CM Punk Out Of Hiding, Back On TV Tonight

CM Punk was with Lyoto Machida, Rener Gracie, Perceu Friza and Tioki Gracie on Saturday night to watch UFC 171. Machida Tweeted the following:

Punk will appear on this week’s episode of Talking Dead alongside Nicole Brown and Yvette Nicole Brown. It’s interesting that Punk is billed by his real name, Phil Brooks.

Connect With WNW

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and LinkedIn!

  • _JIM_

    I take Punk being billed under his real name as a bad sign for the WWE and wrestling fans. Him being on TV under his real name looks to me like him trying to have people recognize him by it instead of the name WWE most likely owns the rights to.

    • BIG M

      Does WWE own the rights to his ring name.
      I mean he came into WWE before it was mandatory that they created and trademarked all their talents ring names.
      And even if they do own it since he did actually create the name back when he was wrestling in the indies he could probably sue them for it and win.

      • Splat

        He was going by CM Punk before joining WWE.

        • jackkedx10

          He was known as chick magnet punk before he was even a pro, back when he wrestled in back yards. He later shortened it to cm punk so it’s his name and not wwe.

      • SandeepBains

        I think I do recall reading years ago that he did keep the rights to the CM Punk name. Which would be pretty rare. Team 3-D created the Dudley Boys name but WWE owns it, for example.

        • BIG M

          Actually Paul Heyman created the Dudley Boys name and gimmick back in ECW With Big D Dudley and added D-von, Bubba Ray, Spike and about 10 others as a long running joke of brothers of different mothers by a traveling table salesman (seriously it was a 3 year long gag).
          D-von and Ray were the only stand outs of the group and thats why WWE signed them in late 99.
          I Think they paid Heyman a small flat fee for use of the name every week because Spike stayed in ECW under the Dudley name till ECW folded Heymen couldn’t have done that if WWE bought the trademark outright which I think they eventually did when they bought the ECW name, trademark and video library off Heyman during his very memorable time as WWE’s colour commentator.

        • BIG M

          Actually Paul Heyman created the Dudley Boys name and gimmick back in ECW With Big D*** Dudley (Cant finish his first name because WNW didn’t approve it the first time I posted this comment) and added D-von, Bubba Ray, Spike and about 10 others as a long running joke of brothers of different mothers by a traveling table salesman (seriously it was a 3 year long gag).
          D-von and Ray were the only stand outs of the group and thats why WWE signed them in late 99.
          I Think they paid Heyman a small flat fee for use of the name every week because Spike stayed in ECW under the Dudley name till ECW folded Heymen couldn’t have done that if WWE bought the trademark outright which I think they eventually did when they bought the ECW name, trademark and video library off Heyman during his very memorable time as WWE’s colour commentator.

          • SandeepBains

            I see. I knew about Spike and er, Large Richard Dudley, didn’t know there was a whole stable of other Dudleys. I also wasn’t aware Heyman came up with the Dudley gimmick.

    • Bob’s Diner

      I doubt WWE own the CM Punk name

      • Seth Gordon

        WWE trademarked CM Punk as a character name in 2009, and took out a second TM on it for merchandise sales in 2011. That’s been their MO for years – you sign, you sign everything over. It’s not like Punk was gonna get some special treatment when he was a newbie signing his first papers for them.

        It doesn’t matter one bit, from a legal perspective, if he was using the name before then. Vince owns the trademark, end of story. Phil Brooks can’t use the name anywhere Vince doesn’t authorize it now.

        • Bob’s Diner

          So they trademarked it a whole 4 years after he started working for them?
          And their second trademark started 2 years ago, so if it is anything like the last time it will expire soon.

          Legally, CM Punk could easily prove he created the name so would win if this went to court. But it won’t. Chances are he either signed over the rights to the name, knowing this would be the last thing he ever did in wrestling, or he still will maintain rights to it once his contract expires in a few months.

          • Seth Gordon

            Who created the name has no legal meaning whatsoever. Stan Lee could not move to DC comics and put out a “Spider-Man” book, even though he created Spider-Man. Marvel owns the trademark. He can prove he crated Spider-Man, of course, and no one would deny it. He still can’t use it anywhere but Marvel.

            A trademark lasts ten years and the owner has the right to re-file it as many times as they wish. Sometimes two trademarks are held, as in this case – one for the character name “CM Punk” and the second to use the name on merchandise. If Phil Brooks wanted to argue the point, he could have argued WHEN Vince took out the trademark that WWE didn’t have the right to trademark it, as it was his creation – but he didn’t. He allowed them to, and now they own it, and they will always own it, end of story.

          • Bob’s Diner

            Like I said, it depends on the deal – if he signed the rights away, it would be because he most likely considered WWE to be his last stop in professional wrestling. I’m sure his friends don’t call him CM Punk in real life

      • http://wrestlingnewsworld.com/ Theophilus McFadden

        As has been said, Vince wouldn’t market anything or anyone he doesn’t owe. The only exception to that are Hogan and Flair. I’d be very surprised if Mr. Brooks owns that name. Likely, Vince trademarked that name years ago. He just doesn’t want to enforce it for fear Punk won’t come back. Once he’s gone, WWE’ll make sure he doesn’t use it if he chose to go elsewhere on TV with it.

        • Bob’s Diner

          It really depends on the deal – not every wrestler has the same deal. Like I said, if he signed away the rights then so be it. If he didn’t, he’ll get it back. I guess we’ll find out once his contract finally expires

          BTW Hogan and Flair aren’t the only exceptions. Other veterans have said they won’t sign legends contracts because it involves signing over the rights to their character names. Though I wonder if Hogan has actually caved this time around…

          • http://wrestlingnewsworld.com/ Theophilus McFadden

            I think Hogan just licenses the name to WWE for their use, though I’m not sure what the deal actually is. He’s on a totally different playing field. BTW, Flair and he are the only exceptions signed to the company at the moment. That’s what I meant.

          • Bob’s Diner

            Is Flair signed?
            I just remember Hogan saying when he signed with TNA that he didn’t want to sign the Hulk Hogan character to Vince McMahone… but I wonder if he was so keen to be involved with WrestleMania that he decided to do it… just pondering…