PWInsider - WWE News, Wrestling News, WWE

BREAKING DOWN THE LATEST IN THE MARTHA HART VS. WWF COURT CASE, WHAT WAS THROWN OUT, WHAT PARTS OF THE LAWSUIT ARE GOING FORWARD AND WHAT HAPPENS NEXT

The Martha Hart vs. WWE and Vince and Linda McMahon lawsuit has gotten some attention in the last few days due to a 3/28 ruling that effectively dismissed personal claims by Hart against the McMahons as well as some of her claims against WWE.  The suit continues to get attention nationally, and specifically in the Northeast, due to Linda McMahon's Senate hopes in Connecticut.

Here's the breakdown of what happened and where things stand with the lawsuit, which was NOT dismissed against WWE, although media reports seem to be creating that impression. 

*Owen Hart's "Original Intellectual Property" -  In her lawsuit, Martha Hart alleges that WWE continues to use Owen Hart's original intellectual property that he owned prior to signing his WWE deal.  However, in the signed deal, the section that would denote that property that Owen brought with him to WWF is blank.  Martha Hart claimed that is because any original property would never have been signed to WWF to begin with.  The Judge disagreed, saying that under the contract, any Intellectual Properties not claimed by Owen in the contract would fall under the idea of new Property created by WWF.  So, going forward, WWE does indeed have the rights to use any of Owen Hart's material.  This part of the case was dismissed.

*Owen Hart's name. - In the lawsuit, Martha Hart has claimed that WWE does not have the right to use or market Owen Hart's legal name.  However, since his legal name and his ring name were one in the same, and since Martha failed to "plausibly claim" that Owen's legal name was not his ring name, that point was dismissed.  So, going forward, WWE can use his name.  This part of the case was dismissed.

*Breach of Contract for not paying Owen's estate royalties on usage of his name and footage - In the lawsuit, Martha Hart alleged that WWE had breached their old contract with Owen Hart by not paying royalties on his likness, matches, etc. to his estate.  WWE's stance is that Martha released WWE from any additional claims or rights to Owen's material when she signed the settlement agreement over his death in 2000, where she was paid $18 million dollars.  The Judge disagreed with that, stating that according to WWE, any issues related to Owen's Original Intellectual Property rights ended with his death and the settlement.  However, since Owen's contract only dealt with *new* property from his work with the company, royalty payments MUST be made based on that contract and would not be changed with Owen's death.  WWE's argument against that was described as "unpersuasive."

*WWE's claim that the claim of breach was filed too late.  WWE claimed that since the first alleged breach took place in 1999, therefore the statue of limitations have passed.  The Judge shot that down, stating that with each piece of footage used and each DVD sold, that WWE created what would constitute a new breach over and over.  Therefore, that claim was shot down.

So, Martha Hart's claim of a breach of contract due to WWE not paying Owen Hart's estate royalties for usage of his footage, likeness, etc. stands and goes forward.

*Martha Hart's allegation of WWE's "unjust enrichment" through the use of Owen Hart's name, likeness and material was shot down.  Martha claimed that Owen's legal name was not included in the WWF contract and its right to use it expired with his May 1999 death.   Since Martha was unable to prove that his ring name was not also his legal name, the Judge threw that out.  "If Owen‟s legal name was also his ring name, then WWE had a contractual right to use it, and there can be no claim for unjust enrichment."  That part of the case was dismissed.

*Hart's allegedation that WWE Invaded Owen Hart's right to privacy through their usage of his name and likeness, claiming that WWE created "unreasonable publicity" through their usage of his material.  Hart has claimed Canadian law would cover those claims as she and Owen were Canadian citizens.  WWE has claimed that Connecticut, where Owen's contract was executed, was where those legalities would fall.  The Judge ruled that since Owen's contract deemed legal issues would be heard in CT, therefore CT law would govern the right to privacy complaint, so:

-Martha Hart's right to privacy complaints over family photos being used in WWE's Hart and Soul DVD would fail under CT law since they would not constitute "the kind of publication that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person."  That claim was dismissed.

-Martha Hart's right to privacy complaints over WWE using Owen's legal name and wrestling photos would fail under CT law since WWE has the rights to them per their Booking Agreement with Owen.  That claim was dismissed.

-Martha Hart's claim that WWE's usage of the family photos was a "Appropriation of Likeness" for Owen and the family was not denied, as the Judge ruled that Owen's Booking Contract with WWF would have not included personal family photos under that umbrella.   Since the DVD can be seen as an "feature length commercial" for WWE, that claim will go forward.

*Martha Hart's personal lawsuit against Vince and Linda McMahon:

-Hart claimed that Linda personally participated in the decision to release the WWE Hart & Soul DVD.    However, since Hart did not allege that Linda had knowledge of Owen's personal photos being used on the DVD, all claims in regard to rights of privacy, invasion of privacy, etc. against Linda were dismissed.    Since no claims in that regard were brought against Vince McMahon personally, those too were dismissed.

-Hart claimed that the release of the DVD was "negligent supervision" by the McMahons:

-The Judge ruled that despite those claims, Martha did not claim that Linda was aware that Owen's personal photos were used on the DVD release and that since those photos were a "very small percentage" of the Hart & Soul DVD, "I cannot assume that Linda knew Hart & Soul contained those pictures, and thus I cannot assume that Linda knew or reasonably should have known about any tortious conduct."  So that was thrown out of court and dismissed. 

-In the case of Vince, "Martha has alleged even fewer facts indicating that Vince knew or should have known about his employees‟ tortious conduct."  Thus, the claims against Vince were also thrown out of court and dismissed.

*Martha Hart's allegations that only the Owen Hart Foundation have the rights to Owen's name and likeness and that WWE has illegally used Owen's original intellectual property on their materials.  Martha also claims that the usage falsely implies that Owen's estate and/or the Owen Hart Foundation have endorsed WWE and their materials.    In regard to this, the Judge ruled:

-WWE has the rights to use Owen's name in their materials, per his WWF contract, so that claim was dismissed.

-WWE has the rights to use photos of Owen from his wrestling career, per his WWF contract, so that claim was dismissed.

-The claim of WWE using personal photos of Owen hurting the Estate was also shot down because "Martha has failed to allege that the photographs used have acquired a secondary meaning that identifies them with the Estate."  So, there could be no confusion if WWE used those photos as well.

*Martha Hart's copyright infringement claim.  Martha claims that WWE used several holiday cards in the Hart & Soul documentary, therefore they violated copyright law since Hart is claiming ownership.  However, Hart admitted in court that when she opened her legal case against WWE, she did not own the copyrights of the card.  Since she did not own the copyright at the time she filed the case, the Judge ruled, "Martha did not allege in her complaint that it was the former copyright owner whose copyright had been infringed, or that the former copyright owner had assigned to her the right to prosecute claims for infringement.  Without that allegation, Martha cannot bring claims based on a violation of rights of the original owner."  Thus, that was thrown out of court and dismissed.

*Martha's claims that WWE insisted and required Owen Hart to perform the PPV stunt that led to his death in May 1999, that the defendants (WWE) have engaged in blatantly disrespectful acts in regard to Owen since his death, that WWE had a role in Owen's death and that by counter-suing Hart, WWE "tried to intimidate her in the wrongful death suit in the same way they rule their wrestlers with intimidation and high pressure" were all thrown out of the case by the Judge, who described them as "unnecessary and inflammatory."

SO WHAT STILL STANDS?

The lawsuit continues based on these claims:

*WWE breached their contract with Owen Hart by failing to pay his estate royalties for their usage of his name, likeness and material.

*WWE's usage of personal family photos appropriated Owen's likeness and right to privacy.

WHAT NEXT?

There is a conference call set for 5/4 to attempt settling the remaining matters out of court.

If you enjoy PWInsider.com you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more by clicking here!

• Tweet