By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Kevin Butler: Vice President of Betrayal and Tears

Tagged games:

mike_intellivision on 04 September 2012
HappySqurriel said:
For years I've wondered how these actor's contracts are written ...

If it was possible, and it likely isn't, when Sony stopped using an actor for one of their campaigns (if I was Nintendo or Microsoft) I would create a series of commercials to be run on youtube using these actors. Essentially have "Marcus" or "Kevin Butler" switch sides in a humorous way.


The character (Kevin Butler) would be owned by Sony. It could not be used by anyone else without Sony's permission.

The actor (Jerry Lambert) would have been a contract employee. His contract may have included a "non-compete" clause which would not prohibit him from doing anything for a competitor of Sony for a certain length of time afterwards -- or not.  Such a delay requirement would have lessoned the effectiveness of a "switching" commercial, if one could figuure out how to make it without being in copyright violations.

So Lambert went from Holiday Inn Express to Sony to Bridgestone Tires. He also does some acting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Lambert_%28actor%29 and http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1208801/

Mike from Morgantown



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV
Around the Network
HappySqurriel on 04 September 2012
mike_intellivision said:
HappySqurriel said:
For years I've wondered how these actor's contracts are written ...

If it was possible, and it likely isn't, when Sony stopped using an actor for one of their campaigns (if I was Nintendo or Microsoft) I would create a series of commercials to be run on youtube using these actors. Essentially have "Marcus" or "Kevin Butler" switch sides in a humorous way.


The character (Kevin Butler) would be owned by Sony. It could not be used by anyone else without Sony's permission.

The actor (Jerry Lambert) would have been a contract employee. His contract may have included a "non-compete" clause which would not prohibit him from doing anything for a competitor of Sony for a certain length of time afterwards -- or not.  Such a delay requirement would have lessoned the effectiveness of a "switching" commercial, if one could figuure out how to make it without being in copyright violations.

So Lambert went from Holiday Inn Express to Sony to Bridgestone Tires. He also does some acting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Lambert_%28actor%29 and http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1208801/

Mike from Morgantown


You wouldn't (necessarily) need to use the character though ...

I could be wrong but I was always under the impression that non-competition clauses were generally not enforceable; of course that could just be that (for a typical employee) the cost of going to court over a non-competition clause is more costly than the benefit it could possibly provide for the company.



mike_intellivision on 04 September 2012
HappySqurriel said:
mike_intellivision said:
HappySqurriel said:
For years I've wondered how these actor's contracts are written ...

If it was possible, and it likely isn't, when Sony stopped using an actor for one of their campaigns (if I was Nintendo or Microsoft) I would create a series of commercials to be run on youtube using these actors. Essentially have "Marcus" or "Kevin Butler" switch sides in a humorous way.


The character (Kevin Butler) would be owned by Sony. It could not be used by anyone else without Sony's permission.

The actor (Jerry Lambert) would have been a contract employee. His contract may have included a "non-compete" clause which would not prohibit him from doing anything for a competitor of Sony for a certain length of time afterwards -- or not.  Such a delay requirement would have lessoned the effectiveness of a "switching" commercial, if one could figuure out how to make it without being in copyright violations.

So Lambert went from Holiday Inn Express to Sony to Bridgestone Tires. He also does some acting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Lambert_%28actor%29 and http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1208801/

Mike from Morgantown


You wouldn't (necessarily) need to use the character though ...

I could be wrong but I was always under the impression that non-competition clauses were generally not enforceable; of course that could just be that (for a typical employee) the cost of going to court over a non-competition clause is more costly than the benefit it could possibly provide for the company.

Without using some reference to the former character, the "switching" commerical makes no sense.

As for the enforcability of "non-compete" clauses, I guess it would depend upon the contact and the courts.  And in most cases, the period of time (6 months) is shorter than the wait for a court date. So it becomes "de facto" enforcement, if not "de jure."



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV
DanneSandin on 04 September 2012
Jay520 said:
Excellent. My plan to destroy Nintendo is going pretty well. The first step is infiltrating their workforce and gaining their trust. It's too easy. They'll be dead before they even know we were in there.

But... Why... I don't understand Jay =( Why would you infiltrate BRIDGESTONE TIRE if you wanna bring down Nintendo?! They don't have anything to do with Nintendo, right? This is probably a too complex plan for me to understand =/



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Jay520 on 04 September 2012
DanneSandin said:
Jay520 said:
Excellent. My plan to destroy Nintendo is going pretty well. The first step is infiltrating their workforce and gaining their trust. It's too easy. They'll be dead before they even know we were in there.

But... Why... I don't understand Jay =( Why would you infiltrate BRIDGESTONE TIRE if you wanna bring down Nintendo?! They don't have anything to do with Nintendo, right? This is probably a too complex plan for me to understand =/



We will sabotage the tires of Nintendo leaders.

Around the Network
Dgc1808 on 04 September 2012

You're dead to me, KB!



4 ≈ One

DanneSandin on 04 September 2012
Jay520 said:
DanneSandin said:
Jay520 said:
Excellent. My plan to destroy Nintendo is going pretty well. The first step is infiltrating their workforce and gaining their trust. It's too easy. They'll be dead before they even know we were in there.

But... Why... I don't understand Jay =( Why would you infiltrate BRIDGESTONE TIRE if you wanna bring down Nintendo?! They don't have anything to do with Nintendo, right? This is probably a too complex plan for me to understand =/


We will sabotage the tires of Nintendo leaders.

Oh snap! :-0



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

d21lewis on 04 September 2012

It's almost as big of a game changer as this:

Pretty much killed the Mortal Kombat franchise. 



miz1q2w3e on 04 September 2012
Kyuubi Ricky SSJ2 said:

XD



Adinnieken on 04 September 2012
Ajescent said:
Slightly on (not really) topic question. I'm convinced it's "Different from or to" but I keep hearing people saying it's "Different than" As in Apples are different from/to/than oranges. Am I right?

No. 

All three are technically acceptable.  "Different from" is the most widely accepted, "Different to" is chiefly British, and "Different than" is not prefered but acceptable.  Than is used for comparison, so I'm not sure why one would feel it is incorrect, personally.