www.411mania.com
|  News |  Columns |  TV Reports |  Video Reviews |  Title History |  Hall of Fame |  News Report |  The Dunn List |
SPOTLIGHTS  SPOTLIGHTS
MOVIES/TV
// Watch: Test Footage For Deadpool Movie Leaks Online
MUSIC
// Orlando Bloom Allegedly Throws a Punch at Justin Bieber
WRESTLING
// Full WWE Smackdown Taping Results (SPOILERS)
MMA
// Why Does MMA Have Rules If No One Follows Them? – Looking At Fighters Missing Weight
GAMES
// Watch: New Campaign Trailer For Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare




 HOT TOPICS
//  CM Punk
//  John Cena
//  Triple H
//  Hulk Hogan
//  Randy Orton
//  Christian
SYNDICATE  SYNDICATE



411mania RSS Feeds





Follow 411mania on Twitter!




Add 411 On Facebook
 


 
 411mania » Wrestling » News

Advertisement
UPDATED: Update on WWE Court Case vs. Bootleggers
Posted by Larry Csonka on 04.03.2014



UPDATE: WWE has issued the following statement about the decision:

"It is customary practice for all touring shows to ask for a temporary restraining order to prevent their fans from being sold counterfeit, inferior goods. Merchandise sales are important to the promoter, as well as to the arena or the stadium in which they play. Sales of legitimate merchandise generate revenue for the promoter, the arena and to the local municipality. This is the first time that WWE has experienced a negative decision for a temporary restraining order by a federal judge. Caveat emptor!"


ORIGINAL: According to The Hollywood Reporter, WWE filed a lawsuit against "various anonymous defendants" that they asserted were bootlegging unauthorized merchandise at WrestleMania. The company was hoping to be able to seize goods of people selling their trademarked items, which they have been able to do in the past.

They will not be allowed to do so this year as U.S. District Judge Helen Berrigan issued a ruling that denied WWE's attempt to control the sale of its merchandise within a five-mile radius of The SuperDome, which is the location of WrestleMania 30. The judge stated the following…

"The problem with Plaintiff's request is apparent once one recalls that the order it requests is not directed against a single named, identified, or even described person—all the defendants are John Does, and Plaintiff provides no particular information about the identity of any of them. At best, Plaintiff defines Defendants almost tautologically: Defendants are anyone who would be a proper defendant within broad geographic and temporal limits."

The full story is available here.





MUST-READ 411 STORIES:

The Best Batman Gadgets

Orlando Bloom Throws Punch At Bieber!

Lindsay Lohan Snaps Bikini Selfie


comments powered by Disqus









www.41mania.com
Copyright (c) 2011 411mania.com, LLC. All rights reserved.
Click here for our privacy policy. Please help us serve you better, fill out our survey.
Use of this site signifies your agreement to our terms of use.