Just a thought...

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Xero Limit 126 I believe ECW chants. Speaking of which, while we're on the subject, how legal was it for Team 3D to bring out the WWE, WCW and ECW tag titles on-screen? I mean, all three are technically WWE property, and they're trying to gain from the fact that they were at least once a part of that company. It's one thing to mention in passing they were ECW champions, but to bring out the actual titles (well, replicas)? Also I seem to remember someone (possibly BG James) wearing an old Jarret WWF shirt, what about that?

The original belts are WWE property. The replicas are not.

Now, I think that showing the belts skirts the line of what's acceptable. You can still be sued for using a trademark for self-promotion (Brian Wilson's being sued for saying he's a former Beach Boy), but it's incredibly hard for the owner to win those cases. Bringing out the belts still isn't technically claiming endorsement, but it certainly steps into market confusion.

As for wearing a Jarrett Shirt, they might be able to get away with it because they don't own Jarrett's name. I don't know the shirt, so I don't know if there was a visible logo. I don't know how much they actually showed, etc.

Yeh I was just thinking about that whole title thing. Didn't (allegedly) Rhino have the ECW World Title in a bag a while back and set it on fire, and he said he couldn't show it on TV because he didn't want TNA to get sued? How could the Dudleys pull all those belts out like that?

Could be they felt they were legally more sound in showing the belts than burning them. It could be that they are trying to provoke WWE now, or it could be they're idiots and lucky Vince still doesn't want to acknowledge TNA.

To be honest: I don't fucking know. It's an odd situation, and I think it's just over the line. It's probably not in Vince's interest to sue over something that isn't a surefire deal.


...Granted, that confuses the fuck out of me, because there was the deal with ECW chants. There is virtually NO chance for a legal victory there (If that was the case, WWE would have been sued many times over for crowd chants).

Trademarks can get kind of screwy at points. Mostly, it's pretty clear cut. It's just hard to define where "market confusion" really begins when it comes to whether or not someone else's intellectual property is on the line in a case of something physical like a belt or whatnot.

The other option is that the WWE could make a roundabout argument for Defamation of the ECW title or whatever, but I think that's probably a bigger stretch.