The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I just heard this on WrestleZone, pretty big news for Invasion. Strange thing is, the USA edition of Heat carried on the angle! Anyway, here is the story:
The WWF has been told to retract statements made on television this past week indicating Stephanie McMahon's ownership of ECW. The story quoted a source close to the trustee handling the ECW Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings in the Southern District of New York.
The story claimed no ECW assets have been purchased by the WWF and the court had no prior knowledge ECW trademarks would be used. Not only was the term ECW used as part of an angle, but the ECW insignia was used, their music was played and t-shirts with the logo were worn by all of the wrestlers on the ECW team.
The irony to all this is this was a copy of the NWO angle in many ways, which WWF sued WCW for and eventually settled with them out of court. In that case, while one could say WCW may have never specifically the first few weeks of TV indicated that Kevin Nash and Scott Hall were not representing WWF, which was sort of alluded to on television without being said (and said more specifically on the WCW Hotline for a week before Hall & Nash & Eric Bischoff specifically made clear on television they were not representing the WWF). In this case, the term ECW was specifically said, talked about being purchased, while would leave the debtors which $7.5 million wanting to collect their money from the supposed new owner. Even as an angle and not reality of a purchase, the trademarks, currently the property of the bankruptcy court, and the name, were being used. It's almost inconceivable to me the WWF would do this without taking the proper steps if only because the company was on the other side of a legal case that was, if anything, less blatant.
WWF officials were told not to comment on the legal situation other than say that ECW was mentioned on television as part of a fictional storyline.
Thanks for reading, Ant.
The WWF has been told to retract statements made on television this past week indicating Stephanie McMahon's ownership of ECW. The story quoted a source close to the trustee handling the ECW Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings in the Southern District of New York.
The story claimed no ECW assets have been purchased by the WWF and the court had no prior knowledge ECW trademarks would be used. Not only was the term ECW used as part of an angle, but the ECW insignia was used, their music was played and t-shirts with the logo were worn by all of the wrestlers on the ECW team.
The irony to all this is this was a copy of the NWO angle in many ways, which WWF sued WCW for and eventually settled with them out of court. In that case, while one could say WCW may have never specifically the first few weeks of TV indicated that Kevin Nash and Scott Hall were not representing WWF, which was sort of alluded to on television without being said (and said more specifically on the WCW Hotline for a week before Hall & Nash & Eric Bischoff specifically made clear on television they were not representing the WWF). In this case, the term ECW was specifically said, talked about being purchased, while would leave the debtors which $7.5 million wanting to collect their money from the supposed new owner. Even as an angle and not reality of a purchase, the trademarks, currently the property of the bankruptcy court, and the name, were being used. It's almost inconceivable to me the WWF would do this without taking the proper steps if only because the company was on the other side of a legal case that was, if anything, less blatant.
WWF officials were told not to comment on the legal situation other than say that ECW was mentioned on television as part of a fictional storyline.
Thanks for reading, Ant.
Page:
I know i know but its my opion. Im now gonna watch November 2 Remember and see Angel get powerbombed through a table on fire. Goodday.
Have you seen a ECW PPV? If not you should shut your mouth and only crictisise once you have.
ECW RULE!
I just heard this on WrestleZone, pretty big news for Invasion. Strange thing is, the USA edition of Heat carried on the angle! Anyway, here is the story:
The WWF has been told to retract statements made on television this past week indicating Stephanie McMahon's ownership of ECW. The story quoted a source close to the trustee handling the ECW Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings in the Southern District of New York.
The story claimed no ECW assets have been purchased by the WWF and the court had no prior knowledge ECW trademarks would be used. Not only was the term ECW used as part of an angle, but the ECW insignia was used, their music was played and t-shirts with the logo were worn by all of the wrestlers on the ECW team.
The irony to all this is this was a copy of the NWO angle in many ways, which WWF sued WCW for and eventually settled with them out of court. In that case, while one could say WCW may have never specifically the first few weeks of TV indicated that Kevin Nash and Scott Hall were not representing WWF, which was sort of alluded to on television without being said (and said more specifically on the WCW Hotline for a week before Hall & Nash & Eric Bischoff specifically made clear on television they were not representing the WWF). In this case, the term ECW was specifically said, talked about being purchased, while would leave the debtors which $7.5 million wanting to collect their money from the supposed new owner. Even as an angle and not reality of a purchase, the trademarks, currently the property of the bankruptcy court, and the name, were being used. It's almost inconceivable to me the WWF would do this without taking the proper steps if only because the company was on the other side of a legal case that was, if anything, less blatant.
WWF officials were told not to comment on the legal situation other than say that ECW was mentioned on television as part of a fictional storyline.
Thanks for reading, Ant.
The WWF has been told to retract statements made on television this past week indicating Stephanie McMahon's ownership of ECW. The story quoted a source close to the trustee handling the ECW Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings in the Southern District of New York.
The story claimed no ECW assets have been purchased by the WWF and the court had no prior knowledge ECW trademarks would be used. Not only was the term ECW used as part of an angle, but the ECW insignia was used, their music was played and t-shirts with the logo were worn by all of the wrestlers on the ECW team.
The irony to all this is this was a copy of the NWO angle in many ways, which WWF sued WCW for and eventually settled with them out of court. In that case, while one could say WCW may have never specifically the first few weeks of TV indicated that Kevin Nash and Scott Hall were not representing WWF, which was sort of alluded to on television without being said (and said more specifically on the WCW Hotline for a week before Hall & Nash & Eric Bischoff specifically made clear on television they were not representing the WWF). In this case, the term ECW was specifically said, talked about being purchased, while would leave the debtors which $7.5 million wanting to collect their money from the supposed new owner. Even as an angle and not reality of a purchase, the trademarks, currently the property of the bankruptcy court, and the name, were being used. It's almost inconceivable to me the WWF would do this without taking the proper steps if only because the company was on the other side of a legal case that was, if anything, less blatant.
WWF officials were told not to comment on the legal situation other than say that ECW was mentioned on television as part of a fictional storyline.
Thanks for reading, Ant.
Page: