Things are getting really weird with Bridgestone's recent Wii-related commercial. It all started when Kevin Butler was spotted in the company's "Game On" promotion featuring the Wii. It didn't take long for an updated TV spot to be released, this time featuring a new actor.
10°
30°
20°
20°
Ad 
40°
Sony has also been doing huge cutbacks to remain profitable. Lets just say Kevin got a pay cut and he quit, while Sony's executives running the company into the floor are getting bonused all day long.
They own the character "Kevin Butler" not the man Jerry Lambert
He can act in whatever he wants to act in... Sony doesn't own him, unless this commercial is a breech of terms with Jerry
All in all, this is a stupid ass decision from sony
http://dockets.justia.com/d...
http://docs.justia.com/case...
^
Those are the actual documents, proving this is a real thing
Not sure if this is true, but:
" Not only are they suing Bridgestone for the commercial, they're also suing Wildcat Creek, Inc.
Who are they? Well, evidently they're the advertising company hired by Bridgestone for the commercial. According to this their president is none other than Jerry Lambert."
From the Neogaf thread
"Sony can't do that unless there is a non-compete clause in Lambert's contract."
None compete clauses are often impossible to enforce, due to it in fact bars people from using their trade to earn money.
By the way, that is a good thing!
I never saw the commercial. Did he use the Kevin Butler name and dress like him? If so I'm sure Sony would have a reason for suing. He'd have to at least not pretend to be the same character.
Guys....when an actor signs a commercial contract to represent a certain company, there is always a clause that states that said actor CANNOT EVER feature in any commercial work representing a competitor, it is a breach of contract.
Lebron is under Contract with Nike, hence can never appear in a commercial for Adidas, or Reebok, or Under Armour. Same thing for Messi as he is under contract with Adidas, therefore cannot feature in Nike commercials even though Barcelona, the club he plays for is sponsored by Nike. Any breach of those contract term is subject to legal action.
The purpose of commercials in the first place is build a certain perception, and actors/mascots are spokesperson for those companies. that's why they put these actors under a contract, meaning that you get paid specifically not to work for the competitor.
A company cannot afford to be publicly sponsoring you, and have you as a downloadable character in one their biggest franchises, while you're also pushing commercials for their direct competitor........I don't a single company that would allow that. And as much as I like Lambert, as an actor, he would be well aware of that, and as the president of marketing company, he would know that all too well.
Sony is going to have to cut ties with him, meaning that all their future plans to use him as Kevin Butler are now washed up, meaning an entire marketing strategy and investment has been foiled.......Cmon now, get real, What Lambert did was amateurish and unprofessional,and he breached his contract, period.
After reading through most of these comments I'm glad to see someone who actually understands what's going on. When this commercial came out I knew there would be a legal action coming and when Bridgestone suddenly edited out KB it was pretty much confirmed that this was going to happen.
I'm not sure if it's just people trolling because it's Sony or they really don't understand how the world works. I'd honestly be surprised if this weren't a shoe-in case for Sony and I suspect we'll hear about a settlement in a few months.
The only issue here is they are not suing the actor who might be in breach of contract. They are suing the companies that utilized him. And regardless of who is President... they can't sue the company for using him... they can only confront the actor if he is in breach.
Prince was under something similar, as he could not use the name given to him by his parents unless he was with Time/Warner; so it's not a stretch to think something like this exists out there.
@ therealspy;
Your presence here either undermines your hypothesis or supports it.
I'm saying support. ;D
Well, he could always go back to killing babies on scare tactics.
Firstly is if he signed a non-compete clause. This would basically not allow him to work on anything for a certain period of time in advertising or not work on anything that was gaming related. It all depends on the contract he had signed with Sony.
2nd Sony could be suing because they believe Bridestone was leading people to believe he was still portraying the Kevin Butler character.
This has happened before mind you in a different business. During the Monday night wars of the late 90's the WWF sued the WCW when Razor Ramon(Scott Hall) went to WCW because when he went he played the same character and while they never said his name they clearly hinted at who he was and that he was portraying a character the WWF had Trademarked. As a matter of a fact one of the first things he said was "You know who I am but you don't know why I'm here" Implying he was their as the Razor Ramon character which was against his contract.
Something similar could be happening here with the Sony law suit but until more info comes out there is no reason to be throwing hate in every possible direction.
I honestly can't take you seriously like this
No need to call every lawsuit 'frivolous'. No one seems to REALLY know any details here anyway.
http://www.gamestop.com/ps3...
and its a karting game lust like the mario kart game lambert was promoting in the commericial
he's trolling on behalf of sony fanboys everywhere. that's all it is. nobody is this stupid.
lets think for a sec,so you're tellin me a he shouldn't do commercial that involves video games becuase he used to do sony ones, then i guess ppl who work for pepsi can't drink coke.
if no names weren't involved then its a free country he can do what ever job comes his way, he needs to eat u know.
( l thought this was AMERICA ) south park:
I suppose every penny counts when you're on your way to bankruptcy.
I thought Apple suing Samsung was bad till i saw this.
Well, well, it sure beats threatening as Bill Maher would have said. I think...
I mean if I had created something like Kevin Butler for my company I wouldn't like rival companies using it....nobody would.
I know Jerry Lambert is an actor but he could of made a new character for it.
"Hey it's Kevin Butler"
Even though it's not, to most gamers who havent heard of Jerry Lambert they would still relate him to Kevin Butler.
And furthermore. Kevin Butler was a CEO in a dress shirt and tie. In the Bridgestone commercial Lambert was a scientist/tester wearing lab clothes. That should be a big enough difference to tell the two characters apart. People just say he's the Kevin Butler guy because that was his most popular role.
http://dockets.justia.com/d...
http://docs.justia.com/case...
@carl
Sony didnt really change the actor appearance all that much from what he looks like real life. This is a dumb lawsuit if true.
One of the most iconic things at outdoor sports events for decades was none other than the Goodyear blimp. Yes, another tire manufacturer.
Tire commercials, and general auto related commercials are plentiful during sports broadcasts. Saw some just last night during TBS's coverge of the ALDS and NLDS.
Bridgestone plays heavily to that with their 'made a football, hockey puck, etc. from our tire compound' whimsical commercials. If I'm not mistaken, they were first aired during the Superbowl.
Millions of sports games licensed from the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, FIFA, etc. are sold to gamers every year, indicating many gamers are sports fans and many sports fans are gamers.
Why would Bridgestone and Nintendo run an ad that was aimed at drivers/gamers during a broadcast that didn't appeal to them? They wouldn't.
Sorry admiralvic, I think your 90%+ is way off the mark.
Also they did not use KB in the commercial they used Jerry Lambert and he never spoke and was not even the main person in the commercial.
Sony messes up on this and they are also suing Lamberts advertising company which is sad because I really like him as a person.
Bridgestone should have known this I'm sure they have tons of lawyers.
Do you know Jerry personally? I would think that would be required to like him as a person.
http://www.gonintendo.com/?...
See's frankfurt
Expected as much... did sony do something to you as a child.. because your spite towards them is abnormal, even beyond fanboy terms
@Outside_ofthe_Box
No seriously, I think Frankfurt has a problem. Usually fanboys act like this to spite people on relevant articles... frankfurt does this in almost every comment he makes, iregardless of the content of the article
I honestly think
A) Sony did something to him as a child
B) He works for microsoft based on his article posts and his comments
C) He is a new breed of fanboy that we have not seen before... and it scares me
I did expect a comment like that from you however... lol.
@Nimblest-Assassin
lol, he's just one of those people that takes everything that they hate/like way too seriously, crossing all sorts of boundaries/lines..
There is nothing emberassing to sue bridgestone for their stupid mistake. Its called business dude
MS, Apple and even Nintendo do it all the time
He's an actor, ffs.
He's more concerned about putting food on the table and taking care of his wife and kids.
I doubt this guy knew anything about the PS3/Move before he had to learn about them for the TV ads.
Someone should have known better and that's why Sony has to sue.
I can see if Bridgstone went out of there way and called the character Kevin or Mr. Butler, but they didn't.
And was there anything in this actor's contract that stated he couldn't appear on TV playing another gaming counsole? Cause if that's the case it should be on him.
Anyways this is pretty low of Sony is true.
think the problem is the wii console in the bridgstone commercial
As much as you may love Sony no one should be defending them on this...Sony should have just sent them a warning letter telling them to pull the commercial which they did.
I mean how much money do Sony expect to get from this and do they really expect to win?
. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`\
thats how u earn bubbles son, 1-up for u
Plus I'm sure they need every cent they can get after losing billions over the last couple of yrs
In fact, sometimes it would only get In the way( see Apple vs.Samsung)
I say that because Jerry lambart has appeared in some movies, like Bad teacher ( 2011 ), no lawsuit over that.
So the problem here is that he is appearing in an ad which is essentially also promoting the Wii, I find Sony's concern on that very legitimate.
This doesn't sound like a case to me. Sounds like Sony's trying to make a case out of nothing. And trying to make money.
and no one made a big deal about it. Hmmmm conspiracy? 0_o????
They need to be friends ..Why compete in things that do not deserve sensitivity , This is the only reason that makes me hate competition in this type of positions !
God i hate that when companys fight against each other for one person !
if your not using him anymore you can't just pop up a year later and say heyyy that's not cool dude you did that commercial with the other guys console