Jim Cornette Loses Preliminary Injunction In Lawsuit Against G-Raver

Jim Cornette has lost a preliminary injunction against G-Raver after filing a lawsuit back in December 2019.

Cornette chose to pursue the lawsuit over a ‘Fuck Jim Cornette’ t-shirt featuring his likeness that was stabbed. While G-Raver’s attorney filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit against his client, that motion was denied.

Alexandra J. Roberts, who writes on trademarks and entertainment law, revealed the details of the preliminary injunction in a Twitter thread, stating that “the court says the t-shirts aren’t commerce but speech: “G-Raver sold the shirts…to critique Cornette’s views on deathmatch wrestling through parody; 1a protects this expression…b/c parodies are a valuable means of expression to weaken the ideas the celebrity espouses.”

She added that “on top of that, the shirts don’t create a likelihood of confusion & Cornette’s name may possess the distinctiveness that would make it a trademark. it’s certainly not a famous one capable of dilution. even if it were a mark, defendants’ uses aren’t similar” and that “even when the use is facially for a commercial or advertising purpose; the relevant exception here is…the shirts are expressive works & the use is through a communications medium.”

According to Roberts, the court also ruled that the shirts are “works “invented by G-Raver’s imagination”; they are transformative.”

Roberts noted how interesting cases like this from the wrestling world are: “cases about the wrestling world are always fascinating b/c the parties are not exactly people but not purely fictional characters”

Cornette’s attorney, Stephen New, noted the preliminary injunction in a reply to Roberts’ thread.

It was on a preliminary injunction. Glad you enjoyed it. Academia can be boring sometimes I am sure

— Steve New (@StephenPNew) September 1, 2020

the court says the t-shirts aren't commerce but speech: "g-raver sold the shirts…to critique cornette’s views on deathmatch wrestling through parody; 1a protects this expression…b/c parodies are a valuable means of expression to weaken the ideas the celebrity espouses."

— alexandra j. roberts (@lexlanham) August 21, 2020

on top of that, the shirts don't create a likelihood of confusion. & cornette's name may possess the distinctiveness that would make it a trademark. it's certainly not a famous one capable of dilution. even if it were a mark, defendants' uses aren't similar.

— alexandra j. roberts (@lexlanham) August 21, 2020

the court holds the shirts to be works "invented by g-raver's imagination"; they are transformative.

— alexandra j. roberts (@lexlanham) August 21, 2020

cornette is a wrestling commentator w/ 2 popular podcasts. the court calls him a "celebrity" w/ a "professional persona."

cases about the wrestling world are always fascinating b/c the parties are not exactly people but not purely fictional characters (see hulk hogan).

— alexandra j. roberts (@lexlanham) August 21, 2020