Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.
I’m sad

WWF vs WWF was bad and I hate the name change

Why did you sue over initials to another company who has nothing to do with you?
3 people have
this question
+1
Reply
  • Hi there
    As a global conservation organization that relies heavily on the recognition and the influence of its name and brand, WWF is very concerned about the use of the initials "WWF" by the World Wrestling Federation Entertainment, Inc.

    In 1994, WWF and World Wrestling Federation Entertainment entered into an agreement to settle a series of disputes created by the Federation's expansion into geographical areas and markets likely to affect WWF's identity. This agreement limited the Federation's use of the initials 'WWF', which initials WWF has used virtually since its inception in 1961. However, the World Wrestling Federation Entertainment breached this agreement literally thousands of times.

    Unfortunately, all WWF's repeated requests to the Federation to abide by the agreement failed despite the fact that the Federation freely negotiated and signed the agreement. WWF was therefore forced to take legal action.

    On 10 August 2001, the court in London upheld the 1994 agreement limiting the Federation's use of the initials "WWF". This decision confirms the conservation organization's rights over its WWF name and trademark. WWF now expects the Federation to abide by this ruling and to cease using the initials on its merchandise, on its website and in the other ways in which it has breached the 1994 Agreement thousands of times. WWF brought this action for the same reason we entered into the 1994 agreement: our identity through the "WWF" initials is crucial to our ability to achieve our mission. For example, WWF's campaigns to educate the world as to the need to slow the degradation of the earth's natural environment relies on the public's recognition and trust of a respected, global conservation organization.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • 1
    Ok, so if I a small Supermarket owner that has been trading 20-30 years using the initials "WWF" for my supermarket called Wallys Wonderful Foods, you would take me to court?

    The lawsuit was stupid and flawed! You cant own initials, if that was the case, then every John Smith (JS) could take any other JS to court!

    Wild life and Wrestling are two very different things. There is no mistake, if anything more people know WWF for wrestling.

    The RSPCA for wildlife and animals.

    The lawsuit just spent money that was donated for wildlife to fight against WWF Wrestling. You could have used that money to invest in better advertising.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • The person above my post clearly isn't grasping the situation. What sort of identity crisis would a local supermarket business pose to a multinational organization used to spread information and resources about conservation? None. That's why even the concept of something so outlandish wasn't brought up during the debate. If I go to a country and begin talking about the WWF, or I have those initials sewed onto my sleeve, I don't want any confusion as to my purpose there (because we all know at the time more people knew of the World Wrestling Federation than of the World Wildlife Fund, which I personally find idiotic: To have two completely different ideas under the same heading). As for contesting that people sharing the same initials is identical to two organizations sharing the same problem is absolutely absurd. If some research had been done before posting that, I would think there would have been enough of an accumulation of sense to avoid such a ridiculous comparison.

    The biggest part of spreading a brand name is advertising, and if (for arguments sake) half of the people that see the trademark think of wildlife and the other half think of wrestling, I can see how it can be contradicting to a nation's, country's, or town's mindset.

    The World Wildlife Fund had come to many conclusions on how to solve this problem with the "Federations" consent. The fact that they (the wrestling league) were taken to court after choosing to ignore those agreements came at their own expense. In other words, they bent themselves over.

    What I will agree with is the latter of his opinions; I think it was a stupid waste of money that could have been put to much better use (not in "better" advertising because if you knew what any of the clauses were, you'd know they were for wrestling to better discern the two organizations. If you ask me, I'd much rather have funds accrued from spectators and used for capital gain to create and distribute a logo change rather than investments made by donors used to facilitate resources and information on recreational and post-industrial wildlife conservation) if the actions of the WWE wasn't so asinine.

    The bottom line is, the World Wildlife Fund has existed since 1961 under the same trademark. In 1979, the ownership of Titan Sports changed hands and used the name "World Wide Wrestling Federation" (WWWF) and then shortly after dropped the second "W". The original consensus was for the wrestling league to continue using this title (WWF) in North America but not over seas. This agreement was violated not long after Titan Sport *officially* changed their name to the "World Wrestling Federation" in the mid-90's in a bid to overturn their restrictions and therefore it was settled in court.

    If Vince didn't want any trouble then he should have made better decisions initially instead of trying to play the system, with any luck he learned a valuable lesson in his defeat. I don't mean to sound belligerent because this had happened, but because people still whine about it before they even attempt to comprehend the entire situation. Do a little homework, learn a little more regarding what you're complaining about before you actually start getting upset.
    • I read it, And I still don't agree with the name change. We bring it up because it's ridiculous to argue over initials. Also if you think Vince learned anything,then you are sadly mistaken. The more likely thing Vince did wekas brush his shoulders off.

      One last thing,the ruling was fair, but we loved the old name we are allowed to get upset about this. But what you are really saying is that we shouldn't be upset about it. The logical thing to do when you understand something fully is to accept it, right? Right. But we are still allowed to be upset. Sure you can say we are "Whining" but if the roles were reversed you would be upset too.
    • "If you ask me"... Guess what pal, no one asked you. You have no idea what you are talking about. The World Wrestling Federation was around a lot longer; it was founded in 1952 by Jess McMahon. It's not the Federation's fault some random guy who had a fetish for pandas decided to get greedy OVER INITIALS, of all things.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • 2
    I don't dispute the ruling/outcome at all, especially as in the internet age there could only be one wwf.com, but one thing I find strange is the retrospective blurring out of old WWF logos and dubbing of verbal mentions of the letters WWF in rereleases or archived wrestling footage.

    What is the rationale behind that? I could just about understand the verbal editing, although it is annoying and distracting, but what about the blurring of the logos? What purpose does that serve? Seriously, nobody is going to watch a 10-year-old wrestling match, notice the logo on a turnbuckle and think "Oh, this was arranged by the World Wildlife Fund".
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I’m sad
    1
    The only thing that the fund did was make Vince McMahon WWF more popular because I'm gathering up Vince mcmahons WWF videos to add to my collection so in the end people can still watch Vince McMahon WWF wetsimg
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I’m sad
    1
    World Wildlife Fund is great, but a company that helps animals doing this seems wrong. Why couldn't you all make some new agreement?
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • This reply was removed on 2011-04-12.
    see the change log
  • This reply was removed on 2011-04-12.
    see the change log
  • I’m bemused
    Please elaborate on how you find it to be seemingly wrong, and what kind of agreement would you find more suitable than that of the court's decision? The Wildlife Fund made an agreement that WWE agreed to, as previously indicated by Jackie. A second set of rules were brought in, this time the major constituent of those were drawn up in the court of law because the WWE did not hold up their end of the bargain. That's why you see that the archives have been modified, the WWE had bent the rules of their contract before so it had been made so they couldn't do it again, by any means. When you screw around with fire (the legal system), you're bound to get burned

    I really don't know how many other angles this situation can be looked at from, sounds pretty cut and dry to me
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • This reply was removed on 2011-04-12.
    see the change log
  • I’m sad
    3
    Dear WWF International,

    I understand that the legal battle between World Wrestling Entertainment and the World Wildlife Federation is something that happened several years ago, resulting in the new name WWE.

    However, I recently purchased a WWE DVD and found that all classic matches from the WWF era had the WWF logo blurred out. I could've complained about this to WWE, but I'm sure it wasn't their decision to have to ruin several decades of their history for their audience.
    Frankly I think it's pathetic that this has had to be done. I'm an adult, I can tell the difference between a panda and a wrestler, and I can tell when I'm watching wrestling and when I'm watching an advert asking me to save endangered animals. With the new Internet driven world, I can almost understand the desire to make the WWE change their name, but this is a step too far.

    Furthermore, I'd like to point out that any person who has spent money on these DVDs will understand that it is your organisation which has imposed these ridiculous regulations. Therefore, it puts the WWF in an extremely poor light. It may seem trivial, but when someone spends money on a DVD with extremely high expectations, only to be truly disappointed when they discover their viewing pleasure has been disrupted in such a way, it will surely change thier opinion of the WWF, and may cause them to think twice before donating to your organisation. I know that I certainly won't 'DONATE!' to your organisation now that I have seen the sort of petulance and disregard for others your legal team can display.

    Regards,
    Samuel Morgan

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
    WWF and WWE.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • Mim (Official Rep) June 10, 2012 07:44
    Hi Ricky,
    Have a read of David's reply above and he's nailed it in one - it's a legal issue.
    I know you don't like it, but that's what was decreed by the courts and both WWF and WWE need to abide by this ruling.

    Hope that helps,
    Mim
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • There have been rumors online that WWF Int. and WWE have reached an agreement allowing the pro wrestling company to use the old "scratch" logo unblurred. Is there any truth in that?

    -C.J. Bradford
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. sad, anxious, confused, frustrated kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned