Zoe
Member
Bridgestone was the owner of the content in the commercial. They needed to be included to remove the content.
-
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
Bridgestone was the owner of the content in the commercial. They needed to be included to remove the content.
Brad Grenz
Member
Bridgestone were the only ones actually empowered to create a remedy. Lambert's company may have produced the ad, but Bridgestone owns it and was airing it. For all we know Sony asked nicely and got stonewalled. With big business lots of time nothing will get done unless courts are involved. Sony wanted "Kevin Butler" out of the ad. Simply suing Jerry Lambert and taking money from him solves nothing. By naming Bridgestone in the lawsuit it seems they were able to force a reasonable settlement.
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
I think the problem with your point is self evident. It is precisely because people's position on these kinds of things are irrational and emotion driven that it shouldn't have come to this to begin with. Sony has nothing to gain with this, (it was just some short running promotion that would have stopped airing soon anyway, no?) and just some face to lose - precisely because, as you said, no one is going to change their mind, even if they win in the court.
benjipwns
Banned
Jerry Lambert appeared in three episodes of 'Til Death.
'Til Death was produced by Sony Pictures.
Sony gave the show to Fox for free so they could hit syndication numbers.
WGN America is one network that shows tons of syndicated 'Til Death.
WGN America is owned by the Tribune Company.
The Tribune Company owns 30% of Food Network.
Guy Fieri is employed by Food Network.
Follow the money people.
'Til Death was produced by Sony Pictures.
Sony gave the show to Fox for free so they could hit syndication numbers.
WGN America is one network that shows tons of syndicated 'Til Death.
WGN America is owned by the Tribune Company.
The Tribune Company owns 30% of Food Network.
Guy Fieri is employed by Food Network.
Follow the money people.
Gokurakumaru
Banned
If even a minority of posters here actually had a job as a brand manager I might take these claims of not "properly managing their brand" a bit more seriously. The fact is this is storm in a teacup for anybody outside of the GAF community.
The overwhelming majority of the population will never even know this happened. And personally, even if I was among the community of forum posters who cared I wouldn't be about to stop buying Sony over this case.
And how awesome would it be if they challenged that line of the contract with the 'doesn't view the Wii as a competitor' line in court?
Making Sony legally admit that the Wii is in fact a full rival and not a kiddy toy that they can pretend they're not worried about sounds hilarious to me.
TimeEffect
Member
On an unrelated note, I wonder how Nintendo feels about All Stars. I can see Sony's rep getting uglier if this becomes bigger
That's the only crime going on here.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
Shit is being kept QUIET. NeoGAF is the news source for what's real. Has Kotaku stoelen this yet for an article? I need a convenient link to share with my social media.
MoonsaultSlayer
Member
Ok, this got me good. You made me realize that I see this in nearly every thread and I never caught on to A) its ridiculous overusage and B) the fact that it has become a meme as a result of A.
As always with these threads whats actually amusing is not the action of the the titular corporate bodies but the ignorance of how trademark law functions on display and the idea that a random game fan is somehow more informed on this matter by the highly competent lawyers companies like this employ.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
LOL Luke is the same one who got a news story (http://kotaku.com/5513192/there-are-too-many-damn-video-games) out of an infographic I made for one of my bitmob articles (http://bitmob.com/articles/the-death-of-the-video-game-expert). Did that sound catty? Because it's no hard feelings, I just would rather have his job!
Agent X
Member
The vast majority of the public aren't going to know about this lawsuit. So no, I don't think this lawsuit would net Sony a significant amount of bad publicity. The only "bad PR" sentiments are from people on Internet forums like this one, often from people who already disliked Sony and their products anyway...so yeah, once again, no real loss here.
However...
I agree. This is definitely on the table now, and might be where Sony really gets hurt in the future.
While I can't read Jerry Lambert's mind, I'd bet that he's already entertaining this possibility. There may be bad blood, and consequently a looming dark cloud over Sony knowing that a rival could hire Mr. Lambert for a similar role in a future commercial (or even an E3 appearance).
If this matter could have been settled out of court in an amicable fashion, then Sony probably wouldn't have to worry about this.
Brad Grenz
Member
That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I doubt Lambert will follow up this lapse in judgement by deliberately trying to damage Sony's interests by working directly for a competitor. That is a lawsuit he would lose in a most emphatic fashion.
Exactly.
Agent X
Member
That depends on the outcome. If the suit goes forward, and Lambert and Bridgestone win, then this blows the doors wide open for Lambert to do an ad for a rival. It's not much about deliberately wanting to damage Sony, as it would be an opportunity to work with a competitor who would pay good money to cast him similarly to the Kevin Butler role.
This assumes the suit goes on, which it very well may not. It sounds like SCEA and the defendants have reached an agreement on their own.
Littlegator
Banned
Why are so many people assuming they're suing over a breech of contract when the lawsuit says it's for intellectual property?
I mean, the people with legal backgrounds were saying that it's pretty much NOT a lawsuit about a noncompete.
Also, yeah, if it IS about a noncompete:
It'd be pretty easy to argue that a public statement from the president of the company saying that Nintendo's console is not a competitor would allow you to advertising for them without breaking a noncompete.
I mean, the people with legal backgrounds were saying that it's pretty much NOT a lawsuit about a noncompete.
Also, yeah, if it IS about a noncompete:
It'd be pretty easy to argue that a public statement from the president of the company saying that Nintendo's console is not a competitor would allow you to advertising for them without breaking a noncompete.
Brad Grenz
Member
And in fact, it appears it was settled two weeks before anyone even heard about it.
Catchpenny
Member
It's too bad this has likely been settled already, because it would have been amazing to see this brought up in court.
civilstrife
Member
Actors are contractually obliged not to appear in an ad even remotely related to a competitor's brand for two years. At least, that's what the deal here in Canada is.
KojiKnight
Member
I think it's pretty safe to say that's one of the reasons why they didn't. You can guarantee he had a non-competitive clause in his contract unless Sony's legal department is run by monkeys, but they also knew that was a battle they couldn't win. I doubt sony WANTS a real law suit... they probably got exactly what they wanted. They filed a legal claim of copyright infringement, Bridgestone removed the offensive material from their ads, Sony got what it want and now it can be quietly settled.
It's already been posted that non-compete clauses are invalid in California, where the lawsuit was filed.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Its as if you think everything would be resolved if only Sony only said to Bridgestone "Please do a bunch of work editing out an actor in your commercial for us" even though Bridgestone is probably happy with the commercial the way things are and editing it would make the commercial worse. Of course Bridgestone would actually say screw you to that.
And of course Sony would have escalated it to being sued because making sure that Kevin Butler isn't seen promoting the wii on television is absolutely critical to them.
And in the end, Bridgestone probably realized that Sony is way more willing to fight to fight for this then they are, so of course Bridgestone said lets not waste money on this and settle out of court by giving sony what they want and removing the actor from the commercial.
Its how big business works. I don't really see how either side could have played out this situation differently. The only mistake made by either side was that Bridgestone/Jerry somehow didn't see this coming a mile away.
because any part of sony is focused on this one lawsuit. a worker browsing youtube might have been a more productive and less expensive use of time.
This is win. I laughed more than I probably should have.
timetokill
Banned
If this is what it takes to end the terrible Kevin Butler ads, then so be it
Kaz: Kevin Butler did what ?
Jack Tretton: I know, it's bad.
Kaz: We'll sue Bridgestone and Butler too ! I'll need to make some calls.
Jack Tretton: His name's Jerry Lambert.
Kaz: I don't care what the fuck his name is, he betrayed us! I don't believe it.
Jack Tretton: What are we going to do now? With Lambert gone, we have no marketing mascot. We need a new plan.
Kaz: *rubs his chin* We will do nothing. That's the plan. Besides, Butler's ads were getting shitty anyway.
Jack Tretton: Are you crazy? Our products won't sell themselves! The holiday season is coming for God's sake.
Kaz : It will. Just shut up and watch.
Jack Tretton: ... But the PS Vita's already in troubl ...
*stares at Tretton* "Riiiidge Racer!"
Jack Tretton: ... We're screwed.
Good night folks.
Jack Tretton: I know, it's bad.
Kaz: We'll sue Bridgestone and Butler too ! I'll need to make some calls.
Jack Tretton: His name's Jerry Lambert.
Kaz: I don't care what the fuck his name is, he betrayed us! I don't believe it.
Jack Tretton: What are we going to do now? With Lambert gone, we have no marketing mascot. We need a new plan.
Kaz: *rubs his chin* We will do nothing. That's the plan. Besides, Butler's ads were getting shitty anyway.
Jack Tretton: Are you crazy? Our products won't sell themselves! The holiday season is coming for God's sake.
Kaz : It will. Just shut up and watch.
Jack Tretton: ... But the PS Vita's already in troubl ...
*stares at Tretton* "Riiiidge Racer!"
Jack Tretton: ... We're screwed.
Good night folks.
vatstep
This poster pulses with an appeal so broad the typical restraints of our societies fall by the wayside.
All of this ridiculousness aside, when I first saw this commercial I couldn't help but think how odd it is that Bridgestone would be giving away Wiis at this stage in the console's life. It just seems strange. Sweepstakes are usually for relatively-new, buzzworthy items not ones that have been around for six years that millions and millions of people already own.
rofl.
RSLAEV
Member
I hope Jerry Lambert wins and Sony ends up looking like (even bigger) morons. Seriously they got him removed from the damn commercial, suing the guy is just a fucking jerk move. Did they think that whatever they stood to gain by suing their former spokesman would outweigh the damage they would create by being a company that sued their former spokesman?
Phife Dawg
Member
The fact that Sony devotes substantial resources to this has me shaking my head and laughing at the same time.
Brad Grenz
Member
The fact that you think this constitutes "substantial resources" has the rest of us laughing and pointing at you.
GillianSeed79
Member
He was a made man. You don't just leave the Playstation Family overnight. Just ask Phil Harrison. Guy was in witness protection over at Atari until Microsoft got him to flip.
(I'm joking)
(I'm joking)
bigtroyjon
Member
Logic- A company would never pursue a lawsuit that wasn't valid and Sony would never do something idiotic.
Hey man, it's okay every once in a while for you to not be one of Sony's white knights.
SpinningBirdKick
Banned
Looks to me that Sony didn't have Lambert's contract water tight to prevent him working for competing brands.
So now that they've realised their mistake they're suing for inappropriate use of the Kevin Butler IP.
Knowing how Sony operate they'll pay off the actor and kill the future Kevin Butler ad campaigns.
RIP Kevin Butler 2012.
So now that they've realised their mistake they're suing for inappropriate use of the Kevin Butler IP.
Knowing how Sony operate they'll pay off the actor and kill the future Kevin Butler ad campaigns.
RIP Kevin Butler 2012.
What a day and age where a human being can be IP, hahahaha. Sony should just build a little cage, stick him in it, and only let him out when they need to waste money on marketing.
Similar threads
- Locked