Edwin Coe wrestles with libel twist to trademark battle

London law firm Edwin Coe is considering launching defamation proceedings on behalf of an English barrister at the heart of the long-running trademark battle between the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).

The US-based WWE used to be the World Wrestling Federation and it has been engaged in litigation with theWorld Wide Fund for Nature over the 'WWF' trademark since 1994.

In October 2001, the High Court granted an injunction enforcing a 1994 agreement under which the wrestling organisation undertook not to use the 'WWF' trademark, except under limited circumstances.

Last week, a court rejected an application by video game manufacturer THQ/JAKKS - one of WWE's licensees producing wrestling-related merchandise - to use the 'WWF' trademark in its products.

WWF is pursuing damages from the wrestling organisation in respect of trademark infringement.

However, in a statement issued ahead of the ruling, WWE attacked the environmental fund over its claim for damages.

In particular, the statement attacked the fund's legal adviser, Geneva-based English-qualified barrister Michael Rogers.

The WWF is headquartered in Switzerland.

The statement also makes a number of potentially defamatory comments about Mr Rogers' past business experience, all of which he vigorously denies.

Mr Rogers said: 'The court has fully vindicated our case.' He added that in his view the allegations were part of the dispute over damages.

Edwin Coe partner Graham Clark - who has been acting on the main litigation - confirmed that libel proceedings were being considered.

A spokesman for WWE responded: 'We stand by our release and are interested to see people's reaction to it.'

Under US law, comments criticising opponents such as contained in this release may be covered by qualified privilege.

Victoria MacCallum