Justin Bieber Gets Caught Soliciting Illegal UFC 162 Replay
Anderson Silva's shocking loss to Chris Weidman at UFC 162 will go down as one of the biggest sports moments of 2013. For that reason, anyone with even a remote interest in mixed martial arts is intrigued to see how it all went down.
One of those people is none other than teen heartthrob Justin Bieber.
Shortly after the results were posted, Bieber turned to his Twitter followers in hopes of receiving video of the bout without having to pay for the pay-per-view replay.
Who has a video of the ufc fight tonight? Send it to me— Justin Bieber (@justinbieber) July 7, 2013
Apparently, word of the Beeb's request got back to Dana White. The UFC president wasted little time in letting Mr. Selena Gomez know exactly which avenue to take.
PPV Justin RT @justinbieber: Who has a video of the ufc fight tonight? Send it to me— Dana White (@danawhite) July 7, 2013
For those of you unfamiliar with the UFC's stance on illegal bootlegging of events, let's have a refresher course. At the beginning of every card, Zuffa LLC airs the following warning:
Warning: The unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this copyrighted work is illegal. Criminal copyright infringement, including infringement without monetary gain, is investigated by the FBI and is punishable by up to 5 years in federal prison and a fine of $250,000.
For years, Zuffa has been suing bar owners who have broadcast pay-per-views without paying the proper fees. While there have yet to be any notable cases of the world's largest fight organization suing individuals who've watched events illegally, there is nothing stopping the UFC from starting now.
Clearly the UFC isn't going to take legal action against a star of the caliber of Justin Bieber. However, it is interesting to note that the pop star publicly broke the law by asking someone to illegally distribute a reproduction of the PPV broadcast.
What do you think? Should Uncle Dana place a call to Mama Bieber and make sure that her little boy gets a proper whoopin'? Or should Zuffa just look the other way?
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?