fuboTV Inc FL

We are, and may in the future, be involved in various legal proceedings arising from the normal course of business activities. Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, currently, the Company believes that the likelihood of any material adverse impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations, cash flows or our financial position for any such litigation or claims is remote. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on the Company because of the costs to defend lawsuits, diversion of management resources and other factors.

DISH Technologies, LLC, et al. v. fuboTV Media Inc., No. 1:23-cv-00986 (D. Del)

On September 6, 2023, DISH Technologies L.L.C. and Sling TV L.L.C. (collectively, “DISH”) filed a complaint in the District of Delaware alleging that fuboTV Media Inc. (“fuboTV Media”) infringes certain of DISH's patents by streaming video through a fuboTV Media application and seeking damages and injunctive relief.

On December 14, 2023, following a series of stipulated extensions, fuboTV Media filed a motion to dismiss the complaint asserting that DISH’s patents are invalid. Briefing on the motion is complete and a hearing was held on March 25, 2024.

On May 7, 2024, DISH filed a motion for leave to file a First Amended Complaint to assert more claims. The district court granted this motion on May 21, 2024, and denied-as-moot fuboTV Media’s motion to dismiss. fuboTV Media also filed petitions forinter partes review on all the asserted patents, five of which relate to patents for which the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) has already instituted proceedings, and those are expected to be complete by April 25, 2025. The PTAB will decide whether to institute proceedings on the remaining three patents by December 3, 2024.

After filing itsinter partes review petitions, fuboTV Media filed a motion to stay the district court case pending resolution of those reviews. The district court granted that motion on August 13, 2024, staying the case until two weeks after the PTAB issues final written decisions on the five already instituted patents and any appeals therefrom, and at least until the institution decisions are due for the remaining three patents. If the PTAB institutes review for the remaining three patents, the stay will remain in place pending resolution of those inter partes reviews, including any appeals therefrom.

The Company believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to defend itself vigorously in this matter.

Fubo Gaming Dissolution

Following the dissolution of Fubo Gaming in October 2022, several disputes with commercial partners of Fubo Gaming that alleged breach of applicable agreements have been resolved. Additional allegations or litigation may arise against Fubo Gaming or the Company in the future related to the dissolution of Fubo Gaming, including potential breach of contract claims by other commercial partners of Fubo Gaming or claims seeking to hold the Company responsible for Fubo Gaming’s contractual obligations (on contractual guaranty and other bases). The Company believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to defend itself vigorously in any such matters.

FuboTV Inc. and FuboTV Media Inc. vs. The Walt Disney Company, ESPN, Inc., ESPN Enterprises, Inc., Hulu, LLC, Fox Corporation, and Warner Brothers Discovery, Inc.

On February 20, 2024, the Company filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York asserting federal and state antitrust claims against The Walt Disney Company (“Disney”), ESPN, Inc. and ESPN Enterprises, Inc. (collectively, “ESPN”), Hulu, LLC (“Hulu”), Fox Corporation (“Fox”), and Warner Brothers Discovery, Inc. (“WBD”). The Company's complaint asserts four major categories of claims. First, the complaint alleges that the announced joint venture (the "Network JV") between Disney, WBD, and Fox is unlawful under Section 7 of the Clayton Act and Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Second, the complaint alleges that the “bundling” requirements imposed by Disney, ESPN and Fox constitute unlawful tying and block-booking arrangements under Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Third, the complaint alleges that the Defendants’ use of “most-favored-nation” clauses in their carriage agreements, in combination with other anticompetitive terms, constitute unlawful vertical restraints of trade, in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Fourth, the complaint alleges that all of this conduct violates New York’s Donnelly Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 340, for the same reasons it violates federal antitrust law. The Company’s complaint seeks injunctive relief to stop the proposed Network JV and other practices described above, damages for harm already suffered because of those practices, and other relief. On April 29, 2024, the Company filed an amended complaint, alleging an additional antitrust market but no additional causes of action.

On April 8, 2024, the Company filed a motion for preliminary injunction (“PI Motion”) seeking to enjoin the launch of the Network JV pending the outcome of the lawsuit. On August 16, 2024, after a five-day hearing, the district court granted the Company’s PI Motion. On September 16, 2024, Fox moved to transfer certain of the Company’s claims against it to the Central District of California. The Company filed an opposition brief to this motion on October 7, 2024. On September 20, 2024, the Defendants filed their brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, seeking a reversal of the district court’s preliminary injunction order. Six days later, Defendants moved in the district court to dismiss the Company’s amended complaint. On October 25, 2024, the Company filed its brief in the trial court opposing the Defendants’ motions to dismiss. The Company also plans to file an opposition to Defendants’ appeal of the preliminary injunction. Pursuant to the district court’s scheduling order, trial is scheduled to begin on October 6, 2025.

The Company believes it has meritorious claims and will continue to pursue its rights vigorously in this matter.

Video Privacy Protection Act ("VPPA") Matters

The Company has been named as defendant in putative class action complaints bringing claims under the VPPA, alleging the Company shared subscribers’ personally identifiable information to third party advertisers and through the Meta Pixel and Google Analytics without consent. The complaints are captioned Burdette v fuboTV, Inc., No. 1:23-cv-10351 (N.D. Ill.); Perez, et al., v. fuboTV, Inc., No. 0:23-cv-61961 (S.D. Fla.); Beasley v. fuboTV, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-00711 (S.D.N.Y). The Company has reached an agreement in principle to resolve these matters on a class basis, subject to negotiation of the terms of the proposed class action settlement and subject to approval by the court. Additional allegations or litigation may arise against the Company in the future related to the VPPA and other privacy and consumer protection laws.