Update on the Warrior and WWE lawsuit

[Brain Of F'n J]

dothebird said:

Lawyer: "Please state your name."

Warrior: "When the thunderbolts appeared and the elephants stampeded across the tundra, there was only one force left in the multiverse, the only force capable of handling the destruction of the twelve planets and all the comets, the only force of survival and destruction that understood the alignment of the desert moon and it was the WAAAARRRRRIIIAHHHHHHHH!!!!!"

Lawyer: "Your honor, the defense rests."

Judge: "This man is batcrap crazy. I award the case to the WWE."

Warrior: "WAAAARRRRRRRRRIIIIIIAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!"

That Warrior introduction had too much English. It needs more Warrior language, like "destrucity" and other mangled malaprops.

Jed Shaffer
~Scary idea: Backlund vs. Warrior in a debate.

[Deleted]

Everything in the DVD was opinion, nothing can really be considered a lie.

I agree that it was a cheap thing for WWE to do. You supposedly want nothing to do with this guy, yet have no problem exploiting his name for a quick cash grab?

But I doubt Warrior has a legit case.

[boiledewokthe3rd]

I don't believe this is a real lawsuit.

[skskillz]

godz said:

I usually agree with ya, skillz, but not this time.

And I'm not just some blind Warrior hater, I liked the guy in his day and can admit it, but the WWE should be allowed to present their opinions. They say Warrior sucked in the ring, didn't appreciate his spot, etc etc....well, that's not impossible! I'm sure they've pushed plenty of guys who didn't deserve it, or who didn't work hard. That doesn't mean he wasn't a success, but it can mean that his peers and co-workers didn't care for him.

Plus like others have mentioned, its not like the DVD 'adversely affected his indy bookings'. Has he even been involved in the wrestling business since his horrid WCW run?

Warrior still makes money off his name though, whether it's by independently selling his merchandise, public speaking, etc. By dragging his name through the mud, the WWE has potentially hurt Warrior's character (i.e. one of his main sources of income). I'm not going to pretend that I know a lot about law, but I do know defamation of character and/or slander was all over the DVD. It's up to Warrior to prove some of the statements to be fabricated (if they were).

As others have mentioned, the WWE was set to release a similar DVD about Bret Hart before Bret agreed to work on the project. That's blackmail. "Either work with us or we'll bury your entire legacy". That's disgusting. All the wrestlers have are their names. Terry Bollea is not a star, Hulk Hogan is. Steve Williams is not a star, Steve Austin is. If you do anything to destroy the characters, it will instantly kill the earning potential of the actual people. In wrestling, the character and the person are pretty much the same as far as money is concerned.

The only right the WWE had was to show the footage. The Warrior can't do anything about that. But slander, defamation, and libel are all over this, and that's the case Warrior can present. Again, whether he wins is a different matter.

I liked the Warrior growing up. I think he's scum as a human being. But that doesn't mean he deserved to have his name buried in the fashion that it was.

[Johnny Danger (Godz)]

And what you've said brings about another interesting point. I only watched the DVD once and deleted it (I DLed a torrent) but I dont recall them mentioning Warrior's public speaking career. Since he is no longer an active wrestler, did they REALLY hurt his current means of supporting himself? And if they did, did they hurt it any more than Warrior himself does DURING his "speeches"?

[boiledewokthe3rd]

godz said:

And what you've said brings about another interesting point. I only watched the DVD once and deleted it (I DLed a torrent) but I dont recall them mentioning Warrior's public speaking career. Since he is no longer an active wrestler, did they REALLY hurt his current means of supporting himself? And if they did, did they hurt it any more than Warrior himself does DURING his "speeches"?

I think JR said something like " I don't know what he's up to now, public speaking or something", that was all.

[PTBartman]

reiko22 said:

I hope that the jury will consist of 12 gay people.

Would love to see the look on the face of vinnie mac if he walked in and the jury consisted of:

Wayne Ferris
Lex Luger
Bruno Sanmartino
Jesse Ventura
Randy Savage
Bret Hart
Rita Chatterson
Chyna
X-Pac
Mark Merro
Brian James
Monty Sopp

[Bram wants to 'urt you]

bookerhatman said:

faceturn said:

Going out to seminars and riling up the crowds by saying things that will PO the majority of people in attendence may seem like the guy is a few drips short of a piss, but at the end of the day, it also helps to get him further bookings on the lecture circuit.

The WWE is making money off the back of Warrior's name and reputation, yet also offering the standpoint that the man was a jerk and a goof and should never have been a wrestler, or while he was a wrestler, that he was unpopular among other wrestlers.

The thing is, there's a contradiction in those statements : WWE claims he's a loon, so he is less hired to do lectures - Yet in those lectures, he acts like a total crazy bastard and thus secures more lectures?

It boggles me mind.

Yeah, I get where you're coming from. There's a very subtle difference in context though;

Consider the statement: Warrior is a crazy bastard.

Which seems like a straightforward thing to say, until you give it context:

1. Warrior had the chance to make zillions of dollars and be the biggest draw the wrestling world has ever seen. But he had no respect for the business, the fans or any of his co workers.


2. Warrior never knew his father, as he was the product of a drunken fling his mother had. In later life, he suffered from a number of medical issues relating to his mental health including acute depression and moderate schizophrenic tendencies. Numerous therapy sessions have helped Warrior come to terms with his problems and address the issues he had with his parents.

Both of the above can be read as explanations to the statement that 'Warrior is a crazy bastard', but one has a far more sympathetic tone, and is more likely to generate interest based on who the man is, rather than something that he once did.

WWE is cashing in on a tiny part of Warrior's career, yet a part that established him and gave him a springboard to do other things from.

The fact that the guy gets on stage and says all the wrong things hasn't stopped him from making a decent living out of it; I'm sure a lot of people actually attend his lectures hoping that he will say something outrageous or ridiculous. Whatever the reason, people still go to see him, and he still gets paid for doing it.

The WWE attempting to cash in on a very small part of his career, in terms of how long he was an active WWE wrestler, and subsequently ridiculing him for whatever reason they choose, may in turn damage his current career.

The old adage; if something is good, people don't tell their friends about it, if something is bad, they tell their friends, family and anyone who will listen.

[amsiraK]

brentreznor said:

Everything in the DVD was opinion, nothing can really be considered a lie.

I agree that it was a cheap thing for WWE to do. You supposedly want nothing to do with this guy, yet have no problem exploiting his name for a quick cash grab?

But I doubt Warrior has a legit case.

As everything was couched as opinion, it would be hard for him to prove otherwise.

The problem is that Vince considers himself untouchable. Have they ever LOST a lawsuit? Since he's "the only game in town" and seemingly above everything, everything he does is OK. Blackmail? Sure. What can you do? I own the footage. Either participate or get buried. What consequences does he have to face up to.

It'll be interesting to see where Crazy Jim can get with this. It would make for good precedent for him to succeed. We'd be spared "From Macho to Nacho" and other illustrious video titles.

[Johnny Danger (Godz)]

karisma888 said:

brentreznor said:

Everything in the DVD was opinion, nothing can really be considered a lie.

I agree that it was a cheap thing for WWE to do. You supposedly want nothing to do with this guy, yet have no problem exploiting his name for a quick cash grab?

But I doubt Warrior has a legit case.

As everything was couched as opinion, it would be hard for him to prove otherwise.

The problem is that Vince considers himself untouchable. Have they ever LOST a lawsuit? Since he's "the only game in town" and seemingly above everything, everything he does is OK. Blackmail? Sure. What can you do? I own the footage. Either participate or get buried. What consequences does he have to face up to.

It'll be interesting to see where Crazy Jim can get with this. It would make for good precedent for him to succeed. We'd be spared "From Macho to Nacho" and other illustrious video titles.

But Kari to make that they'd have to first admit that the mythical Randy Savage exists, and I don't think they are willing to do that.

[skskillz]

godz said:

And what you've said brings about another interesting point. I only watched the DVD once and deleted it (I DLed a torrent) but I dont recall them mentioning Warrior's public speaking career. Since he is no longer an active wrestler, did they REALLY hurt his current means of supporting himself? And if they did, did they hurt it any more than Warrior himself does DURING his "speeches"?

I won't argue that Warrior doesn't make an ass out of himself during his speeches. No argument there. He's Archie Bunker without the lovable side. My main point is that he still makes money off his name, so any slander to that name in a public setting is potentially hurting his chances of making money off that name. Let's face it, his "queering" outburst didn't stop his public speaking career. He's still selling his merchandise on EBay to make money (and the types of questions he gets from fans who were probably influenced by the DVD prove that it had a negative effect). He doesn't really have to be an active wrestler. Hogan is making money off his name (reality show and whatever other outside ventures he does). He wrestles once a year (if that). The name is more a marketing tool than a wrestling name.

It's one thing to say "Warrior didn't know how to wrestle", which is an opinion. It's another thing to say "he didn't know his father and never cared for him" and other nonsense the WWE put out on DVD. Hell, it may all be true, but if it's not, then Warrior can present that as defamation that impacted his relationship with members of his family (for example). Again, it's a case Warrior (and his lawyer) has to present logically, but it is a case nonetheless.

[Johnny Danger (Godz)]

great, now I'm thinking of Warrior as Archie Bunker

"MEATHEAD!!!!! IF YOU DON'T REMOVE YOURSELF FROM THE ULTIMATE CHAIR, I WILL ASSIMILATE ALL THE ENERGY OF ALL THE LITTLE WARRIORS IN PARTS UNKNOWN, SO THAT THEIR DESTRUCITY FLOWS THROUGH MY WARRIOR VEINS, AND I WILL BLITZKREIG YOU INTO OBLIVION....ya dumb pollock."

[Deleted]

ptbartman said:

reiko22 said:

I hope that the jury will consist of 12 gay people.

Would love to see the look on the face of vinnie mac if he walked in and the jury consisted of:

Wayne Ferris
Lex Luger
Bruno Sanmartino
Jesse Ventura
Randy Savage
Bret Hart
Rita Chatterson
Chyna
X-Pac
Mark Merro
Brian James
Monty Sopp

That doesn't make the jury work.

[JMA]

I have to agree with skillz here. I hate Warrior, but making a DVD solely to bad-mouth him is messed up. The fact that Vince can do this to wrestlers is just plain wrong.

[Jason Todd Grisham]

karisma888 said:

Have they ever LOST a lawsuit?

They lost to the Ultimate Warrior, after he took drastic measures and named himself... Warrior. Allowing to keep his character. That and of course they lost to the Pandas.

That's the only instances I can think of.

[skskillz]

godz said:

great, now I'm thinking of Warrior as Archie Bunker

"MEATHEAD!!!!! IF YOU DON'T REMOVE YOURSELF FROM THE ULTIMATE CHAIR, I WILL ASSIMILATE ALL THE ENERGY OF ALL THE LITTLE WARRIORS IN PARTS UNKNOWN, SO THAT THEIR DESTRUCITY FLOWS THROUGH MY WARRIOR VEINS, AND I WILL BLITZKREIG YOU INTO OBLIVION....ya dumb pollock."

;D

One of my favorite Bunker quotes:

"I never said a guy who wears glasses is a queer. A guy who wears glasses is a four-eyes; a guy who's a fag is a queer."

The filters will probably butcher that quote, but you can't tell me you can't picture Warrior saying that!

[MiLB Fan]

a2j88 said:

karisma888 said:

Have they ever LOST a lawsuit?

They lost to the Ultimate Warrior, after he took drastic measures and named himself... Warrior. Allowing to keep his character. That and of course they lost to the Pandas.

That's the only instances I can think of.

They also lost to Jesse Ventura, hence why they edit his commentary out of DVDs.

About that scenario someone posted earlier, regarding Warrior's reaction to losing the case: It'd be funny if he reacted in the same fashion as when Sherri asked him if he would give Randy Savage a title shot.

Judge: "This man is bat-crap crazy. I award the case to WWE."
Warrior (shakes his head violently): "NNNNOOOOOOOOO!!!"

And I agree with Karisma: If this goes to trial, it MUST be broadcast on Court TV!

[Confused Mark Wahlberg]

Warrior only has one choice when he loses this case...

Cause the Judge's plane to go into a NOSEDIVE

[Johnny Danger (Godz)]

skskillz said:

godz said:

great, now I'm thinking of Warrior as Archie Bunker

"MEATHEAD!!!!! IF YOU DON'T REMOVE YOURSELF FROM THE ULTIMATE CHAIR, I WILL ASSIMILATE ALL THE ENERGY OF ALL THE LITTLE WARRIORS IN PARTS UNKNOWN, SO THAT THEIR DESTRUCITY FLOWS THROUGH MY WARRIOR VEINS, AND I WILL BLITZKREIG YOU INTO OBLIVION....ya dumb pollock."

;D

One of my favorite Bunker quotes:

"I never said a guy who wears glasses is a vacuum. A guy who wears glasses is a four-eyes; a guy who's a boxer is a vacuum."

The filters will probably butcher that quote, but you can't tell me you can't picture Warrior saying that!

LOL. Thank god I know the original quote,or else I'd have no idea what a boxer has to do with a vacuum.


Or, how about what happens when Warrior is served dinner at The Imperial Dragon, and isn't given a fork?

Warrior: HOW AM I, THE ULTIMATE ONE, TO EAT WITH THESE CHINK PICK-UP-STICKS!? AAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!

[skskillz]

jma said:

I have to agree with skillz here. I hate Warrior, but making a DVD solely to bad-mouth him is messed up. The fact that Vince can do this to wrestlers is just plain wrong.

That's why it's imperative that Warrior wins this case. If the WWE ever released a DVD bad-mouthing Randy Savage, I'd go into a rage. This whole "you're either with us or we'll destroy your legacy" stuff has got to stop. If I have to root for the current incarnation of Ultimate Warrior to succeed for that to happen, then so be it.