UFC demands retraction from Cagepotato for 'outrageous' statement that Dana White bets on fights

NEW YORK NY - JANUARY 13: Dana White UFC President speaks during a press conference to announce commitment to bring UFC to Madison Square Garden and New York State at Madison Square Garden on January 13 2011 in New York City. (Photo by Michael Cohen/Getty Images)

Shit just got real.

The gang over at CagePotato.com have their hands full after the legal team behind Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) failed to see the humor in a recent post that suggested promotion president Dana White was wagering on fights under his jurisdiction.

From today's official release:

Zuffa, LLC, dba the Ultimate Fighting Championship® (UFC®), today announced that it served a demand for retraction upon the parent entities and executives of the website CagePotato regarding certain false and defamatory statements attributed to UFC® President, Dana White, in an April 14th website posting.

As detailed in the formal demand for a retraction prepared by UFC® attorney, Donald J. Campbell of the Las Vegas law firm, Campbell & Williams:

"The claim that Mr. White would financially wager on the outcome of a UFC® event is outrageous in the extreme. Indeed, in the verified complaint we are presently preparing for Mr. White's signature upon his return from Abu Dhabi, Mr. White expressly states under oath that at no time in the history of his association with the UFC® has he ever financially wagered on the outcome of a UFC® event."

Mr. Campbell further explained that under Nevada law a demand for retraction is the first required step in the filing of a lawsuit seeking punitive damages against a party that has maliciously published defamatory statements about another.

A screenshot of the actual post in question, after the jump.

Dana_jones_bet_medium

Photo via Bloody Elbow.

Note to aspiring bloggers: If they didn't say it, don't use quotation marks.

The jab at White stems from the promotion's recent decision to sponsor UFC Light Heavyweight Champion Jon Jones. Critics of the deal call it a conflict of interest while proponents think it's the way of the future and no different than standard UFC bonuses and awards.

Anyone think the punishment doesn't fit the crime?

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

Join MMAmania.com

You must be a member of MMAmania.com to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at MMAmania.com. You should read them.

Join MMAmania.com

You must be a member of MMAmania.com to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at MMAmania.com. You should read them.

Spinner

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_5349_tracker