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

[QUOTE="KBFloYd"]

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

sony are dead serious about gamming :lol:

tormentos

He was promoting a special deal and didn't even work with ninty on the deal.

[QUOTE="Blabadon"] The character in the advertisement isn't Kevin Butler though. So this is all smoke and flames. Why can't you get this in your head?tormentos

You are such a huge hypocrit since that is exactly how you have acted innumerable times when MS is involved. :lol::lol::D

[QUOTE="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.

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.

JohnF111

I think the real question here is why did sony left kevin go? i mean it was one of the best if not the best spokeman company could ever have.Solid_Tango

[QUOTE="tormentos"][QUOTE="KBFloYd"]

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

sony are dead serious about gamming :lol:

super600

He was promoting a special deal and didn't even work with ninty on the deal.

Still, the connection aint making Sony happy,and probably is borderline infringement. If I was a Sony exec I'd be mighty upset too. This probably is not Kevin Butler's fault so I don't see him getting into much trouble when it's all over. Firestone will probablly just pull the ads or end their deal with Nintendo Wii. Bread_or_Decide

Bridgestone(not Firestone...) already pulled the advertisements and edited him out... This was prior to any legal action by Sony.

Sony filed the lawsuit anyway.

Also, before someone who know absolutely nothing about the legal implications of anything makes a statement about it, Bridgestone pulling the advertisements and editing Jerry Lambert out of them is NOT(I REPEAT NOT) an implication of guilt or even any form of wrong-doing... Bridgestone is a risk averse company and given that the commercial does not rely on the Jerry Lambert character, and ultimately doesn't need him to accomplish the same goal, removing him from the commercial does them no harm and removes any contention from the situation.

Sony decided that it was not good enough(because lord knows that Sony PR doesn't have a single intelligent person working for them), and filed a useless and frankly ridiculous lawsuit anyway...

Simple fact is, the only thing that Sony can argue is that Jerry Lambert = Kevin Butler, therefore Sony owns Jerry Lambert's likeness. And that is frankly a preposterous argument.

Non-Compete Agreements are not valid in California, they are not filing for Breach of Contract, and their use of the Lanham Act wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of holding up in court.

Considering that it appears a settlement was already reached, my guess is that Sony settled for less than the legal fees of taking this to court and effectively commited legal extortion.

There is no way that Sony comes out of this looking anything less than slimy...

wow....wow....so sony owns the actors face? thats basically what we are getting here.

I wanna personally see Sony take this to court and get laughed out of court for it.

[QUOTE="Solid_Tango"]I think the real question here is why did sony left kevin go? i mean it was one of the best if not the best spokeman company could ever have.Bread_or_Decide

wow....wow....so sony owns the actors face? thats basically what we are getting here.

I wanna personally see Sony take this to court and get laughed out of court for it.

WilliamRLBaker

Sony doesn't own the actor's face, but they sure think they do given that they are making the claim that their Trademark was infringed upon by his appearance in another commercial. They seem to think that they have a Trademark on Jerry Lambert's face.

The self destruction of Sony continues.gago-gago

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]

wow....wow....so sony owns the actors face? thats basically what we are getting here.

I wanna personally see Sony take this to court and get laughed out of court for it.

sts106mat

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/1808779.stm

Pretty dumb though. He did plenty of roles before he was ever Kevin Butler VP. Same look, same personality and all.

... nobody here knows enough about the details to be making stupid comments. TheWalkingGhost

Does anybody in this thread hear of a contract? If his contract states he can't do any advertisements that promote Sony's competition they do indeed have a case. If he did any ad not involving the Wii or Xbox 360...maybe the DS/3DS we wouldn't being hearing about this. But nobody here knows enough about the details to be making stupid comments. TheWalkingGhost

But you see, thats a big if. However, the contract does not say that.

You may want to take your own advice and read the details before accusing others of making stupid comments.

The claims are based on violations of the Lanham Act, misappropriation, breach of contract and tortious interference with a contractual relationship. We invested significant resources in bringing the Kevin Butler character to life and hes become an iconic personality directly associated with PlayStation products over the years. Use of the Kevin Butler character to sell products other than those from PlayStation misappropriates Sonys intellectual property, creates confusion in the market, and causes damage to Sony.

Sony owns the Kevin Butler character. They do not own Jerry Lambert and his personality. Bridgestone has since edited him out of the ad to avoid legal nonsense, but at no point did they label, or portray him as Kevin Butler.

Did Sony jump on this because of the Wii promotion? Most likely, yes. But they had no contractual grounds to do so.

[QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"][QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"]... nobody here knows enough about the details to be making stupid comments. TheWalkingGhost

You tell everyone they're stupid for commenting without knowing the details of the suit when in fact it is you making assumptions.

I present the main excerpt to you, proving that you're wrong.

Yet somehow I'm the one "shooting his mouth off".

Makes sense.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"]Never. Like the guy above me shooting his mouth off.TheWalkingGhost

You tell everyone they're stupid for commenting without knowing the details of the suit when in fact it is you making assumptions.

I present the main excerpt to you, proving that you're wrong.

Yet somehow I'm the one "shooting his mouth off".

Makes sense.

But you see, thats a big if. However, the contract does not say that.WiitMoteFan

The claims are based on violations of the Lanham Act, misappropriation, breach of contract and tortious interference with a contractual relationship. We invested significant resources in bringing the Kevin Butler character to life and hes become an iconic personality directly associated with PlayStation products over the years. Use of the Kevin Butler character to sell products other than those from PlayStation misappropriates Sonys intellectual property, creates confusion in the market, and causes damage to Sony.WiiMoteFan

:lol:

Man, listen. There is nothing wrong with admitting that YOU WERE WRONG. Cool? This is twice in a week now that you got ahead of yourself, said some dumb stuff and tried backpedaling.

And here you are again trying to gloss over they fact that you were way off and instead of just moving on, you get mad at me. Focusing insults towards me doesn't make your "argument" work. It just makes you look worse.

Really man, you're too much.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"]Never. Like the guy above me shooting his mouth off.TheWalkingGhost

You tell everyone they're stupid for commenting without knowing the details of the suit when in fact it is you making assumptions.

I present the main excerpt to you, proving that you're wrong.

Yet somehow I'm the one "shooting his mouth off".

Makes sense.

But you see, thats a big if. However, the contract does not say that.WiitMoteFan

The claims are based on violations of the Lanham Act, misappropriation, breach of contract and tortious interference with a contractual relationship. We invested significant resources in bringing the Kevin Butler character to life and hes become an iconic personality directly associated with PlayStation products over the years. Use of the Kevin Butler character to sell products other than those from PlayStation misappropriates Sonys intellectual property, creates confusion in the market, and causes damage to Sony.WiiMoteFan

Your a f*cking idiot. :lol:

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="El_Zo1212o"] When has that ever stopped The Internet?Wiimotefan

You tell everyone they're stupid for commenting without knowing the details of the suit when in fact it is you making assumptions.

I present the main excerpt to you, proving that you're wrong.

Yet somehow I'm the one "shooting his mouth off".

Makes sense.

Your a f*cking idiot. :lol:

ConanTheStoner

You're. (not a grammar nazi, but if you call someone an idiot you may want to watch out.)

And thats a bit much. :P

I choose to believe hes just a bit uneducated. Probably a kid.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"]Never. Like the guy above me shooting his mouth off.El_Zo1212o

You tell everyone they're stupid for commenting without knowing the details of the suit when in fact it is you making assumptions.

I present the main excerpt to you, proving that you're wrong.

Yet somehow I'm the one "shooting his mouth off".

Makes sense.

The only fact we have is that Sony does not want the Kevin Butler IP being used in any non-Sony adverts. I'm sure its safe to say the Wii involvement is what prompted Sony to seek action, but on their end they havent put forth any information saying Lambert is out of bounds for doing so.

If it were part of their contract they would surely be putting that forward rather than arguing over whether or not this character portrayal sits too close to Kevin Butler.

I really hate to adblock people. :?

But I'm really close to adding a 3rd to the list. The other two got banned so maybe lighting will strike three times.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

I really hate to adblock people. :?

But I'm really close to adding a 3rd to the list. The other two got banned so maybe lighting will strike three times.

TheWalkingGhost

There is no debate with you son.

You say flamboyant things, jump to conclusions, get proven wrong over and over again, never admit to mistakes and then resort to insults out of anger.

You're not a pleasant person and you don't have the ability to debate.

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

I really hate to adblock people. :?

But I'm really close to adding a 3rd to the list. The other two got banned so maybe lighting will strike three times.

Wiimotefan

There is no debate with you son.

You say flamboyant things, jump to conclusions, get proven wrong over and over again, never admit to mistakes and then resort to insults out of anger.

You're not a pleasant person and you don't have the ability to debate.

Again! :lol:

Are you still a Nintendo troll. :P

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"] I am doing that to you now. Next time, try debating errors in comments. sandbox3d

There is no debate with you son.

You say flamboyant things, jump to conclusions, get proven wrong over and over again, never admit to mistakes and then resort to insults out of anger.

You're not a pleasant person and you don't have the ability to debate.

Again! :lol:

Are you still a Nintendo troll. :P

What can I say?

I'm a magnet for nonsense posters.

And yeah, by the end of that "discussion" he still thought I was bashing Nintendo lol.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"] I am doing that to you now. Next time, try debating errors in comments. TheWalkingGhost

There is no debate with you son.

You say flamboyant things, jump to conclusions, get proven wrong over and over again, never admit to mistakes and then resort to insults out of anger.

You're not a pleasant person and you don't have the ability to debate.

Do the board a favor and adblock your account.

[QUOTE="sandbox3d"]

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

There is no debate with you son.

You say flamboyant things, jump to conclusions, get proven wrong over and over again, never admit to mistakes and then resort to insults out of anger.

You're not a pleasant person and you don't have the ability to debate.

Wiimotefan

Again! :lol:

Are you still a Nintendo troll. :P

What can I say?

I'm a magnet for nonsense posters.

And yeah, by the end of that "discussion" he still thought I was bashing Nintendo lol.

I know, I read it lol.

Is WiiMoteFan still running his mouth about that other thread? You should read it, I told him multiple times I didn't buy into his trolling. Of course, no matter how many times I tried to tell him that I wasn't buying it, he kept trying to convince himself I was. LOL. Some people never learn. TheWalkingGhost

Nah, I read it. And you were severely butthurt. That text doesn't just disappear after you type it.

it is highly likely that the guys contract will have a clause in it saying that he shall not directly promote or be seen to promote a direct competitors produce for x number of years.sts106mat

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"][QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

There is no debate with you son.

You say flamboyant things, jump to conclusions, get proven wrong over and over again, never admit to mistakes and then resort to insults out of anger.

You're not a pleasant person and you don't have the ability to debate.

sandbox3d

Do the board a favor and adblock your account.

[QUOTE="sandbox3d"]

[QUOTE="TheWalkingGhost"] HAHAHAHA!!!! This is just too much. Funny you have never proven me wrong anything, because you can't seem to. Oh and btw, Breach of contract is the part I was referring to in your post. Well, adblock for you. At least now I don't have to read any of your posts anymore. Good lord, funny guy you are BTW. rjdofu

Do the board a favor and adblock your account.

:lol: Probably.

Hes an interesting personality, I'll give him that.

One of those "everyone else is crazy and I'm the only one that's right" kind of guys. You could have a more coherent conversation with Shadow Moses 900.