- Thread starter
- #1
HPC
New member
This was made in regards to WWE and Wrestlemania, but the NFL and MLB are also notorious for going around to different locations near the Superbowl and All-Star/World Series games and confiscating merchandise.
When I worked at a lcs in Phoenix when the Superbowl was here in 2008, the NFL and two Homeland Security officials came and tried to take every piece of football memorabilia in the store. They even tried to take an autographed Matt Leinart USC jersey but didn't after we pointed out that, duh, it's an NCAA item.
Here's the gist of her ruling:
They (WWE) will not be allowed to do so this year as 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 is the location of WrestleMania 30. The judge stated the following:
“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.”
I wonder how this will impact future Superbowls and All-Star games
When I worked at a lcs in Phoenix when the Superbowl was here in 2008, the NFL and two Homeland Security officials came and tried to take every piece of football memorabilia in the store. They even tried to take an autographed Matt Leinart USC jersey but didn't after we pointed out that, duh, it's an NCAA item.
Here's the gist of her ruling:
They (WWE) will not be allowed to do so this year as 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 is the location of WrestleMania 30. The judge stated the following:
“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.”
I wonder how this will impact future Superbowls and All-Star games
