Tires aren't videogames.
-
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
Tires aren't videogames.
Following her on instagram, waiting till she slips up
Brad Grenz
Member
And Sony never made a peep until he picked up a Wii controller for Bridgestone. But your willfully obtuse comment has been noted.
The Sony brand. And let's not pretend the Playstation brand hasn't suffered this gen.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Sony can't possibly think they have the right to tell this actor that every job he holds in the future has to have the stipulation that his employer can never do a promotion with Microsoft or Nintendo. What if he gets a TV gig and sometime in season 2 that show had Nintendo or MS product placement? This deal with Bridgestone was done long before Bridgestone did a promotional campaign with Nintendo. Guy did not go out of his way to promote Wii, his employer did a promotional campaign with Nintendo long after he was already working for them.
Brad Grenz
Member
Sure they can. There's a good chance it says so right in his contract. He could have easily informed Bridgestone he could not appear in this particular promo. He did not have an essential role and they would have understood.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Once again, that's right up there with the silly urban legend about James Bond actors that claimed that they could never again appear on screen in a tux. And even then, that would have only applied to a certain look. There is no way Sony has trademark on this guys face.
Bullshit! Why on earth would someone work for that company then? They must give some amazing severance packages...
Brad Grenz
Member
These kinds of lock-in clauses for spokespeople are not out of the ordinary. Did you not read the Business Week article linked earlier in this thread? Lambert's agreement appears to have been a lot less restrictive than most in that he could still take other jobs. As long as he never appeared to be promoting another videogame system. They literally spent years and millions of dollars associating his face with the PlayStation brand. They can't have people at home wondering why the PlayStation guy is playing Wii all of a sudden.
Technically irrelevant.
Bridgestone isn't Sony's competitor. Also, he wasn't playing Kevin Butler.
Again, he is not being sued for breech of contract. He's being sued for trademark infringment under the Lanham Act. Sony is claiming that Kevin Butler appeared in the commercials.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
I honestly cannot believe this thread. Like, this is one of the stupidest things ever.
Given the situation, given how bad this looks on Lambert's part, given that there probably are contractual elements (see Venture Beat piece) - given that Lambert already settled.
How is Sony the bad guy here? Especially after all they invested in the Kevin Butler series of ads?
Given the situation, given how bad this looks on Lambert's part, given that there probably are contractual elements (see Venture Beat piece) - given that Lambert already settled.
How is Sony the bad guy here? Especially after all they invested in the Kevin Butler series of ads?
Welp a lot of Sony fans seem to confuse the actor from the character so why not Sony too?
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Read the post above yours. That's why it's stupid. Nothing about that ad made any reference to the Kevin Butler character.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
Who says it has anything to do with calling him Kevin Butler?
He ran a multi-year campaign where he played an overacting character in relation to videogames. Surely you can argue that his appearance as an overacting human character in a lab is at minimum, very similar, and at worst, trademark infringement and confusing to consumers.
And finally - the Venturebeat article mentions contractual violations. I've seen the stuff that comes out of Sony legal, and trust me in that they would've covered him promoting other videogame systems for a LONG TIME.
Even IF it doesn't break the contract, it's pretty shady considering he owns the ad agency (if his company did actually conceive / create the ad, if it's just an incorporation for his acting revenue, nevermind) too. And it's still pretty gray considering how close it feels to KB.
Sony doesn't have to prove that Bridgestone used the Kevin Butler character to prove trademark infringement. Rather, they have to prove Bridgestone used something confusingly similar to the Kevin Butler character.
If there is a no-compete clause, it would only be for a limited timeframe, namely enough of a time period to let people forget about Kevin Butler. It would also depend on the wording on the contract. Is it "You can't work for another video game company for however long" or "You can't be in the same room as another video game product for however long"? If it's the former then Sony's got no legal foothold, but if it's the later, then they might have a case here.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
Even if it's the former, the fact that it seems to be a co-promotional spot would put it into an area that could draw a lawsuit and/or force a settlement. Sure it's a Bridgestone commercial, but it's also clearly promoting the Wii.
RukusProvider
Banned
He's a contractor. He's not salaried so he setup a company to get tax breaks and protect himself. That's common practice. Nothing shady about it.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
The posts here and elsewhere made it seem like Bridgestone used an ad agency run by Lambert, which would in theory conceive of the idea for the spot / promotion and cast him in it. That's what seemed shady about it (ie, Lambert's own ad agency conceiving / pitching / creating a gaming co-promotional spot that included him in a role).
You are correct that it isn't weird in the slightest if he just has a company for himself as an actor. And you're probably right in that this is just his representation company, not the agency that created/conceived the ad.
RukusProvider
Banned
I'd imagine the details of the campaign are likely with Lambert and Bridgestone marketing team. The rest being conjecture.
The only real stance Sony has would be a clause in their contract with Lambert that he cannot impersonate a character playing a video game on a competing system while actively engaged or within stated time of his Sony contract.
Outside of that, it'd be very shameful of the courts to hold up something like this. Then again, US courts....
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
While Lambert and his ad agency might have conceived and put together the commercial (and lets be honest, it's in the same spirit and humor as his previous Bridgestone ads), it's highly unlikely he had anything to do with the promotion. Bridgestone probably just called the company one day, said they signed a deal for a promotion with Nintendo, and to get an ad made.
jstevenson
Sailor Stevenson
Regardless, Lambert in theory then should have recused himself from appearing in the ad due to his conflict of interest
You have a point. Shouldn't either Bridgestone's or the actor's legal consul have informed them ahead of time of conflicts-of-interests? I got a feeling that Sony's no-compete clause is unclear on the subject, but Bridgestone removed him from the ads with the Wii just in case.
Bridgestone already had the lawsuit in hand once they changed the ad.
Yeah, that's kind of the point. Minimize the damage in case the lawsuit goes Sony's way. Bridgestone might win the lawsuit, but they aren't going to risk Sony asking for more damages. It's not like a commercial is a product, after all.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Takao said:
That could be viewed as an admission of liability.
Bottom line is that as an actor Lambert really should have done something to differentiate himself from the Kevin Butler persona. A wig, facial hair, glasses, any simple device to disassociate with the PS-brand character when in such proximity to a direct competitor's product.
As I wrote earlier, he really should've known better. Its just bad business for him, its certainly not going to help him get more advertising gigs.
Brad Grenz
Member
It's not irrelevant. The ad is clearly a cross promotion with Nintendo for the Wii. Who pays for the ad makes little difference to the person watching at home wondering why the guy they've known as PlayStation's "Kevin Butler" for years is suddenly playing Wii on TV.
Breach of contract is absolutely a component of their complaint, according to the official statement Sony have given. Furthermore, Bridgestone doesn't have a contract with Sony, so they have to use the Lanham act if they want to compel them to pull or alter the ad. Sony doesn't own Jerry Lambert's likeness, but they have a pretty good claim to someone who looks just like him in a corporate setting playing a videogame in an ad on TV.
In a non-Wii Bridgestone ad from January he appears for 6 seconds total, yet 1 in 6 Yotube comments is about Kevin Butler. So putting a competing game console into play is like adding fuel to the fire.
http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=AGIN58Tnkt0
http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=AGIN58Tnkt0
Kevin butler, you are my idol
kevin?
KKKKKKKEEEEEEEEVVVVVVVVIIIIIIIIINNNNNNN BBBBBBBBUUUUUUUUTTTTTTTTLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEERRRRRRRR
KEVIN BUTLER!!!
@elphanchoxxx he is just an actor, he is in several commercials and tv shows.
Anyone else notice the guy in the professor suit and blonde hair is also the PS3 commercial guy?
Isn't that the CEO of playstation lmao what is he doing there.
Not the CEO just spokesperson
hes not the ceo hes the spokesperson... but yes
@elpanchoxxx @taliewacker2007 Hes a actor how the hell dont you know this
Kevin ur a ps3 man and always a ps3 man be my ps3 man again
First of all, "Kevin Butler"is an actor. I've seen him on "Scare Tactics" and other places. Second, what is the third ball, a bowling ball???
....why is kevein butler selling tyres?
come back to us kevin
So is Kevin Butler an actor, or does he actually work for Sony?
Is that the guy from the Sony commercials Kevin butler?
KEVIN BUTLER!!!!!!!
0:09 Is that Kevin Butler, Playstation Guy?
0:07 OMG its Kevin Butler
Hey at 0:10, that's the PS3 guy. He doens't work at Bridgestone.
thumbs up if you noticed that they had Kevin Butler from the PS3 commercials
shouldn't have hired a largely recognizable commercial actor as one of the engineers. stick with what works....tires and...wait, golf balls? Hold on is this real life? I'm very confused.
That was Kevin butler
LOL KEVIN BUTLER
With Kevin Butler in, it's hard to go wrong.
What's Kevin Butler doing here?
Kevin Butler can do everything.
Isn't the 2nd guy the spokesman for SONY HAHAHA
Why is Kevin Butler in this? The PS3 guy?
Kevin Butler lmao
Kevin Butler?
isnt that the dude from the PS3 commercials? 0:08
kevin buttler eh?
Kevin Butler gets around.
KEVIN BUTLER
0:08 Kevin Butler
0:08 Kevin Butler VP of Superbowl Teasers
Didn't know the head of Playstation gaming worked at Bridgestone too.
Kevin Butler get back to PS3 headquarters.
OMG is that Kevin Butler
is that Kevin Butler?!?
0:07 PS3 guy??
Kevin Butler is now the VP of tires? What can't he do?
because Sony are always the bad guy. Why do I need to read any of the posts - it involves Sony therefore they are in the wrong.
Lambert runs an ad agency that did this campaign. If he signed a restrictive contract with Sony how on earth did he ever think that playing on a Wii in an ad that his own company created would ever fly?
manueldelalas
Time Traveler
I don't get this thread, if I was head of Sony I would put a demand too. It's pretty obvious that the guy is at fault. It's a clear conflict of interests right here...
And people say Nintendo fans have a persecution complex...
Tripolygon
Banned
Requote so people see how spokespersons are very important in brand image
Kevin butler, you are my idol
kevin?
KKKKKKKEEEEEEEEVVVVVVVVIIIIIIIIINNNNNNN BBBBBBBBUUUUUUUUTTTTTTTTLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEERRRRRRRR
KEVIN BUTLER!!!
@elphanchoxxx he is just an actor, he is in several commercials and tv shows.
Anyone else notice the guy in the professor suit and blonde hair is also the PS3 commercial guy?
Isn't that the CEO of playstation lmao what is he doing there.
Not the CEO just spokesperson
hes not the ceo hes the spokesperson... but yes
@elpanchoxxx @taliewacker2007 Hes a actor how the hell dont you know this
Kevin ur a ps3 man and always a ps3 man be my ps3 man again
First of all, "Kevin Butler"is an actor. I've seen him on "Scare Tactics" and other places. Second, what is the third ball, a bowling ball???
....why is kevein butler selling tyres?
come back to us kevin
So is Kevin Butler an actor, or does he actually work for Sony?
Is that the guy from the Sony commercials Kevin butler?
KEVIN BUTLER!!!!!!!
0:09 Is that Kevin Butler, Playstation Guy?
0:07 OMG its Kevin Butler
Hey at 0:10, that's the PS3 guy. He doens't work at Bridgestone.
thumbs up if you noticed that they had Kevin Butler from the PS3 commercials
shouldn't have hired a largely recognizable commercial actor as one of the engineers. stick with what works....tires and...wait, golf balls? Hold on is this real life? I'm very confused.
That was Kevin butler
LOL KEVIN BUTLER
With Kevin Butler in, it's hard to go wrong.
What's Kevin Butler doing here?
Kevin Butler can do everything.
Isn't the 2nd guy the spokesman for SONY HAHAHA
Why is Kevin Butler in this? The PS3 guy?
Kevin Butler lmao
Kevin Butler?
isnt that the dude from the PS3 commercials? 0:08
kevin buttler eh?
Kevin Butler gets around.
KEVIN BUTLER
0:08 Kevin Butler
0:08 Kevin Butler VP of Superbowl Teasers
Didn't know the head of Playstation gaming worked at Bridgestone too.
Kevin Butler get back to PS3 headquarters.
OMG is that Kevin Butler
is that Kevin Butler?!?
0:07 PS3 guy??
Kevin Butler is now the VP of tires? What can't he do?
And you are the expert on this matter because?
Box of Bunnies
Banned
Thanks for that bro, couldn't read the big-arse wall of text like four posts up from yours.
SpinningBirdKick
Banned
He probably thought that it would fly because his contract with Sony didn't cover this situation.
He's a jobbing actor, he has to eat. So he took the job.
Now Sony are pissed at him (and probably at their own legal dept too) for exploiting the leaky contract.
Sony probably know they have little chance of winning on breach of contract with Lambert because of the holes in his contract. So have decided to play the Kevin Butler IP infringement angle instead.
This could be because Sony:
- Feel that they have a poor chance of winning if they go after Butler for contract breach, which is understandable.
- The IP infringement option is most likely to cause Lambert/Bridgestone to fold and do their bidding.
A long protracted IP infringement case will time/resource consuming and costly for all parties involved. The smaller party even if they are in the right will usually fold in situations like this. The small fish will have little chance of meeting their legal costs to see the case to it's conclusion against a behemoth like Sony and it frightens the shit out of them. So typically the smaller party just folds before it even begins.
This type of bullying tactic is used all the time by larger companies.
No matter how this pans out, I think it will kill off the Kevin Butler character.
Sony and Lambert will both feel slighted by this and I doubt there will be any working relationship in the future once current obligations have been fulfilled.
Why the fuck would you requote something 4 posts up from yours? I must be missing something here.
gaming_noob
Member
Deleting my useless comment. I hope Sony loses though.
I think Sony should have probably let this one slide, even if they somehow are in the right on the eyes of the law. It's a pretty grubby thing to do.
If Kevin Butler IS Playstation products personified as their official spokesperson as many have mentioned, then Sony's act of suing KEVIN BUTLER (asplayedbyJerryLambert) means a few things to me:
1. Sony thinks their audience of sophisticated non-kiddy mature adult gamers can't tell the difference between Jerry Lambert as Kevin Butler and Jerry Lambert as random scientist.
2. Sony somehow finds that the tiny bad PR of Jerry Lambert appearing in a tire ad that also has a Wii in it will be more costly financially than the bad PR of openly suing their own ad man for years will.
3. If people like Kevin Butler more than the entity that is Sony, does Sony think people will like them more or less after they sue THE KEVIN BUTLER into the ground? "How can they sue Kevin Butler? He's awesome! Boo on Sony! Microsoft should hire him!"
If Kevin Butler IS Playstation products personified as their official spokesperson as many have mentioned, then Sony's act of suing KEVIN BUTLER (asplayedbyJerryLambert) means a few things to me:
1. Sony thinks their audience of sophisticated non-kiddy mature adult gamers can't tell the difference between Jerry Lambert as Kevin Butler and Jerry Lambert as random scientist.
2. Sony somehow finds that the tiny bad PR of Jerry Lambert appearing in a tire ad that also has a Wii in it will be more costly financially than the bad PR of openly suing their own ad man for years will.
3. If people like Kevin Butler more than the entity that is Sony, does Sony think people will like them more or less after they sue THE KEVIN BUTLER into the ground? "How can they sue Kevin Butler? He's awesome! Boo on Sony! Microsoft should hire him!"
we.are.the.armada
Member
If an attorney suggested that they photoshop Kevin Butler out of that ad then I can't imagine things looking good when equitable remedies are mentioned.
If Sony's opponent felt that they were not in the wrong, nothing needed to been done. Why cover it up?
If Sony's opponent felt that they were not in the wrong, nothing needed to been done. Why cover it up?
Dumb people believe characters they see in ads are real.
I thought it was clear that Sony is suing for violation of intellectual property and not for violation of a non-compete clause? Because if this is the case, the legal issue isn't the presence of the wii, even though that's likely what spurred the suit, its the use of Kevin Butler's character, likeness, and appearance.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Dumb people are the foundation of the advertising market.
lunchwithyuzo
Banned
Or it could be viewed as a risk-averse response to the situation. Bridgestone likely isn't looking for a fight, regardless of their chances of winning.
And Lambert's really under no obligation to alter his personal appearance, Sony has no legal rights to that. He was in costume and character as a lab tech, which already distances him from the Kevin Butler role, though not distanced enough for Sony's legal dept. I doubt a beard or hat or whatever would've changed the result.
Similar threads
- Locked