Maximum Fighting Championship Goes to Court Too!

With the UFC suing Bellator, and Bellator suing the UFC, it seems like it was only a matter of time before their promotional counterpart to the North entered the fray.   That's right, Maximum Fighting Championship is now also on its way to doing battle in a courtroom.  MFC hasn't filed a lawsuit against a competitor, however.  They are taking on the Edmonton Concert Hall Foundation, whic owns the famousWinspear Centre.  Because the Winspear Centre is known as a music venue, its booking of three MMA shows made big news when it was announced this winter.  It made bigger news when the plug was quickly pulled on the MFC events.

Most venue contracts have some sort of catchall clause that lets the venue cancel a show for all sorts of reasons... earthquake, union strikes, bankruptcy, and on and on.  It remains to be seen whether deciding--after signing a contract--that your venue simply "isn't suitable" for mixed martial arts can pass muster before a judge.   MFC hopes it does not and is asking for $500,000 in damages.

Mayorga v. Thomas Postmortem

As the world turns its attention to UFC 118 in Boston where former boxing champion James Toney takes on Randy Couture, I offer this look back at another famous boxer's ill-fated attempt to switch combat sports.

In the spring of 2010, Shine Fights Promotions, LLC announced that its third event would feature a fight between former Welterwight Champion Ricardo Mayorga and UFC Veteran Din Thomas.  The addition of Mayorga (best known for fights against Vernon Forrest, Shane Mosley and Oscar De La Hoya), brought instant media attention to the Ft. Lauderdale based promotion.  It also attracted  the attention of Don King, Mayorga's boxing promoter.

The Timeline

October 1, 2009 – Mayorga Enters into a three-year, exclusive Promotional Agreement with Don King Productions, Inc.  Interestingly, the copyright notice on the Agreement indicates it was last revised in 2006.  At that time MMA did not hold the threat for boxers "crossing over" that exists today.

April 15, 2010 – Shine Fights Promotions holds a press conference announcing "Worlds Collide: Mayorga vs. Thomas" scheduled to take place ony May 15 in Fayetteville, NC.

April 20, 2010 – Don King sends a letter to Shine CEO Devin Price putting him on notice of Don King Productions' contract with Mayorga and that DKP will take “any and all necessary steps" to enforce its contractual rights. Putting Shine on notice about the contract was a necessary step. Since Shine was not a party to the contract, DKP has to establish that Shine was aware of the contract as an element of a lawsuit for "tortious interference" with the contract.

April 22, 2010 – Pamela Bradshaw, Shine's General Counsel, writes back and says the Agreement does not prevent Mayorga’s participation with Shine because the Agreement only covers boxing, not MMA.

April 27, 2010 – King writes back and “categorgically disagrees” with Bradshaw.  He also uses the dreaded I-word...“injunction.”

May 5, 2010 – Shine issues a press release “dismissing Don King’s threat,” essentially daring Don King to sue them.

May 7, 2010 – Don King obliges.

May 15, 2010 – Broward County Circuit Judge Marc Gold holds an emergency hearing, and grants DKP's Emergency Motion for Injunctive Relief pending entry of an appropriate bond.  Bond was required because the ruling restricted Shine's actions without a final determination on the merits of the case. If the court later determined that Shine had not tortiously interfered with DKP's contract, DKP could have been held responsible for the profits Shine would have received if the fight had taken place.  King had two hours to up with a bond of $1 million—cash—on a Saturday!  No problem. (Don King actually has a history with cash and duffel bags.) 

The Complaint and Ruling

DKP's complaint in Broward County Florida alleged tortious interference and sought a preliminary injunction, asking the court to stop the Shine event from taking place. The complaint had two major arguments.  The first was that DKP has an exclusive right to promote Mayorga's "Bouts."  A "Bout" is defined in the Agreement as a “professional boxing bout."  (This is probably why Shine thought it was in the clear.)

The second argument was that participation in Worlds Collide would place Mayorga in risk of "substantial physical harm" because Din Thomas has a black belt in jiu-jitsu and Mayorga had never competed in MMA.  This argument was where DKP's firm- Zarco Einhorn Salkowski & Brito, P.A. -earned their money.

In granting the injunction, Judge Gold relied on paragraph XVI(c) of the Agreement which prevents Mayorga from entering into any other agreement “which would or might interfere with Fighter’s full and complete performance hereunder.”  In short, the court appeared to believe that Mayorga might get hurt which would prevent him from engaging in boxing matches promoted by DKP.

The Aftermath

Shine Fights announced that it was going ahead with the fight despite the Court’s order [note: that would have been an even worse idea than daring Don King to sue them], but ultimately had the choice removed from their hands when the North Carolina Athletic Commission pulled the plug on the whole event.

Ron Foster who was the matchmaker for the ill-fated event has now left the company entirely.  In his intervew with MMAWeekly.com, he explained that he was left alone to deal with the events in North Carolina while Devin Price was stuck in Florida dealing with the litigation.  That would explain why, shortly after the event was canceled, Price was not aware of the reasons for the cancellation. Subsequent reports indicated that it was because Shine had not provided the Athletic Commission with the funds that were to be distributed to the fighters and/or that a doctor was not going to be in attendance at the event.   Terrance Merriweather, chair of the North Carolina Boxing Authority, told MMAJunkie.com that: "The show was canceled over concerns [about] the fighters' safety and well-being."

Shine and the fighters who were slated to participate in the event continue to trade barbs in the press with Shine claiming the fighters were taken care of (with 25 or 35% of their show money) and some fighters claiming they haven't received a dime.

Shine has claimed that it plans to put on another event this summer, but their website continues to promote Worlds Collide.

Shine's appeal of the ruling was dismissed, and Don King got his money back from the court.  Sadly, the court issued him a check.  No word on whether the duffel bags were returned.

The Lessons for Promoters

1. Do everything you can to make sure that your fighters are not under contract with someone else.

2. If you get a letter threatening litigation, take it seriously.  Sometimes, such letters are a bluff, but it's tough to go into an event with the threat of an injunction hanging overhead.

3. Most importantly, if you're a promoter, never EVER ignore the Athletic Commission.

Square Ring Sues Zuffa and Big Country

The internet is abuzz about the UFC suing Bellator, but in another less publicized lawsuit, the shoe is on the other foot.    Square Ring, Inc. (the promotional company of former boxing champion Roy Jones Junior) has sued Zuffa, LLC and Roy "Big Country" Nelson for allegedly interfering with a contract Square Ring had with Nelson.

More details on the case are in Robert Joyner's article on MMAFA.tv.

Zuffa Sues Bellator for Theft of Trade Secrets

As first reported by Kevin Iole at Yahoo! Sports, the parent company of the UFC has sued Bellator, alleging that the rival promotion wrongfully gained access to, and used confidential contracts and other documents created by Zuffa.  The alleged source of the disclosure is MMA superagent Ken Pavia.

Justin Klein, author of The Fight Lawyer blog, provides an interesting and detailed analysis of the lawsuit here.

More to come....

MMA Academy Sued When Student Allegedly Commits Murder

An 18-year old was murdered in Hawaii in August 2009, and new developments in the case have some interesting legal implications. Corbit Ahn was taken into custody about a week after the murder of Iris Rodrigues-Kaikana and was held at the Oahu Community Correctional Center.

The father of the victim has sued Ahn, which is not unusual as civil suits for wrongful death often follow murders.  What is unusual is that the mixed martial arts academy where Ahn trained has also been sued.  I suspect that the plaintiff's attorney assumed that Ahn (who has an 0-1 MMA record and an extensive criminal record) would be "judgment proof," meaning that even if the lawsuit was successful, there could be no recovery of assets since Ahn would have no money and no way to get any in prison. 

I have not yet seen a copy of the lawsuit, but the most likely legal theory is that the academy gave Ahn the skills he used to kill Rodrigues-Kaikana.  As other commenters have noted, this theory has huge holes. (Can you successfully sue a driviing school if your loved one is the victim of a hit and run?) Even so, the case highlights the need for MMA schools and instructors to have insurance that not only covers damages awards, but also the cost of  defending against a lawsuit.

In yet another odd twist to the case, Ahn could actully end up with some of his own assets.  He was recently assaulted at the OCCC and his attorney says the guards were in on it.  If there is any evidence to support that allegation, you can bet that Ahn will be involved in another lawsuit--this time as the plaintiff.

MMA Promotion Sued for Copyright Infringement

Tuff-N-Uff Productions Inc. and its President have been sued for copyright infringement.   According to the Las Vegas Sun, its rival newspaper Las Vegas Review-Journal has sued multiple parties for using the Review Journal's copyrighted content without permission.  In Tuff-N-Uff's case, the promotion allegedly posted a Review-Journal article about a Tuff-N-Uff fight on the Tuff-N-Uff website. I don't know the exact article at issue, but I was able to find at least one such article on the Tuff-N-Uff website. It appears to be an exact cut and paste of an article that appeared on the Review Journal's website.

The Sun quotes Tuff-N-Uff's vice president as saying "Tuff-N-Uff didn't intend to infringe on copyrights and had taken steps to ensure stories posted on its website properly credited the source."  Therein lies the problem.

Many people believe that reproducing someone else's article or other content is okay as long as you note the source.  That is simply not true. 

Giving credit to the original author just means you are not guilty of plagiarism.  It does not mean you have not committed copyright infringement. In fact, it might just make it easier to get caught.  

In the case of the Review Journal, the newspaper assigned its copyright in the article to a company called Righthaven, LLC.  That entity uses software to find people infringing a copyright and then sues.  So, citing the Review-Journal as a source just makes it easier for Righthaven to find you.  I have no knowledge of the contract between the Review-Journal and Righthaven, but I would not be surprised if the Review-Journal gets a cut of any damages award or settlement that Righthaven gets from the infringers.

The moral of the story is that if you don't have permission (and you're not engaging in "fair use" by, for example, quoting a bit of an article to offer critique on the article) then you can't just reproduce someone else's article, photograph, song, etc.  That's why you see MixedMartialArtsLawBlog posts linking to other articles, rather than just cutting and pasting them onto this site.

So, I've explained why a newspaper, can sue someone for reproducing an article and giving due credit--and thus publicity-- to the paper, but I can't explain why it would want to in this instance.  Perhaps if it was the Review-Journal directly making the decisions on who to sue (rather than Righthaven) this would have been taken care of with a polite phone call and a license to re-post the article in exchange for a promise by Tuff-N-Uff to place an ad for its next fight in the paper.

As far as this blog goes, as long as you give me credit as the original author of an article, re-post to your heart's content.  I just want people to hear what I have to say, whether on this site or somewhere else where a reader chooses to re-post my content.  So, Underground, you're safe.  I have plenty of people to sue in my day job.

DMX is a Rapper/Actor/Boxer/Defendant

Rapper DMX has been sued for $1 million backing out of a celebrity boxing match that was part of a Boxing/MMA card called "Alabama Pride" slated for December 12, 2009 in Alabama.   

Documents posted by TMZ (add requisite grain of salt) indicate that DMX wanted the "fight" staged in a way that protected both his safety and his reputation.   While Thunder Promotions is not above advertising a fight featuring a rapper whose best martial arts credential is that he co-starred with Steven Seagal, it does draw the line at fixed fights.  DMX is out.  Coolio is in.  Really. 

Several lessons here:

1.  Before you promote a fight, make sure those on the card actually plan to take part in a real fight.  (Of course, this may have happened here as a lawsuit has been filed, but see Number 2.) 

2.  The amount of damages sought in a lawsuit often have nothing to do with reality.  (19,000 people wouldn't pay to see DMX rap, let alone fight.)      

3.  If you are going to send out a document that makes your client look really bad, a confidentiality provision in that same document does not help you if the other party decides to go public with it instead of signing it.

TUF 10's Zak Jensen Sued for Wrongful Death

Zak Jensen has been named as a defendant in a wrongful death lawsuit filed in Minnesota state court.  The suit involves an altercation that Jensen had with 20-year-old Josh Gunderson in Mexico during a spring break trip in March 2009 when Jensen was serving as a bodyguard.

Jensen traveled to Puerto Vallarta with Gunderson and 19-year-old Ashley Jones.  At some point, while the three were sharing a room, Gunderson allegedly tried to kiss Jones while she was in bed and Jensen pulled him off.  From there, accounts differ, ranging from there being no fight to Jensen engaging in a confrontation in self defense.    

According to the Pioneer Press's account of the Mexican police report, Jensen stated to authorities:

I grabbed Josh by the shirt and took him off of (her) ... then he went to the bathroom, closed the door, and I stayed with (Jones) consoling her, and after a few minutes, I heard a loud noise," Jensen is quoted as saying in the Mexican police report. "I opened the door and that is when I saw Josh laid out on the floor of the bathroom.

According to a witness statement recounted by the Star Tribune, Jensen told the following to a hotel concierge:

"I was sleeping and I heard Ashley screaming and saying 'Get off of me,' so I got up and I saw Josh on top of her, he was attacking her, I took him away from her and he attacked me so I just defended myself and told him to go away, and he walked in the direction of the bathroom," Jensen is quoted as telling Perez. "We heard a strong noise in the bathroom, so I walked there and I found the boy right there," he told Perez, pointing to Gunderson's body.

In sum, it seems that Gunderson passed out in the bathroom and ultimately died after aspirating his own vomit, but it is unclear whether it was due to his blood alcohol content of .12 or due to an altered mental state resulting from the alleged altercation with Jensen.  As with any litigation, it is important to keep in mind that the statements in the filed lawsuit are just allegations and the defendants have not yet had a chance to tell their side of the story in court.

Ashley Jones' father, Jason Jones, and an industrial cleaning company he owns called Sterling Systems are also named as defendants. Jensen was employed by Mr. Jones and/or Sterling Systems to serve as Mr Jones's chauffeur.  Accordingly, these defendants could arguably be held liable for Jensen's actions, depending largely on whether the actions were within the scope of Jensen's employment.  It is not unusual for a lawsuit to name multiple defendants in the hopes to find someone who is able to pay a damages award or settlement.  Here, a business owner presumably has deeper pockets than a 7-3 mixed martial artist.  

Jensen recently fought on national television on The Ultimate Fighter.  Jensen had no fights between Gunderson's death and his fight on the show.  Jensen also serves as a guest blogger recapping TUF 10 episodes for Cagewriter on Yahoo! Sports.  

One has to wonder whether Yahoo!, Spike TV, or the UFC knew anything about the incident before putting Jensen in the national spotlight.  Gunderson's death did get a fair amount of publicity in his native Minnesota, but early reports did not name Jensen.

School Sued Over Impromptu MMA Matchups

A high school in Blue Springs Missouri is being sued because some students began MMA-style fighting in the gym when their scheduled wrestling practice was canceled. (Video of some of the fights that allegedly occurred that day is available here.)  Predictably, one student was injured and his family is now suing the school, its superintendent, its athletic director, the head wrestling coach, and an assistant coach who was allegedly present when the fights took place.

According to the Kansas City Star:

The lawsuit alleges that the Blue Springs wrestling program promoted extreme fighting and created Wildcat (school’s mascot) wrestling T-shirts that featured the Ultimate Fighting Championship emblem. Also, the school once employed a wrestling assistant coach, Matt Cox, who has since started a career as an MMA fighter.

Interestingly, the reason that Matt Cox (also known as Chris Cox) is a former wrestling coach at the school is that he was fired in 2006 for his own participation in mixed martial arts.  (I can't locate the original article on this story, but it was reprinted at MMAUniverse.)

Although the school will argue that the activity was not sanctioned and that it disapproves of MMA (as evidenced by its prior firing of Cox), I think the school is in hot water here.  The activity allegedly occurred on school grounds in the presence of a school employee.  Whether or not you think that juveniles should be allowed to participate in MMA (a subject for a future MMALB.com post) the bottom line here is that these kids didn't have parental permission.  It doesn't matter if the sport involved is MMA, wrestling, or cheerleading--starting the competition before mom or dad has signed off is a sure way to find yourself in court.  

"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. 

Square Ring Sues UStream for Pay-Per-View Piracy

Square Ring, Inc., the promotional company owned by Roy Jones, Jr., was the entity behind "March Badness" a hybrid boxing/MMA card March 22, 2009, that featured Bobby Lashley in the main event.    Square Ring has now sued UStream for copyright infringement, alleging that the company knowingly allowed users to upload and illegally watch streaming footage of the pay-per-view event.

Copyright laws prohibit copying or re-broadcasting someone else's program.  Thus, if UStream was directly putting copyrighted MMA events online, it would certainly be liable.  The grey area here is that UStream isn't posting any content directly.  Like YouTube or a typical internet bulletin board, users post the content that appears on UStream.  Typically, when a company just provides the space for others to speak, it is protected by "safe harbor" provisions in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.  The protection is not absolute, however, as companies like Napster found out.

Square Ring's legal theory is, in a nutshell, that UStream knew copyright infringement was taking place and allowed it to happen.  In fact, before March Badness, Square Ring warned companies like UStream that it would crack down on internet piracy

Pirating pay-view events is as old as the events themselves, but the internet presents a whole new set of challenges. It's especially difficult for MMA promoters who serve a young, tech-savvy fan base.  Dana White has acknowledged that the UFC had an "incredible underground internet fan base," reported to have kept the sport of MMA alive in the lean years when its pay-per-view events were banned by cable distributors

The UFC has attemped to capitalize on the marketplace of the internet, offering live broadcasts of UFC events on Yahoo! for $44.95.  The flipside is that it also has to deal with mirror sites, like this one registered to a user in Istanbul, which offer the same broadcasts for substantially lower fees.

Like Viacom's ongoing lawsuit against YouTube, this case could have a dramatic impact not only on how MMA fans watch future broadcasts, but how user-generated content is distributed on the web in general. 

Reports of Kimo's Death Greatly Exaggerated (and Defamatory?)

Erroneous reports of the death of UFC pioneer Kimo Leopoldo spread like wildfire on Tuesday.  Numerous MMA and mainstream sites picked up the story, with TMZ.com going so far as to "confirm" the death. Yahoo!'s Kevin Iole provides a great recount of the hoax.    

One of the most interesting aspects of this story is the way that technology was involved.  The hoax itself began as a single post on an online MMA forum at The Underground.  Ever more fascinating, however, is that this may be the first hoax that was debunked over Twitter.  Both Iole and CBSSports.com's Denny Burkholder provided frequent tweets as they were investigating the story (as chronicled by Bloody Elbow.)

Now that Kimo has held a press conference to end all doubts, the legal wrangling begins.  As Kimo's manager reported to MMAJunkie.com:

You can see the posts from the original people and the original guy who started it. That gentleman was banned (from the site). We're trying to summons his name so we can sue him. We're not taking this lightly.

As it turns out, a summons (subpoena) won't be necessary as the poster's identity has already been revealed by The Smoking Gun who clearly relished the chance to point out the original faulty reporting by its main competitor. 

But, if it had been necessary, could Kimo have forced the forum to release the poster's identity?  The answer is likely yes.  Although this is a very unsettled area of law, one of the leading cases is Dendrite v. Doe, 775 A.2d 756 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 2001), which laid out some factors for a judge to consider in deciding whether to enforce a subpoena designed to reveal the identity of an anonymous poster.  Although it is a delicate balancing act, if a party can lay out strong evidence that a wrongful act was committed, the poster's identity can generally be revealed.  The First Amendment does protect anonymous speech, but it does not protect defamation.

Will Dana White Be Ibarra's Next Target?

The Ibarra defamation lawsuit is interesting in that Ibarra sued not only Tito Ortiz (who allegedly made the defamatory comments), but also Punch Drunk Gamer (who conducted the interview in which the comments were made) and just about every MMA blog that subsequently reported Ortiz's allegations including Bloody Elbow, Five Ounce of Pain and Yahoo!.

How can Ibarra do this?  Generally, someone (or some blog) that repeats a defamatory statement is just as liable as the person who originally made the statements.  There is a principle called "neutral reportage" which sometimes protects media outlets that simply report that X made an allegation about Y, but this principle does not apply in California unless the person defamed is a "public figure."  If Ibarra is found to be a "public figure" his lawsuit likely fails anyway, so the "neutral reportage" doctrine offers little additional help for the blogosphere in this case.

Although I enjoy litigating defamation cases, I have no desire to be the defendant in one.  Therefore, I will not repeat Dana White's comments about Ibarra, which can be found at cagewriter. (Warning - as usual, White's comments contain profanity.)  I will however be keeping an eye out for a future Ibarra lawsuit listing cagewriter, YouTube, and ESPN Radio 1100 as defendants. 

Ibarra Lawsuit is the Pot Calling the Kettle Black

For a good explanation on the weaknesses with Juanito Ibarra's lawsuit against Tito Ortiz, see Todd Martin's piece on MMAPayout.com.  The article explains that to have any real chance of success, Ibarra must prove he is a "private figure" rather than a "public figure."  

One factor generally considered in determining whether someone is a public figure is whether he has "access to the media."  This makes sense.  If news outlets are willing to report what someone says, that person has an easier time refuting any false statements made about them.  (I, however, do not have "access to the media."  That's why I have a blog.)

As an example of Ibarra's "access to the media," I found an interview Ibarra gave to a website called ThaFormula.com.  The most interesting thing about the interview is that Ibarra was hardly shy about sharing his own negative opinions of others in the MMA world.   Is Ortiz calling Ibarra a "thief" any more derogatory than Ibarra saying Chuck Liddell was intimidated by Rampage or that Vitor Belfort lacked heart?