SCEA sues Bridgestone and Jerry Lambert (Kevin Butler) over Game On promotion

Jerry Lambert, the actor who plays the Kevin Butler character began appearing in Bridgestone Tire commercials a few months ago. More recently the company began running a Game On promotion where purchasing a new set of tires nets you a $70 American Express card or a Nintendo Wii. The commercial for the promotion drew the attention of Skiesofwonder who posted this on September 3:

SCEA filed a lawsuit against Bridgestone, and Wildcat Creek (an advertising company Lambert is the president of) on September 11

Summary
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/cal...v04753/258962/
Court filing 1
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal...4753/258962/8/
Court filing 2
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal...753/258962/14/

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=494626

wth... sony is suing him for enjoying the wii after playing the playstation.

sony are dead serious about gamming :lol:

This is just funny if he did this after he left sony.Sony can't sue him for this if he did this after he left sony.

sony no likey the betrayal.

revenge is a dish best served cold.

KBFloYd

This is just funny if he did this after he left sony.Sony can't sue him for this if he did this after he left sony.

super600

This is just funny if he did this after he left sony.Sony can't sue him for this if he did this after he left sony.

super600

Sony's suing over intellectual property.

I assume "Kevin Butler" is Sony's intellectual property and Bridgestone portraying Jerry Lambert as "Kevin Butler" would infringe their IP.

[QUOTE="super600"]

This is just funny if he did this after he left sony.Sony can't sue him for this if he did this after he left sony.

Nonstop-Madness

This is just funny if he did this after he left sony.Sony can't sue him for this if he did this after he left sony.

super600

Hilarous, I remember those new commercials started with the Wii in the backround. I thought it was funny seeing Lambert playing Wii. :lol: I am slighly curious about the details of this case, to find out if Mr. Lambert signed some sort of agreement or what.

Another thought, maybe Sony has some unaired ads they don't want to use now?

[QUOTE="Nonstop-Madness"][QUOTE="super600"]

This is just funny if he did this after he left sony.Sony can't sue him for this if he did this after he left sony.

charizard1605

might be because he was being funny during those whole 2 seconds he was on camera.

How dare he. Once you're a Sony fan, you're one for life. No exceptions. I say put him to the chair.tagyhag

this is what I was thinking. He may have signed something saying he won't associate with certain competitors consoles on TV for a specified period of time.

SDC GUYS!

Dudes a actor last time I checked.Unless he was under some kinda contract with Sony.

Thank you Sony for protecting your interest with great honor, integrity and esteem.Heil68

edikt oops caplock.

[QUOTE="Heil68"]Thank you Sony for protecting your interest with great honor, integrity and esteem.Stevo_the_gamer

edikt oops caplock.

i hope Sony sues lambert for all he's got. teach these f*ckers a lesson not to back stab SonyLems_R_Tools

Oh my goodness...this is why PS3 fanboys are so looked down on..but but the guy betrayed my overlord he must pay.

[QUOTE="Lems_R_Tools"]i hope Sony sues lambert for all he's got. teach these f*ckers a lesson not to back stab Sonycoasterguy65

Oh my goodness...this is why PS3 fanboys are so looked down on..but but the guy betrayed my overlord he must pay.

C'mon now. I'm pretty lazy about spotting fakeboys too, but that's one is rather obvious...:|

While i don't know all the details my guess is he signed a contract not to appear in a rival's ad's, for a set period of time. And he figured appearing in a tire commercial with focus on the Wii was differant.

While i don't know all the details my guess is he signed a contract not to appear in a rival's ad's, for a set period of time. And he figured appearing in a tire commercial with focus on the Wii was differant.

TwistedShade

This,

Contracts are what drive Hollywood & entertainment.

Accidentally breaking a one is like stepping on a landmine.

Sony's really stupid for letting him leave.

[QUOTE="tagyhag"]How dare he. Once you're a Sony fan, you're one for life. No exceptions. I say put him to the chair.hoola

this is what I was thinking. He may have signed something saying he won't associate with certain competitors consoles on TV for a specified period of time.

So its against the law to enjoy games on other systems than the PS3 and/or Vita? I'll see you guys in court.

Cows really have lost their greatest exclusive. RIP Kevin Butler

I actually did find the football throw a little funny.

U Mad Sony?

It is funny how Kevin Butler was like a hero to the PS3 fans the past few years but now he will become enemy number one since they have to stick by anything Sony does no matter if it makes any sense or not. How many said he should be in the All-Star game, as their avatars/sigs, and always making threads anytime a new commercial with him was made.

It is funny how Kevin Butler was like a hero to the PS3 fans the past few years but now he will become enemy number one since they have to stick by anything Sony does no matter if it makes any sense or not. How many said he should be in the All-Star game, as their avatars/sigs, and always making threads anytime a new commercial with him was made.

CanYouDiglt

So in all those commercials kevin butler is really thinking, "god i cant wait to get home and play some wii bowling"??? Hilarious.TheEroica

I find this all hilarious.

Anyways outside of a few chuckles, I never found "Kevin Butler" to be funny.

They are doing a Trademark Infringement claim, which means that they are claiming that his likeness is their intellectual property.

Effectively, Sony is attempting to make the argument that they own his face.

LMAO. They are LITERALLY going to be laughed out of the court room.

They are doing a Trademark Infringement claim, which means that they are claiming that his likeness is their intellectual property.

Effectively, Sony is attempting to make the argument that they own his face.

LMAO. They are LITERALLY going to be laughed out of the court room.

KingsMessenger

Lol!So sony isn't suing him for appearing in a competitor's commercial when he wasn't suspose to.:lol:

[QUOTE="KingsMessenger"]

They are doing a Trademark Infringement claim, which means that they are claiming that his likeness is their intellectual property.

Effectively, Sony is attempting to make the argument that they own his face.

LMAO. They are LITERALLY going to be laughed out of the court room.

super600

Lol! So sony isn't suing him for appearing in a competitor's commercial when he wasn't suspose to.:lol:

That is part of it, but the crux of the argument appears to be that they are claiming Trademark Infringement because "Kevin Butler" appeared in an advertisement associated with Nintendo. However, Jerry Lambert is not playing "Kevin Butler," he is just playing another character, which isn't surprising given that he is an actor... So, Sony's entire argument effectively rests on the concept that Jerry Lambert's likeness = Kevin Butler, and therefore Sony owns Jerry Lambert's face.

Also, just to clarify, the commercial was not for a competitor, it was for a third party company that is in an entirely different industry who happened to be running a promotion.

If the issue was a non-compete clause then they would be filing based upon a breach of contract, not a trademark infringement. Trademark Infringement immediately means that it is something related to the likeness of Kevin Butler, and therefore some claim of ownership of Jerry Lambert's face...

Another thing of note is that given that the lawsuit was filed in California, that immediately throws out all "non-compete clause" possibilities given that such things are not legally valid in California...

As I said before, Sony is suing based upon the claim that they own Jerry Lambert's face.