WWF vs. WWF was a trademark dispute involving the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and the World Wrestling Federation (WWF) over the use of the "WWF" initials.

On April 17, 2000, the Fund pursued the case in the High Court of Justice in England through international arbitration, as the Fund was based in Switzerland, and the Federation was based in the United States. The court ruled in favor of the Fund on August 10, 2001, and the Federation abandoned their attempt to seek leave to appeal in the House of Lords on May 6, 2002, rebranding as World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).^[1]

On May 16, 2002, WWE chairman Vince McMahon appeared on TSN's Off the Record with Michael Landsberg, stating that WWE's international expansion in the 1990s and the advent of the Internet had created unforeseen challenges when the company and the World Wildlife Fund initially agreed on the use of the "WWF" initials in 1989.^[2]

The World Wildlife Fund registered the "WWF" initials as a trademark in 1961, despite changing its name to the World Wildlife Fund for Nature in 1989, the Fund retained use of the "WWF" initials as its logo and in-print.^[3]

In 1979, the World Wide Wrestling Federation (WWWF) rebranded as the World Wrestling Federation (WWF). The business primarily conducted operations in the United States.^[4]

On September 6, 1989, the Fund had filed for extensions of time to oppose a trademark application by the Federation for "WWF", on the grounds of potential confusion with their own registered "WWF" trademark.^[5]

On September 12, 1989, the Federation sent a letter to the Fund addressing its federal trademark application for the "WWF" mark in International Class 41 (for wrestling entertainment services). This marked the beginning of formal discussions between the two parties regarding the use of the "WWF" initials.^[6]

On September 26, 1989, both parties reached an agreement that the Federation would not use the "WWF" mark in the Times Roman typeface when the mark appeared alone, without the Federation's logo. In exchange, the Fund agreed not to oppose the Federation's federal trademark registration for "WWF" in Class 41.^[7]

By 1993, despite the 1989 agreement, both parties had been involved in further disputes, as the Federation had grown in popularity across Europe. Both the Fund and Federation had contested international trademark applications the other party had made. The Fund obtained an interim injunction against the distributor of the Federation's WWF Magazine in Switzerland.^[8]

On January 20, 1994, the Fund and the Federation formed a new agreement, including that the Federation would stop using the "WWF" initials in printed, written, or visual form in connection with its business, though allowances were made for pre-approved merchandise and publications.^[9] The Federation was also prohibited from filing any new trademarks with the "WWF" initials and had to cancel existing registrations, except for those associated with the Federation's “block logo.” The Federation was allowed to occasionally use the initials in oral contexts, such as referring to the “WWF champion,” but was otherwise expected to avoid using them. Other terms included that business partners were required to exclusively refer to the company as the "World Wrestling Federation".^[10]

On April 17, 2000, the Fund commenced proceedings against the Federation at the High Court of Justice in England through international arbitration, claiming that the Federation had violated the 1994 agreement, particularly with their use of WWF.com and other Internet-based endeavors using "WWF".^[11]

On August 10, 2001, the court ruled in favor of the World Wide Fund for Nature.^[12] The World Wrestling Federation filed against the decision in England's Court of Appeal on October 1, 2001.^[13]

On February 27, 2002, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Federation's challenge to the High Court of Justice's decision. However, the Federation was granted a stay by the Court of Appeal.^[14] The Federation announced on the same day that it would seek leave to appeal in England's House of Lords.^[15]

On May 6, 2002, the Federation announced that it would abandon its attempt in seeking leave to appeal in the House of Lords, and would rebrand from World Wrestling Federation (WWF) to World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).^[16] The WWE would be able to still use its block 'WWF' logo in some contexts, as well as the term 'World Wrestling Federation', but would be prohibited from using the 'WWF' initials moving forward, as well as the 'WWF scratch' logo introduced at Survivor Series 1997. The WWE would also have to censor any "WWF" spoken references and the former 'WWF scratch' logo in any previous footage.^[17]

In the same statement, Linda McMahon, CEO for WWE, said that the rebranding allowed for the company to emphasize its focus on entertainment, and the company also launched its "Get the F Out!" marketing campaign.^[18]

On April 7, 2003, the Court of Appeal partially overturned their decision to allow re-released titles of interactive software published by licensees THQ/Jakks Pacific that contained the former 'WWF scratch' logo within the gameplay to be sold, as THQ argued that censoring the "WWF" logo and initials would be impractical due to the configuration of the software.^[19] The re-released titles included the PlayStation Greatest Hits/Platinum versions of WWF SmackDown! 2: Know Your Role and WWF SmackDown! Just Bring It, as well as the Xbox Platinum Hits re-release of WWF Raw. However, whilst the internal gameplay of these titles were the same, the external cover artwork was amended on all to display the WWE logo.^[20]

On March 23, 2005, Mr Justice Patten gave the Fund permission to amend paragraph 8 of their claim to seek for damages.^[21] On February 16, 2006, the Fund sought damages against the WWE in the High Court over the entire dispute.^[22] On April 2, 2007, the High Court sided with WWE, mainly due to the Fund's abuse of process and inconsistent legal strategy.^[23][24]

On May 6, 2002, WWE promptly changed its website from WWF.com to WWE.com, but other updates took longer. The WrestleMania X8 video game that was released on GameCube on June 10, 2002 had any typical WWF logo placements on its case artwork replaced with "World Wrestling Federation" typography, as the manufacturing and shipping took place toward the end of the legal battle, but before "WWE" was introduced; later versions of the game were released with WWE logos on the case.^[25] The New York Stock Exchange ticker symbol remained as WWF until August 7, 2002, and some championship titles continued to feature the WWF logo for a while after the agreement until they could be redesigned.^[26]

The exclusive British WWE Tagged Classics DVD re-releases of WWF programming released between 2004 and 2012 by third-party distributor Silver Vision were released in their original form, without any censorship of "WWF".^[27]

On December 1, 2002, the WWF.com web domain name expired. WWE had allowed the domain name to expire, as there was no legal obligation to transfer the asset to the Fund. The domain was quickly acquired by Frank Baach, who sold it to Gregory Ricks from Texas, who used the domain for his 'Web Wrestling Forum' in the year following.^[28] On November 17, 2006, it was announced that the Fund's attempt to obtain the domain name through the World Intellectual Property Organization's Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy, on the grounds that it was registered in bad faith, was unsuccessful.^[29]

The WWE and the Fund formed a new agreement which meant that the WWE would no longer have to blur or censor 'WWF' logos and spoken 'WWF' references in previous footage, however as part of the deal, the WWE would be prohibited from using the original 'WWF' block logo in new footage, as well as any references to "World Wrestling Federation" in new footage. The first instances of the WWF logo being unblurred was in archival segments on the WWE Raw 1000 television special broadcast on July 23, 2012.^[30]