Date Filed: January 25, 2018
Original Court: U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Case Status: Settled
College athlete and YouTube star Donald De La Haye is an American success story. At the age of 7, Donald immigrated to the United States with his family from Costa Rica. As a teenager, he began posting online unique, creative videos of himself. He was also a skilled athlete, recruited by the University of Central Florida to be a member of its football program and earning a full-ride athletic scholarship. But this success story has had some big bumps in the road.
De La Haye was kicked off the UCF football team and lost his athletic scholarship because videos on his “Deestroying” YouTube channel were popular enough to garner ad revenue. By his sophomore year, he had hundreds of thousands of YouTube followers, and he began to receive a modest amount of income from the ad revenue. Before Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) rules changed in 2021, the NCAA and colleges severely restricted athletes’ ability to receive income outside of educational scholarships.
TPPF and the Goldwater Institute represented De La Haye in a lawsuit defending his free speech rights. De La Haye worked for years to build up his brand and online presence. He did not want to delete all his hard work during his time as a student athlete. He described his content as “something that I’ve worked so hard for . . . Something that I have put blood, sweat, and tears into.”
In denying UCF’s motion to dismiss, the district court found that De La Haye brought a valid legal claim against UCF for violating his First Amendment free speech rights. After the motion to dismiss was denied, De La Haye decided to move on from his athletic career and agreed to a settlement that will allow him to seek readmission to UCF as a student, but not as an athlete.
De La Haye stood up for his rights and made his point: Sometimes you kick the field goal instead of trying for the touchdown. Both put points on the board.
Case Documents:
Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss