Jive Turkey
Unconfirmed Member
I'd love to hear this one.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
SCEA sues Bridgestone and Jerry Lambert (Kevin Butler actor) over Game On promotion
- Thread starter Takao
- Start date
I'd love to hear this one.
SkylineRKR
Member
He's not Kevin Butler in the commercial
Its not a Nintendo Wii commercial
And even then, Howard Stringer flat out stated that the Wii is not a competitor to them, lol.
Its going to be a tough case for Sony. Lambert probably isn't stupid. His contract probably states that Kevin Butler may not be used anywhere else, and he's not playing Kevin Butler. If Sony's confident about sueing him, it must mean that Jerry Lambert himself is committed to Sony by contract. And I doubt that.
Its not a Nintendo Wii commercial
And even then, Howard Stringer flat out stated that the Wii is not a competitor to them, lol.
Its going to be a tough case for Sony. Lambert probably isn't stupid. His contract probably states that Kevin Butler may not be used anywhere else, and he's not playing Kevin Butler. If Sony's confident about sueing him, it must mean that Jerry Lambert himself is committed to Sony by contract. And I doubt that.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
As far as I know this hasn't been posted on this thread, maybe it could be added to the OP.
Bridgestone's first comment on the lawsuit:
"Mr. Lambert is one of the actors who appeared in the commercial as a Bridgestone engineer. Bridgestone denies that 'Kevin Butler' appears in the Bridgestone commercial discussed herein and thus denies that he speaks or does anything whatsoever in the commercial." - Bridgestone statement
source: The Hollywood Reporter - The article is worth a read imo for anyone interested in seeing how the entertainment industry views this case. It also offers a concise and well-written overview, as well as some new details such as this one:
"But on September 3, just three days after the expiration of an agreement between Sony and Lambert's loan-out company Wildcat Creek, the actor appeared in ads for Bridgestone that promised consumers a Nintendo Wii upon the purchase of four tires."
And as most of us suspected:
"According to a complaint filed in California federal court, the contract between Sony and Wild Creek was entered into on August 7, 2009 and contained an "exclusivity clause" that prevented Lambert from providing his services or his likeness to competing gaming system manufacturers like Nintendo."
Looks like the Hollywood Reporter paid to get access to more complete records of the suit.
Bridgestone's first comment on the lawsuit:
"Mr. Lambert is one of the actors who appeared in the commercial as a Bridgestone engineer. Bridgestone denies that 'Kevin Butler' appears in the Bridgestone commercial discussed herein and thus denies that he speaks or does anything whatsoever in the commercial." - Bridgestone statement
source: The Hollywood Reporter - The article is worth a read imo for anyone interested in seeing how the entertainment industry views this case. It also offers a concise and well-written overview, as well as some new details such as this one:
"But on September 3, just three days after the expiration of an agreement between Sony and Lambert's loan-out company Wildcat Creek, the actor appeared in ads for Bridgestone that promised consumers a Nintendo Wii upon the purchase of four tires."
And as most of us suspected:
"According to a complaint filed in California federal court, the contract between Sony and Wild Creek was entered into on August 7, 2009 and contained an "exclusivity clause" that prevented Lambert from providing his services or his likeness to competing gaming system manufacturers like Nintendo."
Looks like the Hollywood Reporter paid to get access to more complete records of the suit.
Some juicy details there. I understand now why Sony is focussing on the trademark angle rather than breach of contract, but I really don't see that they have much of a case. It's important to remember that the details of the contract are still unknown, but this certainly makes it seem like the contract itself is not the issue.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
So their exclusive work contract had expired and they're instead going after the Butler character angle? It would be real shitty for Lambert to lose this case.
Squirrel Killer
Member
Empyrean Heaven
Member
I refuse to believe Nintendo didn't have anything to do with this.
I mean, out of all the companies to promote your game system (and a dying, about to be replaced one at that), you pick BRIDGESTONE TIRES? It doesn't make any sense, until you see who has been appearing in their ads.
My theory? Nintendo saw that Lambert had been appearing with Bridgestone now, and decided to work out a deal specifically as a jab at Sony. It wouldn't cost them anything (considering Wii production costs must now be at like 70-80 a system) and turns things around on Sony with consumers being confused why their vice president now is promoting Nintendo.
I mean, out of all the companies to promote your game system (and a dying, about to be replaced one at that), you pick BRIDGESTONE TIRES? It doesn't make any sense, until you see who has been appearing in their ads.
My theory? Nintendo saw that Lambert had been appearing with Bridgestone now, and decided to work out a deal specifically as a jab at Sony. It wouldn't cost them anything (considering Wii production costs must now be at like 70-80 a system) and turns things around on Sony with consumers being confused why their vice president now is promoting Nintendo.
ShockingAlberto
Member
What
Empyrean Heaven
Member
Excuse me for not believing in coincidences when it comes to business.
I'm not saying they probably wouldn't do something to mess with the competition (although it is very unlikely), I'm saying there are easier, more creative, less potentially litigious ways of doing it.
You do know actors play more than one role, right? You do know that Nintendo has been running Wii promotions this entire generation with a ton of different companies, right?
LOL, trollbait at its worst. You need to be more creative than that, son.
SlaughterX
Banned
Haha, I thought that was KB in that commercial, which is hilarious.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Smiles and Cries
Member
wait... this is serious?
Bumblebeetuna
Member
Reading more articles on it now that news outlets have gone over the actual complaint, it seems Sony is conceding that his exclusive contract indeed did expire before the commercial aired but that the planning, casting, and shooting of the commercial all took place while his contract was still valid. And, of course, they are arguing that its Kevin Butler himself in that video.
The last part is a sad reach but maybe they have a case with the first part of it?
The last part is a sad reach but maybe they have a case with the first part of it?
Please be sarcastic (or not - this is a borderline legendary bit of fanboy persecution complex delusion here).
Zero-Crescent
Member
Interesting, so the non-compete part of his contract had already expired by the time the commercial aired.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
According to the settlement, Lambert acknowledged that his contract with Sony precluded him from promoting or endorsing competing game systems. Lambert also acknowledged that at the very least, confusion was created in the minds of some consumers who believed he was portraying the Kevin Butler character in both the PlayStation and Bridgestone commercials.
Under the terms of the settlement, Lambert agreed not to appear in any ad or promotion that features or even mentions “any other video game or computer entertainment system or video game company” for a period of two years.
So... two years later, Microsoft will use him?
D
Deleted member 80556
Unconfirmed Member
I'm glad that this was settled this way.
So... New Kevin Butler ads, Sony and Mr. Lambert?
So... New Kevin Butler ads, Sony and Mr. Lambert?
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
According to the settlement, Lambert acknowledged that his contract with Sony precluded him from promoting or endorsing competing game systems. Lambert also acknowledged that at the very least, confusion was created in the minds of some consumers who believed he was portraying the Kevin Butler character in both the PlayStation and Bridgestone commercials.
Under the terms of the settlement, Lambert agreed not to appear in any ad or promotion that features or even mentions “any other video game or computer entertainment system or video game company” for a period of two years.
So... two years later, Microsoft will use him?
they could use him as long as he doesn't get too close to Kevin Butler, which is hard, because Butler is very close to him.
It's a fair resolution. I think any commercial actor would probably accept strip mining an industry (ie, not being able to do ads for it again) if they knew they'd get a 3-4 years of solid and varying national spots.
Shai-Tan
Banned
So... two years later, Microsoft will use him?
Someone should. He's a good spokesman.
AuthenticM
Member
I guess this signals the end of Kevin Butler ? I am sad.
At the end of the day Sony just let one of their best marketing strategies slip through their fingers.
Lambert should have had a contract straight through to PS4 including "Butler" being used in place of the regular talking heads on their E3 stage presentations.
Just like they let Insomni...... ohh nevermind.
Lambert should have had a contract straight through to PS4 including "Butler" being used in place of the regular talking heads on their E3 stage presentations.
Just like they let Insomni...... ohh nevermind.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
It's probably in the best interest of both parties if they continue working together. We all know Sony's commercials have sucked pretty hard since they stopped using Lambert...
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
No where does it says that Lambert is done with Sony. Those 2 years, he could be promoting PS4.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
I guess this signals the end of Kevin Butler ? I am sad.
Join me in a magical fantasy land where he actually runs the joint.
It's better here.
Psychotext
Member
Might just be me, but I wouldn't be in any great rush to work for a company that just sued me.
Acquiescence
Member
So now that Sony and Jerry are bum chums again, how about some more Kevin Butler ads.
Nostremitus
Member
http://youtu.be/aqIAjxyri80
He's wearing a suit and says the word "games" it MUST be Kevin Butler...
Seriously, this whole this has been stupid...
He's wearing a suit and says the word "games" it MUST be Kevin Butler...
Seriously, this whole this has been stupid...
Welcome to usa, the only place on earth where you can sue mc'donald because you are fat
Brad Grenz
Member
Good campaigns don't last forever. They have a way of burning themselves out, no matter how successful. I mean, you don't see the Budweiser Frogs on TV anymore either. It would be great if they can find something new that is as sharp, and resonates as well as the Kevin Butler character did, but his time has probably passed at this point.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
That seems like a fairly reasonable requirement for being the Playstation spokesperson for as long as he has. I guess you could argue over whether or not two years is too long, but it doesn't seem like a huge over-estimate of the time it takes for these things to fade from the spotlight.
Kind of makes me wonder how a clause similar to this wasn't part of a previous contract between Lambert and Sony. Maybe they really did just make up the whole campaign as they went along, or maybe they never expected it to last so long.
Either way, I find it strange that these kind of legal issues still come up. Is there no standard contractual documentation available when hiring an actor to represent your brand for an undetermined amount of time?
Seems like really basic stuff in this field.
I think I'll continue to believe someone at Sony's legal department screwed up, and Lambert didn't ask any questions.
MikeE21286
Member
Kevin Butler, VP of not giving a shit about contracts
DAREALGUMMY
Member
I still can't believe they stopped making the KB ads for a bit and tried to use that Marcus character instead. So bad.
exmachina64
Banned
Hey, I better sue them because their food didn't make me fat!
exmachina64
McMillionaire
Today, 5:04AM
I'd like to live in a magical fantasy land! He'd probably run the company better.
Maybe I can win my McDonald's lawsuit there.
Brad Grenz
Member
That never happened. The campaigns ran concurrently, but Marcus flopped and was quickly abandoned.
Zoe
Member
There was some kind of non-compete clause that ended in September. This seems to have just extended it and put more restrictions on.
Sony is definetly feisty this year.
Well they can never use him again as part of their marketing so I'd be a little upset too.
Similar threads
- Locked