Shadoken Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Either the companies take their customers to be too dumb or the customers are really too dumb to comprehend anything ! Just so scary how the answer to any problem in the western world today is a lawsuit ! Now now, no need to be too smart about things. Am totally confused , this Kevin butler guy I see him promoting playstation but now he is playing on a Wii? Does this mean Wii and Playstation are the same thing? I dont really know. Sony please help me.Sony,Sony......Sonly Pls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeehunter Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Jerry Lambert changed his DP to Sackboy on twitter because Kevin butler is a pre order bonus in LBP karting Edit - Last page zzzz .. Sony didn't sue Kevin butler but they sued Jerry lambert's company He was sued because he endorsed a gaming brand other than Sony Why the heck will Sony sue him if he doesn't work for them ?? He surely works at Sony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bird Bird Bird Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 He was sued because he endorsed a gaming brand other than Sony Dumb much ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 ^^He must have definitely signed some really shitty contract , If all this is actually happening. Probably, but since none of us have any details about it there is no point speculating about the basis of this suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CM Sunny Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Probably, but since none of us have any details about it there is no point speculating about the basis of this suit. no no no lets go & mock Sony because that's what we are supposed to do. you sony fanboy you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeehunter Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Dumb much ? There are speculations that the Wii giveaway was the cross promotion by both Nintendo and Bridgestone .. When Sony filed a lawsuit , Bridgestone immediately removed Lambert from the Game On advert .. If he was 100% clean , no action would have been taken by Bridgestone / Sony Sony lawyers would have done some homework before suing him and throwing their brand image into the drain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bird Bird Bird Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 There are speculations that the Wii giveaway was the cross promotion by both Nintendo and Bridgestone .. When Sony filed a lawsuit , Bridgestone immediately removed Lambert from the Game On advert .. If he was 100% clean , no action would have been taken by Bridgestone / Sony Sony lawyers would have done some homework before suing him and throwing their brand image into the drain Oh my. We've an insider. A dumb one at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VelivolusDas Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Oh my. We've an insider. A dumb one at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeehunter Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Oh my. We've an insider. A dumb one at that. Lol .. Do U people check GAF ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnackChap Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Sony are well within their right in suing lambert. Almost every contract will prevent you from endorsing a rival competitors product even years after your contract ends with the first company. Lambert, knowingly or unknowingly did just that and sony went after him. Fair and square. In fact i dont know on what basis did they evn sue bridgestone. Poor guys got caught in a crossfire. No wonder they removed the ad asap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Sony are well within their right in suing lambert. Almost every contract will prevent you from endorsing a rival competitors product even years after your contract ends with the first company. Lambert, knowingly or unknowingly did just that and sony went after him. Fair and square. In fact i dont know on what basis did they evn sue bridgestone. Poor guys got caught in a crossfire. No wonder they removed the ad asap. And who are you to back Sony up?? you must a fanboy who has no knowledge of contracts, people in here have insider knowledge of what happened. So why dont you go and clear the BAR and become a lawyer or something......like the people in here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The JACKAL Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Just wondering , waht if JL had a look like ( there has to be one) is sony going to sue him for existing?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColorCodePurple Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Just wondering , waht if KB had a look like ( there has to be one) is sony going to sue him for existing?? Waht if you have a look alike too? Add zee on fb and find out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Right Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 LBP Karting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadoken Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Probably, but since none of us have any details about it there is no point speculating about the basis of this suit. Hmm yea , I guess there must be a set amount of time after which he can work for other gaming companies or something.Seems fair enough. no no no lets go & mock Sony because that's what we are supposed to do. you sony fanboy you Pretty sure if this was MS here , everyone would go about blasting them. But if its Sony , omg there must be some info we dont know. Sony are too awesome to be doing dick moves like this , you guys are so dumb.You dont know anything abot law etc blah blah. Bridgestone even went ahead and removed KB from the ad completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Right Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 But if its Sony , omg there must be some info we dont know. Sony Computer Entertainment America filed a lawsuit against Bridgestone and Wildcat Creek, Inc. on September 11. The claims are based on violations of the Lanham Act, misappropriation, breach of contract and tortious interference with a contractual relationship. Yet I believe Sony overreacted, this should have been settled amicably. Again, I don't know what is US equivalent of FIR or sending a legal notice...I mean how can you formally ask someone for a S&D? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Sony always wins baby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeehunter Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 And who are you to back Sony up?? you must a fanboy who has no knowledge of contracts, people in here have insider knowledge of what happened. So why dont you go and clear the BAR and become a lawyer or something......like the people in here. Nice try If you look a couple of pages back , I said the same thing what KC said Only thing that I added was in all this process Sony is gonna lose the brand image But you people were more busy in pointing out the 2nd part LBP Karting That's the reason why Lambert changed his profile pic on twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Right Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 The point is, whatever happens here, there would be no KB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScrewyAurum Posted October 9, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 Bridgestone has responded to Sony's lawsuit against the tyre maker and the actor who plays Kevin Butler, the fictional Sony executive who has fronted PlayStation in the US for years. Last month Sony sued Bridgestone and Jerry Lambert, the actor who plays Kevin Butler, after a US telly ad showed Lambert advertising tyres by playing the Nintendo Wii, which customers can receive as part of a gaming promotion. The ad, later edited to remove Lambert, can be seen at GoNintendo. Sony, citing a breach in US trademark law, reckons the ad "depicts a Bridgestone employee who consumers reasonably perceive to be Kevin Butler promoting the Nintendo Wii, a product that competes directly with SCEA's PlayStation products". To back up its claim, Sony said Kevin Butler has appeared in more than 30 ads, has a presence on Twitter (with a whopping 129,000 followers) and Facebook and has waved his arms about on stage at E3. A Kevin Butler costume is available for LittleBigPlanet Karting as a pre-order bonus. In short, Sony reckons when we gamers see Jerry Lambert, we see Kevin Butler, and accuses Bridgestone of cashing in. "With the intent of unfairly capitalising on the consumer goodwill generated by Kevin Butler, Bridgestone has used and is using the same or confusingly similar character, played by the same actor, to advertise its products or services in the commercial," Sony said. In a response unearthed by The Hollywood Reporter, Bridgestone insists Kevin Butler did not appear in its ads at all, "and thus denies that he speaks or does anything whatsoever in the commercial". Bridgestone will fight the suit and attempt to show that Sony has failed to register a trademark on Kevin Butler, that the character has not acquired secondary meaning and there is no likelihood of confusion among consumers. There are other aspects of this case. The contract between Sony and Wild Creek, Lambert's company, was entered into on 7th August 2009 and contained an exclusivity clause that prevented Lambert from working for PlayStation competitors, such as Nintendo. The contract expired at the end of August 2012. The Bridgestone ads appeared on TV three days later. Sony said Lambert started work for Bridgestone in February 2012 while still under contract with SCEA, and so Sony claims a breach. The case may be settled out of court. Sony has until 12th October 2012 to either withdraw its motion or see it through at a hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.