How WWE Decides Which Wrestlers Get to Keep Their Indie Names Explained

Ever wondered why some wrestlers keep their indie names in WWE—while others get stuck with bizarre rebrands? The answer comes down to one thing: trademark control.

During the installment of Fightful Select Q&A, Sapp broke down how WWE handles this behind the scenes. It’s not about personal preference or history—it’s about whether WWE believes they can legally own the name.

“If they feel like they can get the rights to it, they’ll do it,” Sapp explained.

But the system isn’t perfect. In fact, Sean pointed to a recent case involving now-former AEW star Ricky Starks that shows WWE doesn’t always have its facts straight.

“For example, you mentioned Ricky Starks in your question. For some reason, they thought that AEW had the trademark to that. And I’m like, dude, he wrestled there under that name. He wrestled, like, in WWE under that name years ago. Like, what are you… what are you talking about?”

That kind of confusion shows how WWE’s name policy can be both strategic and flawed. Even if a wrestler used their indie name for years—and even if WWE previously booked them under that name—it doesn’t guarantee anything.

If WWE believes they can secure exclusive rights, they’ll run with it. If not, they’ll often change the name entirely—sometimes to avoid future legal complications, and other times to make sure they can control the branding, merchandise, and licensing.

For wrestlers coming into the system, it’s a gamble: either you walk in with a name you built, or you walk out with a name you didn’t ask for.

Is WWE justified in changing names to protect trademarks—or should they let more talent keep what they’ve built? Let us know what you think in the comments.

Please credit Ringside News if you use the above transcript in your publication.