Is the Ali Act coming to MMA?

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

Wild

Zi Nazi
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
85,008
123,340


For years there has been a debate as to whether the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act should be expanded to also cover the sport of mixed martial arts. While some argue it is unnecessary and would harm MMA, others counter that the lack of protection offered to fighters has left them at an extreme disadvantage when dealing with promoters. Up until now that debate has been academic, but that may change very soon.

Following a concerted public campaign by a group of professional fighters, staff members for U.S. Congressman Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma have confirmed to Bloody Elbow that he plans to introduce legislation, perhaps as soon as this month, that would amend the Act so that it would also cover the sport of mixed martial arts.

The Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, or Ali Act for short, was enacted in 2000. It amended the 1996 Professional Boxing Safety Act by including protections for boxers financial interests in addition to the previous bill's minimum health and safety standards. According to the bill itself the purpose was:

(1) to protect the rights and welfare of professional boxerson an interstate basis by preventing certain exploitive, oppressive, and unethical business practices;

(2) to assist State boxing commissions in their efforts toprovide more effective public oversight of the sport; and

(3) to promote honorable competition in professional boxingand enhance the overall integrity of the industry


View: https://twitter.com/CungLe185/status/702973874837782533/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


LINK: Is the Ali Act coming to MMA? Plans to introduce legislation is in the works
 

Ted Williams' head

It's freezing in here!
Sep 23, 2015
11,283
19,102
Guys I hate to once again be the guy to inject some logic into an anti-Zuffa thread, but here it is.

This is not going to happen, and that's a good thing because it shouldn't happen.

The Muhammad Ali act was enacted after a good year of investigation of boxing's systemic problems that had evolved over it's 100+ year history. It was tailor-made specifically for boxing.

MMA is a completely different sport with a completely different history and a completely different business model.

As a completely different sport, it needs an act that is tailor-made for MMA. This will require extensive research into MMA's problems and what can reasonably done to better the sport.
 

La Paix

Fuck this place
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
38,273
64,597
Guys I hate to once again be the guy to inject some logic into an anti-Zuffa thread, but here it is.

This is not going to happen, and that's a good thing because it shouldn't happen.

The Muhammad Ali act was enacted after a good year of investigation of boxing's systemic problems that had evolved over it's 100+ year history. It was tailor-made specifically for boxing.

MMA is a completely different sport with a completely different history and a completely different business model.

As a completely different sport, it needs an act that is tailor-made for MMA. This will require extensive research into MMA's problems and what can reasonably done to better the sport.
I disagree and I'll let R @Rob Maysey explain for me here.


MARTIAL ARTS
by Rob Maysey | Aug 25, 2008 | Ali Act

Sam Caplan, of Fiveouncesofpain.com, asked for just one GOOD reason as to why the Muhammad Ali Act Boxing Reform Act of 2000 (the “Muhammad Ali Act“) should be applied to Mixed Martial Arts (”MMA“). Ask, and you shall receive. Before I proceed further, let me first thank Mr. Caplan for taking the time to read and respond to my article, which delves into subject matter that many may find dull. It is of the utmost importance, however, and Mr. Caplan’s time and effort in discussing the subject is greatly appreciated.


Immediately below, are six good reasons why the Muhammad Ali Act should be applied to mixed martial arts:


“The Congress makes the following findings:1


(1) Professional MMA differs from other major, interstate professional sports industries in the United States in that it operates without any private sector association, league, or centralized industry organization to establish uniform and appropriate business practices and ethical standards. This has led to repeated occurrences of disreputable and coercive business practices in the MMA industry, to the detriment of professional mixed martial artists nationwide.


(2) State officials are the proper regulators of professional MMA events, and must protect the welfare of professional mixed martial artists and serve the public interest by closely supervising MMA activity in their jurisdiction. State athletic commissions do not currently receive adequate information to determine whether mixed martial artists competing in their jurisdiction are being subjected to contract terms and business practices which may violate State regulations, or are onerous and confiscatory.


(3) Promoters who engage in illegal, coercive, or unethical business practices can take advantage of the lack of equitable business standards in the sport by holding MMA events in States with weaker regulatory oversight.


(4) The sanctioning organizations which have proliferated in the MMA industry have not established credible and objective criteria to rate professional mixed martial artists, and operate with virtually no industry or public oversight. Their ratings are susceptible to manipulation, have deprived mixed martial artists of fair opportunities for advancement, and have undermined public confidence in the integrity of the sport.


(5) Open competition in the professional MMA industry has been significantly interfered with by restrictive and anticompetitive business practices of certain promoters and sanctioning bodies, to the detriment of the athletes and the ticket-buying public. Common practices of promoters and sanctioning organizations represent restraints of interstate trade in the United States.


(6) It is necessary and appropriate to establish national contracting reforms to protect professional mixed martial artists and prevent exploitive business practices, and to require enhanced financial disclosures to State athletic commissions to improve the public oversight of the sport.”


Of course, the six items immediately above are the Congressional findings that were inserted into the Muhammad Ali Act. I have taken the liberty to replace the word “boxer” with mixed martial artist, and the word “boxing” with “MMA” to vigorously illustrate how those Congressional findings apply with equal validity to the current state of the mixed martial arts industry.

Six Good Reasons To Apply the Muhammad Ali Act to Mixed Martial Arts - MMAFA
 

Tom O'Bedlam

Resident loon.
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
2,103
2,217
If the Ali act passes then the UFC will have to change a lot about the way it does business. In the short term this will likely hurt their business and may have some negative impacts on fighters that are yet to be seen.

Long term, this type of regulation is necessary for the health and financial protection of fighters.
 

Ghost Bro

Wololo ~Leave no turn unstoned
Nov 13, 2015
8,511
10,828
Nothing listed there explains why applying an act created for a different sport would be more effective in combating it's problems than an act tailor-made for MMA itself. Maybe Rob can explain that one.
I'm guessing the idea is that its a blueprint to follow, and its already set in boxing where you can see its validity/applicability and rather than reinventing the wheel its a good set of guidelines to follow. Of course it could be better or more tailor made for MMA as you say, but that doesn't negate the point that something is needed to be done and this does combat some of the things that are to the detriment of fighters in MMA..I haven't read the full Ali-act, but my guess is its better than nothing at this point.

And a necessary step for the "sport" to be legitimised far more important than Reebok gear.
 

Tom O'Bedlam

Resident loon.
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
2,103
2,217
I'm guessing the idea is that its a blueprint to follow, and its already set in boxing where you can see its validity/applicability and rather than reinventing the wheel its a good set of guidelines to follow. Of course it could be better or more tailor made for MMA as you say, but that doesn't negate the point that something is needed to be done and this does combat some of the things that are to the detriment of fighters in MMA..I haven't read the full Ali-act, but my guess is its better than nothing at this point.

And a necessary step for the "sport" to be legitimised far more important than Reebok gear.
If you do try to read the Ali act or any act of Congress, I recommend brushing up on your legalese and taking your time lol. I just skimmed through and while a lot is straight forward, there are a lot of extra words.
 

Tom O'Bedlam

Resident loon.
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
2,103
2,217
One big thing in the Ali Act is that some of the stuff HAS to be changed due to the stipulations of many regulations relating directly to the number of rounds combatants participate in, such as:

Section 5: Conflict of interest.


1) IN GENERAL.—It is unlawful for—
‘‘(A) a promoter to have a direct or indirect financial interest in the management of a boxer; or ‘‘(B) a manager—
‘‘(i) to have a direct or indirect financial interest in the promotion of a boxer; or
‘‘(ii) to be employed by or receive compensation or other benefits from a promoter, except for amounts received as consideration under the manager’s contract with the boxer.
‘‘(2) EXCEPTIONS.—Paragraph (1)—
‘‘(A) does not prohibit a boxer from acting as his own promoter or manager; and
‘‘(B) only applies to boxers participating in a boxing match of 10 rounds or more"
 

Ghost Bro

Wololo ~Leave no turn unstoned
Nov 13, 2015
8,511
10,828
If you do try to read the Ali act or any act of Congress, I recommend brushing up on your legalese and taking your time lol. I just skimmed through and while a lot is straight forward, there are a lot of extra words.
That's why I've been avoiding it, I think they purposefully try to make the text extra boring to deter people.
 

Tom O'Bedlam

Resident loon.
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
2,103
2,217
That part would actually exclude the UFC from being involved in a big way and would be massively beneficial to fighters, except it won't apply because there are no 10 round MMA fights, ever.
 

La Paix

Fuck this place
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
38,273
64,597
Nothing listed there explains why applying an act created for a different sport would be more effective in combating it's problems than an act tailor-made for MMA itself. Maybe Rob can explain that one.
This is from his site, might answer some of what you're asking.

APPLIES ONLY TO BOXERS?
In discussion with various individuals in the mixed martial arts industry, it is often said that while mixed martial artists should be afforded some form of protection, the Muhammad Ali Act is not applicable to mixed martial arts. In support of this notion, it is said that the Muhammad Ali Act utilizes the terms “boxer” and “boxing,” and makes no mention of the terms “mixed martial arts” or “mixed martial artist.”

This article argues that despite the usage of the term “boxer,” the Muhammad Ali Act is still applicable to mixed martial arts and mixed martial artists. To make this argument, an analysis of the history behind the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (the “Land Sales Act“) and its applicability to condominium sales is instructive. As discussed below, the federal agency designated to administer the Land Sales Act determined that it applied to condominiums nine years before Congress used the term “condominium” at all.

I. Land Sales Act.1

A. Scope and Protections of the Land Sales Act.

The Land Sales act was enacted by Congress to combat fraud in the sale of land. The Land Sales Act was the federal government’s response to widespread fraud occurring in the interstate sale of lands. The use of mails for interstate land sales proliferated during the 1960’s, and abuses soon became widespread.2


Muhammad Ali Act: Applies Only to Boxers? - MMAFA

More here.

Why the Muhammad Ali Act Should Apply to MMA-UPDATE - MMAFA


TO MMA-UPDATE
by Rob Maysey | Jul 4, 2008 | Ali Act

Eddie Goldman of NHBnews published an article on December 27, 2007, which contained detailed quotes from Fedor Emelianenko. The article can be found here: http://www.adcombat.com/Article.asp?Article_ID=14555. Unfortunately, I didn’t see this article while drafting the initial blog, but it is worth referencing now.



In the article, Fedor Emelianenko detailed the reasons he chose not to sign with Zuffa. Emelianenko stated:



“The contract that we were presented with by the UFC was simply impossible, couldn’t be signed–I couldn’t leave. If I won, I had to fight up to eight times in two years. If I lost one fight, then the UFC had the right to rip up the contract. At the conclusion of the contract, if I am undefeated, then it automatically extends for an as yet unspecified time, though for the same compensation.”



Emelianenko continued:



“Basically, I can’t leave undefeated. I can’t give interviews, appear in films or advertising. I don’t have the right to do anything without the UFC’s agreement. I could do nothing without the OK from the UFC. I didn’t have the right to compete in combat sambo competition. It’s my national sport. It’s the Russian sport, which in his time our president competed in, and I no longer have the right to do so. There were many such clauses; the contract was 18 pages in length. It was written in such a way that I had absolutely no rights while the UFC could at any moment, if something didn’t suit them, tear up the agreement. We worked with lawyers who told us it was patently impossible to sign such document.” (Finding Fedor - Finding Fedor



Mr. Goldman observed that Randy Couture (the then current heavyweight champion of the UFC), Emelianenko, and Dana White himself went “on public record stating that UFC fighters are essentially required to sign contracts from which they ‘couldn’t leave’ or can’t or ‘don’t resign.’”



Mr. Goldman then concluded that:



“The time has come for both federal and state agencies in the U.S. to examine the legality of these UFC contracts. Even if they are technically legal, they also must be compared to the federal requirements for boxing contracts mandated by the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, which was enacted in 2000.”



Additionally, on Mr. Goldman’s most recent “No Holds Barred” radio show, Nick Lembo, New Jersey State Athletic Control Board Deputy Attorney, declared that he believed the Muhammad Ali Act should be applied to mixed martial arts. You can check this show out here: NO HOLDS BARRED.



Finally, Matt “the Law” Lindland also spoke out, declaring:



“The UFC contracts are illegal. Based on the Muhammad Ali (Safety) Act, you cannot be the promoter and the manager at the same time. If they are telling you who and when you are going to fight, they are the manager as well as the promoter.” Matt Lindland claims UFC contracts are illegal - Five Ounces of Pain.



Lindland’s quote references the provision in the Act which prohibits certain conflicts of interest by establishing a “fire-wall” between managers and promoters. 15 § USCA 6308.



http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00006308—-000-.html.



The original article entitled “Battle Lines Being Drawn: Why the Muhammad Ali Act Should Apply to MMA” can be found here:



Preview DNS

I tweeted this threads link to Rob so maybe he'll stop in.
 

Tom O'Bedlam

Resident loon.
First 100
Jan 17, 2015
2,103
2,217
While both articles address the use of the term "Boxer", neither addresses the round stipulations that would prevent the UFC from having most the leverage when it comes to contract negotiations.

And that is the main point of this Act. It will have some effect on fighter safety but mainly it will strip the UFC of the negotiating power it currently has.
 

Ted Williams' head

It's freezing in here!
Sep 23, 2015
11,283
19,102
I'm guessing the idea is that its a blueprint to follow, and its already set in boxing where you can see its validity/applicability and rather than reinventing the wheel its a good set of guidelines to follow. Of course it could be better or more tailor made for MMA as you say, but that doesn't negate the point that something is needed to be done and this does combat some of the things that are to the detriment of fighters in MMA..I haven't read the full Ali-act, but my guess is its better than nothing at this point.

And a necessary step for the "sport" to be legitimised far more important than Reebok gear.
I think it's all about using the right tool for the job and getting it as right as possible the first time out. Better to attack a problem with a precision shot instead of wildly firing a shotgun in all directions, especially when it comes to passing a law.

MMA fans talk about the Muhammad Ali Act like it's some kind of silver bullet. I've followed boxing religiously since 2002 (2 years after the Ali act was passed) and it's looked at as largely a joke by boxing fans because it's hardly ever enforced and there seems to be a ton of loopholes. The only instance I can think of is Golden Boy suing Al Haymon for breaching it, and that case is still ongoing so who knows how that will go.

Hauser: Federal boxing laws go unenforced

All I've heard from people in regards to applying the Ali act to the UFC is using it as a "fuck you" to Zuffa by supposedly breaking up the UFC's ability to sign fighters to exclusive contracts or some shit? Totally different business models. Boxing has always been promoted on the strength of a main event or a championship. The UFC is a sports league with incredible brand recognition.

The Ali act will never be applied to MMA and I'm glad it won't.
 

Ghost Bro

Wololo ~Leave no turn unstoned
Nov 13, 2015
8,511
10,828
I think it's all about using the right tool for the job and getting it as right as possible the first time out. Better to attack a problem with a precision shot instead of wildly firing a shotgun in all directions, especially when it comes to passing a law.

MMA fans talk about the Muhammad Ali Act like it's some kind of silver bullet. I've followed boxing religiously since 2002 (2 years after the Ali act was passed) and it's looked at as largely a joke by boxing fans because it's hardly ever enforced and there seems to be a ton of loopholes. The only instance I can think of is Golden Boy suing Al Haymon for breaching it, and that case is still ongoing so who knows how that will go.

Hauser: Federal boxing laws go unenforced

All I've heard from people in regards to applying the Ali act to the UFC is using it as a "fuck you" to Zuffa by supposedly breaking up the UFC's ability to sign fighters to exclusive contracts or some shit? Totally different business models. Boxing has always been promoted on the strength of a main event or a championship. The UFC is a sports league with incredible brand recognition.

The Ali act will never be applied to MMA and I'm glad it won't.
You overestimate politicians' foresight. They'd rather pass something quickly while its hot and move on forever and adjust next time people get riled up. Besides that I wouldn't trust any of them to suggest anything of particular importance or interest on the matter until someone tells em.

The thing about the Ali act is that it will make the UFC have to decide what it is. Is it a league /promotion or whatever or is it a promoter, that's just from the nature of the thing. I get that it has a lot of issues that don't apply to MMA or even aren't ever in use in boxing, but on a fundamental level it will make that clear. Should it be decided to follow the Ali act and the UFC decides it wants to act as both, then, they would be legally liable for doing so and fighters will have a leg to stand on arguing this. The specific argument against the UFC here would be that it serves as both promoter and promotion and so has a vested interest in promoting certain people over others, in the same way that it promotes itself over any one fighter. There's a fair amount of people that think MMA is the UFC and in my opinion this recognition has come from the UFC promoting itself and treating the fighters like they're as part of the spectacle as the octagon itself. I see what you're saying about boxing, but I feel that people don't understand MMA enough and how its business is done to come up with a totally different system..its still a very fringe sport.
 

Zeph

TMMAC Addict
Jan 22, 2015
24,355
32,126
The Ali Act will have to be amended for it to cover MMA fighters, using the right language you can cover MMA's specific problems with that amendment. There is no need for an MMA specific act, since the Ali Act can be amended with MMA specific language.
 

Severianb

Posting Machine
Aug 5, 2015
2,251
4,344
This is from his site, might answer some of what you're asking.

APPLIES ONLY TO BOXERS?
In discussion with various individuals in the mixed martial arts industry, it is often said that while mixed martial artists should be afforded some form of protection, the Muhammad Ali Act is not applicable to mixed martial arts. In support of this notion, it is said that the Muhammad Ali Act utilizes the terms “boxer” and “boxing,” and makes no mention of the terms “mixed martial arts” or “mixed martial artist.”

This article argues that despite the usage of the term “boxer,” the Muhammad Ali Act is still applicable to mixed martial arts and mixed martial artists. To make this argument, an analysis of the history behind the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (the “Land Sales Act“) and its applicability to condominium sales is instructive. As discussed below, the federal agency designated to administer the Land Sales Act determined that it applied to condominiums nine years before Congress used the term “condominium” at all.

I. Land Sales Act.1

A. Scope and Protections of the Land Sales Act.

The Land Sales act was enacted by Congress to combat fraud in the sale of land. The Land Sales Act was the federal government’s response to widespread fraud occurring in the interstate sale of lands. The use of mails for interstate land sales proliferated during the 1960’s, and abuses soon became widespread.2


Muhammad Ali Act: Applies Only to Boxers? - MMAFA

More here.

Why the Muhammad Ali Act Should Apply to MMA-UPDATE - MMAFA


TO MMA-UPDATE
by Rob Maysey | Jul 4, 2008 | Ali Act

Eddie Goldman of NHBnews published an article on December 27, 2007, which contained detailed quotes from Fedor Emelianenko. The article can be found here: http://www.adcombat.com/Article.asp?Article_ID=14555. Unfortunately, I didn’t see this article while drafting the initial blog, but it is worth referencing now.



In the article, Fedor Emelianenko detailed the reasons he chose not to sign with Zuffa. Emelianenko stated:



“The contract that we were presented with by the UFC was simply impossible, couldn’t be signed–I couldn’t leave. If I won, I had to fight up to eight times in two years. If I lost one fight, then the UFC had the right to rip up the contract. At the conclusion of the contract, if I am undefeated, then it automatically extends for an as yet unspecified time, though for the same compensation.”



Emelianenko continued:



“Basically, I can’t leave undefeated. I can’t give interviews, appear in films or advertising. I don’t have the right to do anything without the UFC’s agreement. I could do nothing without the OK from the UFC. I didn’t have the right to compete in combat sambo competition. It’s my national sport. It’s the Russian sport, which in his time our president competed in, and I no longer have the right to do so. There were many such clauses; the contract was 18 pages in length. It was written in such a way that I had absolutely no rights while the UFC could at any moment, if something didn’t suit them, tear up the agreement. We worked with lawyers who told us it was patently impossible to sign such document.” (Finding Fedor - Finding Fedor



Mr. Goldman observed that Randy Couture (the then current heavyweight champion of the UFC), Emelianenko, and Dana White himself went “on public record stating that UFC fighters are essentially required to sign contracts from which they ‘couldn’t leave’ or can’t or ‘don’t resign.’”



Mr. Goldman then concluded that:



“The time has come for both federal and state agencies in the U.S. to examine the legality of these UFC contracts. Even if they are technically legal, they also must be compared to the federal requirements for boxing contracts mandated by the Muhammad Ali Boxing Reform Act, which was enacted in 2000.”



Additionally, on Mr. Goldman’s most recent “No Holds Barred” radio show, Nick Lembo, New Jersey State Athletic Control Board Deputy Attorney, declared that he believed the Muhammad Ali Act should be applied to mixed martial arts. You can check this show out here: NO HOLDS BARRED.



Finally, Matt “the Law” Lindland also spoke out, declaring:



“The UFC contracts are illegal. Based on the Muhammad Ali (Safety) Act, you cannot be the promoter and the manager at the same time. If they are telling you who and when you are going to fight, they are the manager as well as the promoter.” Matt Lindland claims UFC contracts are illegal - Five Ounces of Pain.



Lindland’s quote references the provision in the Act which prohibits certain conflicts of interest by establishing a “fire-wall” between managers and promoters. 15 § USCA 6308.



http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00006308—-000-.html.



The original article entitled “Battle Lines Being Drawn: Why the Muhammad Ali Act Should Apply to MMA” can be found here:



Preview DNS

I tweeted this threads link to Rob so maybe he'll stop in.
Top notch. Thank you.

Fuck the UFC.