The Lawsuit

scudzilla · 17-12-2014 11:15pm #1

Guess this is so big it deserves it's own thread

If Le, Fitch and Quarry win this it's gonna cause so much trouble, would love to see who is actually funding the costs here, was only a matter of time before someone took a big law suit against Zuffa

Here's the full court document

http://www.bjpenn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/ufclawsuit.0.pdf

user2011 · 18-12-2014 1:33am

Pretty funny reading this, it got posted on r/mma it's Dana talking about Cain not wanting to sign away his image/likeness for life to the UFC. (Wonder if he ended up signing it?)

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ufc-drops-fitch-aka-fighters-054200825--mma.html

Hope the fighters give Zuffa a good kick in the nuts and a poke in the eye for good measure.

Sean Quagmire · 18-12-2014 10:09am

that court document is fascinating. Zuffa will take a hit on this one for sure, its a huge accumulation of malpractice by the ufc.

Devastator · 18-12-2014 2:31pm

I'm not a lawyer so my opinion counts for very little but all I can see from this is sour grapes from a handful of pretty irrelevant (some ex)fighters. They were not held captive and threatened to sign their contract they seen the $ and put pen on paper. If they didnt agree with it they should not have signed it. I'm sick of people not accepting responsibility for their own actions.

http://www.mmamania.com/2014/12/17/7406283/mma-attorney-bottom-line-dont-see-strong-case-laid-out-against-ufc

osl · 18-12-2014 2:40pm

Devastator wrote: »

I'm not a lawyer so my opinion counts for very little but all I can see from this is sour grapes from a handful of pretty irrelevant (some ex)fighters. They were not held captive and threatened to sign their contract they seen the $ and put pen on paper. If they didnt agree with it they should not have signed it. I'm sick of people not accepting responsibility for their own actions.

http://www.mmamania.com/2014/12/17/7406283/mma-attorney-bottom-line-dont-see-strong-case-laid-out-against-ufc

What difference does it make that they are "irrelevant fighters"? Goes without saying that they have sour grapes considering they are involved in the lawsuit

Devastator · 18-12-2014 3:05pm

osl wrote: »

What difference does it make that they are "irrelevant fighters"?

Pretty big difference IMO. If they were champions or even potential champions their argument of earning less would be hugely important.

Le has continued his acting while being with UFC. Quarry was badly injured during TUF and the UFC stuck with him, got him back fit and gave him fights when he recovered. I think these are good examples of the UFC helping their fighters

I hear the next big name expected to be added to the lawsuit is Cody McKenzie(for anyone thinking who? ex TUF contestent, had about 6 UFC fights with very mixed results)

osl · 18-12-2014 3:22pm

Devastator wrote: »

Pretty big difference IMO. If they were champions or even potential champions their argument of earning less would be hugely important.

Le has continued his acting while being with UFC. Quarry was badly injured during TUF and the UFC stuck with him, got him back fit and gave him fights when he recovered. I think these are good examples of the UFC helping their fighters

I hear the next big name expected to be added to the lawsuit is Cody McKenzie(for anyone thinking who? ex TUF contestent, had about 6 UFC fights with very mixed results)

It makes no difference. If a fighter feels aggrieved he has the right to say so regardless how skilled he is. It's absurd to assert otherwise

I have no idea whether they have a case, but I wouldn't be rushing to judge anyone

Devastator · 18-12-2014 3:29pm

osl wrote: »

It makes no difference. If a fighter feels aggrieved he has the right to say so regardless how skilled he is. It's absurd to assert otherwise

Did you want my opinion just to argue with me? :rolleyes: Its an opinion, we're all entitled to them!

I did not say or even hint that these irrelevant fighters have no right to be included in this lawsuit so stop making stuff up :rolleyes:

osl · 18-12-2014 3:33pm

Devastator wrote: »

Did you want my opinion just to argue with me? :rolleyes: Its an opinion, we're all entitled to them!

I did not say or even hint that these irrelevant fighters have no right to be included in this lawsuit so stop making stuff up :rolleyes:

I disagree with your opinion. I never said you weren't entitled to it. I don't like that you seem to dismiss their grievances based on the fact that they aren't contenders

ASOT · 18-12-2014 3:57pm

Devastator wrote: »

Pretty big difference IMO. If they were champions or even potential champions their argument of earning less would be hugely important.

Le has continued his acting while being with UFC. Quarry was badly injured during TUF and the UFC stuck with him, got him back fit and gave him fights when he recovered. I think these are good examples of the UFC helping their fighters

I hear the next big name expected to be added to the lawsuit is Cody McKenzie(for anyone thinking who? ex TUF contestent, had about 6 UFC fights with very mixed results)

McKenzie wore basketball shorts for one of his fights with the tag still on them it was hilarious. ID be 100% certain we will see some big names sign up to the lawsuit, without a doubt. Theres ALOT of pissed off fighters out there who are held much higher than McKenzie, its just a matter of time. Would expect the Diaz brothers to sign it, wouldnt be surprised if some of the top fighters who will lose ****loads on the Rebook deal like MM sign it. Id say Microsoft pay him a bomb, alot more than what he will get from the Rebook deal and any potential personal deal with them like Rousey & Jones etc.

I genuinely think this thing will snowball, as much as I find Dana entertaining its hilarious that alot of what he has said in the past is coming back to haunt him.

Devastator · 18-12-2014 4:15pm

I remember that Asot, he said he forgot his shorts or something? lol :rolleyes: there could well be more names added through time but I think the lack of a bigger name from the outset could be damaging and anyone else wanting in could be seen as jumping on the bandwagon.

The Diaz bros is strange situation, obviously Nicks got a new contract, a huge fight against Silva and possibly a title fight should be beat Silva, I can't see Nate doing much or saying much for the time being....but who knows what craziness is floating through his mind

I just don't see this lawsuit going anywhere or anything significant coming from it. Yeah Dana's a brash loudmouth but thats no grounds to sue a company on lol a lot of business owners/CEO's/Directors etc would be on dodgy ground if this was the case.

ASOT · 18-12-2014 4:20pm

Devastator wrote: »

I remember that Asot, he said he forgot his shorts or something? lol :rolleyes: there could well be more names added through time but I think the lack of a bigger name from the outset could be damaging and anyone else wanting in could be seen as jumping on the bandwagon.

The Diaz bros is strange situation, obviously Nicks got a new contract, a huge fight against Silva and possibly a title fight should be beat Silva, I can't see Nate doing much or saying much for the time being....but who knows what craziness is floating through his mind

I just don't see this lawsuit going anywhere or anything significant coming from it. Yeah Dana's a brash loudmouth but thats no grounds to sue a company on lol a lot of business owners/CEO's/Directors etc would be on dodgy ground if this was the case.

Yeah he did then herb dean had to remove the tag mid fight it was hilarious :pac:

True it all depends how the Silva fight goes I reckon but I could see Nate signing it, if not for the money but for a big **** You to the UFC! The lawyers have won bigger cases against bigger companies so id say the UFC are slightly worried, its a major point in the sport anyway as it could have massive outcomes. Looking forward to see who else joins in on it because im banking on it being quite a few, its only a matter of time until Wandi ends up on it, id say hes next in line anyway!

Devastator · 18-12-2014 4:34pm

Yeah he certainly has his gripes with the UFC(among others lol) but I feel his credibility would be called into question due to how he conducted himself over the drug testing prior to supposedly fighting Chael.

Lots of Ifs and Buts at this point in time, my only concern is the longterm damage this would do to MMA world. I 'm a spectator, I really don't care about fighter earnings,etc I just want to see the best fight the best. Thats why I love MMA compared to boxing, because pretty much the best end up in the UFC so compete against eachother, the worst thing for the sport would be if it turned into a boxing scenario were there were multiple world championships, promoters and fighters being able to pick and choose who they fight.

Fromvert · 18-12-2014 5:17pm

Devastator wrote: »

Yeah he certainly has his gripes with the UFC(among others lol) but I feel his credibility would be called into question due to how he conducted himself over the drug testing prior to supposedly fighting Chael.

Lots of Ifs and Buts at this point in time, my only concern is the longterm damage this would do to MMA world. I 'm a spectator, I really don't care about fighter earnings,etc I just want to see the best fight the best. Thats why I love MMA compared to boxing, because pretty much the best end up in the UFC so compete against eachother, the worst thing for the sport would be if it turned into a boxing scenario were there were multiple world championships, promoters and fighters being able to pick and choose who they fight.

Do you not think these two things are related?

p to the e · 18-12-2014 6:29pm

I think this lawsuit will have huge implications but just don't expect a decision on it any time soon. It's basically deciding whether the UFC became the best known in the business through legitimate business acumen or through breaking anti competitive legislation of which there seems to be a decent case e.g. threatening sponsors and fighters with banishment if they do business with any competitors or businesses not affiliated with UFC.

One of the best arguments I heard was that Dana and Co. comparing themselves to the NFL where being the biggest organisation in the sport and that UFC has become a by word for MMA. The writer then goes on to state that the NFL has many teams that are independently owned and the players are free to move from one to the other. If a player disagrees with a payscale he's free to move to another team. A fighter has little or no alternative like this so he may be coerced into taking a lower fee than what he's worth.

weemcd · 18-12-2014 6:53pm

p to the e wrote: »

I think this lawsuit will have huge implications but just don't expect a decision on it any time soon. It's basically deciding whether the UFC became the best known in the business through legitimate business acumen or through breaking anti competitive legislation of which there seems to be a decent case e.g. threatening sponsors and fighters with banishment if they do business with any competitors or businesses not affiliated with UFC.

One of the best arguments I heard was that Dana and Co. comparing themselves to the NFL where being the biggest organisation in the sport and that UFC has become a by word for MMA. The writer then goes on to state that the NFL has many teams that are independently owned and the players are free to move from one to the other. If a player disagrees with a payscale he's free to move to another team. A fighter has little or no alternative like this so he may be coerced into taking a lower fee than what he's worth.

NFL also allow players to have a union, something the ufc would currently never allow

Devastator · 18-12-2014 7:53pm

Fromvert wrote: »

Do you not think these two things are related?

Yes,No,Maybe or as otherwise stated I don't care. Another person's salary, whether a fighter or not is none of my business.

p to the e wrote: »

The writer then goes on to state that the NFL has many teams that are independently owned and the players are free to move from one to the other. If a player disagrees with a payscale he's free to move to another team. A fighter has little or no alternative like this so he may be coerced into taking a lower fee than what he's worth.

I'm not a NFL fan but surely a player signs a contract for X amount of time to play for that team, its their choice as to whether they sign or move elsewhere, but is this not same idea as UFC(except fighter cotracts are for amount of fights)? In terms of the UFC offers a fighter a contract, if they feel its acceptable they sign or if not move on. A fighter may feel he has no other choice if other promotions are not offering the same package but thats not necessarily any fault of the UFC.

Fromvert · 18-12-2014 9:51pm

Devastator wrote: »

Yes,No,Maybe or as otherwise stated I don't care. Another person's salary, whether a fighter or not is none of my business.

I'm not a NFL fan but surely a player signs a contract for X amount of time to play for that team, its their choice as to whether they sign or move elsewhere, but is this not same idea as UFC(except fighter cotracts are for amount of fights)? In terms of the UFC offers a fighter a contract, if they feel its acceptable they sign or if not move on. A fighter may feel he has no other choice if other promotions are not offering the same package but thats not necessarily any fault of the UFC.

You want to watch the best compete and you want them to stay in the one organisation so it happens. For these two things to continue to happen the fighters will have to get paid what they're worth so you should care because it'll effect your ability to watch the best compete, which you want.

It's all linked together.

Wrongway1985 · 19-12-2014 2:07am

Sean Quagmire wrote: »

that court document is fascinating. Zuffa will take a hit on this one for sure, its a huge accumulation of malpractice by the ufc.

What malpractice? please explain from that document what they have done wrong exactly?

They are putting together a case; they used the press conference and went public to beckon others to come aboard. The case can be thrown out or else which most predict there will be a discovery period where basically the UFC would have to hand over whatever material asked for.

Some key things I've noticed;

The case starting point is 2010, I'm assuming this is as the UFC were about to aquire Strikeforce. What about the other organizations they'd taken over before then?

They refused so far to consider Bellator as Competition even though it's owned by Viacom.

They are not looking to Unionize fighters.

A good chunk of that document refers to pretty much how mainly Dana White on part of the UFC conducts himself even including the likes of when he publicly stated that UFC151 would become known as the card Greg Jackson killed.

Potential fighters joining the Lawsuit even though I guess the likes of Tito Ortiz,Randy Couture,Wanderlei Silva etc. surely resent the UFC but having these guys who made big money in the lawsuit could actually be a liability.

Fromvert wrote: »

You want to watch the best compete and you want them to stay in the one organisation so it happens. For these two things to continue to happen the fighters will have to get paid what they're worth so you should care because it'll effect your ability to watch the best compete, which you want.

It's all linked together.

The UFC is the top organization in MMA. Some fighters may not get paid what they are worth but its most likely better than anywhere else will pay them (which at the end of the day is what this case is about) so the best will be competing in the UFC.

In fact only if there was more competition would it affect peoples ability the best compete in the one organization which was UFC'S goal for trying to eliminate it in the first place dismissing your point I think.

DrPhilG · 19-12-2014 1:22pm

Thought this was a good article on the subject.

http://www.si.com/mma/2014/12/16/ufc-antitrust-lawsuit-cung-le

Devastator · 19-12-2014 2:32pm

Fromvert wrote: »

You want to watch the best compete and you want them to stay in the one organisation so it happens. For these two things to continue to happen the fighters will have to get paid what they're worth so you should care because it'll effect your ability to watch the best compete, which you want.

It's all linked together.

SO WHAT? I still don't care! LOL whats up with people not wanting to believe me or try to twist my mind that I should be concerned? I am a spectator, I'm not nosey therefore I do not need to know what a fighter earns to enjoy a fight!

I'm also a big football fan and tbh players salaries are pretty much common knowledge which annoys me, because you watch a match and think "How the hell can that fella be on 150k a week and not be able to pass a ball 6 yards"

John_D80 · 19-12-2014 4:41pm

Devastator wrote: »

SO WHAT? I still don't care! LOL whats up with people not wanting to believe me or try to twist my mind that I should be concerned? I am a spectator, I'm not nosey therefore I do not need to know what a fighter earns to enjoy a fight!

I'm also a big football fan and tbh players salaries are pretty much common knowledge which annoys me, because you watch a match and think "How the hell can that fella be on 150k a week and not be able to pass a ball 6 yards"

You've totally missed his point by the look of things. As fans we should not be concerned about how much fighters are earning. You are absolutely correct in this. It's a private matter of course.

But I think what that chap is saying is that we should be concerned with whether or not the fighters are being treated fairly and their pay is a huge part of that. These fighters are only trying to get the same rewards that are available to their counterparts in other sports.

Devastator · 19-12-2014 8:09pm

John_D80 wrote: »

You've totally missed his point by the look of things. As fans we should not be concerned about how much fighters are earning. You are absolutely correct in this. It's a private matter of course.

But I think what that chap is saying is that we should be concerned with whether or not the fighters are being treated fairly and their pay is a huge part of that. These fighters are only trying to get the same rewards that are available to their counterparts in other sports.

I'm lost as to how I can put this any simplier......I DO NOT CARE!

:rolleyes: Does anybody actually consider themselves as being treated fairly in thier job? If so can you send me an application form please(probably along with 99.99999999999999% of the forum lol)

John_D80 · 19-12-2014 8:48pm

Devastator wrote: »

I'm lost as to how I can put this any simplier......I DO NOT CARE!

:rolleyes: Does anybody actually consider themselves as being treated fairly in thier job? If so can you send me an application form please(probably along with 99.99999999999999% of the forum lol)

If you're so indifferent to fighter welfare, why did you bother commenting on this in the first place. If you had actually read the legal document you would know there is a lot more at stake here than fighters pay even if that's the only thing you are focusing on.

As a supporter of the sport it's encumbent on all of us, from promoters down to fans and everyone in between to place the best interest of the athletes to the fore.

DrPhilG · 24-12-2014 10:56am

http://mmajunkie.com/2014/12/dennis-hallman-javier-vasquez-join-class-action-lawsuit-against-ufc

2 more

Mellor · 24-12-2014 1:30pm

John_D80 wrote: »

If you're so indifferent to fighter welfare,

The lawsuit isn't about fighter welfare. Fighter welfare would be a terrible angle to chase the ufc on also due to the medical insurance they provide. No other promoter does that for its roster. Maybe in special cases, but maybe not even then.

It's about anti-competition. From what I've read of the lawsuit (not all of it yet), it's not a very strong case. Being the most popular promotion isn't illegal on its own. Some if the alleged mal-practises are;
"Requiring fighters to sign a contract that means they can't fight for another promotion when signed for the UFC."
- Eh? How is that anything other than completely standard.
And there's the whole deal with fighter likenesses for promoting fights and computer games etc. Calling it inapprioate use. Fairly standard to do both if those things, not inappropriate imo, whether they are compensated fairly or not, I don't know.

John_D80 · 24-12-2014 8:03pm

Mellor wrote: »

The lawsuit isn't about fighter welfare.

Never said it was. Nice how you think that one sentence is the basis of my entire opinion on the lawsuit. It's about a number of different issues.

I have read the entire document and I'm quite aware of what it contains and what it means, the vast majority of which ultimately affects the fighters.

Mellor · 24-12-2014 8:52pm

John_D80 wrote: »

Nice how you think that one sentence is the basis of my entire opinion on the lawsuit.

I don't. But you brought it up, I was just saying that I don't think it's relevant.

A lot of the issues affect the fighters, but a lit if then are nonsense also.
The fighters signed up don't exactly add much weight to it.
Nate Quarry: Quit for his own reasons, and didn't even fight during the period covered by the lawsuit.
Cung Le: making a lot if noise after the reversal of HGH ban. Definitely looks like a case of "he that protest too much"
Jon Fitch: axe to grind after being cut, was snapped up by WSOF. Undermines the whole "can't fight for other promotions after UFC" case.
Dennis Hallman: don't think he has any case for being sold short, Dana mocked his clothes once, but they were ridiculous
Javier Vasquez: ...Who?

John_D80 · 24-12-2014 10:23pm

Mellor wrote: »

I don't. But you brought it up, I was just saying that I don't think it's relevant.

In the post in which I mentioned it, it was relevant to the exchange of views I was having with another poster at the time, so you pretty much quoted me out of context.

DrPhilG · 28-12-2014 7:59pm

Pablo Garza and Brandon Vera sign up.

News Url :: http://mmajunkie.com/2014/12/report-brandon-vera-pablo-garza-third-set-of-fighters-to-file-suit-vs-ufc/

Redmen Rafalution · 28-12-2014 10:57pm

The fighters really need to have a union or some body to negotiate on their behalf, like in other top US sports.

threeball · 28-12-2014 11:55pm

DrPhilG wrote: »

Pablo Garza and Brandon Vera sign up.

News Url :: http://mmajunkie.com/2014/12/report-brandon-vera-pablo-garza-third-set-of-fighters-to-file-suit-vs-ufc/

Vera really isn't any addition seen as he came back for a second bite of the cherry.

dickwod1 · 31-12-2014 7:20pm

UFC hire heavyweight's ... http://www.mmafighting.com/2014/12/30/7471353/zuffa-engages-heavyweight-antitrust-firm-in-defense-against-fighter

John_D80 · 31-12-2014 9:35pm

dickwod1 wrote: »

UFC hire heavyweight's ... http://www.mmafighting.com/2014/12/30/7471353/zuffa-engages-heavyweight-antitrust-firm-in-defense-against-fighter

Very interesting. UFC/Zuffa are taking this very seriously by the looks of it. Looks to me like they are either a little worried or are intending to crush this lawsuit like a bug.

Mellor · 31-12-2014 10:09pm

John_D80 wrote: »

Very interesting. UFC/Zuffa are taking this very seriously by the looks of it. Looks to me like they are either a little worried or are intending to crush this lawsuit like a bug.

If they didn't take it any way other than very seriously they be fools, regardless of the basis of the complaints.

03-01-2015 10:11am

Comparisons to the NFL don't really work. The NFL can operate as it does due to legal exemptions granted to it. I can't imagine elected politicians looking after a "bloodsport" in the same way any time soon.

The Lawsuit

Comments