Independent Wrestler Claims TNA Stole His Gimmick

[Trot]

the fact you guys are even arguing about this, shows the lack of commonsence that flys around these fourms on a daily basis,

look at it like this,

you contact a book company, give them an idea for a book, they say, looks good show us some stuff, write us some samples, send us them, after constant praise, and being asked for more material, boom, that book company release a book, that guess what, is full of ur ideas, ofc ud complain, hes doing the right thing going trew the right channles and doing stuff like he should, respect him, he could of went all matt hardy on us and started using youtube!

 

[Tripleb2k1]

except the emails count as copyright protection as the second any thought it written down electronically or otherwise it is owned by the person who wrote it. the fact that there is emails sent to an office with time stamp also seals the protection tighter. The fact that he sent them promo's in a court case would look pretty coincidental and tna would have to prove otherwise their origin.. And changing the first letter of a name does not separate it enough.

Also as far as creativity goes look at girl talk who takes copyright songs uses portions to create his own songs and messages. questionable in legality however as of this date is still covered by copy right protection as a new creative entity.

Please by all means keep arguing with a writer about copyright rights....

doesnt have copyright to protect until he legally copyrights it.

as for topic at hand,

1) he owned zero rights to the name or gimmick
2) TNA's Crimson was purely named for being a variation of the color red
3) so he is gonna throw a bitch fit everytime there is a derranged character in facepaint? Dont hear Matt "Doink" Bourne complaining
4) him and Sting simply are ripping off same Batman character

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

the fact you guys are even arguing about this, shows the lack of commonsence that flys around these fourms on a daily basis,

look at it like this,

you contact a book company, give them an idea for a book, they say, looks good show us some stuff, write us some samples, send us them, after constant praise, and being asked for more material, boom, that book company release a book, that guess what, is full of ur ideas, ofc ud complain, hes doing the right thing going trew the right channles and doing stuff like he should, respect him, he could of went all matt hardy on us and started using youtube!

His ideas? He didn't create the Joker or the word crimson.

Amazing Red has been with TNA off-and-on for several years, Crimson was introduced as his brother, Crimson being a variation of red and also with connotations of menace and danger. There is a lot more continuity for the TNA character than there is for a guy on the indy circuit.

He's done a few promo videos that are far more blatant a rip-off of the Dark Knight Joker, so at least Hardy's crazy rants aren't in danger of infringing copyright via their production and scripting.

It's just another case of characters being influenced by other characters that can all be simplified to either 'hero' or 'villain'. Trying to claim that one guy should have the sole rights to a character they themselves have ripped off is absurd.

 

[BulletVonAwesome]

I'm with Prince punk.

This Man does, by law, have a case.

If i turned up in wwe tomorrow as Luke Warm Steven Texas, a foul mouthed S.O.B who don't take no Sh*t From Nobody, used the Luke Warm Stunner, Drank Beer , said what and hell yeah all the time, you people would say i was ripping off stone cold steve austin.

would you not??

That's what this is to this man. It's his job, something he claims to have worked with for years, if he can prove it...which he claims he can, then he is in the right. Now whether anything will come of it,who knows. The case could be thrown out. BUT at least he has the balls to bring this to the fans attention, and to the attention of other wrestlers who might feel similar things have happened to them.

If it was found that TNA did indeed recieve these emails,tapes etc etc and passed their contents onto someone for use within the company,without the owners consent it will be found as copyright infringement.

Which is illegal.

 

[MB1025]

except the emails count as copyright protection as the second any thought it written down electronically or otherwise it is owned by the person who wrote it. the fact that there is emails sent to an office with time stamp also seals the protection tighter. The fact that he sent them promo's in a court case would look pretty coincidental and tna would have to prove otherwise their origin.. And changing the first letter of a name does not separate it enough.

Also as far as creativity goes look at girl talk who takes copyright songs uses portions to create his own songs and messages. questionable in legality however as of this date is still covered by copy right protection as a new creative entity.

Please by all means keep arguing with a writer about copyright rights....

So Mr. Writer Krimosn is the same as Crimson? Even though you can take someones music and change one thing about it and it be completely OK? Also Crimson is a color. Krimson is a misspelled word. How exactly did TNA do anything wrong?

Now how is it that this guy has a copy right, regardless of him emailing TNA emails and videos, on a character/likeness owned by DC Comics? Please explain to me how this guy legitimately has an argument when his character is copyrighted by a comic book company.

He doesn't own or have the rights to either the name or character so I would love to know how you come to this conclusion.

 

[MB1025]

the fact you guys are even arguing about this, shows the lack of commonsence that flys around these fourms on a daily basis,

look at it like this,

you contact a book company, give them an idea for a book, they say, looks good show us some stuff, write us some samples, send us them, after constant praise, and being asked for more material, boom, that book company release a book, that guess what, is full of ur ideas, ofc ud complain, hes doing the right thing going trew the right channles and doing stuff like he should, respect him, he could of went all matt hardy on us and started using youtube!

Different scenario completely. Your book scenario was an original piece taken by the book company and published on their own. Clearly it was stolen from you.

The problem here is Crimson is a color and has nothing to do with Krimson which is a misspelled word. He has no fight what so ever with that.

The next issue is he is mad that someone stole his character which is the likeness of the Joker. The problem is he doesn't own that likeness.

So please tell me anyone on these forums how he can walk into a court room and go I want to so this company because they stole the likeness to a character that I stole from a comic book company.

 

[RicSpade]

Alright seriously I want to point something out when it comes to the independent wrestling world, there are so many character overlaps in this business its unreal, a guy in California may be working under the name Johnny Lawless, but a guy in Michigan goes by the same name, is it the same gimmick? probably not but in the independent world it does happen, sometimes you see things in TNA or WWE that you may see on the independent circuit whether its a character or a storyline Kato is a good example. But seriously a name is a name, thats like someone getting pissed about being a clown, in the independent world there atleast 10 people who dress like Doink, but there is only one real doink but people imitate the gimmick. so far the only similarity I see is the red paint thing with the interview, the Krimson guy acts like Raven, looks like the joker. anyone ever youtubed one warrior nation, some fat guy parading the Ultimate Warrior, does anyone give him any crap? probably, but I'll tell you what if you got ripped be flattered that a legend liked something you do, but if its just coincidence or just similar get over it, unless your in the top 7 organizations in the world do what you do on your level and move on with your life.

 

[steve6314]

I'm a Lawyer in Britain so can own talk about british law here but with repect to Trot and MB1025 as dicussions like this are to me what makes these forums interesting I'll try and add my reading of the situation under british law.
Owning the rights to put a spin on an exsisting theme of charater is not neccessary to be able to claim creative rights on putting a spin on this charater providing its is significantly different to the original use of the charater. He's not saying I perform as DC comics the 'Joker' he's saying he adapted the traits of that charater and used them for his own original wrestling charater. Its like the Killers saying we're influenced by say REM for example only in this case Krimson has taken traits from a charater and applied them to a new medium.
So there is potentially a case here the problem being proving TNA stole Krimsons idea 'his personal creative proerty' to use the same elements i.e actual promo's, signiture movements/repeated mannerisms etc that are clearly shown in the promos D lo Brown had access to. Its genrally pretty hard to prove but expensive to defend against often large companies will choose to offer a payoff in these cases to avoid negative puplicity and minimise defence costs which I imagine is what Krimson is hoping will happen here.
As for the name issue I completly agree with MB1025 the name issue is a no starter. The spelling is different and the context in what it is used is also different
And yes I think if Krimson does have a legitamte gripe and eveidence to back this up he is going about it in the right way by not doing a Matt Hardy

 

[Zeven_Zion]

I'm a Lawyer in Britain so can own talk about british law here but with repect to Trot and MB1025 as dicussions like this are to me what makes these forums interesting I'll try and add my reading of the situation under british law.
Owning the rights to put a spin on an exsisting theme of charater is not neccessary to be able to claim creative rights on putting a spin on this charater providing its is significantly different to the original use of the charater. He's not saying I perform as DC comics the 'Joker' he's saying he adapted the traits of that charater and used them for his own original wrestling charater. Its like the Killers saying we're influenced by say REM for example only in this case Krimson has taken traits from a charater and applied them to a new medium.
So there is potentially a case here the problem being proving TNA stole Krimsons idea 'his personal creative proerty' to use the same elements i.e actual promo's, signiture movements/repeated mannerisms etc that are clearly shown in the promos D lo Brown had access to. Its genrally pretty hard to prove but expensive to defend against often large companies will choose to offer a payoff in these cases to avoid negative puplicity and minimise defence costs which I imagine is what Krimson is hoping will happen here.
As for the name issue I completly agree with MB1025 the name issue is a no starter. The spelling is different and the context in what it is used is also different
And yes I think if Krimson does have a legitamte gripe and eveidence to back this up he is going about it in the right way by not doing a Matt Hardy

Well, if we're talking about mannerisms, moves and such, Sting's persona is WAY more different than Krimsons.

Krimson seems to be incredibly distraught, dark, depressed and gloomy. He's got a gripe with the wrestling business and how he doesn't make it. He's a psycho. He does grainy backstage promos and he has the same mannerisms as Heath Ledger's Joker, such as his weird twitches and licking his lips in a weird way.

Sting on the other hand looks to be acting like Jim Carrey more than he is acting like Ledger's Joker or Krimson. Sting is playful, funny, does silly faces all the time, prances around and has a lot of his old self in those promos. His mannerisms are still of his old character (pointing at the crowd, howling), just a bit goofier. The face paint is similiar, but not the same as Krimson's.

Moves wise, I doubt Sting is stealing any of Krimson's moves. Sting was using his moves before Krimson was even born.

So in the end, it's two people having their own twist on a popular and successful movie character, and one of them claiming the other one's ripping him off when in fact he isn't. He's ripping off Ledger's character, not some indy person.

The handler of the Krimson character has openly admitted that he's been trying to sign with TNA for years. There's his agenda. He wants to be noticed by TNA and possibly land a job with them out of pity or whatever. Krimson has absolutely zero reason to point fingers at TNA. The characters are similiar because they draw inspiration of the same character, but they're not the same. If they were, it's a whole new story. If Krimson has the right to say TNA is ripping him off with a character only REMOTELY similiar to his, then every wrestler out there has the right to sue TNA for having a character like AJ Styles.

 

[NoChanceInHell]

I just watched 15 seconds of the first video i found on youtube of this Krimson guy and he's nothing more than a poor mans Heath Ledger

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIkCXQiPowM

 

[yoshi_doce2006]

I just watched 15 seconds of the first video i found on youtube of this Krimson guy and he's nothing more than a poor mans Heath Ledger

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIkCXQiPowM

Heath Ledger could speak without some grating primal shriek. So he isnt even quite that.

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

I'm with Prince punk.

This Man does, by law, have a case.

If i turned up in wwe tomorrow as Luke Warm Steven Texas, a foul mouthed S.O.B who don't take no Sh*t From Nobody, used the Luke Warm Stunner, Drank Beer , said what and hell yeah all the time, you people would say i was ripping off stone cold steve austin.

would you not??

That's what this is to this man. It's his job, something he claims to have worked with for years, if he can prove it...which he claims he can, then he is in the right. Now whether anything will come of it,who knows. The case could be thrown out. BUT at least he has the balls to bring this to the fans attention, and to the attention of other wrestlers who might feel similar things have happened to them.

If it was found that TNA did indeed recieve these emails,tapes etc etc and passed their contents onto someone for use within the company,without the owners consent it will be found as copyright infringement.

Which is illegal.

You mean like Shark Boy?

At least if this thing did actually go to court and got Nolan/Batman folk involved it would garner publicity for all parties. Still don't see how this guy has much of a case though as both he and Sting are paying homage to a character neither were involved in creating.

 

[mral82]

This dude needs to quit whinning as Sycho Sid did this kind of thing back in the '90s. so this dude stole it from him imo.

 

[AntiChristDeicide]

Meh, this guy should shut the fuck up. Everything is used and re-used in wrestling, so to try to find something that hasn't been used before is pointless. The guy seems to be a mix of Vampiro ( when he was with the Insane Clown Possee), Raven and Matt "Doink" Bourne. Anyways didn't he trademark the name Krimson and his likeness before sending the videos to TNA (Assuming that he did in fact send them)? Because if not, he is more screwed than a hooker on Times Square. Oh and by the way, Tommy "Crimson" Mercer was first brought in as Amazing -Red's brother so Crimson being in the same color family as red it made sense.

___________________________
"Survey Says, One more for the good guys!!!" - Scott Hall

 

[GrandSword]

... also as a fan of Sting over the years, what he's doing now isn't exactly new to him. He has been this crazy guy before and although he was wearing the joker make-up last episode, he still seems to be more like Brandon Lee's Crow character than the Joker...

 

[wrestlingfan]

This Krimson guy should not be taken seriously. Obviously just some Indie guy looking to make a name for himself so TNA can maybe go find out who he is and be like "hey maybe he seems good"

 

[DangerousDave]

Please by all means keep arguing with a writer about copyright rights....

OK, I will. You can not copyright a name, you have to trademark it which requires registration, unlike a copyright. Do you think if I typed "John Smith"
I could sue every John Smith in the country? I don't think so.

As far as the Joker character being imitated, it is a parody which is perfectly legal. Unless this jobbers promos are repeated word for word he has no legal standing at all.

 

[JJYanks121]

So here's the thing. Whether or not this guy has a case is irrelevant. It's not going to amount to anything in the public light and it's certainly not going to change any business practices. Let's remember who we are dealing with here.

We have Eric Bischoff. A fine, upstanding citizen from Minnesota, Bischoff gained infamy in the wrestling business by stealing an idea from another promotion, giving it legs with incredible talent, and riding its coattails both to great heights and awful lows. I'm of course referring to the gimmick of Buff Bagwell.

No, I'm totally kidding. Bischoff did rip off the nWo idea though and it's pretty well documented that he did so. Other than Scott Hall using his Razor Ramon character, a likeness that was owned by the WWF, nothing was brought to court over it. And as for Hall acting all Cuban-like, it was found to be unworthy of a lawsuit and dismissed.

Then we have Vince Russo. The list of things he may or may not have ripped off is endless. He's still working, though does regularly commit a more heinous crime than gimmick infringement...........nonsensical writing and booking. Guilty as charged since the day he started writing wrestling.

Do I think these two men ripped off Krimson's gimmick? You bet your ass I do! Hell, I know they did! They got a hold of those tapes, saw an indy guy with an undeveloped, pretty good idea, and they used it for their own gain. I'm sure that's not the first time this has happened, and while it's sleezy and underhanded, it might not be illegal.

Different characters in TNA have shown character traits that this guy has. Crimson's name being a variation of Krimson (they are related just like Steve Awstin would be to Steve Austin), Jeff Hardy's joker-like tie outfit complete with cigarette as well as certain mannerisms for his "antichrist" character, and of course Sting's new facepaint and licking the lips mannerisms. Elements of this guy have been given out so as not too rip him off 100 percent, but 20 percent here and 20 perecent there. Still, I have no doubt in my mind that the writers saw these tapes he sent in and used them for their own personal gain.

I see nothing coming of this, but don't think that just because TNA didn't break the law that they aren't coming off like sleeze buckets here. They absolutely are, but it's not the first time in wrestling that writers come off that way. It certainly won't be the last either, but let's settle on this one conclusion:

"Bischoff, Hogan, Dixie, Russo, and whoever else is writing and booking this product have received tapes from this individual and taken elements of his wrestling name, likeness, and persona and assigned them to their contracted workers. This is morally objectionable but not unlawful (most likely). Thus, we shall see TNA management as the leeches they are and we shall understand that they are a bit slimy and underhanded, but they were in a way where they couldn't really get caught. They are no saints, but they won't deal with too much legal action over this."

 

[Trot]

His ideas? He didn't create the Joker or the word crimson.

Amazing Red has been with TNA off-and-on for several years, Crimson was introduced as his brother, Crimson being a variation of red and also with connotations of menace and danger. There is a lot more continuity for the TNA character than there is for a guy on the indy circuit.

He's done a few promo videos that are far more blatant a rip-off of the Dark Knight Joker, so at least Hardy's crazy rants aren't in danger of infringing copyright via their production and scripting.

It's just another case of characters being influenced by other characters that can all be simplified to either 'hero' or 'villain'. Trying to claim that one guy should have the sole rights to a character they themselves have ripped off is absurd.

First of all, at no point in my post did i mention Amazing Reds Step Brothers Second Cousin Twice Removed Crimson, thats not my point, my point, is that TNA/Impact Wrestling obtained promos and samples of a gimmick, by misleading the guy and telling him the more he sent, the more likley he would get a possition within the company, for the company to give a some1 a gimmick at the very least SIMALER to the samples he was sending in, that first and foremost is my point, so now we have two points, we have 1 indy wrestler who WONT find work now with his current persona because it will be seen as a rip off of stings char, is this as it should be? that you should send in videos of somthing you do, to a large multinational company in the same line of work as you, and they should give your gimmick to someone who dosnt need the money, who quite frankly has no place wrestling, nevermind being at the peek of a company, to argue the point that TNA did nothing wrong, is idiotic, moronic, and shows that you sir have no common sence, your logic is flawed,

and, incase you wonderd you dont have to reply to anything i just wrote, because in 5 months when TNA give him a pay off so he dosnt take them to court, ill take my reward in knowing that i did my bit for the IWC and enlightend the 0.00001% of the 10% that arnt smart enough to just

STOP,
READ,
THINK,
POST,

Now, stop copying Eric Youngs Gimmick of the Village Idiot and GTFO,

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

First of all, at no point in my post did i mention Amazing Reds Step Brothers Second Cousin Twice Removed Crimson, thats not my point, my point, is that TNA/Impact Wrestling obtained promos and samples of a gimmick, by misleading the guy and telling him the more he sent, the more likley he would get a possition within the company, for the company to give a some1 a gimmick at the very least SIMALER to the samples he was sending in, that first and foremost is my point,

Wow. OK, try using some punctuation and a spell-checker in the future please so I can understand you quicker. That would be a massive help
I know you didn't mention the Amazing Red/Crimson connection, that's why I did, to make a point as to why TNA introducing a character called Crimson made sense. I thought I explained it simply enough so maybe go back and have another read of it.

The promos and samples of a gimmick were based on a character from a movie franchise which is far well more known to everyone than some guy imitating that character on the indy circuit.

so now we have two points, we have 1 indy wrestler who WONT find work now with his current persona because it will be seen as a rip off of stings char, is this as it should be? that you should send in videos of somthing you do, to a large multinational company in the same line of work as you, and they should give your gimmick to someone who dosnt need the money, who quite frankly has no place wrestling, nevermind being at the peek of a company, to argue the point that TNA did nothing wrong, is idiotic, moronic, and shows that you sir have no common sence, your logic is flawed,

Em, no. TNA is more widespread than whatever promotion he is working for, but The Dark Knight and Heath Ledger's Joker are FAR more well known worldwide than Sting's imitation of it. Both Sting and Krimson are imitating/paying homage to a character from a film, so this is where the whole, "TNA stole his character" thing is just ridiculous. Sting's previous persona was based on a similar character to The Joker, The Crow, but whereas The Crow represented a sense of tragedy and loss, The Joker is more anarchistic and deranged. It makes sense for Sting to start imitating another pop-culture figure that is more suited to the company and storyline he is currently in:

With WCW, Sting's 'Crow' would sit in the rafters and watch the company he loved be taken over by the evil NWO until finally he started getting revenge via psychological and guerilla-esque warfare. It all fitted together perfectly.

With TNA, Sting's 'Joker' is no longer sitting idly by, but is doing his utmost to get in the faces of authority and unsettle the balance of Immortal/Hogan. It's the right evolution for Sting's character.

and, incase you wonderd you dont have to reply to anything i just wrote, because in 5 months when TNA give him a pay off so he dosnt take them to court, ill take my reward in knowing that i did my bit for the IWC and enlightend the 0.00001% of the 10% that arnt smart enough to just

STOP,
READ,
THINK,
POST,

Now, stop copying Eric Youngs Gimmick of the Village Idiot and GTFO,

Hey, Eric Young stole my gimmick! I'm going to sue because obviously I'm the only one to have been inspired by a Village Idiot before! Mind you, going by the amount of spelling mistakes and not heeding your own advice with the whole, 'STOP, READ, THINK, POST' (maybe just the first 3 will do you for a while until you get a spell-checker on the go) EY might be in contact with you about stealing his gimmick first.

 

[mgodeker]

I watched this dbags promos on youtube and watched sting last night on impact. Sting is doing an impression of the Jack Nichloson/Tim Burton version of the Joker and Villian is doing an impression of the Heath Ledger/Chris Nolan version of the Joker. Either way its not original. He cant say its his orginal and creative idea when he is completely copying it.

 

[d_henderson1810]

the fact you guys are even arguing about this, shows the lack of commonsence that flys around these fourms on a daily basis,

look at it like this,

you contact a book company, give them an idea for a book, they say, looks good show us some stuff, write us some samples, send us them, after constant praise, and being asked for more material, boom, that book company release a book, that guess what, is full of ur ideas, ofc ud complain, hes doing the right thing going trew the right channles and doing stuff like he should, respect him, he could of went all matt hardy on us and started using youtube!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have shown some interest in copyright as of late, since I have a few movie ideas I want to pitch, and want to protect my ideas from being ripped off by studios.

I haven't gone in-depth into it yet (and if I could someone familiar with the law to correct me, then I will take it on board), but I think that you can only copyright something that you originally created or designed. If you wrote a book, and the company, stole the ideas, you can test your copyright in court, and say that you conceived the idea of the book. This guy didn't created the Joker character, the creators of "Batman" did. The difference goes to who owns the copyright on the creation, and who orginally concieved it.

I would suggest that you get anything you create yourself copyrighted, so that you have some legal ground if it gets unsed without your authorisation. Or at least, if someone else wants to use it, they have to seek your permission and pay royalties for it. I doubt Krimson was paying DC Comics for the use of the "Joker".

 

[Rayne]

I have shown some interest in copyright as of late, since I have a few movie ideas I want to pitch, and want to protect my ideas from being ripped off by studios.

I haven't gone in-depth into it yet (and if I could someone familiar with the law to correct me, then I will take it on board), but I think that you can only copyright something that you originally created or designed. If you wrote a book, and the company, stole the ideas, you can test your copyright in court, and say that you conceived the idea of the book. This guy didn't created the Joker character, the creators of "Batman" did. The difference goes to who owns the copyright on the creation, and who orginally concieved it.

I would suggest that you get anything you create yourself copyrighted, so that you have some legal ground if it gets unsed without your authorisation. Or at least, if someone else wants to use it, they have to seek your permission and pay royalties for it. I doubt Krimson was paying DC Comics for the use of the "Joker".

On the mark some, off the mark some. If you're in the employ of a company for the purpose of creating intellectual property, you can't claim copyright on the ideas you create while working for the company. A writer from the WWE can't claim copyright for conceiving of the "Jack Swagger" character, for instance.

Copyright is assigned to the person who can demonstrate the first legitimate copy, which is why it's always important to write down your ideas/material/what have you. The method I use for the stuff I like to have proof of copyright for is to mail it in an envelope to myself; the postmark on the sealed envelope serves as a copyright date. (The method is probably a bit dated now, but it works.)

Once copyright is assigned, it's up to the holder to enforce it, and for reasons I couldn't explain to you but have seen from example after example that it's true, if you don't enforce your copyright, courts will be less convinced about later attempts to enforce it. You hear about a lot of people who come out after a popular book/series has been around for five years and say they had the 'original' idea, but you don't often hear of them being successful in getting settlements.

 

[Daniel.Wood]

People aren't getting it.

In Wrestling a Gimmick is part of your character/trademark.

Like CM Punk. WWE wanted to keep the CM Punk name, which is why he isn't signing a new contract (allegedly)

It's important, that's why Jimmy Wang is Jimmy Wang and not Jimmy Wang Yang in TNA, that's why Low Ki was Kaval in WWE, that's why Brother Ray and Brother Devon are not refered to as 'the Dudley Boys'

Because name/gimmick/trademark matters. IT doesn't matter if someone has done it before OR where the gimmick first came from (batman in this case) if it's the current gimmick of a wrestler whose job and livelihood relies on their gimmick/trademark then it's important.

Are you guys getting that it's important.

For TNA to, blatantly, in my opinion, not only lead him on , but use his videos to create a gimmick and a name for two of their stars is wrong, and a douchey thing to do as someone said.

The guy has a case. If he sent the videos in anything time stamped TNA are in trouble.

 

[Bigrog25]

You're not getting it, he publicly admitted he stole the idea from batman, therefore he DID NOT create the character he would be just as guilty as TNA. Furthermore you can't sue for something like this if you could WCW would have been sued over the crow gimmick, also wwe tried to sue WCW over Scott hall acting like razor ramon newsflash, THEY LOST. This has no legs in a court of law. Now on the fact of it being a douche move by IW, yeah it is, but if I were to see this guy I'd tell him welcome to the entertainment industry, it's not known for being a world full of polite clean cut people, fact of the matter is this sort of thing happens every day in the entertainment industry.