Legends Are Coming to EA Sports UFC in December and They Will Be Free

[hirst1000]

Call me crazy, but the last silhouette looks a bit like Fedor to me. Can't imagine a situation where he makes it in though.

[ERA]

Quote: Originally Posted by hirst1000

Call me crazy, but the last silhouette looks a bit like Fedor to me. Can't imagine a situation where he makes it in though.

I wouldn't doubt it one bit. He was the cover man for EA MMA.

I would be so, so, so happy if it was Fedor. Fedor, Rampage, and Hughes in one update would be absolutely mental.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk now Free

[fballturkey]

I don't follow wrestling, but I remember reading recently about some wrestler making a big stink because Lesnar was allowed to do his own promotion deals when he came back from the UFC. I wouldn't completely discount the possibility that it's him, and that'd be pretty cool.

[New York O]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

Youre not completely right. Every UFC contract now has a likeness clause that is primarily geared toward protecting the UFC's rights when it comes to promoting and exploiting past fights. For example, Tito Ortiz is now a Bellator fighter. Lets say the UFC wants to put out a DVD with Tito's old fights and use his picture on the cover. They dont want to run into a situation where Tito sues and they arent able to promote the video the way they want it. The issue is the clause is broad enough to allow the UFC to use likenesses even after the contract has expired. With that said, I dont feel sorry for the fighters. Any attorney with half a brain would object to that clause and ask them to carve out certain rights that expire once the contract has expired. You also have the Couture situation wrong. Couture signed a likeness deal with EA before THQ and UFC partnered for the Undisputed series. The deal was for the Command and Conquer series but had additional exclusive sports rights also. So you are wrong when you say "Video game likeness has nothing to do with a fighting contract" because the clause that grants them the right to use a fighter's likeness is in the fighter's contract.

You stated NOW I was refering to a sitution from back in 2007-08 when the first THQ UFC Undisputed was in development.

I was also refering to Bellator fighters coming out in a UFC game. Just because UFC is doing those types of contracts doesn't mean Bellator is. Some of Bellator fighters fight in other promotions! UFC doesnt allow that.

Based on the Jon Fitch situation I made an assumption that UFC did that to most the fighters who came out in those UFC games. If they have a lifetime deal to use your likeness it will have nothing to do with their fighting deal expiring or being terminated. Thats why I don't think it would be a problem to have Rampage or Ortiz to be in this game.

I was wrong for grouping Couture in with Fitch. I should have explained my point better but in Randy Couture's own words........
"My fight contract has nothing to do with the ancillary stuff that I do outside of that fight contract. So I don't really see it as a conflict," Couture said. "I know that Dana and others may see it differently, but I don't. I fought hard to maintain my name and rights and ancillary image since Zuffa bought the company in 2000, and that's been a major rub along the way. But I'm a fighter first and foremost. I will continue to fight as long as we have a contract. And all the other stuff that I'm free and clear to do, I'm going to do."

The first line of his comment was my point!
I'm sure now UFC makes sure its worded in their deals but every situation/contract is different. I fighter of Couture's stature can get away with not signing that type of deal while Fitch can't, which is what happen. EXAMPLE guy like Lesnar who would make UFC a ton of money said I'll do a fight deal but you can't use my likeness in a game you think UFC says no? LOL he was one of the top in ppv buys, they would do it in a heart beat!

What you state about the dvd is correct but they already have the rights to all their fights. They can do an all Ortiz fight dvd and slap a generic title and a UFC logo on it and Ortiz wouldn't be able to do nothing about it. I didn't say anything about promoting a figher and/or using their images. Using a persons likeness for a game is a different subject so that was irrelevant to what my point was.

[New York O]

Based on the original silhouette ad I believe it would be Lasnar. I dont think the second ad, that they replaced the original one with is him, I think Ortiz.
Plus I don't see UFC calling Lesnar a legend. We'll find out soon enough though.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by New York O

You stated NOW I was refering to a sitution from back in 2007-08 when the first THQ UFC Undisputed was in development. I was also refering to Bellator fighters coming out in a UFC game. Just because UFC is doing those types of contracts doesn't mean Bellator is. Some of Bellator fighters fight in other promotions! UFC doesnt allow that. Based on the Jon Fitch situation I made an assumption that UFC did that to most the fighters who came out in those UFC games. If they have a lifetime deal to use your likeness it will have nothing to do with their fighting deal expiring or being terminated. Thats why I don't think it would be a problem to have Rampage or Ortiz to be in this game. I was wrong for grouping Couture in with Fitch. I should have explained my point better but in Randy Couture's own words........ "My fight contract has nothing to do with the ancillary stuff that I do outside of that fight contract. So I don't really see it as a conflict," Couture said. "I know that Dana and others may see it differently, but I don't. I fought hard to maintain my name and rights and ancillary image since Zuffa bought the company in 2000, and that's been a major rub along the way. But I'm a fighter first and foremost. I will continue to fight as long as we have a contract. And all the other stuff that I'm free and clear to do, I'm going to do." The first line of his comment was my point! I'm sure now UFC makes sure its worded in their deals but every situation/contract is different. I fighter of Couture's stature can get away with not signing that type of deal while Fitch can't, which is what happen. EXAMPLE guy like Lesnar who would make UFC a ton of money said I'll do a fight deal but you can't use my likeness in a game you think UFC says no? LOL he was one of the top in ppv buys, they would do it in a heart beat! What you state about the dvd is correct but they already have the rights to all their fights. They can do an all Ortiz fight dvd and slap a generic title and a UFC logo on it and Ortiz wouldn't be able to do nothing about it. I didn't say anything about promoting a figher and/or using their images. Using a persons likeness for a game is a different subject so that was irrelevant to what my point was.

Bellator's standard contract features the same lifetime likeness clause as the UFC:

http://www.ingrainedmedia.com/the-re...s-of-bellator/

My biggest concern was was ancillary rights section. In return for a payment of $2,000 the contract granted Bellator essentially unlimited and perpetual rights over Vic’s likeness. I informed Vic that it would be impossible for us to represent him and do what we do if he signed the Tournament contract. Even if Vic agreed to the terms and won the Tournament, he had to ask himself " how much is my name and likeness really worth now and in the future?especially if I win the Tournament." Vic agreed with my review and said he was going to speak with Bellator.

A few days later Vic called me back and informed me that he spoke to Bellator and he was told the terms were “non-negotiable”.'

It appears the only reason that Rampage is appearing in a UFC game is because he likely already signed away his likeness rights in a previous UFC contract and therefore could grant Bellator those rights. That is shocking that a person of Rampage's stature would sign those rights away forever.

As for Couture, again he signed the EA deal before the UFC made the likeness clause mandatory. The one point I agree with is that Couture had the stature to object to signing a exclusive lifetime licensing deal. But so did Rampage. So did Tito. So did Lesnar. Again thats why its shocking that Rampage is in EA UFC and will likely receive nothing in return.

As to your last point, that doesnt make any sense. The clause that you and I are referring to covers a fighter's likeness in all forms of media. The clause applies to DVDs, Games, Apps....anything that would use his likeness. I was giving you an example of why the UFC would want that clause with the Ortiz DVD example. They dont want to have to use a generic cover....thats why they have that clause. So how is that irrelevant?

[mosdef328]

I'm excited about Rampage and whether the 4th is Tito or Brock. I would be excited for both. It's interesting that a few weeks ago a rumor popped up about Rampage coming back to the UFC and Dana didn't deny, just said something like Rampage and I (Dana) have an interesting relationship.

[New York O]

Let me rephrase my original comment for the comment police....

Just because a promotion has a fight contract with someone doesn't necessarily mean that they can stop a fighter from being put in a game for another promotion.
So I'm not surprised to see Rampage and if it is, Ortiz, both now Bellator fighters in EA UFC.
In my opinion, I believe both signed a similar lifetime deal as Jon Fitch was reluctant to do back in 2008 for the THQ UFC.
All contracts are not the same though. Someone like Randy Couture, was able to limit UFC use of his likeness in his fighting contracts and able to sign on with EA to do a game.