It became clear with this post after  the 3 or 4 before that you are making an argument to fit your decision. Not looking at the situation, coming to a conclusion based on points that can be argued.

Can you provide anything solid to show what you are saying is true apart from your gut feeling. My thoughts are quite the oppoiste of yours. For example, you say that Jerry can advertise anywhere he likes apart from a competing games console? How do you know that is the case? Sony are a diversified company, what if he was advertising, let's say basically any electronic device ever made (since they would be competing with Sony), along with maybe a film, considering Sony has a film studio, or maybe a financial product, considering Sony has a finance business... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony#Business_units

So that's 1 point I'm interested in hearing your view on, another would be about the "timed guidline". Now, Kowenicki has mentioned that these things from his own actual experience are quite rare and can't last longer than 6 months from end of use. Considering Jerry hasn't portrayed his character in a Sony advertisment for at least 12 months, that's another point.

For Sony, everything is 10 years.

Smooooooth.

Next up, Walmart ends up applying this principle to its greeters, to prevent them ever working for anyone else.  After all, they are the face of Walmart, when you go into a store.  So, become a greeter, stop working for them, and then then can stick a cardboard cutout of yourself in front of the store, not pay you and have you not work any place else.

It is like the communist 5 year plan, but Sony believes they are so future-proofed they can double the length of time.

And remember, in Russia, you don't own your image, your image owns you... and the state owns the image owning you.

"sony is NOT suing jerry"

just because jerry is the CEO of Wildcat Creek, Inc advertising firm.

"Inc" see that people want to know why jerry put his company in a Inc? its very simple. Jerry is not being sued, and for a reason!

"Incorporation provides legal protection for business owners that no other type of business ownership can afford. Through incorporation, the assets of owners remain completely separate from the assets of the business thereby limiting the overall liability owners can face in the event of business failure. To meet the legal definition of a true corporation, certain conditions must be met, including regular meetings with a board of directors, accurately recording the minutes of all board meetings, issuing stock certificate of ownership and filing the necessary paperwork with the state on a annual basis. Failure to do any of these steps can negate the incorporation and pass liability directly to the owners."

let that sink in real good. Sony could not directly Sue Jerry only the Ad agency. And the case is being moved ex parte order anyway.

IE:

dismissal before the answer or appearance of the defendant(s).

which was in the legal doc.s for this case in reference 14 of the legal doc's. which the person who posted this already knew or posted it anyway. knowing full well it was being settled out of court!

Did they already settle? Wow, that was fast!

"Did they already settle? Wow, that was fast!"

read reference court case doc. 14 its right in the first link it already moved to ex parte  by plaintif.

all there needs by the court is update to the status of resolution to the ex parte, with Jerry being removed from the bridge stone ad its pretty much over with at that point, and the fact it was as of OCT 5th its most likely done in resolution.

The whole thing boils down to, was Sony still paying the man or did the contract he signed say he couldn't promote any other video game promotions?

Butler hasn't been in a commercial for a minute, I don't know if they had something planned down the line but unless they were paying him during that period that he did the Bridgestone commercial or his contract actually states he can't appear on screen with another game competitors products, this really can't hold up. For the sake of actors/comedians in the industry, I hope he didn't do something foolish like double dip because companies all over would then be wary of well known faces and type casting will hit a lot of people that don't get paid nearly enough to live on two 30 to 60 sec spots and maybe a live convention appearance a year from just one company.

Lawsuits are often how corporations try to get the attention of other corporations.  Often times they will quickly settle out of court.  Sony didn't like the whole Wii promotion angle and sued to make it aware.  So, it makes sense they resolved out of court and clarified contract stuff.