The WWFtrademark dispute was a legal event where theWorld Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) filed a lawsuit against theWorld Wrestling Federation (WWF) over the violation of a prior international agreement regarding usage of the "WWF" initials.
On April 17, 2000, the Fund commenced proceedings in theHigh Court of Justice inEngland against the Federation, citing breaches of their 1994 international agreement, as the Fund was based inSwitzerland, and the Federation was based in theUnited States. The High Court ruled in favor of the Fund on August 10, 2001, and theCourt of Appeal upheld their ruling on February 27, 2002. On May 6, 2002, the Federation, despite having an active petition for appeal at theHouse of Lords, announced their name change to World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).[1]
On May 16, 2002, WWE chairmanVince McMahon appeared on TSN'sOff the Record with Michael Landsberg, stating that wrestling's international expansion in the 1990s, as well as the advent of the Internet, had created unforeseen challenges when the Federation and the Fund initially agreed on the use of the "WWF" initials in 1989.[2]
_01.jpg)
The World Wildlife Fund registered the "WWF" initials as a trademark in 1961. Despite changing its name internationally to the World Wide Fund for Nature in 1989, the Fund retain use of the "WWF" initials globally as its logo and in-print, and still refer to itself as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) in the United States and Canada.[3]
Originally founded as the Capitol Wrestling Corporation (CWC) in 1953, the wrestling promotion changed its name in 1963 to the World Wide Wrestling Federation (WWWF).[4] In 1979, the WWWF rebranded as the World Wrestling Federation (WWF). Initially, the Federation conducted operations only within the United States, and did not venture internationally.[5]
On September 6, 1989, the Fund had filed for extensions of time to oppose a trademark application by the Federation for "WWF", on the grounds of potential confusion with their own registered "WWF" trademark.[6]
On September 12, 1989, the Federation sent a letter to the Fund addressing its federal trademark application for the "WWF" mark in International Class 41 (for wrestling entertainment services). The International Class 41 also includes education, which the Fund were registered in.[7] This marked the beginning of formal discussions between the two parties regarding the use of the "WWF" initials.[8]
On September 26, 1989, both parties reached an agreement that the Federation would not use the "WWF" initials in theTimes Roman typeface when the initials appeared alone, without the Federation's logo. In exchange, the Fund agreed not to oppose the Federation's federal trademark registration for "WWF" in Class 41.[9]
By 1993, despite the 1989 agreement, both parties had been involved in further disputes, as the Federation had grown in popularity across Europe. Both the Fund and Federation had contested international trademark applications the other party had made. The Fund obtained an interim injunction against the distributor of the Federation'sWWF Magazine in Switzerland, citing trademark infringements.[10]
On January 20, 1994, the Fund and the Federation formed a new agreement, including that the Federation would stop using the "WWF" initials in printed, written, or visual form in connection with its business, though allowances were made for pre-approved merchandise and publications.[12] The Federation was also prohibited from filing any new trademarks with the "WWF" initials and had to cancel existing registrations, except for those associated with the Federation's WWF “block" logo. The WWF "block" logo was seen by the Fund to be less readable as "WWF", as it looked more like "WF". The Federation was allowed to occasionally use the initials in verbal contexts, such as referring to the “WWF champion", but was otherwise expected to avoid using them. Other terms included that business partners were required to exclusively refer to the company as the "World Wrestling Federation".[13]
In September 1996, the Federation registered WWF.com, later launching their website in the summer of 1997.[14] While the website used "World Wrestling Federation" in its title, the use of "WWF" in the domain name was problematic with the Fund.[15] In November 1997, as part of a corporate rebranding strategy, the Federation introduced a new logo at theirSurvivor Series pay-per-view event, informally referred to as the "scratch" logo. As this logo represented the W's in a different format to that of the previous "block" logo, the Fund felt it more clearly represented the "WWF" initials instead of "WF".[16]
As a result of the previous actions, legal friction between the two entities continued, including various cease and desist letters being sent from the Fund to the Federation and its business partners in the late 1990s.[17] In May 1999, a variation of the WWF "scratch" logo was used for a BritishSky Box Office promotional advertisement relating to theWWF No Mercy live pay-per-view event from theManchester Evening News Arena, splitting the "WW" from the "F" entirely.[18]
On April 17, 2000, the Fund commenced proceedings against the Federation at theHigh Court of Justice inEngland, claiming that the Federation had violated the 1994 agreement, particularly with their use of the WWF "scratch" logo, the WWF.com website domain, and other Internet-based endeavors using "WWF". The Federation counterargued that their agreement did not foresee the Internet, and therefore was restrictive and a restraint of trade, and also argued that the "WWF" scratch logo was still more readable as "WF".[19]
On August 10, 2001, the court ruled in favor of the Fund, agreeing that the WWF.com web domain and WWF "scratch" logo had both violated prior intellectual property agreements between the Fund and the Federation.[20] The court found that the Federation had failed to comply with the 1994 agreement since at least 1997.[21] The Federation filed against the decision in England'sCourt of Appeal on October 1, 2001.[22]
On February 27, 2002, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Federation's challenge to the High Court of Justice's decision. However, the Federation was granted a stay by the Court of Appeal, this meaning the ruling in August 2001 could be put on hold to allow time for the Federation to seek other appeal options.[23] The Federation announced on the same day that it would petition theHouse of Lords for an appeal.[24]
On May 6, 2002, the Federation issued a statement, announcing that it would rebrand from World Wrestling Federation (WWF) to World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).[25] In the same statement,Linda McMahon, CEO for WWE, said that the rebranding allowed for the company to emphasize its focus on entertainment, and the company also launched its "Get the F Out!" marketing campaign.[26] The former WWF "scratch" logo was amended to omit the "F" (displaying as just "WW"). On June 10, 2002, the House of Lords officially refused WWE's appeal petition.[27]
From this point, the 1994 agreement was still upheld, so WWE could be able to still use the original WWF "block" logo, as well as the term "World Wrestling Federation", but would be prohibited from using the "WWF" initials, as well as the WWF "scratch" logo introduced at Survivor Series 1997. To prevent further legal disputes, WWE censored archival footage by muting spoken references of the "WWF" initials, censoring the former WWF "scratch" logo and "WWF" typefaces.[28]
On June 10, 2002,THQ andJakks Pacific released the video gameWWE WrestleMania X8 for theNintendo GameCube. Although the game's title and external packaging featured "WWE" branding, its gameplay featured "WWF" references, as development had been completed prior to the name change.[29] From August 9, 2002, THQ and Jakks Pacific reissued versions ofWWF SmackDown! 2: Know Your Role andWWF SmackDown! Just Bring It under various budget labels for thePlayStation andPlayStation 2 consoles.[30] From September 27, 2002, THQ and Jakks Pacific also reissued versions ofWWF Raw forXbox andMicrosoft Windows.[31] While these legacy titles were unchanged from their original releases (retaining all "WWF" references in their gameplay), their external packaging were amended to display the "WWE" logo and typefaces.[32]
On November 10, 2002, the Fund secured an injunction from the High Court, preventing WWE, THQ, and Jakks Pacific from distributing any legacy interactive software titles that failed to censor "WWF" references in the gameplay.[33] On April 7, 2003, a three-judge panel in the Court of Appeal overturned the injunction. The court ruled in favor of WWE, THQ and Jakks Pacific, agreeing that modifying the games to censor "WWF" references would be impractical due to the configuration of the software. Additionally, the court noted that the Fund failed to prove any actual harm caused by the releases, especially given that all external packaging at consumer-level had already been updated to reflect the WWE branding.[34] The court ordered the Fund to cover $100,000 in legal costs for WWE, THQ, and Jakks Pacific.[35]
On October 29, 2004, the Fund served a pleading described as "Claim for Damages".[36] On March 23, 2005, Mr Justice Patten gave the Fund permission to amend paragraph 8 of their claim to seek for damages.[37] On February 16, 2006, the Fund sought damages against the WWE in the High Court over the entire dispute.[38] On April 2, 2007, the High Court ruled in favor of WWE. The court found that the Fund's approach constituted an abuse of process due to inconsistent legal strategies and delays in seeking damages. Specifically, the court noted that the Fund had previously sought an injunction without pursuing damages and only later amended their claim to include a financial remedy. This shift was seen as procedurally improper.[39]
Furthermore, the court addressed the Fund's attempt to claim damages based on the "Wrotham Park" principle, which allows for compensation reflecting a hypothetical license fee the defendant would have paid for the unauthorized use. The court concluded that such damages were not appropriate in this case, as the Fund could not demonstrate a direct financial loss from WWE's actions.[40]
From May 6, 2002, WWF.com acted as a redirect, sending visitors to WWE.com.[41] The scheduled DVD and VHS releases of "WWF" events (such asBacklash andInsurrextion) were issued as-is with "WWF" references fully retained within the footage, but with "WWE" logos on the exterior packaging and used in marketing materials.[42]
TheWWF Tough Enough 2 compilation CD released byGeffen Records on May 14, 2002, while having the new "WWE" logo on the cover, was issued as a "WWF" release on the CD spine as it had already been cataloged by Geffen.[43] TheNew York Stock Exchange ticker symbol remained as "NYSE:WWF" until August 7, 2002, and some championship titles on WWE programming continued to feature the WWF "scratch" logo on them, until they could be redesigned.[44]
The BritishWWE Tagged Classics DVD re-issues of WWF VHS releases, issued between 2004 and 2012 by third-party distributorSilver Vision, feature pre-2002 content in its uncut, original, uncensored form—fully retaining all references to "WWF". However, the external packaging at retail, and internal selection menus, both exclusively use "WWE" branding.[45]
Throughout the 2000s, the original "WWF" block logo remained used on licensed replica WWE championship titles that were manufactured and sold by Figures Toy Company, as the logo was permitted in the 1994 agreement.[46] On November 15, 2010,WWE Raw hosted an "Old School" edition which featured the WWF "block" logo frequently in the program, alongside a range of WWF "block" logo merchandise that was sold at the event and online.[47] However, the event's overhead banners and the ring aprons used "World Wrestling Entertainment".[48] In other instances, such as on John Cena's vintage-themed 2003 "Word Life" merchandise, WWE modified the block logo to remove the "F" entirely.[49]
The compilation music albumsWWF Aggression,WWF Forceable Entry,WWF Tough Enough (Music from the Hit Series) andWWF Tough Enough 2 remain listed ondigital music stores andmusic streaming services as legacy "WWF" releases, as they are distributed by record labels such asSony Music andUniversal Music Group, therefore are not controlled by WWE.[50][51][52][53]
On December 1, 2002, the WWF.com web domain name expired. WWE had allowed the domain name to lapse, as there was no legal obligation to transfer the asset to the Fund. The domain was quickly acquired by Frank Baach, who sold it to Gregory Ricks from Texas in 2003, who used the domain for his "Web Wrestling Forum".[54] On November 17, 2006, it was announced that the Fund's attempt to obtain the domain name throughICANN'sUDRP system, on the grounds that it was registered inbad faith, was unsuccessful, as Ricks was using the web domain for professional wrestling forum purposes and therefore did not pretend to be affiliated with the Fund.[55]
Ahead of the launch for theWWE Network online streaming service, the WWE and the Fund formed a new agreement in 2012 which meant that the WWE would no longer have to censor WWF "scratch" logos and typefaces, or mute spoken "WWF" references in archival footage. However, this new agreement would override the 1994 agreement, meaning that WWE would no longer be allowed to use the original WWF "block" logo in new footage, or references to "World Wrestling Federation" in new footage. The first instances of the WWF "scratch" logo being uncensored in archival segments on WWE programming were those featured on theWWE Raw 1000 television special broadcast on July 23, 2012.[56]
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)