• Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

News UFC can supposedly take a percentage of a business a fighter starts while under UFC contract.

ConsiderateFearlessHummingbird-size_restricted.gif
 
Ya that's some serious lawyerese right there. It was much cleaner when they just kept likeness rights in perpetuity (many sources including the infamous Eddie Alvarez contract that was made public).

But it does seem to me - Not A Lawyer - to be limited to Zuffa content, or Zuffa marketing.

So my guess is that O'Malley can open a "O'Malley Cannabis" store just fine, but if he opened a "O'Malley - UFC Champion Cannabis" store, he would have to pay. But I flunked out of pre-law, so....

that's how it looks to me.
 
If a business offers you a contract, and you sign the contract because you want it, the only thing that could be "illegal" in the contract would be a provision requiring either party to violate law.

Fighters are adults. Some of them want to compete in the UFC because it is an opportunity to make money. So they sign a contract offered by the UFC.

I imagine if various uninformed emotionally upset social-justice couch posherbros managed to interfere with a fighter attempting to sign a UFC contract, the fighter would be happy to take those posherbros out back and punch their small penises so hard so many times that the posherbors became transvestites.

Because, like, the fighter doesn't care what the posherbros think and doesn't need or want their opinion or their interference. What the fighter wants is to sign the contract so that he or she can take advantage of the opportunity.
While this is true not all contracts are equally valid or even legal . Yeah you can sign whatever you want but this seems like it’s “ skirting the line” in legality being they are “ independent contractors .” Nobody’s saying they can’t sign whatever they want and YES the buyer should beware etc etc , not the point . Now whether or not UFC is actually doing this ( taking cuts from fighters side hustles ) is the real question cause based on the language in the contract it appears they could .
 
If a business offers you a contract, and you sign the contract because you want it, the only thing that could be "illegal" in the contract would be a provision requiring either party to violate law.

There are all kinds of things that can end up being unenforceable or outright invalidate a contract. I work in real estate and see it all the time, actually have a contract lawyer on retainer.
 
Sounds about (Dana) White
It’s only business
 
so let me get this straight no sponsors, low pay, no rights, low pay, no sponsors,
they barely cover medical, low pay, no sponsors, low pay and umm LOW PAY.

everybody who sided with dana against francis please run into a tree....

maybe id understand if DANA AND THE UFC paid they're top fighters win lose or draw 10-50 million, mid tier gate keepers1-5 mil,
got their fighters movie AAA or B movie roles and got them in mainstream commercials, A RETIREMENT CHECK, Free job training post MMA,
etc etc. then maybe id say well its ONE HAND WASHES THE OTHER. but no......

the even more screwed up part is that aside from Chuck GSP Conor Brock Ronda Jon jones and maybe izzy Nobody gives a dam
bout fighters post MMA career
 
So basically a fighter gets a really shitty contract when they initially sign with the UFC. What a revelation. This dude used to get excited about performance bonuses.

EwgLL4.gif
 
From what I understand - if you're marketing your business under the guise of "UFC fighter" you open an avenue where the UFC can seek royalties.
 
How despicable and greedy. Taking a page from the IRS's book. "Oh you made some money with your own skills, own capital (which we already taxed you on), your own time, and own labor? We want some of that money".
 
If a business offers you a contract, and you sign the contract because you want it, the only thing that could be "illegal" in the contract would be a provision requiring either party to violate law.
There are two ongoing class action lawsuits against the UFC right now. Both contend the contracts were illegal due to the power imbalance ("power imbalance" is an incredibly oversimplistic way of putting it, because I don't feel like explaining what a monopsony is.)

I'm not arguing for or against the Le & Johnson suits. I'm merely pointing out that it's not nearly as simplistic as you suggest.
 
Last edited:
It sounds to me like it's anything the fighter makes money on that uses the UFC brand. But it is vague, probably by design.

Here's the actual clause in the contract.:


The fighter's name and likeness are by definition 'UFC Content', right?

That's some serious shit right here.

"Hey, your restaurant is popular because you're using a photo of you to promote the business. We own your likeness since we promote you. You owe us a cut. Else we'll drag this out in court for 10 years. We didn't spare our poster child Randy Couture, and we're certainly not going to spare you"
 
the even more screwed up part is that aside from Chuck GSP Conor Brock Ronda Jon jones and maybe izzy Nobody gives a dam
bout fighters post MMA career

No Fr and even that list is stretching it.
 
UFC running the show like a mafia

the-sopranos-tony-soprano.gif
Watched that episode LAST WEEK with wifey.

This is the same as 360 recording contracts. Ownership outright. Hope these signed fighters have trustworthy family whose name they can open things under.

Guess which elephant-in-the-room question NO REPORTER will ask Dana at ANY time?

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
 
Holy shit.

I had time to track down the source (https://bloodyelbowpodcast.substack.com/p/ufc-contract-change-addresses-royalties#details) - I ask if someone else can listen and give cliffs please. Thanks

EDIT: Nash says he's still gathering data from multiple contracts, and will reveal more details soon. That's it. He suggests or basically says he has seen the language in a contract, but doesn't know how boilerplate it is yet, and if it's not, doesn't want to reveal b/c then UFC will know who's talking.
What a silly idea. If the language is only in one contract, the UFC know, at this time, exactly who's talking, no matter what else Nash says.

Hopefully for that fighter, it's in multiple contracts. Nash should have kept it hush until he saw it in more than one contract. It doesn't take advanced arithmetic to work out which fighter it is if it's only one who has this language.
 
so let me get this straight no sponsors, low pay, no rights, low pay, no sponsors,
they barely cover medical, low pay, no sponsors, low pay and umm LOW PAY.

everybody who sided with dana against francis please run into a tree....

maybe id understand if DANA AND THE UFC paid they're top fighters win lose or draw 10-50 million, mid tier gate keepers1-5 mil,
got their fighters movie AAA or B movie roles and got them in mainstream commercials, A RETIREMENT CHECK, Free job training post MMA,
etc etc. then maybe id say well its ONE HAND WASHES THE OTHER. but no......

the even more screwed up part is that aside from Chuck GSP Conor Brock Ronda Jon jones and maybe izzy Nobody gives a dam
bout fighters post MMA career
{<BJPeen}

Someone here drank the Kool-Aid.
 


{<jordan}

Fucks sake.


The level that these cunts will stoop to put their grubby hands in the fighters pockets knows no fuckin end.

To think that some of the members of this community have backed the company every time someone raises a question against them is mind blowing.

This is the type of shit that you think is bullshit when you first hear it, but come to find out it's an actual reality for these fighters.

Shame on some you...you know who you are smfh.

Edit: I don't care if its in one fighters contract or all of them.
Just shows the level that they will go to fuck these guys.
 
Back
Top