In June 2025, a federal judge approved a landmark settlement that reshaped college sports compensation in two ways.

First, it provided roughly $2.576 billion in back-damages to classes of athletes who were previously barred from earning NIL money. Second — and more significant going forward — it cleared the way for schools to share revenue directly with athletes for the first time. Under the settlement framework, participating schools can pay athletes up to a capped percentage of certain athletic revenues, with the initial annual cap reported at more than $20 million per school for the 2025-26 year and projected to rise in later years. A new oversight body, the College Sports Commission, was created to review deals under the new system.

This is a fast-moving area, and the details differ by school, conference, and sport. The key point for readers is conceptual: there are now two parallel tracks. One is third-party NIL — deals an athlete signs with outside brands, which is what the Fair Pay to Play Act protects. The other is direct school revenue sharing, which the House settlement enabled. They are related but legally distinct, and the rules around them are still settling.

How creators and influencers license their NIL

Lost in the athlete headlines is a simple fact: you do not have to play a sport to have NIL rights. Every creator, influencer, model, podcaster, and ordinary person owns their name, image, and likeness. When an influencer accepts a paid brand partnership, films a sponsored video, or licenses a photo for an ad campaign, they are licensing their NIL — the exact same right an athlete uses, just under a different banner.

For creators, NIL licensing typically shows up in:

• Sponsored content and brand deals, where a creator is paid to feature a product.
• Endorsement and ambassador agreements, often longer-term arrangements with one brand.
• Likeness licensing, such as letting a company use your image, voice, or a digital avatar in advertising or products.
• Merchandise and appearances, where your name and image drive sales or attendance.

Because the right of publicity belongs to everyone, the same protective instincts apply whether you have a million followers or a few thousand. You are granting permission to use your identity, and the contract decides exactly how far that permission goes. To explore related topics, browse our publicity coverage.

Common contract pitfalls to watch for

NIL deals are contracts, and the fine print matters far more than the headline payment. A few clauses cause the most trouble.

Exclusivity. An exclusivity clause can bar you from working with competitors — sometimes an entire product category — for the life of the deal. A poorly scoped exclusivity term can quietly block far more future income than the deal pays. Watch how broadly the “category” is defined.

Perpetuity and broad usage rights. Some agreements let a brand use your image forever, across all media now known or later invented, worldwide. That may be fine for a one-time fee, or it may mean the brand keeps running ads with your face long after the relationship ends, with no further pay. Look for a defined term and a defined territory, plus limits on how the content can be reused.

Morality (morals) clauses. These let a brand terminate the deal — and sometimes claw back money — if your conduct embarrasses them. They are common and often reasonable, but vague language (“any conduct the company finds objectionable”) gives the brand enormous discretion. Narrower, more objective wording protects you.

Other traps include automatic renewal clauses, broad indemnification that shifts legal risk onto you, and assignment terms that let the brand transfer your deal to a company you never chose to work with. For minors, additional rules and parental-consent requirements may apply.

Protecting your NIL

You cannot eliminate risk, but you can manage it. A few habits help:

• Get it in writing, and read every clause. Verbal promises and DM agreements are hard to enforce. Pin down payment, term, territory, exclusivity, and usage rights.
• Define the scope narrowly. Limit how, where, and for how long your image can be used, and tie usage to the fee you are actually paid.
• Register relevant trademarks. If your name, handle, or catchphrase functions as a brand, trademark protection can complement your publicity rights against copycats.
• Track your deals. Keep a simple record of what you have licensed and to whom, so you do not accidentally sign overlapping or conflicting exclusivity.
• Mind disclosure rules. Sponsored content often must be clearly disclosed under advertising regulations — a compliance issue separate from your NIL rights.
• Get qualified help for anything significant. An attorney licensed in your jurisdiction can review terms before you sign and flag school- or conference-specific rules if you are a student athlete.

NIL fits within California’s broader intellectual property framework alongside trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets — see the California IP pillar for the full picture.

The bottom line

NIL is not a loophole or a fad — it is the right of publicity applied to a new economy of athletes and creators. In California, the Fair Pay to Play Act confirmed that college athletes can earn from their name, image, and likeness, and the 2025 House v. NCAA settlement added direct revenue sharing on top of third-party deals. But the same right protects every creator and influencer who signs a brand deal. The money is real; so are the contract traps. Understand what you are licensing, define the limits, and never sign perpetual or broadly exclusive terms without thinking through the cost.

This article is general education about intellectual property law, not legal advice, and it does not create an attorney-client relationship. NIL rules change quickly and vary by state, school, and conference. For guidance on your specific situation, consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.