Get the F out

[Tommy!]

1 hour ago, LaGoosh said:

That's fair. I can't say I remember too well the difference between 2002, 2003 and 2004

I don't mind 2003 either to be honest but 2004 was when shit hit the skids hard in my opinion, JBL being plucked out of a lifetime at the bottom of the card to main event, HHH & HBK trying to drag life out of a dead feud, Eugene getting main event focus and cunts like Kenzo Suzuki and mordici floating about.

While I can see the view they were heading into creativity bankruptcy in 2002 the talent was strong enough to carry through it, and Lesnar & angle were astounding on one show on top in 03. By 2004 those days felt long gone for me.

[theringmaster]

On 5/5/2023 at 10:06 PM, jazzygeofferz said:

I remember a weird time between the WCW buyout and the F getting out when my Sky Planner and channel guide had all their programmingiates as WWFE. They were called World Wrestling Federation Entertainment for a little bit weren't they? 

I can remember reading something years later that the main reason for this was because the wildlife fund were getting very loud about how they own the wwf name and would sue anybody for using them in the context of wrestling. It was clearly something that wouldn't be possible, just an empty threat but Sky panicked and did a knee jerk reaction to cover themselves. 

 

The most amusing thing in all of this i found was if WWE would have won the court case then the Wildlife fun would have essentially have lost millions of dollars in legal fees, kind of makes you look at those wildlife fund 'donate £1 a week' adverts and just think you're desperate for donations yet gambled millions just because a wrestling shared the name? I have a friend who does a lot with an animal shelter type thing and she tells me WWF is known to be a business first, charity second and when I look bak at this whole court case I can kind of believe it.

Also, I have had three of those pandas hitting each other with chairs tshirts bought for me at christmas/birthdays over the years, they are like my stock of 'painting/car washing shirts' but everyone who buys me it is so proud because they think its so clever??

[Carbomb]

4 hours ago, theringmaster said:

I can remember reading something years later that the main reason for this was because the wildlife fund were getting very loud about how they own the wwf name and would sue anybody for using them in the context of wrestling. It was clearly something that wouldn't be possible, just an empty threat but Sky panicked and did a knee jerk reaction to cover themselves. 

 

The most amusing thing in all of this i found was if WWE would have won the court case then the Wildlife fun would have essentially have lost millions of dollars in legal fees, kind of makes you look at those wildlife fund 'donate £1 a week' adverts and just think you're desperate for donations yet gambled millions just because a wrestling shared the name? I have a friend who does a lot with an animal shelter type thing and she tells me WWF is known to be a business first, charity second and when I look bak at this whole court case I can kind of believe it.

Also, I have had three of those pandas hitting each other with chairs tshirts bought for me at christmas/birthdays over the years, they are like my stock of 'painting/car washing shirts' but everyone who buys me it is so proud because they think its so clever??

That's not how it happened, though.

The WWF(N) had managed to come to an agreement with the WWF that worked for some years - fairly sure this was mediated through the courts, so it was documented. What caused them to kick off was that Vince insisted on being Vince, and breaching the terms of that agreement pretty blatantly, so the WWFN would have been confident at the time that they had Vince bang to rights; hence why the wrestling promotion came out on the wrong end of things.

[Your Fight Site]

1 hour ago, Carbomb said:

That's not how it happened, though.

The WWF(N) had managed to come to an agreement with the WWF that worked for some years - fairly sure this was mediated through the courts, so it was documented. What caused them to kick off was that Vince insisted on being Vince, and breaching the terms of that agreement pretty blatantly, so the WWFN would have been confident at the time that they had Vince bang to rights; hence why the wrestling promotion came out on the wrong end of things.

I thought the disagreement came from merchandising? I think the World Wildlife Fund had allowed the WWF to continue using the initials, but with restrictions on merchandising, and—as you rightfully say, Vince being Vince—just disregarded that, churned out merchandise, and the Fund called him on it and took him to court.

[gmoney]

The article in the Guardian from the time gives a fairly decent overview:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2002/feb/27/charitieslaw.charities1

 

Quote

The US-based federation - known for encounters between stars such as The Rock, The Undertaker, Hardcore Holly, Hulk Hogan and Ultimate Warrior

[mim731]

Yeah, but how do they like him now?

[JLM]

On 5/5/2023 at 10:50 PM, TildeGuy~! said:

Everyone I know who doesn’t follow wrestling still call it WWF.

My mum calls it dubya dubya  eff because she used to find JR’s accent hilarious. She is also convinced the Undertaker has been portrayed by several different “actors”. I explained one time it’s the same guy and that’s why he looks fucking knackered now, and she gave me this “ok :)” smile like I still think it’s all real. 

Edited May 12, 2023 by JLM

[unfitfinlay]

4 hours ago, Carbomb said:

That's not how it happened, though.

The WWF(N) had managed to come to an agreement with the WWF that worked for some years - fairly sure this was mediated through the courts, so it was documented. What caused them to kick off was that Vince insisted on being Vince, and breaching the terms of that agreement pretty blatantly, so the WWFN would have been confident at the time that they had Vince bang to rights; hence why the wrestling promotion came out on the wrong end of things.

Yeah. That's the key thing. The McMahons might have had a decent case for fair usage but, because the initial legal action happened at the same time as the steroid trial, they chose not to fight for it. The Wildlife Fund case in the 2000s wasn't about who owned the trademark, because the McMahons had already agreed that they didn't. It was about whether they'd broken the agreement, which they clearly had.

If I remember right, the McMahons side's defense was basically that the earlier agreement "didn't count", which is incredibly fucking stupid for a company that's usually on the ball legally. They had absolutely no chance of winning.

 

[Tommy!]

For a brilliant view of how Vince outs himself as an total idiot outside the wrestling bubble just watch that transcript of him in court on OSW.