[DC 86]

So schools should not pay athletes, because they aren't employees. But if they are students, the question naturally arises why the school has any interest in the economic circumstances of this one particular class of student. If a student blessed with musical talent publishes a song and gets ASCAP royalties (which has happened), no one cares. If a former child actor (e.g., Fred Savage) receives residuals, it's a matter of indifference.

So why are we concerned with this one unique category of student? The short answer, beyond the basic inquiry as to whether payment isn't disguised compensation from the school, is that there is not the slightest reason why we should be.

If there was high stakes, high revenue intercollegiate competition between different universities' musicians and actors then suddenly there would no longer be indifference regarding their compensation.

[DC 86]

So schools should not pay athletes, because they aren't employees. But if they are students, the question naturally arises why the school has any interest in the economic circumstances of this one particular class of student. If a student blessed with musical talent publishes a song and gets ASCAP royalties (which has happened), no one cares. If a former child actor (e.g., Fred Savage) receives residuals, it's a matter of indifference.

So why are we concerned with this one unique category of student? The short answer, beyond the basic inquiry as to whether payment isn't disguised compensation from the school, is that there is not the slightest reason why we should be.

If there was high stakes, high revenue intercollegiate competition between different universities' musicians and actors then suddenly there would no longer be indifference regarding their compensation.