WWF trademark dispute

The WWF trademark dispute involved the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) against the World Wrestling Federation (WWF) who had violated a prior international agreement over usage of the "WWF" initials.

On April 17, 2000, the Fund commenced proceedings in the High Court of Justice in England against the Federation, citing breaches of their 1994 international agreement, as the Fund was based in Switzerland, and the Federation was based in the United States. The court ruled in favor of the Fund on August 10, 2001, and the Federation abandoned their appeal petition to the House of Lords on May 6, 2002, renaming as World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).^[1]

On May 16, 2002, WWE chairman Vince McMahon appeared on TSN's Off the Record with Michael Landsberg, stating that wrestling's international expansion in the 1990s, as well as the advent of the Internet, had created unforeseen challenges when the Federation and the Fund initially agreed on the use of the "WWF" initials in 1989.^[2]

The World Wildlife Fund registered the "WWF" initials as a trademark in 1961. Despite changing its name internationally to the World Wildlife Fund for Nature in 1989, the Fund retained use of the "WWF" initials globally as its logo and in-print, and still referred to itself as the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) in the United States and Canada.^[3]

Originally founded as the Capitol Wrestling Corporation (CWC) in 1953, the wrestling promotion changed its name in 1963 to the World Wide Wrestling Federation (WWWF).^[4] In 1979, the WWWF rebranded as the World Wrestling Federation (WWF). The business primarily conducted operations in the United States.^[5]

On September 6, 1989, the Fund had filed for extensions of time to oppose a trademark application by the Federation for "WWF", on the grounds of potential confusion with their own registered "WWF" trademark.^[6]

On September 12, 1989, the Federation sent a letter to the Fund addressing its federal trademark application for the "WWF" mark in International Class 41 (for wrestling entertainment services). The International Class 41 also includes education, which the Fund were registered in.^[7] This marked the beginning of formal discussions between the two parties regarding the use of the "WWF" initials.^[8]

On September 26, 1989, both parties reached an agreement that the Federation would not use the "WWF" initials in the Times Roman typeface when the initials appeared alone, without the Federation's logo. In exchange, the Fund agreed not to oppose the Federation's federal trademark registration for "WWF" in Class 41.^[9]

By 1993, despite the 1989 agreement, both parties had been involved in further disputes, as the Federation had grown in popularity across Europe. Both the Fund and Federation had contested international trademark applications the other party had made. The Fund obtained an interim injunction against the distributor of the Federation's WWF Magazine in Switzerland citing trademark infringements.^[10]

On January 20, 1994, the Fund and the Federation formed a new agreement, including that the Federation would stop using the "WWF" initials in printed, written, or visual form in connection with its business, though allowances were made for pre-approved merchandise and publications.^[12] The Federation was also prohibited from filing any new trademarks with the "WWF" initials and had to cancel existing registrations, except for those associated with the Federation's “block" logo. The "block" logo was seen by the Fund to be less readable as "WWF", as it looked more like "WF". The Federation was allowed to occasionally use the initials in verbal contexts, such as referring to the “WWF champion", but was otherwise expected to avoid using them. Other terms included that business partners were required to exclusively refer to the company as the "World Wrestling Federation".^[13]

In 1997, the Federation launched WWF.com. Whilst the website used "World Wrestling Federation" in its title, the use of "WWF" in the domain name was problematic with the Fund.^[14] In this period, the Federation were battling their main rival, World Championship Wrestling (WCW), in the Monday Night War, and as such, wanted to introduce new branding.^[15] In November 1997, the Federation introduced a new logo at their Survivor Series pay-per-view event, dubbed the "scratch" logo, that separated the W's more than the previous "block" logo had, making the "WWF" initials appear more readable.^[16]

As a result of the two 1997 violations, legal friction between the two entities continued, including various cease and desist letters being sent from the Fund to the Federation in the late 1990s.^[17] In May 1999, a variation of the WWF "scratch" logo was used for a British Sky Box Office promotional advertisement relating to the WWF No Mercy live pay-per-view event from the Manchester Evening News Arena, splitting the "WW" from the "F" entirely. This logo was a one-off, and would not appear in any other footage or promotional material.^[18]

On April 17, 2000, the Fund commenced proceedings against the Federation at the High Court of Justice in England, claiming that the Federation had violated the 1994 agreement, particularly with their use of the WWF "scratch" logo, the WWF.com website domain, and other Internet-based endeavors using "WWF".^[19]

On August 10, 2001, the court ruled in favor of the Fund.^[20] The court found that the Federation had failed to comply with the 1994 agreement since at least 1997.^[21] The Federation filed against the decision in England's Court of Appeal on October 1, 2001.^[22]

On February 27, 2002, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Federation's challenge to the High Court of Justice's decision. However, the Federation was granted a stay by the Court of Appeal.^[23] The Federation announced on the same day that it would petition the House of Lords for an appeal.^[24]

On May 6, 2002, the Federation issued a statement, announcing that it would rebrand from World Wrestling Federation (WWF) to World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).^[25] In the same statement, Linda McMahon, CEO for WWE, said that the rebranding allowed for the company to emphasize its focus on entertainment, and the company also launched its "Get the F Out!" marketing campaign.^[26] The former WWF "scratch" logo was amended to omit the "F" (displaying as just "WW"). On June 10, 2002, the House of Lords officially refused WWE's appeal request.^[27]

From this point, WWE would be able to still use the original WWF "block" logo in some contexts, as well as the term "World Wrestling Federation", but would be prohibited from using the "WWF" initials going forward, as well as the WWF "scratch" logo introduced at Survivor Series 1997. In any archival footage released outside of the United Kingdom, WWE would have to censor any "WWF" spoken references, and blur the former WWF "scratch" logo, as well as any "WWF" typefaces.^[28]

In November 2002, the Fund obtained an injunction from the High Court to prevent WWE, THQ and Jakks Pacific from selling classic re-released interactive software titles that failed to censor "WWF" references in them, including the PlayStation Greatest Hits/Platinum versions of WWF SmackDown! 2: Know Your Role and WWF SmackDown! Just Bring It, as well as the PC and Xbox Platinum Hits re-issues of WWF Raw.^[29] Whilst the gameplay and internal contents of these classic titles retained the "WWF" references, the external cover artwork and packaging had been amended on all to display the "WWE" logo.^[30]

On April 7, 2003, a three-judge panel in the Court of Appeal overturned the decision to continue to allow these classic titles to be sold, as THQ had argued that censoring the "WWF" references would be impractical due to the configuration of the software. The court also found that the Fund had failed to demonstrate any damage caused by these releases, especially at consumer level as the external packaging had been modified to remove any "WWF" references.^[31] The Fund was ordered by the court to pay WWE, THQ and Jakks Pacific a total of $100,000 in legal costs.^[32]

On March 23, 2005, Mr Justice Patten gave the Fund permission to amend paragraph 8 of their claim to seek for damages.^[33] On February 16, 2006, the Fund sought damages against the WWE in the High Court over the entire dispute.^[34] On April 2, 2007, the High Court ruled in favor of WWE. The court found that the Fund's approach constituted an abuse of process due to inconsistent legal strategies and delays in seeking damages. Specifically, the court noted that the Fund had previously sought an injunction without pursuing damages and only later amended their claim to include a financial remedy. This shift was seen as procedurally improper.^[35]

Furthermore, the court addressed the Fund's attempt to claim damages based on the "Wrotham Park" principle, which allows for compensation reflecting a hypothetical license fee the defendant would have paid for the unauthorized use. The court concluded that such damages were not appropriate in this case, as the Fund could not demonstrate a direct financial loss from WWE's actions.^[36]

From May 6, 2002, WWF.com acted as a redirect, sending visitors to WWE.com.^[37] The scheduled DVD and VHS releases of "WWF" events (such as Backlash and Insurrextion) were issued as-is with "WWF" references fully retained within the footage, but with "WWE" logos on the exterior packaging.^[38]

The Tough Enough 2 compilation CD released by Geffen Records on May 14, 2002, whilst having the new "WWE" logo on the cover, was issued as a "WWF" release on the CD spine as it had already been cataloged by Geffen.^[39] The WrestleMania X8 video game that was released by THQ for GameCube on June 10, 2002 had any "WWF" references on its external packaging replaced with "WWE" logos, however its gameplay and internal contents fully retained all "WWF" references.^[40] The New York Stock Exchange ticker symbol remained as "NYSE:WWF" until August 7, 2002, and some championship titles continued to feature the WWF "scratch" logo on them until they could be redesigned.^[41]

The British WWE Tagged Classics DVD re-releases, issued between 2004 and 2012 by third-party distributor Silver Vision, featured pre-2002 WWF VHS content in its original, uncensored form—retaining all references to "WWF". The "WWF" references in these DVDs were exempt from censorship as they were not released outside of the United Kingdom.^[42]

The compilation music albums WWF Aggression, WWF Forceable Entry, WWF Tough Enough (Music from the Hit Series) and WWF Tough Enough 2 remain listed on digital music stores and music streaming services as legacy "WWF" releases, as they are distributed by record labels such as Sony Music and Universal Music Group, therefore are not controlled by WWE.^{[43][44][45][46]}

On December 1, 2002, the WWF.com web domain name expired. WWE had allowed the domain name to expire, as there was no legal obligation to transfer the asset to the Fund. The domain was quickly acquired by Frank Baach, who sold it to Gregory Ricks from Texas, who used the domain for his "Web Wrestling Forum" in the year following.^[47] On November 17, 2006, it was announced that the Fund's attempt to obtain the domain name through ICANN's UDRP system, on the grounds that it was registered in bad faith, was unsuccessful, as Ricks was using the web domain for professional wrestling forum purposes and therefore did not pretend to be affiliated with the Fund.^[48]

Ahead of the launch for the WWE Network online streaming service, the WWE and the Fund formed a new agreement in 2012 which meant that the WWE would no longer have to blur or censor WWF "scratch" logos and typefaces and spoken "WWF" references in archival footage. However, as part of the deal, WWE would be prohibited from using the WWF "block" logo and references to "World Wrestling Federation" in new footage. The first instances of the WWF "scratch" logo being uncensored in archival segments on WWE programming were those featured on the WWE Raw 1000 television special broadcast on July 23, 2012.^[49]