The W
Views: 99387615
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
1.10.14 1528
The W - Pro Wrestling - WWF attitude scratch logo blurred in WWE DVD's?
This thread has 1710 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 3.99
Pages: 1 2 Next
(7788 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (21 total)
Moralman
Weisswurst
No longer registered








Since: 8.11.03

Since last post: 3156 days
Last activity: 2612 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Dear Friends
kind regards
I was wondering if the WWF scratch logo is being blurred in WWE DVD's?
I was informed by a Wrestling journalist that the WWF attitude scratch logo doesn't have to be blurred.
If you know anything about this I'd be grateful.
yours thankfully
John
Promote this thread!
cfgb
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Ottawa, Ontario

Since last post: 1 day
Last activity: 3 hours
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.87
Yes, it's blurred. And terribly distracting.



Contact cfgb
Visit SHOOTING STAR PRESS - regular updates, great writers. Check it out!
Sean Carless
Cotechino








Since: 30.9.03
From: Mean Streets of Canada

Since last post: 1611 days
Last activity: 1606 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.00
I really don't see why it has to be retroactive. The scratch logo should just be banned from the point of the Lawsuit decision.

Oh well, It's been almost two years since the name change, and I now find myself saying stupid things like HBK was a three time "WWE" Champion, so I guess the brainwashing worked.




"Hulk Hogan may be a house hold name, but so is Garbage, and it stinks when it gets old too"- Jim Cornette
InVerse
Bierwurst








Since: 26.8.02

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 2 hours
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.88
Couldn't they just blur the F and leave the WW alone? That's all they did with the new logo was drop the two prongs on the right, isn't it?
CANADIAN BULLDOG
Andouille








Since: 5.3.03
From: TORONTO

Since last post: 524 days
Last activity: 522 days
ICQ:  
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.38
Dear friend,

The scratch logo has to be blurred out in all WWE content, and has been ever since the court settlement with the World Wildlife Fund. The only `WWF' logo they can show is the older block logo from appeared between the 80's and mid-90's.

Regardless of what any journalist tells you, that has been the case since May 6, 2002 (or at least that's when they publicly announced the name change; it could have been done a day or two before). There was some time they had to phase-in the changes for marketing campaigns, etc., but today -- they can't use the scratch logo. Period.



Remember the 80's? Neither does Canadian Bulldog in this special edition of Inside The Ropes!!!

------------------------------------------------------------
The official Inside The Ropes archive!!!
MARTYEWR
Kishke








Since: 15.10.02

Since last post: 271 days
Last activity: 271 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 10.00
What I've always wanted to know is why is the WWF attitude/scratch logo illegal, but the WWF block logo (80s-mid 90s) perfectly fine?



Martin Kipp: Creative Member, Extreme Warfare Revenge

Wiener Of The Day: Tuesday, March 4, 2003
Wiener Of The Day (2): Wednesday, October 29, 2003

"Because I'm the man, and the man's the man, and that's just the way it is!" -- Eric Foreman, That 70s Show
SKLOKAZOID
Bratwurst








Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 16 hours
AIM:  
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.36
What I'm wondering is why they even have that logo on the screen at all. When you buy or rent a DVD, you're not watching it on television and don't really need to know what you're watching and WWE doesn't need to protect its video content with a watermark so you know it's a WWE product.

Do their master archive tapes really have the watermark on it? That's pretty cheap.

(edited by SKLOKAZOID on 13.11.03 1703)
OMEGA
Lap cheong








Since: 18.6.02
From: North Cacalacky

Since last post: 1919 days
Last activity: 1887 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.08
    Originally posted by InVerse
    Couldn't they just blur the F and leave the WW alone? That's all they did with the new logo was drop the two prongs on the right, isn't it?


They do this whenever possible. But it probably takes more time to try and edit half the logo than it does to just edit the whole thing.

Either way, it's quite annoying and distracting. I agree with SKLOKAZOID in that old video footage really shouldn't have to be edited like this. But I guess there isn't anything WWE can do about. Oh well. There goes those dreams of a WrestleMania DVD box-set.



The answer to WWE's financial problems...
ShotGunShep
Frankfurter








Since: 20.2.03

Since last post: 2515 days
Last activity: 2402 days
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.05
    Originally posted by MARTYEWR
    What I've always wanted to know is why is the WWF attitude/scratch logo illegal, but the WWF block logo (80s-mid 90s) perfectly fine?

Apparently, it didn't look like WWF. It looked more like WF. So they let it slide.



You Samoans are all the same. You have no faith in the essential decency of the white man's culture.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator








Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.65
    Originally posted by MARTYEWR
    What I've always wanted to know is why is the WWF attitude/scratch logo illegal, but the WWF block logo (80s-mid 90s) perfectly fine?
Simple - the block logo was (and is) covered by the old agreement with the Fund. The scratch logo was (and is) considered a breach of that agreement.

EDIT: Geez, John, did you have to post this question TWICE? I mean, I've already had to undo TWO thread closings AND a ban from the "moderators;" you're really pushing it here.

(edited by CRZ on 14.11.03 0145)


CRZ
Moralman
Weisswurst
No longer registered








Since: 8.11.03

Since last post: 3156 days
Last activity: 2612 days
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
Dear friends
kind regards
CRZ.........Sincere apologies for my mistake.
I have been informed from a source that the WWE is negotiating to have the ban lifted on the WWF attitude scratch logo.
Is this true?
if it is and you have more information I'd appreciate it.
yours thankfully
John
jwrestle
Lap cheong








Since: 4.4.03
From: Nitro WV

Since last post: 145 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.11
I know that one of the last Judgemental decisions was in favor of the WWE to be able to use the "WWF" name in some shape or form. I can't remember though if for what it was. Still don't like the Panda People for doing what they did to this company. Talk about a semi-crippling blow. I mean to come off of XFL, ugh, then to be slammed by this the next year was a MAJOR cash down the tube.



As Eric Bishoff asks if he's ok I get this message ------------

ssjaj23: Goldberg: What's wrong? I can't sell, I'm sloppy in the ring. I don't like being heel. I have no ring phycology
fuelinjected
Banger








Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 3240 days
Last activity: 3240 days
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.15
    Originally posted by jwrestle
    I know that one of the last Judgemental decisions was in favor of the WWE to be able to use the "WWF" name in some shape or form. I can't remember though if for what it was. Still don't like the Panda People for doing what they did to this company. Talk about a semi-crippling blow. I mean to come off of XFL, ugh, then to be slammed by this the next year was a MAJOR cash down the tube.


Panda didn't do shit. Vince carelessly and recklessly violated their original agreement.
jwrestle
Lap cheong








Since: 4.4.03
From: Nitro WV

Since last post: 145 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.11
    Originally posted by fuelinjected
      Originally posted by jwrestle
      I know that one of the last Judgemental decisions was in favor of the WWE to be able to use the "WWF" name in some shape or form. I can't remember though if for what it was. Still don't like the Panda People for doing what they did to this company. Talk about a semi-crippling blow. I mean to come off of XFL, ugh, then to be slammed by this the next year was a MAJOR cash down the tube.


    Panda didn't do shit. Vince carelessly and recklessly violated their original agreement.


Mabe he just didn't read the Fine Print. Besides as he said on Smackdown, "Do you know who I am? I'm Vincent Kennedy MacMahon." Apparently that's what he was thinking when he violated the thing. Once again saying MAJOR cash flushing because that's what it became.



As Eric Bishoff asks if he's ok I get this message ------------

ssjaj23: Goldberg: What's wrong? I can't sell, I'm sloppy in the ring. I don't like being heel. I have no ring phycology
King Of Crap
Goetta








Since: 17.9.03
From: Holley, New York

Since last post: 3455 days
Last activity: 3386 days
AIM:  
#15 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.69
I've always wondered how the Wildlife Fund could argue that their two companies could be confused in the marketplace.



You think WWE now is bad? Some of us had to live through 1993-1996!
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong








Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1294 days
Last activity: 60 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#16 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.55
Funny thing was, shortly after the last lawsuit, my Step- Mother recieved a letter from the panda-people. I handed it to her, telling her she got a letter from the "WWF," and she could not understand why she would get wrestling junk mail-

Mind you this is a woman who never watched wrestling, and has been a donation-sucker for the animal people for years- and SHE could not even connect WWF to the Wolrd Wildlife Fund. Pretty silly to me.



Still on the Shelf- Every Tuesday
XPacArmy
Frankfurter








Since: 13.5.03
From: Woodbridge, VA

Since last post: 330 days
Last activity: 327 days
#17 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.94
    Originally posted by Moralman
    Dear friends
    kind regards
    CRZ.........Sincere apologies for my mistake.
    I have been informed from a source that the WWE is negotiating to have the ban lifted on the WWF attitude scratch logo.
    Is this true?
    if it is and you have more information I'd appreciate it.
    yours thankfully
    John


Yes they are always trying to get the judge's decision reversed (kinda on how you keep wanting the WWF Videos on DVD).

I really wish it would be reversed so they can do my INGENIOUS idea of changing the "RAW Brand" to "WWF" and change the "Smackdown Brand" to "WWE" so we can have a WWF vs WWE feud. And on RAW they can call their titles "WWF Titles" so we don't have to deal with just calling them World and etc type titles. But sadly it will never happen. Don't blame Vince blame the Panda Patrol. (P.S. Blame Vince too for pissing them off.)



It's like a koala bear crapped a rainbow in my brain!
CANADIAN BULLDOG
Andouille








Since: 5.3.03
From: TORONTO

Since last post: 524 days
Last activity: 522 days
ICQ:  
#18 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.38
Part of the blame should go to Vince's lawyers, too.

I'm flabbergasted that any legal team (a) allowed themselves to sign that initial agreement in the first place (b) didn't strongly warn McMahon that he was in danger of violating said agreement and (c) Lost the name in such a decisive manner.

Everything I've ever read about trademarking says that there has to be `confusion in the marketplace' about your name in order to make it a legal challenge. Who would ever be confused by a wrestling company and a wildlife concern? And even if some could get confused, how would it cause either company to lose business?

Obviously, none of us were ever privy to the conversations between the two companies (and from what the Torch has reported, lawyers working for the current WWF were a shady bunch), but something somewhere went horribly wrong. The hard-headed Vince McMahon is probably somewhat to blame, but don't discount the awful legal advice he's probably received here.



Outwit! Outlast! OutPredict! The 100% accurate Surviving Series preview edition is now up atInside The Ropes!!!

------------------------------------------------------------
The official Inside The Ropes archive!!!
fuelinjected
Banger








Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 3240 days
Last activity: 3240 days
#19 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.15
The conflict was over the international use of WWF. Vince was free to use WWF in North America all he wanted and he still can but he didn't have the rights to use it in at least England and elsewhere internationally.

The name change cost them so little that there was barely even a mention in the annual reports that year.
kazhayashi81
Potato korv








Since: 17.6.02
From: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Since last post: 2680 days
Last activity: 2630 days
AIM:  
#20 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.99
UNITED WE STAND

Well, if the WWE can still use the WWF name/logo here in the US, why is it blurred out on domestic releases?





It is the soldier not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press

It is the soldier not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech

It is the soldier not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate

It is the soldier not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial

It is the soldier, who saluted the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag
-Anonymous
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread rated: 3.99
Pages: 1 2 Next
Thread ahead: Predict the 2003 Survivor Series
Next thread: I Need Help (yes I know it's obvious ;P)
Previous thread: Angle's Neck Problems Return
(7788 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Anyone know if it's on tonight, or will it be pre-empted yet again?
- The Squire, Smackdown in NY Tonight (2002)
The W - Pro Wrestling - WWF attitude scratch logo blurred in WWE DVD's?Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.723 seconds.