| NeanderCarl |
06-23-2010 06:32 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kane Knight
(Post 3129830)
Because they were doing so in violation of the law. Are you fucking retarded?
That's it. That's all there is. The reason courts had to rule wasn't that this was some strange, unprecedented grounds but because WWE continued to operate in violation of the law.
If I use Hulk Hogan's name, or John Cena's name to imply their support of my promotion, I'm violating the law even before the court orders me to stop. I'm also violating the law even if I manage to fly below the radar.
As such, I have to reiterate:
Are you fucking retarded?
|
No I am most certainly not "fucking retarded". Don't patronise me. Just because I struggle to empathise with your evident loose grasp of my argument doesn't make me retarded. Au contraire.
My whole point was that WWE has only "operated in violation of the law" if they have broken a legally binding agreement to waive their right to use Owen's footage. If they haven't made any such agreement, they own that material. It is stipulated in a WWE talent contract.
Yes, they were in violation of an agreement made with the World Wildlife Fund for Nature as pertains to use of the initials WWF. As a result, they were forced to eliminate the use of the letters and change their existing footage.
A completely seperate situation with its own completely seperate legalities and WWE were made to pay for their violations.
As far as any of us know, this may or may not be the case with Owen. As I said, if they broke the law then they should - and will - be held accountable. But they will only have done so IF they made a legally binding agreement not to show, promote or market Owen Hart related material. |
