Post by The Ultimate Nullifier on Apr 3, 2014 12:02:42 GMT -6
The Hollywood Reporter is reporting that on March 26, WWE filed a lawsuit against "various anonymous defendants" that they asserted were bootlegging unauthorized merchandise at Wrestlemania. They filed a motion to seal the lawsuit when it was filed.
WWE was looking at being able to seize goods of people selling their trademarked items. They did the same thing in the past, catching people selling illegal copies of WWE products over WrestleMania weekend. It will not happen in New Orleans this year however.
Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Helen Berrigan issued a ruling that denied WWE's attempt to control the sale of its merchandise within a five mile radius of The SuperDome, which will house Sunday's WrestleMania XXX PPV.
The judge wrote in her decision, "The problem with Plaintiff’s request is apparent once one recalls that the order it requests is not directed against a single named, identified, or even described person—all the defendants are John Does, and Plaintiff provides no particular information about the identity of any of them. At best, Plaintiff defines Defendants almost tautologically: Defendants are anyone who would be a proper defendant within broad geographic and temporal limits."
While she sympathized with WWE's plight of people selling their merchandise illegally she added, "Does due process allow the Court to deputize a plaintiff to determine which goods are seizable, all while cloaking Plaintiff in the protection of a judicial order?"
WWE was looking at being able to seize goods of people selling their trademarked items. They did the same thing in the past, catching people selling illegal copies of WWE products over WrestleMania weekend. It will not happen in New Orleans this year however.
Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Helen Berrigan issued a ruling that denied WWE's attempt to control the sale of its merchandise within a five mile radius of The SuperDome, which will house Sunday's WrestleMania XXX PPV.
The judge wrote in her decision, "The problem with Plaintiff’s request is apparent once one recalls that the order it requests is not directed against a single named, identified, or even described person—all the defendants are John Does, and Plaintiff provides no particular information about the identity of any of them. At best, Plaintiff defines Defendants almost tautologically: Defendants are anyone who would be a proper defendant within broad geographic and temporal limits."
While she sympathized with WWE's plight of people selling their merchandise illegally she added, "Does due process allow the Court to deputize a plaintiff to determine which goods are seizable, all while cloaking Plaintiff in the protection of a judicial order?"