[quote name='GuilewasNK']That reminds me of the Dudley Boyz situation. That was just plain wrong of Vince.[/QUOTE]
Perfect analogy.
[quote name='Survivor Charlie']This is the story as I heard it...
Vince McMahon seems to feel that when someone wrestles for him, he instantly owns every aspect of their character regardless of whether the wrestler created it long before they worked for McMahon or not.
When Savage gave notice he was going to WCW, Vince McMahon pulled the “I own the name Macho Man and the term Macho Madness” card. Which of course is bullshit. Instead of negotiating with him, Savage told Eric Bischoff, who immediately got WCW’s lawyers on him. McMahon backed down with putting up a fight.
There’s a lot of things Vince McMahon will put up with, even being beaten in court (see Mero, Rena). What he will not put up with is being told that he doesn’t own the rights to someone’s likeness by divine right of the king. I defend the WWE a lot, but McMahon is an egomaniac to the degree that they have to stop meetings in their track if he so much as sneezes because he throws a temper tantrum on himself. Being told he doesn’t OWN YOU FOR ETERNITY? Wow, that’s cause for being blacklisted.
Hell, the WWE brought back Sable. They’re apparently bringing back Wendi Rechter. But anyone who claims the WWE doesn’t own their name?
THEM, BLACKLISTED!
The Ultimate Warrior sued the WWE when they said it was not his character. And I know guys who swallow WWE bullshit won’t like to hear it, but the Warrior was 100% in the right. He could legitimately claim the character of the Ultimate Warrior was his. He called himself the Dingo Warrior before coming to the WWE. He used the same face paint, tassles, etc. Just because the WWE changed his name doesn’t mean they own the rights to the entire persona. It doesn’t work that way.
So in my opinion Randy Savage is blacklisted because Vince McMahon asserted he should own the name Macho Man, was pointed out what a dumbass he was by Turner’s lawyers, and is pouting over it.[/QUOTE]
Where this doesn't hold water is that in the case of both Warrior, he's in the game. If it was due to losing litigation, Warrior would never have an action figure or appear in the game. Now, I understand that Warrior's contract is not with WWE, but Jakks (and THQ by virtue of association over the game content). Just like Bruno Sammartino. Both are seemingly able to have their memories reproduced in action figures and games, and simultaneously "stay true" to their ideals of never working with WWE again.
Though perhaps it explains a small portion of Christian's poor view in McMahon's eyes - he stayed largely the same, characterwise, in TNA. But he dropped his addictive lil TNA hand gesture and references to the "Christian Coalition" (a term I loved to see abused in pro wrestling, mind) in his WWE tenure.
Short version of the story: if it really was over copyright/ownership of the character, I'm absolutely *stunned* that THQ/Jakks didn't go the Warrior/Sammartino contract route with him. It's not like Macho Man has scruples to hold onto in terms of avoiding money: he put out a
ing rap album, for god's sake!