Hooks Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Saw this on NoDQ per Da Meltz - After the recent situation with Alberto Del Rio and CM Punk, WWE has changed all performer contracts. The contract now say that if a talent is fired for disciplinary reasons, they forfeit all merchandise rights and can't work in pro wrestling or MMA for one year. I still will never understand how legally the WWE can get away with stuff like that. They can't. The first time they try to enforce that shit on anyone with sufficient amounts of will and/or legal firepower, it will get STFD. I'm asking this not as a smartass, and as someone with very limited technical legal knowledge: If both parties read the contract, agree to it, and sign it, why can't it be enforced? I mean, it's a pretty strict clause and I wouldn't like it, but legally, how can someone read a contract, agree to the terms, sign it, then when a clause in it comes up later, say "I've decided I didn't like that after all, so never mind, I don't agree" and it go in their favor? Legit curiosity on my part here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StretchMediatedHypertrophy Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 It's hard to give a non-political answer to this, but essentially most people in the legal biz-a-ness see past the voluntary principle, for better or worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nature Boy Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Yeah, contracts have to be at least reasonably fair to both parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 I think WWE even knows it's not really enforceable just that most guys don't want to have to spend the money to have the long drawn out court battle over it. WWE's strategy seems to be to try and drag out it's suits as long as possible and hope the other side runs out of money before it goes to court. The situation with Punk was different in that they knew he had the money to keep going and didn't want him in court trying to go after the independent contractor clause so they just settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyJ Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 It could be a question of whether the contract would be considered an adhesion contract. Generally speaking, courts aren't big fans of whacky provisions (ie you are not allowed to work for a year) the party with overwhelming bargaining power slides into a contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odessasteps Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 I wonder how many people there have agents, outside of Cena/Orton level stars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nature Boy Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 I wonder how many of them take their contract to a lawyer before signing. I feel like most of them just go "OH MY GOD WWE WANTS ME!" and sign the contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mco543 Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Even that doesn't mean anything. Shane Douglas said he took his to his lawyer and the lawyer said "I'd be disbarred if I told you to sign this" and he still signed it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victator Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 There are some things you can't sign away. I can't sign a contract saying you can have my kidneys or sign myself into slavery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fresh Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 "Anytime you get attorneys involved in something, it's going to hell in a handbasket." - Vince McMahon on the Steve Austin podcast Wonder why he feels this way??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Cibernetico Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Saw this on NoDQ per Da Meltz - After the recent situation with Alberto Del Rio and CM Punk, WWE has changed all performer contracts. The contract now say that if a talent is fired for disciplinary reasons, they forfeit all merchandise rights and can't work in pro wrestling or MMA for one year. I still will never understand how legally the WWE can get away with stuff like that. I can understand the 90 day deal because they don't want Lex Luger/Rick Rude situations happening (not that there's anywhere for it to happen). But a year off just seems so harsh. I wonder how long until this is changed for all contracts including run of the mill releases. But again, doesn't that stuff only pass the snuff test if the employees (I'm sorry 'contractors') in question have access to company information? If Alex Bliss is knee deep into Network roll-out plans, WWE TV expansion plans, new merch deals with Nike, etc. then YES she could be prevented from going to another company as to not spread WWE information. But what the hell does Ron Killings not working for a year impact WWE? If I was WWE, despite Punk and ADR, I would still allow wiggle room for folks for the simple fact that TNA has shown that no one really matters anyways. Hogan, Sting, Flair, Angle, RVD, Booker T, Scott Steiner, The Outsiders, The Hardyz, The Dudleyz, and various top ECW guys were in TNA and it didn't matter. WWE shouldn't be so paranoid as to lock down wrestlers because the next thing they will know...there will be an anti-trust lawsuit at its door with wrestlers claiming contract clauses that create unfair competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ken Erico Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Punk would've been the right person to go all in with a lawsuit against the independent contractor stuff. But i can understand that he just wanted to settle out of court so he could sign that UFC contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nature Boy Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 I wonder what UFC's contract structure is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Saw this on NoDQ per Da Meltz - After the recent situation with Alberto Del Rio and CM Punk, WWE has changed all performer contracts. The contract now say that if a talent is fired for disciplinary reasons, they forfeit all merchandise rights and can't work in pro wrestling or MMA for one year. I still will never understand how legally the WWE can get away with stuff like that. They can't. The first time they try to enforce that shit on anyone with sufficient amounts of will and/or legal firepower, it will get STFD. WWE's non-compete contracts are non-enforcable. See: Lesnar, Brock and Del Rio, Alberto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Cibernetico Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 I wonder what UFC's contract structure is. https://docs.google.com/file/d/1Aqij1OpeaxAoHFnHzp5216zAo73Xow_5FVEkoEPSE-d-6EqyaNSPaiyYd0NS/edit This is Bellator's match against the UFC's offer for Eddie Alaverz. This was so controversial for the simple fact that Bellator removed UFC's letterhead and all mentions of 'UFC' and replaced it with Bellator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cristobal Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 I'm asking this not as a smartass, and as someone with very limited technical legal knowledge: If both parties read the contract, agree to it, and sign it, why can't it be enforced? I mean, it's a pretty strict clause and I wouldn't like it, but legally, how can someone read a contract, agree to the terms, sign it, then when a clause in it comes up later, say "I've decided I didn't like that after all, so never mind, I don't agree" and it go in their favor? Legit curiosity on my part here. Even if I sign a contract stipulating that if you fire me, you also get to stab me in the throat, you're still guilty of a crime if you do in fact stab me. Extreme example, but WWE attempting to assert ownership of your likeness effectively in perpetuity AND saying you can't do your job OR a superficially similar but in fact entirely different job for a year after I fire you would get thrown out of court so fast I'll be shocked if WWE EVER lets a challenge to this go to trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nature Boy Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Random thought but......... If WWE decides to keep Bryan out of the Rumble, could they at least bring in someone entertaining for #30? Scott Steiner should be #30. I'd love to see him jaw with the angry fans of Philly as he comes out. EDIT - Meant to post this in the RAW thread but I guess it works here too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuerrillaMonsoon Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 I'd like to see them make an angle out of it by having it be Rey two years running. The Authority are deliberately trying to ruin his legacy with the fans, as they want to get their money's worth out of their contract with Rey, who has been injured so often, are making him show up and in the worst possible circumstances, whilst Rey just wants to retire and be with his family, yet still has X amount of time left on his contract and wants to avoid doing bad by his family. Cue a Gladiator rehash where Rey must fight for his freedom, culminating in him getting his freedom/retirement match against whoever at Summerslam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nature Boy Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Is that going to be like when Shawn Michaels went broke and had to work for JBL because he had to support his family? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuerrillaMonsoon Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Yeah, probably.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greggulator Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Dean Ambrose talks about something at a 7-11 involving teenagers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XToKIyIvVvA#t=114 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casey Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Just let Rey compete in "Career Threatening" matches on select RAWs and PPVs, like Flair did leading up to his retirement. At WrestleMania, he loses to _____. Emotional send-off, since we're in California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Fresh Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Dean Ambrose talks about something at a 7-11 involving teenagers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XToKIyIvVvA#t=114 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuerrillaMonsoon Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 Just let Rey compete in "Career Threatening" matches on select RAWs and PPVs, like Flair did leading up to his retirement. At WrestleMania, he loses to _____. Emotional send-off, since we're in California. I was thinking do the inverse of the Flair retirement run. Flair wanted to wrestle till he was dead, and had to keep winning, whilst Rey wants to finish up to spend time with his family, essentially to not become Flair, or have that opportunity that Eddy never did, whilst the Authority treat him as a piece of meat wanting to get as much out of they can out of him before his contract expires. Have him lose a match at the Feb PPV that extends his contract for another two years. Some promos from doctors saying he keeps wrestling for another two years he'll end up in a wheelchair, and then Steph saying they'll sue him for breach of contract. End up with some great 6 mans between Cena/Rey/Bryan and Rollins/Show/whoever. Rey beats Rollins that allows him the chance to leave on his own terms - a Mania match against, fuck it, Big Show makes the most sense. Never beat him. Never truly overcame the odds, going to do it one last time. Rey can only retire if he wins. If not, he doubles his contract length and half the pay. Rey wins with assistance from Konnan, El Dandy, Psicosis, and dozens of other luchadores. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts