Pixels or Death's Joseph Rush writes, "Never mind the fact that Sony never actually trademarked the 'Kevin Butler' character or that the actor, Jerry Lambert, has done Bridgestone commercials for years. This hullabaloo stems from the actor holding a Wii remote in his hands during the commercial. That’s it. He doesn’t say anything. He doesn’t wear a clever 'Kevin' name tag.
It’s as though Jerry Lambert is Prince Adam and any piece of video game hardware in existence is the Power Sword; Sony is insinuating that touching one transforms Lambert into Kevin Butler.
Sony is practically condemning this man to a lifetime of only being able to hold the Japanese manufacturer’s products."
40°
150°
40°
50°
Ad 
70°
30°
40°
20°
30°
30°
Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Doesn't matter when it's filmed, it only matters when it's actually shown. Sony are effectively trying to own his face in perpetuity as it relates to games. It's ridiculous.
http://n4g.com/news/1097871...
This lawsuit is just as stupid as that "shapes" lawsuit from Apple and i hope that Sony loses and that Bridgestone and Lambert counter sue them.
They should have at least put Jerry doing something else with the ad, he was obviously chosen to go into that segment because he's associated with gaming, due to sony.
Sony is going to lose this one. You can't prevent actors from working. You do not own the actor, the clothes he wears, or what he sells.
basically it mentions that Jerry Lambert's company is doing a joint marketing scheme with Bridgestone that has a competition to win a Wii or something. Anyway, just trying to point out that Jerry Lambert is not as innoncent as it seems and he is using his fame from Sony ads to sell another console.
Not sure if you guys here are old enough, but a character from "friends" had a character who was a coffee shop worker called Gunther. Friends became a massive hit and Gunther(dunno his real name) did an commercial advertising a coffee maker, he and the company got ended up getting sued.
He didn't play as Kevin Butler. I hope Sony loses. This is just ridiculous.
Sony can not prove that the Wii benefited from having Jerry in the advert so the judge will tell Sony to bug off.
to be honest, since we dont know what his contract with Sony states, we can't really say who is right or wrong.
I'm sure if you advertise for Pepsi, I am pretty sure you are not allowed to be seen in public drinking a Coca-Cola.
That's for people being sponsored by companies, not for people advertising. But, of course like you said, it depends on what's in the contract.
He was definitely marketing the Wii, Sony's competitor, no doubt about it
Seriusly I doubt that the Wii sold allot because of this commercial so I do not see why Sony is acting like a diva.
@Soldier - that works both ways...Jerry made Kevin Butler who he is and took Sony out of the bad marketing reputation that they had, sure some other guy could have played KB but who is to say that they would have been as good as Jerry.
Also they covered it up because they did not want bad press which is what is happening now - no company wants there name involved in some law suit no matter the outcome.
Sony does not realize this but this makes them look like jerks and can damage PS3 sales - Bridge switched the commercial so why go further?
If I was wrong, they wouldn't have tried to cover it up by replacing him.
"but but but he wasnt kevin butler" okay so I could go rip off Bugs Bunny, but call him Bigs Bunny and be fine? No.
I mean seriously Sony...this is like beating up a team mascot.