Originally posted by SOKEkedolphin, I agree and disagree.
I would see how the WWE would sue if you created a company called World Wrestling Entertainment, just as I could see them sue if you created a company called Walter's Wiener Eatery.
The WWE doesn't own the initials WWE. As long as there's no brand confusion (wrestling company/weiner eatery) there would be nothing wrong with it. That's how they could get away with using the WWF initials for so long (remember it was a British court decision that forced the change.)
Originally posted by RYDER FAKINTribal Prophet: Before *everyone* jumps on the wagon that wrestlers who don't own all their rights are morons, remember that Vince has a monopoly on the business right now.
No, he doesn't
Well he certainly has as close to one as you're going to get. As much as people would love to believe that TNA or other companies are able to compete with the WWE, they're all years away at best, and much closer to going under than they are to being a place where an up and comer can say "I want to work for TNA for 15 years to make my living". Not everyone loves the idea of working in Japan for the rest of their lives either.
Cyrus/Jackal used to have a show here in Winnipeg where he often said that it's like there's thousands of lawyers graduating each year with only one law firm able to pretty much guarantee that they'd be able to support them for any length of time. If you want job security (or at least as much as can be expected when you decide to be a wrestler) the WWE is still the big target, and that's a hell of an advantage Vince holds going into any meeting. The guy's not worried about anyone not signing with him, he's only offended at the ones that don't.
Originally posted by kingleoThe WWE doesn't own the initials WWE. As long as there's no brand confusion (wrestling company/weiner eatery) there would be nothing wrong with it. That's how they could get away with using the WWF initials for so long (remember it was a British court decision that forced the change.)
Are you sure that the WWE doesn't hold the rights to those initials, because the Panda People had no problem getting the rights to WWF decades ago. Vince didn't 'get away' with using WWF. The Panda WWF said that he could use their initials as long as it was only in the States and not in Europe. I think it was WWF.com that made them say "that's enough, Vince" because now he was using it internationally and since Vince broke the deal, of course the courts were going to rule against him.
WWE has sucked ever since they divided PPV into two parts, Smackdown and raw. They just been trying to make hasty storylines and there is no quality to them. Another factors is they are unwilling to pay people who has devoted their lives to this business people like Stone Cold, The Rock and kept on developing new guys which doesn't work for the fans anymore. Now that they are getting kicked out of Spike TV and UPN, the next thing in store for THEM is the cancellation of both show. ( or they can go to Japan or England) just kidding.
yeah , i highly doubt either show gets cancelled for years. RAW is always 2 spots in the top 5 cable show ratings every week. SMackdown is always UPN's top rated show. Even last week when the moved to Friday and were pre-empted in L.A>, New York & Boston they were still the #1 rated show on UPN. This week in the markets they were on, again pre-empted in LA , New york & Boston, they scored a 3.0 rating which is about what they did on Thrusdays. this proves WWE viewers will follow the product. And they are just now starting to gain steam with some new stars.
I can understand the argument that if WWE doesn't enforce some of its trademarks now, it could lose the right to argue control of those and perhaps other trademarks in the future. But with the Dudleys, there was a legitimate deal in place allowing them use of the name. They may or may not have a legal case for claiming that this deal was viod, but they certainly didn't *have to* do so. If anyone brought it up ("hey, the Dudleys use their name, so I can use mine"), WWE just says, that's different, they were given that right in a deal with Paul Heyman before we had control of it. No problem.
Flea's and others posts about merchandising was correct; as someone whom works as a paralegal for a patent and trademark law firm the main point is is the fact that Vince is just trying to lock in his trademarks that he owns as a smart business move to counter-act the fact that TNA is now on cable and is possibly seen as a threat (which is why he is going after credible; has has to treat every trademark the same, whether it is a valuable one or a mark of lesser value).
now, TNA obviously is not seen as a real serious threat, but Vince is being evil and attempting to squash any and all competition to his company.
is it evil? of course, because these people have to eat, and the fact that they cannot use their character names to work shows and have that character name draw more people makes it harder for them to make more cash.
is it wrong? well, on the above paragraph, yes, but within the fact that he is running a business and he obviously wants to stay on top, and because he owns a lot of video footage that he is now using to make more money than Vince is being a smart businessman. it sucks, and the powerful guys win, and those guys are mostly evil, but the fact is is that Vince has every right legally to do this, so while the morality is corrupt, the law is just.
(something extra to add in)
It is now extremely apparent that anyone on the indys needs to innediately trademark their name/gimmick ASAP, because in this new culture of wrestling war, Intellectual Property is the key to success. It is not like the days in which there was two strong and running companies and one was a lot bigger than the other; any promotion or wrestler that is going to go up against the WWE will now have to lock any and all names/gimmicks/catchphrases before they step up to the plate.