Court Rules for UFC Antitrust Lawsuit to Continue & Potential Impact on MLW’s Lawsuit to WWE

UFC has been dealing with an antitrust lawsuit filed against them by three former UFC fighters for the past eight years.

Combat Sports Law reported that U.S. District Court Judge Richard Boulware ruled on August 2nd that Cung Le, Nathan Quarry, and Jon Fitch’s lawsuit against UFC will be allowed to continue as a class action lawsuit. In the lawsuit, they claimed that UFC had purposely suppressed the pay of their fighters and had committed antitrust violations.

In his ruling, Boulware ruled that every fighter who fought on a UFC event between the period of December of 2010 to June of 2017, a total of over 1,200 fighters, would now become part of the newly upgraded class action lawsuit. Boulware also ruled that any fighter who worked for UFC during that time period will be allowed to opt out of this new upgraded lawsuit.

The plaintiffs are currently asking to be awarded damages between $800 million to $1.6 billion.

Post Wrestling’s John Pollock reported that a separate antitrust lawsuit for MMA fighters who fought for UFC after the date of June of 2017 was also filed against the company.

In regards to the potential impact to WWE, Dave Meltzer reported in this week’s Wrestling Observer Newsletter that UFC’s lawsuit will become a double whammy for WWE next month once they merge together with UFC to form a new company.

Meltzer reported that should UFC’s lawsuit go to trial, the risk of a jury siding with UFC fighters would be high enough due to the potential of jurors being sympathetic towards fighters against a billionaire company accused of underpaying their struggling fighters. Meltzer reported that UFC fighters making far less of a share of a percentage of revenues compared to athletes in major boxing promotions would be a potential major factor hurting UFC’s chances of winning the case. Another major issue against UFC is them being far more profitable than other others in any other sports franchise or sports entertainment franchise that brings in a similar level of money. In the lawsuit, it was claimed that UFC fighters only earn a share of 20% compared to athletes in boxing and major sports who earn over 50%.

Meltzer reported that should the case against UFC be successful, then it would open WWE to a similar case in the future due to they have also been likely more predatory in regards to competition and keeping both viable number two promotions down and pay for their wrestlers artificially down.

Meltzer reported that if UFC were to go to court and win their legal case, then it would also be considered as a win for WWE as well since it would establish a precedent protecting them. If UFC were to settle for a big monetary amount, Meltzer reported that this would open up lawyers to go after WWE for similar claims against the company. Melzter also reported that if a jury were to rule against UFC, it could be both devastating and open up WWE to similar lawsuits against them by wrestlers.

Meltzer reported that one big difference between UFC’s antitrust lawsuit and a potential lawsuit against WWE is that top wrestlers in WWE are currently making more money than ever before and do not look at what boxers or NBA stars are making and instead look more towards what wrestlers have historically made to not feel underpaid.

In an interesting note, Meltzer reported that if wrestlers were paid closer to what athletes in major sports leagues are paid at around 50%, then the average main roster wrestler would be making around $5 million per year in WWE. Only Roman Reigns and Brock Lesnar reportedly currently earn a figure around this amount per year.

Meltzer also reported that another major difference is the success of AEW as a viable number two promotion in wrestling which MMA currently does not have. One former wrestler spoken to reportedly stated that one big evidence against this idea is the fact that WWE salaries have increased greatly once AEW started and WWE had to do that to keep talent from going to AEW. This same person reportedly stated that this would be proof that WWE’s domination of the wrestling market from 2001 to 2019 did suppress the salaries of their wrestlers.

In regards to the potential impact to WWE’s current antitrust lawsuit against them, Attorney Eric Anderson of Redlands, California stated that “The big concern for the parties here should be where the courts are looking at what constitutes an employee and what does not. As you are well aware the WWE has been pushing this false idea that their wrestlers are independent contractors forever. But everything that the court is looking at in the UFC case in regards to what constitutes employment absolutely applies to the WWE. Ironically, the best thing for the WWE to avoid these problems, would be to allow their wrestlers more freedom. I’m not necessarily talking about the working other dates with other companies, but the absolute stranglehold they have on the ability of the wrestlers to use social media, or make money in other streams or platforms without WWE’s permission is a landmine. But who would have standing to sue? No current WWE wrestler would dare. And keep in mind that UFC has objective targets talent can reach but WWE has none since the matches are predetermined. So a court could see it as akin to acting more than sports. But that comparison has its own pitfalls as well once we get back to the control over talents’ time. The class action aspect does not really apply and the existence of AEW weakens some of the class arguments being used against WWE, but the MLW lawsuit experts and discovery can change that as well.“