President of the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) Dana White And Electronic Arts' Executive Vice President And Head Of EA Sports Andrew Wilson (L)
President of the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) Dana White and Electronic Arts' Executive Vice President and head of EA Sports Andrew Wilson (L) unveil EA Sports UFC during the Electronic Arts news conference as part of E3 in Los Angeles, California June 4, 2012. Reuters/Gus Ruelas

The Ultimate Fighting Championship, or UFC, has responded to the claims of former and current mixed martial arts players that the company is employing "illegal market monopolisation," which is one of the many allegations in a class suit. The outfit headed by UFC President Dana White will not take the legal actions lying down as it hopes to protect its brand and the flourishing success it has reached so far in bringing the sport globally.

"The UFC is aware of the action filed today but has not been served, nor has it had the opportunity to review the document. The UFC will vigorously defend itself and its business practices," the company said in an official press statement obtained by Bloody Elbow.

The essence of the suit is the UFC's undermining of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The current and former fighters claim that the company is underpaying them, disallowing the players to make separate deals with interested companies willing to ink an endorsement deal, disallowing the talents to appear in other mixed martial arts fights not carried by the parent company, resulting in the monopolisation of the sport. Current UFC talent Cung Le has come forward, along with Jon Fitch and Nate Quarry, as the lawsuit hopes to expand to several other names and become a class suit.

While the UFC has already responded to the claims, the usually outspoken White has been mum on the issue as he is currently on vacation with his family in Fiji. The litigation could take a couple of years and it is unclear if several big names such as Jon Jones, Ronda Rousey or Chris Weidman will join in in suing the UFC, given that the players have no union that can shield them from the repercussions of a legal action.

The plaintiffs are assumed to seek two major things from the outcome of this case: money and an injunction that will end the anti-competitive behaviour of the UFC. Without the aid of a union, several labour experts have already weighed in and said it would be difficult for the players to eke out a win. The prosecuting side would be hard pressed to cement the fact that there is monopolisation, given that a rival outfit in Bellator is also operating sideways with the UFC.

Nevertheless, the move and clamour for considerable compensation has already been echoed a couple of times by former and current fighters. The UFC employs a performance-based system that gives out the additional payouts during fight nights, and on most nights some of these fighters think they never get what is due them.