Did WWE mislead its audience regarding its access to the company’s Premium Live Events on the ESPN streaming service? That’s what a new class action lawsuit filed against the company claims.
According to Post Wrestling, the lawsuit that was filed on Thursday night in the U.S. District Court in Connecticut alleges that WWE and ESPN engaged in deceptive marketing practices ahead of the Sept. 20 Wrestlepalooza event, which marked the pro wrestling giant’s PLE debut on the Worldwide Leader in Sports.
Specifically, the lawsuit notes that many WWE fans who already subscribed to ESPN through traditional cable services were still required to pay the $29.99 per month fee to receive access to the Disney-owned company’s streaming service in order to watch the show. The lawsuit claims that differs from what WWE communicated to its audience in the leadup to the event, alleging that the TKO subsidiary indicated that anyone who already had access to ESPN would be able to view the event on the streaming service at no additional cost.
Notably, the lawsuit only names WWE as a plaintiff and not ESPN or Disney. According to Post Wrestling’s Brandon Thurston, that’s in an effort to avoid arbitration and class action waiver provisions in Disney’s subscriber agreement.
The lawsuit seeks to represent any U.S. customers who paid for ESPN’s direct-to-consumer streaming service in the leadup to Wrestlepalooza despite already subscribing to the ESPN cable channel through traditional means. It claims that more than $5 million is at issue, with the plaintiffs potentially receiving a partial refund or full reimbursement if the suit is successful.
As we covered at the time, there was certainly no shortage of confusion surrounding WWE’s debut on ESPN’s DTC streaming service last September. While ESPN had reached authentication agreements with cable providers such as Spectrum and DirecTV, it had yet to do so with Comcast, YouTube TV and Cox among others, leaving those companies’ customers to effectively double pay in order to receive access to the event. Predictably, outrage ensued.
Yet despite the apparent confusion, WWE could potentially — and will perhaps likely — argue that it shouldn’t be held responsible for an issue that primarily stems from ESPN’s carriage agreements, as confusion regarding such authentication practices was just limited to pro wrestling. While the lawsuit points to the language used in the announcement of the ESPN deal and comments WWE president Nick Khan made on The Varsity podcast to bolster its claim the company misled its audience, a segment on WWE SmackDown the night before Wrestlepalooza specified that the show would be available at no additional cost to customers of “most big providers.”
Thurston also noted in his report that certifying the class could be a “key issue” in the case. As of Friday, WWE has yet to file a response in court.