A Mixed Martial Arts Promotion By Any Other Name...

In July, I blogged about the Ultimate Cage Fighting Challenge's possible infringement of the UFC's trademark and predicted that when the UCFC's website resurfaced it would be under a new name.  From the new version of the website it appears that the UCFC is now the XCFC (Xtreme Cage Fighting Challenge).

The XCFC homepage discusses a September 19 event, but the XCFC Facebook event page indicates that the event was moved to November 13, 2009.  The name of the organization and the event name (The Backyard Battle) remained the same, so intellectual property issues do not appear to have played any role in the postponement. 

There is already an XCC (Xtreme Cagefighting Championship) based in Michigan, but they are less likely to make a trademark claim than the UFC.   Trademark laws are governed by both federal and state law.  (State trademarks can usually be obtained quickly and easily, but provide less protection than federal marks.)  Since the UFC has a federal trademark, it can prevent any confusingly similar uses anywhere in the country.  In the absence of a federal trademark, a promotion can typically only go after competitors in its own state (absent certain circumstances that would still provide for cross-border confusion.) 

It remains to be seen whether the XCF (based in Missouri) which does have a federal trademark for "XCF Xtreme Cagefighting Federation") will make a claim against the XCFC or XCC. 

The bottom line here is that trademark law is murky and any promotion looking to protect its brand (or avoid stepping on the toes of someone else) should seek professional guidance.

Talk to the Hand

The UFC has extended its agreement with Joe Hand Promotions allowing the company to continue serving as the exclusive commercial distributor of UFC pay-per-view events in the United States.

What does this mean to MMA fans?  Well, if you prefer to go out to your local drinking establishment to watch UFC events, you might find yourself facing a steeper cover charge than you are used to.
 
While a residential viewing of a UFC PPV typically costs $44.95 ($54.95 in HD) it costs much more for a bar to order the event.  Commercial establishments are charged based on their seating capacity.  For example, a restaurant that holds 150 people will pay around $1000 to show the broadcast.   Some places try to get around that fee by using an illegal "black box" to steal the signal or just by hooking up a dish and trying to get the event at the residential rate.  That's where Joe Hand comes in.
 
As explained in the court's opinion in Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Easterling, 2009 WL 1767579, 2 (N.D.Ohio, 2009):
As part of its normal business operations, [Joe Hand] engages in anti-piracy activities designed at protecting the legitimate purchasers of the event. [Joe Hand] utilizes Agencies which hire auditors to visit non-subscribing establishments during the broadcast of the entire bout to determine whether any such establishments are illegally exhibiting the broadcast.
In other words, Joe Hand hires people to look for bars and restaurants that are broadcasting the UFC, but that have not paid Joe Hand for the right to do so.   Those folks go the bars, confirm that the broadcast is being shown, and write down details like whether prices are jacked up and how many people are there in attendance.  As the "exclusive distributor," Joe Hand then has the right to sue those establishments.  This practice helps Joe Hand recoup the licensing fees it pays to the UFC.  The causes of action in the lawsuits include 47 U.S.C. § 605 ("Unauthorized Publication of Use of Communications") and 47 U.S.C. § 553 ("Unauthorized Reception of Cable Service"). 
 
There is no requirement of "intent" with respect to these statutes.  Thus, even if a bar owner truly thought that their $44.95 gave them the right to show UFC 103 to patrons, he or she can still get dinged for statutory damages of up to $10,000.  If the bar owner was willfully violating the statute, the damages can go up to $100,000 and the owner can face criminal penalties. 
 
The risks of getting caught might seem small, but Joe Hand is actually quite vigilant about tracking down violators.  In the last 12 months in just the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa (my home district), Joe Hand has filed thirteen lawsuits against bars and restaurants that allegedly had unauthorized broadcasts. 

As Joe Hand himself noted in an interview with Bernard Fernandez of the Philadelphia Daily News (and yes, Joe Hand is a real guy... there is even  a Joe Hand, Junior) the UFC broadcasts are big business, bigger than boxing:

People ask, 'Do you think UFC will kill boxing? It already has. Boxing's dead.

Look, the next [Floyd] Mayweather fight [Sept. 19, against Juan Manuel Marquez] is the same night as UFC 103. Does that make any sense?

If you own a sports bar and you can buy a UFC event for $1,000, and you know you're going to pack the place, why would you buy the Mayweather fight for $2,200 and not do as well? 

My guess is that Joe Hand isn't having lunch with Bob Arum anytime soon. 

"The Law" Lays Down the Law

Willamette Week Online has reported that Matt "The Law" Lindland has sued former TUF contestant Gerald "Hurricane" Harris for allegedly failing to pay management fees.

Harris had previously been interviewed about his departure from Lindland's Team Quest after Harris appeared on The Ultimate Fighter's seventh season.  Thus, the dispute may stem from confusion over whether the departure from the camp also ended the representation agreement.

As the economy continues to struggle, I expect to see more of these kinds of suits.     

 

Kimo Fights Back

In July, I quoted a report that Kimo Leopoldo was considering legal action against the internet troll that started the frenzy of false reports about Kimo's death.  It appears that a lawsuit is on the horizon, but against a far more well-known opponent: TMZ.com.

Although many blogs ran with the erroneous story of Kimo's untimely demise, TMZ was the first to report that the death had been "confirmed."  This threw fuel on the fire as TMZ's confirmation was republished by countless other sources.

TMZ ultimately took down the story, but the website's prior articles on Kimo still, to this day, show a link with the headline "UFC Legend Kimo Leopoldo Dies."  Kimo's attorney, Stephen Doniger, understandably finds TMZ's actions unacceptable.  Doniger and his client have thus been making the media rounds with Kimo submitting an "open letter'  to MMA blogs and both attorney and client appearing on Fox Fight Game

Doniger explained to me that he had contacted TMZ to try to get a retraction and to see if a resolution could be reached without litigation.  However, according to Doniger, TMZ has not only refused to post a retraction, it has not even bothered to reply to the correspondence.  Doniger says TMZ is running out of time, and a California state court lawsuit is being prepared which accuses TMZ of defamation and other related causes of action.  Doniger believes that TMZ's report caused Kimo harm because, among other things, the report said that Kimo had died of a heart attack.   Kimo is trying to clean up his image and such a report hearkened back to earlier reports of a drug-related arrest and may make MMA promoters hesitant to give him a fight for fear of a possible heart condition. 

I'll leave it to Doniger and the California courts to sort out whether a false report of someone's death can amount to defamation, but it's absolutely clear that TMZ engaged in irresponsible journalism, which troubles me a great deal. (Unless you've been a MMALB reader since the beginning you might not know that I went to journalism school so I take this somewhat personally.)Saying that someone's death has been "confirmed" has a very specific connotation.  While Beau Taylor should never have originally posted the false comments, the situation would not have gotten so out of hand so quickly if TMZ had not jumped into the fray without getting its facts straight.

While any media outlet can make an honest mistake (see Jewel, Richard) TMZ seems to have something against Kimo.  In February, it ran a story with the headline: "UFC Legend Has Finally Meth His Match."  The story related to an incident where Kimo was arrested near an automobile containing methamphetamine, but Kimo was never charged with possession of that drug.  In TMZ's defense, the police report was somewhat confusing and TMZ was not the only outlet to get the story wrong.  Unlike TMZ, however, Sherdog.com posted a correction/retraction and later ran a detailed article allowing Kimo to provide his side of the story. TMZ did neither. 

Score one for the MMA media. 

UPDATE:  This blog post was uploaded on September 6, 2009.  The morning of September 7, 2009, TMZ posted "Update: Kimo Is Alive!"  MMAJunkie.com scooped TMZ by 47 days on that one, which was not particularly difficult since Kimo held a press conference at the Orange County Sheriff's Department debunking the rumors of his death.

Score two for the MMA media.