Last Updated on January 7, 2026
Recently, quarterback Demond Williams Jr. signed a one-year revenue sharing agreement with University of Washington worth a reported $4 million. Ross Dellenger is now reporting that Washington suspects Williams has already been discussing plans to transfer with other schools and that the school is ready to attempt to enforce its contract and report tampering to the NCAA.
I happen to have a copy of a form revenue sharing Memorandum of Understanding from Washington obtained through a FOIA request over the summer. Dellenger says Williams’s agreement prohibits him from entering the portal and also prohibits other schools from using his NIL rights.
Let’s take a look at how those terms are worded in the form contract I have from Washington (keeping in mind Williams or his rep may have negotiated other language). I’m going to highlight a few things and break them down below.
License Grant. During Athlete’s Eligibility Period, Athlete grants Institution the irrevocable, exclusive (as described in Annex A), royalty-free, fully paid-up, sublicensable (through multiple tiers), transferrable, license to use Athlete’s name, nickname, pseudonym, voice, signature, caricature, likeness, image, picture, portrait, quotes, statements, writings, identifiable biographical information, other identifiable features, and any other indicia of personal identity (e.g., jersey number, social media handle, etc.), “rights of publicity”/“personality rights”, trademarks and other IP rights (individually and collectively, “NIL”) (i) as may appear in any photograph, sound/video recording, clips, highlights, broadcast, live stream, social media post, publication or other depictions (ii) with an irrevocable authorization to reproduce, edit, modify, retouch, copy, sell, exhibit, publish or distribute any and all such materials in all forms and in all media (now known or hereafter developed), and (iii) as set forth in Annex A (“NIL License”), and waives any moral rights that Athlete may have in such materials. For clarity, and without limiting the rights granted, the NIL License includes a license to use Athlete’s NIL both individually and in a group license setting. If Athlete transfers to another college or university, Institution will take reasonable steps not to actively use the Athlete’s NIL with the intent of representing that Athlete currently participates in Institution’s athletic program during any period where Athlete is on a team roster of the transferee Institution’s Intercollegiate Athletics program. Notwithstanding the foregoing, after Athlete transfers, Institution is permitted to sell-off any existing products incorporating Athlete’s NIL produced under license prior to the transfer, and use the Athlete’s NIL in any way that does not expressly and intentionally represent that the Athlete is still a member of the Institution’s athletics program (e.g., archival uses and historical signage are permitted).
A few things we need to define and clarify here to fully understand this term. First, the definition of “Eligibility Period.” It’s defined in the contract as, “the finite time span as determined by the NCAA, typically five academic years, during which a student-athlete may compete in competition in a particular sport in an Intercollegiate Athletics Program, as may be updated by the NCAA from time to time.”
That essentially says that Washington has the right to the athlete’s NIL for his entire NCAA eligibility, not just the one-year term of this contract. It’s also irrevocable and exclusive (as described in Annex A, which we’ll get to in a minute). That means the athlete can’t take those rights back from Washington or give them to anyone else. Definitely something an agent or lawyer should have gotten removed or limited for him, but unfortunately I’ve seen a lot of athletes signing these contracts as-is.
Want to learn more about revenue sharing and the contracts out there? Check out my NIL and Athlete Compensation Certificate through UF
Now let’s look at how Annex A defines the exclusivity:
The NIL License will be exclusive in connection with universities/colleges (public or private)…
There’s also a checkbox that can be added that increases the exclusivity to other categories if checked:
⊠ Additional Exclusive Categories: Higher/post K-12 Education; Amateur Athletics, Apparel (including shoes), Athletic Equipment, Health Care, Beverages, Travel, Financial Institutions, and Wireless Communications
This is why Dellenger is saying the contract prohibits other schools from using his NIL, and we don’t know if the box was checked and prohibits other categories.
There’s also a section in Annex A called “Rights Granted” with another potential checkbox:
⊠ Merchandise: The NIL License includes the ☐non-exclusive ⊠exclusive (in the categories below) ☐exclusive (in all categories) right to sell merchandise (jerseys, hats, keychains, etc.) incorporating Athlete’s NIL.
Not only would this prohibit another university from using the athlete’s NIL, it would also prohibit the athlete from creating jerseys and other merchandise himself with a third-party if the box was checked.
The other two sections I highlighted essentially say that Washington can’t use the athlete’s NIL in a way that represents that he is a current member of the team if he transfers. However, that doesn’t mean they can’t use it. They just have to make clear that he’s a former team member when using it. Or, they can just sit on the rights and do nothing with them, instead simply prohibiting his new school from using them.
If Washington wanted to enforce the contract and hold onto the athlete’s rights, it would still have to fulfill its duties under the contract. However, the form contract has another provision that’s terrible for the athlete:
The Institution in its discretion may, after good faith discussion with the Athlete, adjust the Consideration to reflect an increase or decrease in the Athlete’s NIL value (e.g., a Heisman Trophy win may increase the NIL value and reduced playing time may decrease the NIL value).
This gives the school pretty broad discretion to reduce an athlete’s NIL. So, what’s to stop Washington from decreasing the amount it owes him under the contract and arguing his NIL value decreased for them because he’s no longer on their team?
But that provision doesn’t matter so much when you get to this provision:
Rights and Duties Upon Transfer. If the Athlete enters the NCAA’s transfer portal or transfers, the Institution will have no further obligation to pay the Athlete any Consideration, and the Athlete will not be entitled to any Consideration, from the earlier of i) the date the Athlete transfers or ii) the date the Athlete notifies the Institution of the Athlete’s decision to enter the transfer portal. If Athlete transfers or enters the transfer portal prior to the end of a Consideration Period set forth in Annex A, the Athlete will: (a) reimburse, or cause the transferee institution to reimburse, the Institution a prorated portion of the Consideration, equal to the amount paid by the Institution for the remainder of the Consideration Period; and (b) pay or cause the transferee institution to pay, as liquidated damages, the remainder of the Consideration not paid under Section 3(a) above.
Dellenger is reporting that Washington is refusing to enter Williams into the transfer portal. But that doesn’t matter with this language, because he only has to transfer to trigger it. Washington’s duty to pay him ends, and now he actually owes them money (assuming this language wasn’t negotiated by any reps before it was signed). He would have to pay back anything already received (prorated, but this was recent so he’d probably owe most of anything he’s already been paid), plus him or the new school would have to pay liquidated damages equal to everything Washington hadn’t paid him yet.
Yes, he’d owe money not even paid to him yet. So, between the two clauses, we’re talking about all, or most, of the reported $4 million.
So, you say, maybe he just sues them?
Not so fast. The form contract also has this clause:
The Athlete hereby irrevocably releases, waives, forever discharges, and covenants not to sue the Institution, NCAA, Conference, its and their affiliates, governing boards, directors, employees, representatives, agents or otherwise, from, and forever waives, any and all claims to the fullest extent permitted by law, against the Institution, NCAA, Conference, its and their affiliates, governing boards, directors, employees, representatives, agents or otherwise resulting from an Athlete’s lack of playing time or any other decision regarding the Athlete’s role, or impacting Athlete’s performance, or prohibiting the Athlete from participating in the program’s events, games or matches, including any claim that the Athlete’s NIL value was harmed or any third-party NIL deals were affected by any action or inaction of the Institution, NCAA, Conference, or its or their affiliates, directors, employees, representatives, agents, affiliates or otherwise.
Arguably, he’s waiving his right to sue the school saying his NIL value has decreased because of Washington’s actions. Yet another clause any good agent or lawyer would have gotten rid of, but we don’t know if that’s the case here.
There’s also a one-sided termination clause in the contract, which gives Washington the ability to terminate the contract but not the athlete. Another one of those things a good agent or rep should negotiate.
Now, just because the contract has these provisions doesn’t mean a court would enforce them all. For example, the liquidated damages clause may not be enforceable if a court decides it is operating as a penalty and not as a representation of the actual damages incurred by the school (which is what liquidated damage clauses are supposed to do).
We also have no idea what was negotiated in Williams specific contract.
What we do know is that this could be the first true test of the Big Ten’s contract.
Athletes, do you want to learn about more things you might find in a revenue sharing contract that you shouldn’t sign? Check out my book, The Athlete’s NIL Playbook!
