MMA News Forums » MMA Forums » General MMA Forum

[Warchief]

In its latest and most aggressive legal move against its reigning heavyweight champion, Zuffa LLC – the parent company of the Ultimate Fighting Championship – filed a preliminary injunction against Randy Couture that seeks to prevent the 44-year-old from appearing at, or in promotion for, the International Fight League show on Friday, Feb. 29 at the Orleans Arena in Las Vegas.

The 90-page injunction, filed in a Nevada court by attorneys for Zuffa LLC on Feb. 1, claims Couture’s association with the IFL – while still under a contract he signed with Zuffa in December 2006 – will cause the company irreparable harm and violates terms of his deal.

“If Couture is permitted to terminate his employment and promptly take his well-known name and likeness during the Restricted Period to one, or more, of Zuffa’s competitors so that it can be used to promote upcoming events in other MMA leagues, the harm to Zuffa’s business goodwill cannot be calculated,” reads the motion, which later points to a clause in Couture’s contract that states “injunctive relief may be granted ... without the necessary proof of actual damage.”

The motion likens Couture’s involvement with the IFL to cases where prominent on-air radio and television personalities were banned by courts from appearing on competing stations while non-compete agreements were still in effect. How a judge responds to Zuffa’s injunction request will set a precedent regarding the legal validity of such terms in UFC contracts.

Last month, Zuffa LLC sued Couture for breach of contract, citing many of the same IFL-related examples. The injunction could prevent Couture from appearing at the Feb. 29 event or any other non-UFC MMA card until October. It may also thwart the IFL’s plans to use Couture’s gym – Xtreme Couture Mixed Martial Arts – as a promotional tool since it bears his name.

Xtreme Couture plans to field a team at the Feb. 29 IFL event, and Couture has said he intends to corner fighters from his camp at the show. Zuffa’s lawyers – who attached e-mails about the IFL card to its injunction request as evidence, including an IFL.tv screen grab that shows Couture’s face next to an Xtreme Couture logo – argue such advertisements constitute “direct or indirect competition” against the UFC.

“Couture’s continued participation in the promotion of events in a rival professional MMA league during the Restricted Period of his Employment Agreement is causing irreparable harm to Zuffa’s business goodwill that cannot be adequately compensated by a future award of money damages,” the motion reads. “Zuffa, moreover, has reason to believe that Couture’s conduct thus far is only the first in a series of planned moves designed to compete unfairly with and otherwise harm the business interests of Zuffa. Accordingly, it seeks relief from the court now.”

Zuffa bases its motion on the so-called “Employment Agreement,” a three-year deal Couture signed in December 2006. The contract places a one-year restricted period on Couture associating himself with, or working with a promoter of, any non-UFC event. That one-year period was said to have kicked in on Oct. 11, 2007, when Couture informed the UFC by fax that he was resigning from the promotion. He later cited UFC’s statements about how much he was paid relative to other fighters and the company’s unwillingness to co-promote a fight against Fedor Emelianenko as his reasons for leaving.

The motion calls the contract’s terms “entirely reasonable under Nevada law” and states they do not “impose an undue burden on Couture or impair his ability to earn a living.”

The injunction request charts Couture’s history in the UFC, starting with his May 1997 debut. It documents his title victories, exposure through “The Ultimate Fighter” reality series and retirement after a second straight loss to Chuck Liddell in February 2006. The motion claims Couture still owed Zuffa two fights at the time of that retirement under a contract he signed in November 2005.

It goes on to say Couture approached Zuffa in 2006, asking about other employments opportunities in the UFC. This is when Couture’s non-fighting employment agreement with Zuffa, the basis of the injunction request, was reached. The deal, signed in December 2006, hired Couture at a $200,000 annual salary to do, among other things, lobby state athletic commissions to embrace mixed martial arts and act as an on-air analyst for UFC broadcasts.

“Couture, in essence, was to be a public ambassador for MMA in general and the UFC in particular,” the injunction request reads.

The motion states Couture approached Zuffa about fighting again in January 2007 and soon signed a four-fight contract that guaranteed him a $250,000 per-fight purse and a cut of pay-per-view revenue. The motion’s narrative moves on to Couture’s resignation from the UFC, referring to his resignation fax as “cryptic” and pointing out the fax was dated Sept. 18, 2007, even though it was sent Oct. 11, 2007. The suit claims Zuffa accepted his resignation that day.

“Zuffa advised Couture that it interpreted his letter to mean that he was ‘retiring’ from MMA or other professional fighting competition as Couture cannot simply ‘resign’ under the terms of the Promotional Agreement given that he is obligated to fight in two more bouts,” the motion reads.

It also claims Couture’s public comments after the resignation, including those he made during a press conference televised on HDNet, were “false and disparaging” and constitute a contract violation. Couture last fought in August, when he successfully defended the UFC heavyweight championship against Gabriel Gonzaga.

The Fight Network :: ALL FIGHTS ALL THE TIME :: Get it on!

[Clint]

I can't understand Randy's actions. If he honestly wants to fight Fedor, he is going to have to win in court, that is a given. So he needs to stop doing things that show a disregard for the terms of his agreement if he wants any chance of winning the court case.

[valheruking]

He's also supposed to be coaching the USA team in a new series M-1 are planning with different groups of fighters from different countrys, Fedor will be the Russian coach.

[smoogy]

Originally Posted by Clint

I can't understand Randy's actions. If he honestly wants to fight Fedor, he is going to have to win in court, that is a given. So he needs to stop doing things that show a disregard for the terms of his agreement if he wants any chance of winning the court case.

This suit is about alleging a disregard for the terms of the agreement; whether he has actually done that is up to the process to determine. Frankly it would appear that the UFC is trying to overreach here, the Xtreme Couture IFL squad is slated to be coached by Tompkins, not Couture... and as for him cornerning fighters, HE TRAINS THOSE FIGHTERS. It sounds like Zuffa is trying to misconstrue all aspects of Couture's MMA life as a form of competition, and many doubt that the UFC can succeed in shutting down Randy's life via litigation.

[foundstarr]

The incredibly stupid part is he probably would have those two fights over with by now, then he would have leverage in court. As it stands I don't think Randy has a chance in hell of winning this one.

[Malice]

Randy is making a fool out of himself. Goodbye legacy.

[thumper]

Originally Posted by foundstarr

The incredibly stupid part is he probably would have those two fights over with by now, then he would have leverage in court. As it stands I don't think Randy has a chance in hell of winning this one.

How? No compete for a year? So how would it be over?


As for this mess, I called this when it started. i KNEW Zuffa would file an injunction.

I'm also betting Randy's defense to the allegation is that the IFL is not a direct competitor to the UFC, which is true. it's a team fighting league. not single fights.

[jcmichaels42]

Making a fool out of himself? I'd have to say he's all ready made a fool out of himself.

[playuntiltheskyisblack]

Randy reminds me of that problem child. OR STEWART FROM MAD TV!
It's Like UFC is the Strict mother and Randy is this kid who insists on causing shit.

Mom: Randy! Don't touch those cookies.
Randy: *stares blankly and continues to slowly reach for some delicious nom nom's.*
Mom: Randy...if you eat that cookie I'm going to ground you.
Randy: *continuous moronic stare...still reaching*
Mom: RANDY!
Randy: *Finally grabs the cookie and quickly shoves it in his mouth.

As ridiculous as that sounds it's pretty much the case.
The UFC has already made mention of this going to court, and STILL Randy is pushing the limits obviously knowing no case he has will hold any water.
I can't wait until his dream of fighting Fedor is crushed.

[foundstarr]

Originally Posted by thumper

How? No compete for a year? So how would it be over?


As for this mess, I called this when it started. i KNEW Zuffa would file an injunction.

I'm also betting Randy's defense to the allegation is that the IFL is not a direct competitor to the UFC, which is true. it's a team fighting league. not single fights.

I said if he got the two fights done, so if he fought two more times. Then he would have completed his contract. How was that not clear?

UFC has an automatic roll-over clause for champions, so Randy would then have leverage in court to get out of his contract because you can argue against an automatic contract extension. You really can't argue just dropping a contract.