Does TNA have any sort of no-compete clause?

[Kane Knight]

Inspired by

BIG NEWS: WWE Contacts Kurt Angle For Possible TNA Feud @ WrestleMania!!! (>>) (http://www.wrestlingnewsworld.com/track/track.cgi?ryan)

Now, we know that they aren't barring people from doing indy shows, since they do them. But the above, while utterly bullshit, got me thinking. If one of the bigger stars wanted to, could he just jump to WWE? Is there any form of protection against this?

[Xero]

We had a similar question a while ago. I think it winds up being one of three things: they can work for a few specific promotions, they can work any non-televised promotions or they just can't work WWE.

That's for written contracts of course. With unwritten/verbal/per appearance deals, I really don't know.

[Crippla]

I think I heard TNA has an agreement that they can work a few specific promotions.

[Goulet]

I think I heard TNA has an agreement that they can work a few specific promotions.
You simply just repeated what xero said above you, that post added NOTHING... you spam monkey!

[Crippla]

Nah, i was kind of answering Xero's post.

[Goulet]

It doesn't look like he was asking you a question numb nuts

[M-A-G]

It really just depends on the contract.

[Mercury Bullet]

I think it depends on the individual contract. I know they let SOME people work for ROH, IWA-MS, and a few others but I think it all depends on the individual deal.

I was wondering about a no-compete clause also...partially because, and maybe somebody can answer this, why is it taking so long for WWE to put Monty Brown on TV?

[Xero]

I think it depends on the individual contract. I know they let SOME people work for ROH, IWA-MS, and a few others but I think it all depends on the individual deal.

I was wondering about a no-compete clause also...partially because, and maybe somebody can answer this, why is it taking so long for WWE to put Monty Brown on TV?
I seriously doubt TNA has no-compete clauses like WWE does (the three month deal). Brown isn't on TV for the same reason so many in WWE get fired: Creative doesn't have anything for them.

[Crippla]

It doesn't look like he was asking you a question numb nuts
No shit, did you read the fucking posts?

[Xero]

Got to say, CC's in the right here. I listed three things, he backed up one of them.

[thecc]

I'm pretty sure their talent is allowed to compete for any non telivised promotion and their wrestlers aren't allowed to appear on any nationaly released dvd.

[Xero]

Yeah, just recently read that the Dudleys had to be pulled off of one of the Hardcore Homecoming releases because they were under contract with TNA.

[TerranRich]

Got to say, CC's in the right here. I listed three things, he backed up one of them.
People just like shitting on Crippla. He did what lots of other people do: he answered a post by backing up one of the points mentioned. Get a grip, Goulet.

[Kane Knight]

I think it depends on the individual contract. I know they let SOME people work for ROH, IWA-MS, and a few others but I think it all depends on the individual deal.

I was wondering about a no-compete clause also...partially because, and maybe somebody can answer this, why is it taking so long for WWE to put Monty Brown on TV?

Didn't take very long for other TNA-ers to come over, did they?

Or is this only for their most valuable wrestlers?

[Kane Knight]

I'm pretty sure their talent is allowed to compete for any non telivised promotion and their wrestlers aren't allowed to appear on any nationaly released dvd.

I wonder how that works in some cases. Say, for example, WWE decided to come out with "Kurt Angle--Self Destruction of the Olympic Hero." WWE actually could do it with many people (Maybe not Kurt).

Okay, since I added that Kurt's a bad example, look at the Diddy Boyz. They have the legal rights. This is out of P-Von Diddy and his brother Bubba-Dawg's hands.

So how do they handle that?

[Xero]

If you're talking WWE DVDs, they can use whatever footage they own any way they want. I would assume that the Dudleys or Angle, for instance, couldn't legally appear in new footage for a documentary, but if they filmed it before they left it's fair game.

Don't know if that's what you were getting at or not.

[Kane Knight]

Pretty much.

In an instance where the right is not that of the given person. For example, the aforementioned Dudleyz footage.