The original UFC antitrust lawsuit may have been settled for a whopping $375 million, but thereâs still a second antitrust lawsuit ongoing against the UFC ⌠and now two more.
Le v. Zuffa settled last year, with hundreds of millions of dollars being paid out right now to fighters who competed between 2010 to 2017. Johnson v. Zuffa (dba UFC) covers UFC fighters from 2017 to the present day and is still winding its way through court. Itâs a tough one because many fighters in that time period signed arbitration clauses and class action waivers which complicate the legal situation greatly.
In a recent back-and-forth between UFC and fighter lawyers, the promotion argued the fighters that filed suit shouldnât represent the present class of fighters because their specific contracts didnât include the arbitration and class action elements. So lawyers have filed a new lawsuit with former UFC light heavyweight Misha Cirkunov to represent fighters who signed the more recent, most restrictive contracts.
Thatâs just some complex legal wrangling to ensure the 2017 onward antitrust suit properly covers all fighters. Whatâs more interesting is another lawsuit launched with another former UFC light heavyweight, Phil Davis, who hopes to represent all fighters OUTSIDE the UFC.
Thatâs right: now that UFC has basically admitted their monopsony powers hurt UFC fighter pay, non-UFC fighters are out to prove those powers hurt pay outside the UFC as well. John Nash explained the suit in the latest episode of his Hey Not The Face podcast.
âPhil Davis [alleges] the UFCâs scheme impairs professional MMA promotions like PFL in their ability to attract a critical mass of top-level MMA fighters necessary to compete with the UFC at the top tier of the sport of professional MMA,â Nash said. âAnd otherwise substantially forecloses competition in the market relevant to the case.â
âWhat heâs saying is because these other promotions donât have access to fighters, they cannot put on the big fights,â Nash continued. âBecause they canât put on bigger fights, they cannot pay their fighters like Phil Davis â whoâs rated No. 8 on Fight Matrix right now â they cannot pay them more. And so fighters outside the UFC are damaged by their scheme, not just fighters in the UFC. Because the UFC is starving other promotions of a chance to compete for those top level fighters.â
Whatâs most interesting about Davisâ lawsuit is it isnât looking for another big financial settlement from the UFC. Heâs asking for specific injunctive relief to end the UFCâs ability to lock top fighters up in contracts that never end.
The filing calls for the elimination of restrictive and exclusionary clauses from UFC fighter contracts, the elimination of arbitration clauses and class action waivers, and asks that a provision be added to all current and future UFC contracts that allows a fighter to terminate their contract without penalty after one year.
For a brief moment after the initial UFC antitrust lawsuit was filed, the UFC included a five year sunset clause in their contracts. That was removed after fighters like Francis Ngannou used it to escape the promotionâs control and make $30 million as a free agent. That gives you a glimpse of how even the weakest of fighter protections can shake up the game. A one year sunset clause would effectively blow open the MMA market.
The first UFC antitrust case took a decade to wind its way through court to a settlement. Weâll see how long Johnson v. UFC takes, and if Cirkunov v. UFC has to start from scratch or gets folded into the Johnson case as lawyers hope. Does Davis v. UFC also get assigned to the same âbiasedâ judge? Can it skip several steps because of the ongoing antitrust litigation in these other cases?
UFC lawyers will try to slow down all these lawsuits as much as possible. Weâll keep you updated on whether thatâs successful or not.
Much love to Phil.
Hes a real one.
He and his dad.
I always thought the ufc contracts were one sided. If you win they keep you to the terms even if you become a star. If you lose they can tear up the contract. They can also not offer you fights for long periods of time, starving you.
Is there are clause in UFC contracts so fighters can get out if the UFC doesnât offer them a fight within a period of time?
Also, much like pro wrestling contracts, categorization as an âindependent contractorâ is legally dubious.
Esp. with the UFC and their mandated uniforms.
That uniform thing is about impoverishing fighters. Fighter sort of had fuck you money with the endorsements and didnât have to do things that werenât in their best interest. Now they are so broke they have to take -1500 opponts on 2 weeks notice
They arenât independent contractors if they can only work for a single company and have to appear at set dates and times.