Could TNA Sue WWE?

[dirtyshubb]

i was thinking about umaga and how clear it is that the wwe have tried to create a character to rival samoa joe and was thinking that tna could have a good claim for taking legal action against the WWE. The main reason is because of the wwe doind the same thing about the wrestler (cant remember his name right now) for having a similar name (even though it wasnt!) and using a super kick just like Michaels. Now from what i read it seems obvious that umaga is more of a clear cut case than this so in theory tna wouldnt have any problem with doing so.
What do other people think?

 

[Bad Ass]

Dude, Samoa Joe is not a savage that uses a shitty finishing move. There are no similarities besides the fact they are both Samoan.

 

[Advocate]

that would be like TNA suing WWE, because Lashley looks like Monty Brown.

 

[Jaycobo]

It would be like wwe suing tna cuz Christian uses captain charisma.... OH WAIT.

 

[Tae]

lol ^

 

[peopleschamp]

I don’t really see any grounds for a lawsuit. Just because Umaga and Samoa Joe both happen to be Samoans doesn’t mean Umaga is a copy of Samoa Joe. Even if he is, it’s quite common for a wrestler to copy or recycle another wrestler’s gimmick (see Road Warriors/Demolition).

 

[dirtyshubb]

the fact that wwe tried to hire joe and he refused, then straight after wards they start using the umaga gimmick, they have 'the undefeated' before his name, use terms like 'the samoan bulldozer'(not the same but near enough). The whole point its clear that WWE are using umaga to keep wwe marks from jumping to tna because if they watch it now they will just think "look tna are trying to have their own samoan bulldozer" or something along those lines! its just like having sylvester terkay now starting to use the muscle buster! There are a lot more similarities between joe and umaga than in the michaels example (the fact that there was a joe vs umaga thread were a lot of people were saying umaga is just a rip off of joe). i know that the gimmick is different but that doesn't mean he isn't a rip off!

 

[Bad Ass]

I still don't see it. Jamal is shitty in the ring and Joe is one of the best workers. The WWE has always used Samoan savage gimmicks.

 

[peopleschamp]

the fact that wwe tried to hire joe and he refused, then straight after wards they start using the umaga gimmick, they have 'the undefeated' before his name, use terms like 'the samoan bulldozer'(not the same but near enough). The whole point its clear that WWE are using umaga to keep wwe marks from jumping to tna because if they watch it now they will just think "look tna are trying to have their own samoan bulldozer" or something along those lines! its just like having sylvester terkay now starting to use the muscle buster! There are a lot more similarities between joe and umaga than in the michaels example (the fact that there was a joe vs umaga thread were a lot of people were saying umaga is just a rip off of joe). i know that the gimmick is different but that doesn't mean he isn't a rip off!

So even if Umaga is a rip-off (which I still don't think he is), that is still no ground for a lawsuit. There are enough differences that it is not a blatant copy. It's not as if TNA copyrighted that "gimmick." You can make the same argument that Samoa Joe is a Bret Hart rip-off since both are great submission wrestlers.

If Umaga wrestles under the name "Samoa Moe," then there might be grounds for a lawsuit. But as it is, no.

 

[dirtyshubb]

I'm not comparing their ability just that i think their are an awful amount of things that could be seen as riping joe off, as i said the only thing that was 'similar' between michaels and the tna wrestler were his name (which wasn't THAT similar and he used the super kick) if wwe could get tna to change attempt to have his name changed because of that lame reason than there shouldn't be a question as tna having a case!

 

[Bad Ass]

The reason Michael Shane's name was changed is simple. The WWE was using it for someone in OVW.

 

[Jrock]

TNA doesn't have enough power or money to mess with WWE.

 

[Jewlz]

WWE would make TNA go broke if they tried to sue.

 

[MAGGOT]

i don't think it would be a good case even though they do have simularities any ways Joe doesn't need face paint

 

[Clayton38]

For teh guy who said something about christian using his old alias in TNA... christian was smart enough to actually copyright and own his own catchphrases and such, so that if he ever left.. he could take his name with him. Now, you see people like the Dudley's, who's likeness was sold to WWE when they bought ECW. They cant use their names, because they are copyrighted by ECW, which is now owned by WWE. So... long story short... TNA has no copyrights over Samoa Joe. Samoa Joe owns hiw own name and was represented under than name by several companies. He will always be Samoa Joe... and if WWE were to infringe on that, they only person who could sue would be Samoa Joe. Also, it would have to be an exact copy. Samoa Joe and Umaga are not even close to being an issue.

 

[JH2X]

Umm heres 1 difference even a ****** could figure out Samoa Joe =Staright and has a good finisher Umaga= bang s Armondo every night an d has the worst move ive ever seen

 

[Hazard]

I don't think that would be possible, even though Umaga seems like a Joe rip-off, it possibly can't be based off him.

 

[Kasey]

Comparing Joe to Umaga is like comparing apples to oranges. No. Scratch that. It's like comparing apples to rocks. Umaga is another variation on the berserk Islander gimmick that WWF has been using/re-using since Afa was running around the ring like a loon. He's one-dimensional in that respect and will never be anything special because of it. The gimmick is fabricated in a very "personality absent" manner.

The only thing TNA could sue WWE for is putting out a lousy product. If that's the case, though, I'm calling my lawyer and taking Vince to the cleaners.

 

[Smokeydogg]

So even if Umaga is a rip-off (which I still don't think he is), that is still no ground for a lawsuit. There are enough differences that it is not a blatant copy. It's not as if TNA copyrighted that "gimmick." You can make the same argument that Samoa Joe is a Bret Hart rip-off since both are great submission wrestlers.

If Umaga wrestles under the name "Samoa Moe," then there might be grounds for a lawsuit. But as it is, no.

actually that would be a parody and would be protected from a lawsuit

that is how ecw got away with bwo and how wwe got away with gillberg

 

[cuckfena]

GIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!

How I loved how he jumped at his own pyro

 

[KaneRule$]

oh and samoa joe can actully talk umaga cant

 

[wert]

^^^What he said.

 

[ray2kx5]

Somoa Joe Should have went to WWE even tho he probally wouldent get to showcase his talent as well because WWE bans some harmful moves like the vertibreaker and now they cant use the pile driver!Umaga and Joe are both samoan and stuff but its not hard to tell that joe is better so why sue? umaga makes them look bad enough already!

 

[The Legend Killer 21]

Ok Umaga cant talk like Joe but Joe cant talk like Armando Alejandro Estrada.

 

[Superdogg]

The only similaries between the two are that they are both Samoan and both are undefeated (which both companies script who wins their matches). Other than that, they are two different characters.