The WWE responds to Brock's Lawsuit

[MyOwnSummer]

WWE Responds To Brock Lesnar's Lawsuit

Posted By Ashish on 04.06.05

 

WWE vs. Brock Lesnar....

 

WWE has finally responded to a lawsuit filed against them by Brock Lesnar. WWE's reply stated that they find Brock's lawsuit to be without merit since he agreed to all the terms he ended up complaining about.

 

WWE also claims that Brock broke their agreement by appearing at a New Japan Pro-Wrestling show in January. WWE has asked the court to rule that Lesnar has breached their agreement, that he has forfeited any money owed to him for royalties, that the courts bar Lesnar from competing for any sports-entertainment or "ultimate fighting" companies, that the court prevent Lesnar from further breaching their release agreement, and any "further relief" the court might declare.

 

WWE claims that they should not be forced to change their deal with Lesnar just because he was unsuccessful at football. They claim that Lesnar was fully aware of all the terms to the agreement that he signed with them.

 

WWE went on to say that they have suffered "irreparable harm" due to Lesnar showing up at the New Japan show in January and by opting to breach his contract like that, he forfeited all due and future royalty payments.

 

WWE added that they rejected Lesnar when he wanted to return to the company after football partly because he used "vulgar, derogatory and disparaging hand gestures" to the fans at WrestleMania XX, his final WWE match. WWE claimed that they would have to invest a lot of money to even build him back up to the level he was.

 

Credit: PWInsider.com

And on a lighter note;

 

Ultimate Warrior Speech Turns Into Near Riot

Posted By Ashish on 04.06.05

 

University of Connecticut students don't like the Warrior much....

 

The Ultimate Warrior gave a speech infront of University of Connecticut students last night that almost broke out into a riot. Major arguments broke out after many considered Warrior's thoughts to be homophobic and racist.

 

People started yelling at Warrior as he spoke. Warrior at one point started yelling and stomping his feet, telling everyone to not talk while he is and to ask questions after his speech. Officers were eventually called in to calm things down.

 

The group that brought Warrior in, the College Republicans, apologized heavily for bringing Warrior in after the speech ended. Statements that really got the crowd upset were when Warrior said "queering don't make the world work" and told an Iranian girl to "get a towel." Warrior also admitted that he used steroids while in wrestling.

 

Credit: WrestlingObserver.com

[MyOwnSummer]

I'm interested in how the WWE thinks that Brock did them "irreparable harm" by showing up at a New Japan show.

 

The claim they didn't rehire him because he flipped the fans off at Wrestlemania 20 would be humorous if it wasn't so rediculous.

[goodhelmet]

Vince became a billionaire by having a guy flip off the fans, the wrestlers, him, etc.

 

Fuck him.

[Loss]

The WWE lawyers are incredible at what they do. I have sympathy for anyone who goes against them, because they're going to need all the help they can get. I sincerely hope Brock has a fantastic lawyer, because Vince's lawyers are bloodthirsty sharks. Jerry McDevitt is respected by just about everyone in that part of the country who knows anything about the legal profession.

[Guest Some Guy]

I can't see Brock winning this case. He signed a contract with a non-compete clause. I asked my father about this (he's a lawyer) and he said that it depends on the state but most take things of that nature seriously. WWE is not preventing Brock from making a living, they are only preventing him from doing so in profesional wrestling and MMA. Brock could, I'm sure get a job as a wrestling coach at some high school or college. The fact that he chose to walk out on the big contract with WWE is why I feel no sympathy for him, now that he's whining about a decision he made and a contract that he signed. Fuck Brock.

 

I'm not at all looking at this like some Brock mark who is mad that his favorite left WWE. I didn't really care for him as a performer all that much. I look at it as someone who made a decision and should live up to his agreements. If he wants to come back and start over I'm sure they'll resign him to a low level contract. WWE handed this guy everything. He got a $150,000 a year developmental deal, most guys get $500 to $1000 a week. He got a 10 year multi-million dollar contract. He got pushed to the moon and was put over several wrestlers in a dominating fashion, thua making them look weak and him strong. He had the world handed to him, he couldn't handle it, he quit, and now he's crying about it. Fuck him.

[Guest Hunter's Torn Quad]

When Meltzer did a piece on this lawsuit when it first broke, he talked about the different points each side had, and he felt that if either side was going to win, it would be Brock, but with the most likely outcome being a settlement of some kind. I don't have the issue at hand, but I'll dig it up later and transcribe what he said.

[Guest Some Guy]

Please do.

 

I'm pretty sure this will end up with Vince's legal team dragging out so long that Brock can no longer afford to fight and he'll be back in WWE and probably champion within a year of his return.

[Guest Hunter's Torn Quad]

Brock Lesnar filed suit on 2/4 in U.S. District Court in Bridgeport, CT, in an attempt to get out of his non-compete clause in his contract, which the lawsuit revealed lasts until June 30, 2010.

Lesnar signed the non-compete clause in April, attempting to get out of a seven-year contract with the company calling for a $1 million downside guarantee, which went into effect on July 1, 2003. The contract did give WWE several outs, including if he were injured and unable to wrestle for six months, if he was unable to wrestle for reasons due to injury (no-showing dates) he could be fired or if he was habitually late or no-showing appearances, failed a physical or even if the company finds his level of performance to be unsatisfactory. Both sides were also, by terms of that contract, could also have to agree to early termination (as happened) with a written deal signed by both parties.

 

Lesnar's actual contract provided for a one-year non-compete clause in the event of his leaving, which is where that figure came in, or when his contract expired. The only entity specified in the contract he was unable to work for would be a pro wrestling organization that promoted in the United States. His original WWE contract signed in 2000 was even more specific, only prohibiting him from working for a wrestling company owned by Ted Turner. At least two recent WWE contracts have also included UFC in the non-compete, for performers that have a strong amateur wrestling background where they would have the potential to be able to compete in that sport. However, as late as less than two years ago, Lesnar's non-compete clause did not include UFC. When Lesnar asked to get out of his contract to attempt to play in the NFL, WWE put in a clause for his release, which stated that he "shall not appear, participate and/or associate either directly or indirectly in any way throughout the world with any professional wrestling, ultimate fighting and/or sports entertainment companies, associations, joint ventures, sole proprietorships, and/or partnerships, other than the WWE," through the expiration date of the original agreements of June 30, 2010.

 

Publicly. New Japan, K-1 and Pride have expressed interest in Lesnar. There could even be question as to whether Pride or K-1 would constitute "Ultimate Fighting," as many K-1 matches, particularly if they tailored a different style of rule mixed matches like the Bob Sapp vs. Jerome LeBanner match (although Lesnar would be foolish to compete with those specific types of rules) would not qualify under that terminology. Pride and UFC are both MMA organizations, and if Lesnar were to do K-1 matches, it would likely be under MMA rules, but if you describe "Ultimate Fighting" as the caged fighting that takes place within the UFC, there is an argument this is too vague to enforce it with the major Japanese groups. Privately, UFC had also expressed some interest when they learned Lesnar was leaving WWE, although they are careful of not getting on Vince McMahon's bad side, so at this point the interest doesn't seem there. TNA has also expressed interest, although no negotiations have taken place between the two sides.

 

Once the Minnesota Vikings lost interest in Lesnar as a project in October, he began looking to get back into pro wrestling, and began calling WWE. Lesnar's attorney, David Bradley Olson, said WWE would not negotiate with Lesnar regarding a return. WWE sources have indicated that it was unlikely for Lesnar to be brought back because his demands were deemed "outrageous." Both sides concur there have been nothing to any recent rumors of his returning at any point, which this lawsuit clearly confirms.

 

The lawsuit has been inevitable since January. One source with first-hand knowledge of the situation said Olsen spoke with WWE late last year about Lesnar returning. What forced Lesnar's hand was Lesnar agreeing to appear, but not wrestle, on New Japan's 1/4 show at the Tokyo Dome. Both before and after the appearance, WWE wrote threatening legal letters claiming he was violating his non-compete clause. At the New Japan show, Lesnar and fianc?e Rena "Sable" Mero were introduced as special guests, and walked to ringside with New Japan representative Brad Rheingans. They sat at ringside for one match, before going backstage. Lesnar never once entered the ring itself. The New Japan television show aired Lesnar walking to his ringside seat.

At that point, it was said Olsen told Lesnar that he had two choices. He could either not participate in pro wrestling or MMA until 2010, or litigate the non-compete clause as being too broad, unreasonable, oppressive and unfair, most notably the term length and geographical terms to be unreasonable.

 

The lawsuit noted that in 2010, Lesnar would be 33 years old, and would have lost out on his prime earning years as an athlete. When it comes to a competitive sport, such as MMA, he may be too old to start a new career, although Dan Severn was 35 and Randy Couture was 34 when they started their UFC careers. But they were also both coming directly from competing at a national level in wrestling, as Severn was a national AAU champion the year he started with UFC, not to mention the standard of competition in UFC was primitive as compared with today. Couture came in right after failing to make the 1996 Olympic team, and after a few months was already heavyweight champion. Lesnar would have been out of competition for ten years or more, and historically, people like that, even with strong college backgrounds (Yuji Nagata and Manabu Nakanishi come immediately to mind) have not fared well.

 

The lawsuits states by not being allowed to perform in his field. Lesnar is losing income at the rate of more than $1 million per year.

 

The suit claims prohibiting Lesnar from participating world wide in non-pro wrestling ventures imposes an excessive restraint on Lesnar's ability to earn a living, and is not a reasonable expectation to protect WWE's legitimate business interests.

 

The suit takes place in Connecticut, which has a broader application of non-compete clauses than many other states and has favored employers far more than in most states, like California. In most states, including Connecticut, if any part of the non-compete clause is declared unreasonable, and the inclusion of non-pro wrestling promotions, the world wide territory and most notably, the 2010 time limit, could be considered unreasonable, then the entire clause is thrown out. Lesnar's lawyer's strategy would be attacking the weaknesses of the clause, and the time frame and inclusion of MMA would be the ones likely attacked, to eliminate the entire clause. Lesnar had no choice, as his WWE contract also specified that any legal action taken in regards to the contract had to be filed in Connecticut. Still. Connecticut law also doesn't allow non-compete clauses to hold up if they are deemed as unreasonable in tenure or geographical consideration. WWE does run weekly television in Japan and will probably run 4-6 shows there in 2005, so it can reasonably consider Japan part of its territory.

 

The irony is that wrestlers with WCW all had 90 day non-compete clauses in their contracts upon expiration. WWF routinely used wrestlers leaving the company and signing WWF contracts without waiting out the non-compete clause, going under the guise that those clauses would not hold up in court.?  The key difference is WCW contracts were all executed in Georgia, which is a "right-to-work" state and WCW knew full well it couldn?t enforce those clauses, which is why Chris Benoit in 2000 was able to go from being WCW champion without dropping the title and walking onto Raw a few weeks later. William Regal is just one example of someone who showed up on WWE television before his non-compete period with WCW ended, and WCW did not attempt to go to court to uphold its contract.

 

Lesnar has given up on the NFL, as the Minnesota Vikings showed no interest in him after cutting him in Training camp. No other NFL team has shown interest either and he has given up his dream of trying to play in the NFL. He expressed interest in returning to WWE months ago, but there have been no serious negotiations. If his goal is to return, and it likely is, this suit being filed is more to force WWE's hand in either bringing him back or allowing him to work elsewhere, because they aren?t going to be able to have it both ways without paying him. For many reasons, I'd expect it to be settled before it reaches a judge. WWE wouldn't want to risk an unfavorable precedent ruling when it comes to its non-complete clauses, and if there would be one, this would be the one it would come on because of the broad scope it entails. No doubt, from Lesnar's standpoint, the idea is to get him back and running for Wrestlemania, which is the biggest payday of the year, although from a timing standpoint, it looks to be tough to have it settled in time to properly promote his return on that show. They cant negotiate a deal with Vince right now, because he's refused to negotiate. This lawsuit would allow Vince to save face in the locker room, which generally speaking, doesn?t like Lesnar both for how he left and more, because of what he said about wrestling after leaving, giving McMahon the internal out that settling is the best business decision for a publicly traded company. For all the posturing, I don't believe Lesnar wants to do MMA. In his position, he would be nuts to do it if he had a real money option. MMA in Japan would bring him short-term big money, but would risk his aura and reputation and risk him pro wrestling money long-term if he wasn't successful at it.

 

WWE attorney Jerry McDevitt was quoted in the Connecticut Post as saying, "We put a ton of money and time into promoting him as a star," and noted Lesnar agreed to the lengthy non-compete when signing his release.

 

The case will be heard before U.S. District Judge Christopher Droney in Hartford. As it stands right now, the WWE has 20 days to respond to the complaint, at which time the court will assign a date for Droney to hear the case and make a ruling.

 

It is doubtful the judge would uphold the non-compete provided WWE not agree to bring Lesnar back under the terms approximating those of his contract. WWE spokesperson Gary Davis claimed WWE would likely bring Lesnar back under those terms. WWE has no obligation in any way to bring Lesnar back for a better deal than he signed for. If Lesnar's "unreasonable" demands are his old deal, I would doubt a court would find them unreasonable, being that Vince McMahon had already agreed to them in 2003. It is believed Lesnar is looking for a lighter road schedule, which makes things a little different and does bring a shade of grey to the ruling.

 

Ultimately, by precedent, WWE has shown, with Undertaker, and to a lesser extent HHH, that they will promote someone as a top guy who doesn?t work a fall house show schedule. If Lesnar is to claim chronic injuries prevent him from working a full schedule, there is a precedent for allowing a top star to work a lesser schedule. If WWE is willing to allow him to work a similar schedule as they approve Undertaker for, and in firmness, he is willing to take a slightly pro-rated lessening of downside guarantee because of working fewer dates. The lessening should be fairly minimal because the main places the company makes money off his talents, the TV show, the PPV shows and merchandising, are not affected by a lessening house show schedule. If Lesnar would not agree to it, WWE should also have the right to prevent him from working elsewhere for the term of the contract. But if WWE refuses to use him under the terms of his current contract I would be very surprised if the court would rule he couldn't attempt to earn the best living possible for himself anywhere he chooses.

From the February 14th edition of the Observer.