McFarlane/Twist settlement: finally

[sckao]

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, but from reading about this case, it's evident that Twist DID have some sort of public career off the ice. I don't know how good a hockey player he was, but apparently he was a local celebrity that hosted a local television show for a couple of years in his local market and had quantifiable product endorsements.

 

Those type of things are usually springboards for more commentator gigs so you can't really say that it didn't affect his after-hockey career...

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...invol=60729_103

 

Oops... that needed a login. It's cached if you do a Google search for "Tony Twist Fan"

 

 

 

 

According to this page, Tony Twist earned a grand total of $2.9 million in salary for all of his years in the NHL combined.

 

So Twist claims that McFarlane's use of the Antonio Twistelli character in the Spawn comic books caused him damages greatly exceeding his total salary in all of his NHL seasons? Come on.

 

Not to go all Apples and Oranges on you...

 

but John Daly the golfer has career earnings of 8.8 million. In a new book, he claims he's lost between $50 million and $60 million during a 12-year gambling run.

 

That's a lot of endorsement money...

[comix4fun]

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, but from reading about this case, it's evident that Twist DID have some sort of public career off the ice. I don't know how good a hockey player he was, but apparently he was a local celebrity that hosted a local television show for a couple of years in his local market and had quantifiable product endorsements.

 

Those type of things are usually springboards for more commentator gigs so you can't really say that it didn't affect his after-hockey career...

 

 

The problem is.....Twist mauled more people on the ice than the character did in the comics.

 

And the most silly thing is....a guy that has his entire career and notariety based on violence and fighting and being a thug thinks that funny books "hurt" is reputation.

 

As if ESPN was going to hire him to speak but then said....oh no...there is a character in a comic that could be you....we changed our mind.

[agro23]

So Twist claims that McFarlane's use of the Antonio Twistelli character in the Spawn comic books caused him damages greatly exceeding his total salary in all of his NHL seasons? Come on.

What got the jury was that (supposedly) it was his kids that pointed it out to him and he was 'diminshed in their eyes' for being protrayed as a villain. Yet if you know what his job on the ice was...

[Lazyboy]

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, but from reading about this case, it's evident that Twist DID have some sort of public career off the ice. I don't know how good a hockey player he was, but apparently he was a local celebrity that hosted a local television show for a couple of years in his local market and had quantifiable product endorsements.

 

Those type of things are usually springboards for more commentator gigs so you can't really say that it didn't affect his after-hockey career...

 

Yeah, I'm not sure about down in the U.S., but I know that when the CBC is looking to fill spots on Hockey Night in Canada, their first requirement is that applicants never appeared in Spawn comics.

[agro23]

Yeah, I'm not sure about down in the U.S., but I know that when the CBC is looking to fill spots on Hockey Night in Canada, their first requirement is that applicants never appeared in Spawn comics.

Is that like a Vancouver thing?

[Ze-man]

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, but from reading about this case, it's evident that Twist DID have some sort of public career off the ice. I don't know how good a hockey player he was, but apparently he was a local celebrity that hosted a local television show for a couple of years in his local market and had quantifiable product endorsements.

 

Those type of things are usually springboards for more commentator gigs so you can't really say that it didn't affect his after-hockey career...

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...invol=60729_103

 

Oops... that needed a login. It's cached if you do a Google search for "Tony Twist Fan"

 

 

 

 

According to this page, Tony Twist earned a grand total of $2.9 million in salary for all of his years in the NHL combined.

 

So Twist claims that McFarlane's use of the Antonio Twistelli character in the Spawn comic books caused him damages greatly exceeding his total salary in all of his NHL seasons? Come on.

 

Not to go all Apples and Oranges on you...

 

but John Daly the golfer has career earnings of 8.8 million. In a new book, he claims he's lost between $50 million and $60 million during a 12-year gambling run.

 

That's a lot of endorsement money...

 

Shin.. with all due respect.. comparing Daly's own self inflicted gambling problem and his loss of revenue from it.. to Twists losing revenue because sombody created a character based on his own, well know documented violent exploits is as apple and orange as one can ever hope to get.

 

Daly made his own bed, Twist is saying Todd M ruined the bed he was "hoping" to sleep in.

 

There is a big difference.

 

Lets get back to talking funny books, this is not going anywhere good.

 

 

Ze-

[sckao]

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, but from reading about this case, it's evident that Twist DID have some sort of public career off the ice. I don't know how good a hockey player he was, but apparently he was a local celebrity that hosted a local television show for a couple of years in his local market and had quantifiable product endorsements.

 

Those type of things are usually springboards for more commentator gigs so you can't really say that it didn't affect his after-hockey career...

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...invol=60729_103

 

Oops... that needed a login. It's cached if you do a Google search for "Tony Twist Fan"

 

 

url=http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/search/salaries-search.cgi?template=nhl-salaries-search-detail.htm&dbname=NHL-Salaries-test.txt&key2=3968&action=searchdbdisplay]According to this page, Tony Twist earned a grand total of $2.9 million in salary for all of his years in the NHL combined.[/url]

 

So Twist claims that McFarlane's use of the Antonio Twistelli character in the Spawn comic books caused him damages greatly exceeding his total salary in all of his NHL seasons? Come on.

 

Not to go all Apples and Oranges on you...

 

but John Daly the golfer has career earnings of 8.8 million. In a new book, he claims he's lost between $50 million and $60 million during a 12-year gambling run.

 

That's a lot of endorsement money...

 

Shin.. with all due respect.. comparing Daly's own self inflicted gambling problem and his loss of revenue from it.. to Twists losing revenue because sombody created a character based on his own, well know documented exploits is as apple and orange as one can ever hope to get.

 

No no.. it's not a loss of POTENTIAL revenue (as I read your comment) but a loss of actual revenue. My main point was that off-the-field revenue frequently matches or exceeds on-the-field revenue or winnings. I.E. Clearly, Daly has received at least 6X his winnings in endorsements.

 

It's kind of irrelevant that Twist only made 2.9 million over the length of his career. Many athletes continue to have endorsement deals or work in the industry well past their playing days.

 

According to Forbes, Michael Schumacher is the second highest-paid athlete in the world behind only Tiger Woods. His earnings between June 2003 and June 2004 were estimated at $80 million, with his salary from Ferrari accounting for roughly half of that amount.

[FFB]

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, but from reading about this case, it's evident that Twist DID have some sort of public career off the ice. I don't know how good a hockey player he was, but apparently he was a local celebrity that hosted a local television show for a couple of years in his local market and had quantifiable product endorsements.

 

Those type of things are usually springboards for more commentator gigs so you can't really say that it didn't affect his after-hockey career...

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...invol=60729_103

 

Oops... that needed a login. It's cached if you do a Google search for "Tony Twist Fan"

 

 

 

 

According to this page, Tony Twist earned a grand total of $2.9 million in salary for all of his years in the NHL combined.

 

So Twist claims that McFarlane's use of the Antonio Twistelli character in the Spawn comic books caused him damages greatly exceeding his total salary in all of his NHL seasons? Come on.

 

Not to go all Apples and Oranges on you...

 

but John Daly the golfer has career earnings of 8.8 million. In a new book, he claims he's lost between $50 million and $60 million during a 12-year gambling run.

 

That's a lot of endorsement money...

 

Yes, but since you mentioned apples and oranges, you have to admit that to compare the opportunities in golf for endorsements to the opportunities in hockey for endorsements is about the biggest apples/oranges comparison you could make. Golf is the single-most-lucrative sport for endorsements. Michelle Wie made $20 million dollars last year, with almost all of it being endorsements. Tiger Woods made $87 million in endorsements last year, and has made over half a billion dollars in endorsements over his career. Compare that with hockey, where not a single player cracked the top 50 in the last Forbes' poll of athlete earnings from salary and endorsements.

 

Even aside from that, looking at Twist and Daly in terms of where they performed within their respective sports, Tony Twist was never in John Daly's league when it came to skill in his sport. Daly is a really good golfer who has won two major championships and several other tournaments despite a career-long battle with alcohol addiction. After winning the 1991 PGA championship despite being Mr. Irrelevant (the last alternate allowed into the tournament), he was an instant hero in the golf world. Tony Twist never occupied that status in the hockey world. He was nothing but a thug who had virtually no name recognition outside of the St. Louis area, except among die-hard hockey fans.

[sckao]

http://law.slu.edu/fyi/documents/TonyTwist.pdf

 

Twist presented expert testimony regarding damages. One testified that Twist had the qualities of a major brand endorser, that the defendants used his name to gain commercial advantage and that because he is now associated with the comic book, he is no longer desirable to major brands and will lose $3 to $50 million as a result. Another testified that the defendants used Twist’s name as a symbol of his identity to gain a commercial advantage and the name had a monetary value to all Spawn products—15% of revenue from any product using his name and 9% of revenue from any other product—for which is Twist entitled to compensation. An accountant testified this would be just over $15 million.

 

As to damages, the jury was instructed that it must award Twist “the fair market value of what the defendant should have paid to use the plaintiff’s name in connection with its products, and/or .. . the amount of damage done and is reasonably certain to be done in the future to the commercial value of plaintiffs name.”

[FFB]

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, but from reading about this case, it's evident that Twist DID have some sort of public career off the ice. I don't know how good a hockey player he was, but apparently he was a local celebrity that hosted a local television show for a couple of years in his local market and had quantifiable product endorsements.

 

Those type of things are usually springboards for more commentator gigs so you can't really say that it didn't affect his after-hockey career...

 

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...invol=60729_103

 

Oops... that needed a login. It's cached if you do a Google search for "Tony Twist Fan"

 

 

url=http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/search/salaries-search.cgi?template=nhl-salaries-search-detail.htm&dbname=NHL-Salaries-test.txt&key2=3968&action=searchdbdisplay]According to this page, Tony Twist earned a grand total of $2.9 million in salary for all of his years in the NHL combined.[/url]

 

So Twist claims that McFarlane's use of the Antonio Twistelli character in the Spawn comic books caused him damages greatly exceeding his total salary in all of his NHL seasons? Come on.

 

Not to go all Apples and Oranges on you...

 

but John Daly the golfer has career earnings of 8.8 million. In a new book, he claims he's lost between $50 million and $60 million during a 12-year gambling run.

 

That's a lot of endorsement money...

 

Shin.. with all due respect.. comparing Daly's own self inflicted gambling problem and his loss of revenue from it.. to Twists losing revenue because sombody created a character based on his own, well know documented exploits is as apple and orange as one can ever hope to get.

 

No no.. it's not a loss of POTENTIAL revenue (as I read your comment) but a loss of actual revenue. My main point was that off-the-field revenue frequently matches or exceeds on-the-field revenue or winnings. I.E. Clearly, Daly has received at least 6X his winnings in endorsements.

 

It's kind of irrelevant that Twist only made 2.9 million over the length of his career. Many athletes continue to have endorsement deals or work in the industry well past their playing days.

 

According to Forbes, Michael Schumacher is the second highest-paid athlete in the world behind only Tiger Woods. His earnings between June 2003 and June 2004 were estimated at $80 million, with his salary from Ferrari accounting for roughly half of that amount.

 

Q: What is the difference between Tiger Woods and Michael Schumacher on the one hand, and Tony Twist on the other hand?

 

A: Tiger Woods and Michael Schumacher are the top athletes in their respective sports, who have global name recognition. Can Tony Twist say that?

[FFB]

http://law.slu.edu/fyi/documents/TonyTwist.pdf

 

Twist presented expert testimony regarding damages. One testified that Twist had the qualities of a major brand endorser

 

 

, that the defendants used his name to gain commercial advantage and that because he is now associated with the comic book, he is no longer

desirable to major brands and will lose $3 to $50 million as a result.

 

$50 million is about $30 million more than FREAKING SHAQUILLE O'NEIL MADE IN ENDORSEMENTS LAST YEAR. Tony Twist has Shaq earning potential?

 

Another testified that the defendants used Twist’s name as a symbol of his identity to gain a commercial advantage and the name had a monetary value to all Spawn products—15% of revenue from any product using his name and 9% of revenue from any other product—for which is Twist entitled to compensation. An accountant testified this would be just over $15 million.

 

So using Twist in a comic book read by a maximum of a couple hundred thousand people is worth the same amount as a major athletic shoe contract that Nike or Adidas gives to an A-List NBA star?

 

As to damages, the jury was instructed that it must award Twist “the fair market value of what the defendant should have paid to use the plaintiff’s name in connection with its products, and/or .. . the amount of damage done and is reasonably certain to be done in the future to the commercial value of plaintiffs name.”

 

What a crock. Some paid expert witnesses will say anything you pay them to say. Fortunately, most jurors are clever enough to see through that garbage.

[FFB]

Incidentally, Shin, I want YOU on my next jury!

[sckao]

Incidentally, Shin, I want YOU on my next jury!

 

Hey.. it's not my fault if the defendant's legal team didn't immediately refute those figures.. or present expert testimony of their own...

 

(And, by the way, it's LIFETIME endorsements.. not just one year.)

 

If you make $100k a year, in ten years you'll gross $1 million dollars. Yeah, it doesn't seem that much at the time, but it adds up over a lifetime.

 

I always get sent home when I get jury duty anyway... I never get selected.

 

(I'm just waiting for the damn grading contest results.... but I think I'll head home now.)

[esquirecomics]

http://law.slu.edu/fyi/documents/TonyTwist.pdf

 

Twist presented expert testimony regarding damages. One testified that Twist had the qualities of a major brand endorser

 

 

, that the defendants used his name to gain commercial advantage and that because he is now associated with the comic book, he is no longer

desirable to major brands and will lose $3 to $50 million as a result.

 

$50 million is about $30 million more than FREAKING SHAQUILLE O'NEIL MADE IN ENDORSEMENTS LAST YEAR. Tony Twist has Shaq earning potential?

 

Another testified that the defendants used Twist’s name as a symbol of his identity to gain a commercial advantage and the name had a monetary value to all Spawn products—15% of revenue from any product using his name and 9% of revenue from any other product—for which is Twist entitled to compensation. An accountant testified this would be just over $15 million.

 

So using Twist in a comic book read by a maximum of a couple hundred thousand people is worth the same amount as a major athletic shoe contract that Nike or Adidas gives to an A-List NBA star?

 

As to damages, the jury was instructed that it must award Twist “the fair market value of what the defendant should have paid to use the plaintiff’s name in connection with its products, and/or .. . the amount of damage done and is reasonably certain to be done in the future to the commercial value of plaintiffs name.”

 

What a crock. Some paid expert witnesses will say anything you pay them to say. Fortunately, most jurors are clever enough to see through that garbage.

 

Clearly McFarlane should have hired you as his attorney Scott. No doubt his high-priced attorneys (at least before his production company declared bankruptcy) must have simply rolled over and played dead rather than actually try to prevail in this case.

 

Though, to be fair, apparently the settlement was brought upon by the insurance companies, not MarFarlane. Add another "twist" and turn to the discussion!

 

Missouri Lawyers Weekly

 

February 19, 2007

 

SECTION: NEWS

 

LENGTH: 702 words

 

HEADLINE: Final Twist: Suit settled for $5 million in favor of St. Louis Blues hockey player

 

BYLINE: Donna Walter

 

BODY:

 

 

After nine years of litigation and jury verdicts of $24.5 million and $15 million, former St. Louis Blues hockey player Tony Twist has settled his right of publicity claim against Todd McFarlane Productions Inc. for $5 million.

 

The settlement was approved Thursday, Feb. 15, by Judge Charles G. Case II, a U.S. bankruptcy judge in Arizona. Todd McFarlane Productions filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2004.

 

Twist's lawsuit, originally filed in October 1997 in the St. Louis Circuit Court, alleged Todd McFarlane misappropriated Twist's name by naming a comic book character after him. In Spawn, the character of Antonio Twistelli was a Mafia don with a list of evil deeds that includes murder, child abduction and sex with prostitutes.

 

McFarlane himself objected to the settlement, which was the product of negotiations between Twist's lawyers and three of the production company's insurers: General Star Indemnity Co., Hanover Insurance Co. and Citizens Insurance Company of America.

 

McFarlane had plans to appeal his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, and approval of the settlement between his production company and Twist would extinguish his right to do so, according to the objection he filed with the Bankruptcy Court.

 

The filing also complains that the insurance companies refused to defend both McFarlane and Todd McFarlane Productions for eight years and that agreeing to the $5 million settlement now - after being informed of his intentions to go to the Supreme Court - was a decision made solely to protect their own interests.

 

Robert D. Blitz of Blitz, Bardgett & Deutsch said Twist is "elated" with the settlement.

 

"He's elated to see the system work, in other words that judges will uphold big verdicts all the way through the [Missouri] Supreme Court, that juries will give big verdicts," Blitz said.

 

And even though $5 million is considerably less than the final $15 million verdict, it's "a whole lot of money," he said.

 

Of the $5 million settlement, nearly $2.6 will be placed in an escrow account at Regions Bank in St. Louis to be divided between Twist and his ex-wife, Jocelyn Twist.

 

Blitz, Bardgett & Deutsch will receive $433,686.11 in expenses and $333,333.40, which represents the difference between the 40 percent contingency fee agreement between Twist and that law firm, and the 33 1/3 percent fee agreement between Twist and Riezman Berger, Twist's original counsel and Blitz's former law firm. Another $1,666,666.60 will be made payable to both law firms and placed in a Regions Bank escrow account pending a fee agreement between the two firms or a determination of the fee division by a Missouri court.

 

Riezman Berger filed a limited objection to the settlement, asking that the entire settlement be deposited into an Enterprise Bank account, as ordered by the circuit court on June 30, 2000, to be distributed among Twist and the two law firms.

 

The bankruptcy judge overruled Riezman Berger's objection in his order and held the law firm's proof of claim was "satisfied in its entirety" and that the firm has no further claim in Todd McFarlane Production's Chapter 11 case.

 

In July 2000, a St. Louis city jury awarded the former hockey player $24.5 million, but Judge Robert H. Dierker Jr. granted the defendants' motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and in case the JNOV was overturned on appeal, he granted the defendants' motion for a new trial due to evidentiary and instructional errors.

 

The Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, affirmed the lower court's decision, finding that use of Twist's name in a work of fiction was protected by the First Amendment and that the mere use of the name is not a violation of Twist's right of publicity.

 

But in July 2003, the Missouri Supreme Court, while overturning Dierker's grant of JNOV, affirmed his decision to grant a new trial. The court found an instruction did not require the jury to find the defendants intended to derive a commercial advantage; instead, it required only a finding that they derived that advantage from the publication of Twist's name. A year later another city jury awarded Twist $15 million, which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals last June. The state high court denied transfer on Dec. 19.

[Sharkey]

 

What a crock. Some paid expert witnesses will say anything you pay them to say. Fortunately, most jurors are clever enough to see through that garbage.

 

 

It's true that expert witnesses will say whatever they are expected to say. However, having seen the decisions of "most jurors" and knowing what a "peer" can be, I don't think the latter statement may be as cut and dried as you say.

 

There are a ton of *spoon* [since when is id iot a spoonable word?] out in the world, and many of them end up in juries. Sad but true.

 

Remember this was Missouri and one boarder has characterized them as a bunch of "good old boys". Nuff said, true believer.....

[FFB]

Clearly McFarlane should have hired you as his attorney Scott. No doubt his high-priced attorneys (at least before his production company declared bankruptcy) must have simply rolled over and played dead rather than actually try to prevail in this case.

 

Though, to be fair, apparently the settlement was brought upon by the insurance companies, not MarFarlane. Add another "twist" and turn to the discussion!

 

At this point, I am all too aware that reading comprehension has never been your strong suit, but try to follow along anyway. I am sure that McFarlane's lawyers did a fine job. That is reflected by (I hope you're still able to follow along here, because this might be a little more technical than you're used to) the fact that they won their JNOV motion after that ridiculous verdict. I'm saying the jury was nuts, not that McFarlane's lawyers blew it.

[FFB]

 

What a crock. Some paid expert witnesses will say anything you pay them to say. Fortunately, most jurors are clever enough to see through that garbage.

 

 

It's true that expert witnesses will say whatever they are expected to say. However, having seen the decisions of "most jurors" and knowing what a "peer" can be, I don't think the latter statement may be as cut and dried as you say.

 

There are a ton of *spoon* [since when is id iot a spoonable word?] out in the world, and many of them end up in juries. Sad but true.

 

True indeed, and McFarlane came across twelve of them right there in Missouri.

[drice6900]

Yet another thing to consider - wasn't McFarlane throwing big money around on MLB homerun balls around the time of the trial?

 

Personally, I believe Todd was wrong to do what he did. Twist was right to sue. An amount was eventually agreed upon by both sides. Doesn't seem too difficult to me

 

Oh, and I hope FFB simply forgot to put in a few funny graemlins in here and there, because he really looks like a pompous, egotisitical jerk in this thread.

[tth2]

Remember this was Missouri and one boarder has characterized them as a bunch of "good old boys". Nuff said, true believer.....

I have serious doubts that a jury from "the city of St. Louis" was a bunch of "good old boys".

[ashrael]

Stupid lawsuits. I want to sue the McDonald's coffee lady for being an *spoon* and causing all of this.