You heard it here first folks
Ok, not really.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Though I’m curious why the suit was filed in Dallas (?), when both the UFC and Couture are based in Las Vegas.
Hopefully a judge will clarify the date after which Randy can fight for someone other then the UFC, and then he and Fedor can get it on. OR, maybe that will cause the UFC to realize that that fight is inevitable and agree to do it under the guise of a co-promotion with M-1. (Ha! LIke that’ll ever happen)!
I severely doubt a co-promotion will take place. I would assume the lawsuit is in Dallas because that is where Cuban resides.
It seem like the UFC is grasping at straws to prevent their former golden boy from earning any dough. Would Randy have to fight two more times in the UFC before fighting elsewhere regardless of time frame?
This is quite simply a direct challenge seeking a legal decision on Zuffa’s contracts. Basically, Randy is saying that he can wait out his contract till later this year, and then fight wherever. Zuffa is saying that if he never fulfills the contract, by fighting his last two fights in the UFC, he can never escape it.
In these situation judges always, always, rule in favor of the right of an individual to make a living. Mark Cuban is very bright, and this will undoubtedly free up Randy to fight later this year, or even earlier. This is also a very dangerous road for Zuffa to go down, because a lot stuff behind the curtains is about to become public record.
[quote]Donut62 wrote:
This is quite simply a direct challenge seeking a legal decision on Zuffa’s contracts. Basically, Randy is saying that he can wait out his contract till later this year, and then fight wherever. Zuffa is saying that if he never fulfills the contract, by fighting his last two fights in the UFC, he can never escape it.
In these situation judges always, always, rule in favor of the right of an individual to make a living. Mark Cuban is very bright, and this will undoubtedly free up Randy to fight later this year, or even earlier. This is also a very dangerous road for Zuffa to go down, because a lot stuff behind the curtains is about to become public record.[/quote]
This is a really smart move on their behalf.
You are right.
You can’t stop a man from making a living and in this case the court will almost certainly find the contract too restrictive.
I have been sued over non-competes before so have first hand experience…heh.
^Interesting, something professionally?
I don’t remember the specifics, nor care to look them up at the moment, but Brock Lesnar was in an almost indentical situation with WWE when he left to go compete in New Japan. WWE said basically the samething Zuffa is, and the court told the WWE to go fuck itself.
[quote]Donut62 wrote:
^Interesting, something professionally?
[/quote]
Yeah. About seven years ago I joined a firm and the senior partner decided he could loosely interpret our fee agreement.
He screwed me out of around $35K in 3 months. It was ridiculous but one of those things that I didn’t see coming and by the time it had happened had no leverage.
I decided to cut my losses and left. Being the assholes they are they then tried to assert a non-compete.
What was hilarious about the whole thing is I have a friend who is a promininet Business/Comm attorney up here and he handled it for a real reasonable flat fee because he hated the firm that was representing these guys and was pissed about what they did.
Long story short, their billing rate was around $400 an hour and he literally did everything he could to make their lawyers do more work. It was a huge source of entertainment for him.
They couldn’t touch me and ended up having to pay damages, as well.
About a year later I heard through the grape vine it cost them just over 6 figures to pursue, without indemnity. It cost me $10K plus about $3K in expenses which I got back plus what they owed me.
Hahahahahahahahahhaha HA!
The ironic thing is had they left me alone I probably would not have pursued them for the $$.
[quote]Donut62 wrote:
^Interesting, something professionally?
I don’t remember the specifics, nor care to look them up at the moment, but Brock Lesnar was in an almost indentical situation with WWE when he left to go compete in New Japan. WWE said basically the samething Zuffa is, and the court told the WWE to go fuck itself.[/quote]
Not really the same thing. Lesnar actually signed a very restrictive non-compete in conjunction with being let out of his WWE contract early. The courts did find the non-compete to be overbroad and struck it down.
Randy is still under a valid contract with UFC. He definitely needs a court to make a decision regarding the interpretation of the contract, but this is NOT a non-compete situation.
[quote]TJN713 wrote:
Donut62 wrote:
^Interesting, something professionally?
I don’t remember the specifics, nor care to look them up at the moment, but Brock Lesnar was in an almost indentical situation with WWE when he left to go compete in New Japan. WWE said basically the samething Zuffa is, and the court told the WWE to go fuck itself.
Not really the same thing. Lesnar actually signed a very restrictive non-compete in conjunction with being let out of his WWE contract early. The courts did find the non-compete to be overbroad and struck it down.
Randy is still under a valid contract with UFC. He definitely needs a court to make a decision regarding the interpretation of the contract, but this is NOT a non-compete situation.[/quote]
There are two contracts here, and one of them is a promotional contract that has a no-compete clause which is the issue I believe. The contract hasn’t been made public yet, but his fight contract expires this year, which isn’t a point of contention, but what is the no-compete clause on a promotional contract that says unless he fulfills his contract he can’t do anything affiliated with any MMA organization.
In fact, they are suing him right now for simply being on camera at an HDNet fight, and are claiming that people can’t even compete in the IFL from his gym because the gym bears his name.
[quote]TJN713 wrote:
Donut62 wrote:
^Interesting, something professionally?
I don’t remember the specifics, nor care to look them up at the moment, but Brock Lesnar was in an almost indentical situation with WWE when he left to go compete in New Japan. WWE said basically the samething Zuffa is, and the court told the WWE to go fuck itself.
Not really the same thing. Lesnar actually signed a very restrictive non-compete in conjunction with being let out of his WWE contract early. The courts did find the non-compete to be overbroad and struck it down.
Randy is still under a valid contract with UFC. He definitely needs a court to make a decision regarding the interpretation of the contract, but this is NOT a non-compete situation.[/quote]
They are disputing a restrictive covenant in his contract which they feel keeps him from fighting in or promoting another organization.
Direct from the article: “Zuffa sued Couture and then filed an injunction against him, claiming he has violated the non-compete clause by appearing on rival promotion�??s television shows to do interviews, in specific shows on Cuban�??s HDNet.”
Trust me when I tell you this is exactly what happens when a company pursues a non-compete. They file suit and then file an injunction for the court to order a cease and desist.
It is a non-compete issue (and no I am not an attorney, I just play one on the internet…heh.)