Vince McMahon bans all WWE talent from using their likeness on third parties such as Twitch, Cameo..

dh86

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
23,705
Reputation
930
Daps
53,610
Reppin
Detroit
So I read on another forum that Mike Lowe said on his Twitch that they were told to not use their WWE names on Twitch or Cameo. Basically to change it to their real names hence Paige changing her's last night.

That makes more sense. Hopefully all this outrage is overblown.

That doesn’t add up to what was in the statement though. WWE used to have a 900 line back in the day where wrestlers had pre recorded “personal” messages for fans and they had virtual access a couple weeks ago so it’s obvious that WWE will have their own thing on WWE.com where they’ll sell the same thing for a lot more.
 

Max.

Banned
WOAT
Joined
Jun 23, 2015
Messages
33,993
Reputation
3,196
Daps
102,358
Yeah just seen that Mia Yim and Zelina Vega have changed their names on Twitch as well.

I guess the reports weren’t clarified at first it seems and were over-exaggerated.

So basically these cacs fake outraged for a minute
 

Thavoiceofthevoiceless

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Messages
43,915
Reputation
5,053
Daps
135,811
Reppin
The Voiceless Realm
well then tough shyt McMahon.... she’s an independent contractor and can take non-wrestling related work and sponsorships with anyone she wants. An energy drink sponsorship has absolutely nothing to do with WWE or pro-wrestling.

None of WWE’s threats to the talent would hold up. At the end of the day they are independent contractors.

You can’t hire a plumber to do work on your house and then demand to them that they only do work on your house and no one else’s.

I get the point in what they are trying to say though. The wrestlers WWE name is more valuable than their personal name even to the wrestlers. They are eventually using it to profit without WWE getting a cut of the profits.

It’s no different in a wrestler leaving the WWE and having to change your name as they own it.
 

dh86

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
23,705
Reputation
930
Daps
53,610
Reppin
Detroit
I get the point in what they are trying to say though. The wrestlers WWE name is more valuable than their personal name even to the wrestlers. They are eventually using it to profit without WWE getting a cut of the profits.

It’s no different in a wrestler leaving the WWE and having to change your name as they own it.

Even the wrestlers under their real name like Cena signed it over to WWE for the purposes of merchandising for the duration of the contract , that’s why Brock merch was yanked off WWE.com when all of his responsibilities lapsed. Thing is, you can’t sign something with illegal language and have it hold up. If a wrestler sues before the statue of limitations elapse it’ll be bad for Vince.
 

Thavoiceofthevoiceless

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Messages
43,915
Reputation
5,053
Daps
135,811
Reppin
The Voiceless Realm
Even the wrestlers under their real name like Cena signed it over to WWE for the purposes of merchandising for the duration of the contract , that’s why Brock merch was yanked off WWE.com when all of his responsibilities lapsed. Thing is, you can’t sign something with illegal language and have it hold up. If a wrestler sues before the statue of limitations elapse it’ll be bad for Vince.

Which is why you see WWE rarely have a wrestler go by their real name. Cena and Brock are two of the rare occasions.

I can’t blame WWE for wanting to be strict in how the WWE name they created (in most cases) is used. The problem comes in is that the majority of wrestlers bottom lines are going to be effected since they will have to use their legal name. Most people don’t know a wrestlers legal name and even then, the media still refers to them by their WWE name.
 
Last edited:

The Amerikkkan Idol

The Amerikkkan Nightmare
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
13,619
Reputation
3,522
Daps
36,547
This is why I'm #NoWatchGang :sas2:

3DDErwS.gif
 

El_Mero_Mero

All Star
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
5,684
Reputation
-1,112
Daps
7,213
Reppin
NULL
Before I read this thread, I kind of see where he's coming from.

Can you imagine if Ultimate Warrior would've been doing cooking shows online, Kamala would've been doing Cameo using his James Harris voice, etc. I wouldn't be able to take their characters seriously in the ring.

I'm not saying that I agree with his point because things are different now in this day and age, but I do understand it.
 

GunRanger

Veteran
Joined
May 17, 2014
Messages
31,008
Reputation
4,624
Daps
102,529
Before I read this thread, I kind of see where he's coming from.

Can you imagine if Ultimate Warrior would've been doing cooking shows online, Kamala would've been doing Cameo using his James Harris voice, etc. I wouldn't be able to take their characters seriously in the ring.

I'm not saying that I agree with his point because things are different now in this day and age, but I do understand it.
Kayfabe is dead and has been for 18 years.
 

R=G

Street Terrorist
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
123,430
Reputation
8,538
Daps
145,966
Reppin
Westcoast
WWE sent a statement to 411 about the reports and their stance on matter. It reads:
Much like Disney and Warner Bros., WWE creates, promotes and invests in its intellectual property, i.e. the stage names of performers like The Fiend Bray Wyatt, Roman Reigns, Big E and Braun Strowman. It is the control and exploitation of these characters that allows WWE to drive revenue, which in turn enables the company to compensate performers at the highest levels in the sports entertainment industry. Notwithstanding the contractual language, it is imperative for the success of our company to protect our greatest assets and establish partnerships with third parties on a companywide basis, rather than at the individual level, which as a result will provide more value for all involved.
 

MenacingMonk

Tranquilo
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
62,366
Reputation
7,958
Daps
135,981
Reppin
West where the Sunsets
I’m surprised this didn’t happen LONG ago. The wrasslers don’t own the E names, so it would make sense for the E to grab a little outta the pockets when one of them uses their name to make some dough on the side. Now how much they take is the real question.

Not sure how the contracts are, but if it says the E owns the name, but no mention of profit taken if made outside of the deal then I wonder if they can still do this. Or if a new deal has to be made. :jbhmm:
 
Top