• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

MMA Payout

The Business of Combat Sports

  • Home
  • MMA
    • UFC
    • Bellator
    • One
    • PFL
  • Boxing
  • Legal
  • Ratings
  • Payouts
  • Attendance
  • Gate

Court sides with challenge to FTC non-compete ruling

August 21, 2024 by Jason Cruz Leave a Comment

On Tuesday, a federal court judge sided with a challenge to the Federal Trade Commission’s edict this past spring which set a ban on most non-compete agreements for employees. Judge Ada Brown of the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Texas ruled in favor of the challengers in Ryan v. FTC.

The rule was the set to be place in effect on September 4, 2024. With Judge Brown’s ruling, that will not happen pending an appeal from the agency.

As it relates to the sport of mixed martial arts, the ruling would have prevented the use of non-competes in MMA contracts. The clause, which have been used in WWE and MMA contracts, prevents the contracted individual from moving on to another position for a certain amount of days.

Judge Brown, an appointee of Donald Trump, sided with a Dallas Tax Firm, Ryan, LLC which filed the challenge of the FTC ruling and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business entities which intervened in the lawsuit taking the side of Ryan, LLC.

Judge Brown wrote that the FTC lacked “substantive rule-making authority.” In a NY Times article, an FTC spokesperson stated the FTC, “stands by our clear authority, supported by statute and precedent, to issue this rule.”

Last month, I was quoted in and article about the impact the ruling may have on MMA contracts. With the current Le-Zuffa case heading into trial in February 2025 and injunctive relief not on the table at the moment, one would suspect no huge changes to contracts at the moment. But, the Johnson-Zuffa case outlined issues with UFC contracts which may hear more about if and when the second UFC case comes to light. Barring a settlement in the UFC lawsuit addressing contracts (like it proposed in the failed $335 million settlement), amendments preventing non-competes in the MMA space will not be touched.

The reason why non-competes are of importance in contracts is the ability for employees (or in the case of MMA independent contractors) to be able to move to another employer without having to wait or sit out a period of time due to a non-compete. The FTC argues that workers lose money each year due to non-compete agreements.

MPO will continue to follow.

Filed Under: legal, UFC

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Featured

Does Conor McGregor still have the aura?

Court Memo and Order from CSI Entertainment-Mayweather TRO hearing

TKO responds to allegations of missing discovery in Johnson case

Judge denies CSI Entertainment’s Temporary Restraining Order

Mayweather-CSI Entertainment legal drama heats up

Mayweather legal saga continues as CSI Entertainment continues to pursue injunction

Archives

MMA Payout Follow

MMAPayout

lol

Polymarket @Polymarket

JUST IN: GOP lawmakers warn WNBA the DOJ could get involved if the league fails to address “attacks” involving Caitlin Clark.

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

Didn't know this was a thing but delighted it is.

Conor McGregor is a horrible, despicable rapist wanker and he should be the shame of Ireland. Well done The Burren

Maybe they should just call it the Ariel Helwani award and give it to other MMA journalists?

ICYMI

MMA Payout @MMAPayout

https://www.patreon.com/u7694041/posts/does-mcgregor-163168719?utm_medium=clipboard_copy&utm_source=copyLink&utm_campaign=postshare_creator&utm_content=join_link

Retweet on Twitter MMA Payout Retweeted

JUST IN: Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson has turned off surveillance cameras in the Stadium District following the World Cup.

Wilson says this follows through on a committment she made after she was elected.

Load More

Copyright © 2026 · MMA Payout: The Business of Combat Sports