WWE/Lesnar Lawsuit Information

World Wrestling Entertainment filed a 29 page response to Brock Lesnar's lawsuit against them on 4/1, noting that in their opinion, his lawsuit is without merit as he agreed to the terms of his release last year. They also claim Lesnar violated their agreement for his release by appearing at a New Japan Tokyo Dome show this past 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. Major points from WWE's response: *Brock Lesnar voluntarily agreed to the terms of his release when he decided he wanted to play professional football. WWE claims that Lesnar was aware of the usage of the term "ultimate fighting" when he asked for a release and that it would include Mixed Martial Arts competition. They also claim Lesnar knew he wouldn't be able to work for a "sports-entertainment" company. Their settlement agreement ends on 6/10/10 and shouldn't be forced to change because Lesnar was unsuccessful at football. They also claim that the release settlement allowed them to retain his licensing rights, with the exception of NFL-related endeavors. *The company admits that they haven't paid Lesnar from his booking contract since he asked for a release to pursue his NFL career, but noted he had been paid $125,000 in royalties since that point. *WWE contends that Lensar's appearance at the January 2005 New Japan Pro Wrestling Tokyo Dome event (where he was introduced and came to a ringside seat with Brad Rheighans and Rena Mero during the show from backstage) was in violation of their agreement terms for his release. Lesnar's appearance at the show and it airing in Japan, were both in violations of his release. *WWE believes that Lesnar entered into negotiations with New Japan to participate in a May 2005 event. *WWE has suffered "irreparable harm" from Lesnar's breach of their agreement. *WWE contends that by appearing at the New Japan event, he has forfeited all due and future royalty payments and has not paid him since that time. It appears WWE ending the royalty payments in January may have paved the way for Lesnar to file the lawsuit the following month. *WWE admitted to not bringing Brock Lesnar back into the company after washing out on his NFL aspirations, but noted Lesnar "has attempted to use the settlement agreement against WWE, and has made exorbitant financial and other demands which would grant Lesnar, as compared to his 2003 Booking Contract, much more favorable terms." *WWE has also rejected his terms for wanting to return due to actions have diminished his value, noting "vulgar, derogatory and disparaging hand gestures" to the fans at Wrestlemania XX in Madison Square Garden. WWE claims they would need to invest extra money in order to build Lesnar back up as a performer after that incident, disparging comments made about the company, and Lesnar's previous decision to walk away from his old contract. *WWE claimed they felt the need to enforce the terms of their settlement contract with Lesnar after he appeared at the New Japan Tokyo Dome event and in response to a threat by Lesnar to file a lawsuit against the company. *WWE shoots down Lesnar's contention that anyone could be in his position as champion because 13 other performers had held the belt since his departure. WWE noted that they use the championships as a way to promote their talents and increase their popularity and worth to the WWE fan base. At this point, it's in the hands of the courts (if the two parties do not settle before stepping into a courtroom) to see what happens.

http://www.pwinsider.com/ViewArticle.asp?id=9417&p=1

13 champions?!?!?

[KayfabeMan]

This whole thing is a freakin' joke. Not only did WWE make many obvious mistakes with Lesnar, but he also made several with the company [besides the ones most discussed] in regards to this contract. You botch your big shot, then you botch chances any kind of return [at least immediately], then you botch having a career in any type of related field, etc.

On an interesting note, obviously I haven't seen the contract, but I wonder despite it saying that Lesnar couldn't work for any other promotion [wrestling / MMA / etc.], if it also would stop Lesnar from STARTING his own promotion. Obviously not a major one, but it'd be interesting if he could start his own indy fed - which would probably do OK for itself. Of course that all depends on his contract, but just a random thought.

[Corkscrewed]

ROFL

Well, most of the WWE points are pretty valid, especially in legalese. But this one cracked me up.

*WWE has suffered "irreparable harm" from Lesnar's breach of their agreement.

They always claim that in lawsuits.

[The Fugitive]

That one almost got me ranting earlier, but I decided against it.

I just am curious, since I'm no legal expert, how the hell the WWE has suffered said 'irreparable harm', he breached his condition, they can compensate themselves by not paying him out at all, it's not like he cut down a 2000-year old protected tree where nothing can be done about it and no amount of compensation can fix it.

[SuperSlim]

this thing certinly has it's comical points

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by The Fugitive That one almost got me ranting earlier, but I decided against it. I just am curious, since I'm no legal expert, how the hell the WWE has suffered said 'irreparable harm', he breached his condition, they can compensate themselves by not paying him out at all, it's not like he cut down a 2000-year old protected tree where nothing can be done about it and no amount of compensation can fix it.

I know!

They've suffered irreperable damages by forcing them to fire Austin when he "made a good judgement call" and refused to lay down for him, as well as the finances they lost pushing him.

[PullMyFinger]

Originally Posted by Corkscrewed ROFL Well, most of the WWE points are pretty valid, especially in legalese. But this one cracked me up. They always claim that in lawsuits.

Also, there's no denying Lesnar's idiocy...but WWE is ridiculous. They're a complete monopoly with everything now it seems.

[Kane Knight]

Yeah, but it doesn't much matter if they're a monopoly.

[PullMyFinger]

It's against the law.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger It's against the law.

OMG!!!! LET ME CALL CNNN!!!!11111111111111

Who gives a flying rat's ass?

It's against the law to be a monopoly? Yeah, except this isn't a corporate deal. This is entertainment. That's like claiming Disney has a children's movie monopoly or some such retarded shit. In either event, it doesn't matter FOR THIS COMPLAINT whether or not they have a monopoly.

[Anybody Thrilla]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger Also, there's no denying Lesnar's idiocy...but WWE is ridiculous. They're a complete monopoly with everything now it seems.

Monopoly? Monopoly's just a game. They're trying to take over the world!

The thing that got me laughing was the part about his hand gestures at Wrestlemania XX. He flipped the fans the bird.

WHAT?

I said, he flipped the fans not one bird.

WHAT?

But two birds.

WHAT?

Then he had an awful match.

WHAT?

Gotta love the double standard.

[Pepsi Man]

The thing about the WWE being a monopoly is that it IS for all intents and purposes to anyone that knows anything about wrestling, but counting indy promotions, there are hundreds, if not thousands of other wrestling companies out there, so really it's not like the WWE is the only one that produces something.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Pepsi Man The thing about the WWE being a monopoly is that it IS for all intents and purposes to anyone that knows anything about wrestling, but counting indy promotions, there are hundreds, if not thousands of other wrestling companies out there, so really it's not like the WWE is the only one that produces something.

Yeah, but Microsoft's not the only producer of software, either.

Doesn't matter when deciding whether or not something's a monopoly. It's whether or not competition can develop. Right now, the WWE has NONE.

There may even be thousands of wrestling promotions, but they're nothing compared to the WWE, and neither threat nor competition. Even TNA's not enough to get them pissing themselves.

Still, it's funny that a monopoly argument comes up based on Brock signing a non-competetion contract when released from his own. IT's almost like arguing that contracting workers is a monopoly, because Brock wouldn't be able to go elsewhere in pro wrestling for a living anyway.

[Corkscrewed]

Originally Posted by PullMyFinger It's against the law.

A pure monopoly is against the law, but there's TNA and ROH and plenty of Japanese promotions, so there's no way the WWE can be cited for being a Monopoly.

[BigDaddyCool]

Whatever, just as long and Brock suffers.

[Loose Cannon]

Yea, don't understand the whole "No compete thing." First, like KK said, it's not like he can make a living off wrestling anywhere else anyway. Second, he's not going to help TNA or an independent grow to compete with WWE all of a sudden.

It's wierd that it seems he's not allowed to compete anywhere on the planet. Usually, for the clauses I've seen, it's just within a certain geographical region. But this is wrestling, so who knows.

[PullMyFinger]

That's true.

[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Loose Cannon Yea, don't understand the whole "No compete thing." First, like KK said, it's not like he can make a living off wrestling anywhere else anyway. Second, he's not going to help TNA or an independent grow to compete with WWE all of a sudden. It's wierd that it seems he's not allowed to compete anywhere on the planet. Usually, for the clauses I've seen, it's just within a certain geographical region. But this is wrestling, so who knows.

It's more common in wrestling for people to go over to Japan, or any other market for wrestling.

[Savio]

*WWE has also rejected his terms for wanting to return due to actions have diminished his value, noting "vulgar, derogatory and disparaging hand gestures" to the fans at Wrestlemania XX in Madison Square Garden.

He should have just sauluted Hitler in Germany.

[Kane Knight]

Yeah, but that's different.