I think its bad taste by Jerry Lambert has created this Kevin Butler Figure that is actually pretty HUGE in America.. Having him promote every Sony game and accessory he has been the face of Sony America Promoting, he is funny and does a great job.. Bridgestone having him and various Sports related firgures makes little sense and they don't need him.. saves a lot of headaches on both sides.. He can do what he wants but Sony hates/loves Nintendo and vice versa serious rivals and hate when the two intertwine in any way.. For Example in Marvel Ultimate Alliance the Wii verison was suppose to have 2 exclusive characters Samus and Link.. however when Nintendo Learned the verison they saw was on the PS2 they freak out and demanded the characters be removed.. it goes both ways and i thinks its more Nintendo Sony hate if anything.. kinda petty and immature

Can't everyone just be friends? :P

Einstein said: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."  So I do believe a large chunk of people would have been confused by seeing a person that has been championing the PS3 all this time only to have him appear on a commercial playing with a console from a competitor.  This is what is called a "PR nightmare".

You gotta wonder the level of stupidity/greed of the agent that represents Jerry Lambert not to have seen the huge red flags that a cross promotion Nintendo-Bridgestone could pose.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here and say Sony has every right to complain on this issue.  While Jerry Lambert is an actor, the character of Kevin Butter is associated with the PlayStation brand, which means Jerry Lambert's likeness has been licensed for the promotion of an specific video game console   (Much like Colonel Sanders likeness is associated with an specific chicken fast food chain)    And as such, Lambert can make and appear on any commercial and act on any movie or series he wants as long as it is not associated with the promotion of other video games consoles. (The word Apple while associated to Computers, it can also be used on any other context or brands as long as it is not associated to other computers manufacturers as well.)  So in other words, there was a breach of contract  on part of the actor's agency,  otherwise, Bridgestone would have not removed Jerry Lambert form the add as they did.

Screwattack seems down for me. Kotaku also has a piece on this though: http://www.kotaku.com.au/2012/10/kevin-butler-actor-being-sued-for-creating-confusion-and-causing-damage-to-sony/

"Sony Computer Entertainment America filed a law suit 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. We invested significant resources in bringing the Kevin Butler character to life and he?s become an iconic personality directly associated with PlayStation products over the years. Use of the Kevin Butler character to sell products other than those from PlayStation misappropriates Sony?s intellectual property, creates confusion in the market and causes damage to Sony."

I searched around but couldn't find the original commercial, I did manage to find a similar commercial without Butler: http://youtu.be/M9WRGjODZDQ

Lambert almost certainly would have signed an agreement with Sony that prevented him and/or the Butler character (which Sony most likely owns) from being used to promote another product. It looks like Lambert broke the terms of his contract with Sony, who were also likely still paying him if he was still bound.

Oh, Sony.