Sounds fine to me, if they're suing then his contract must have something to do with it which makes a lot of sense.

But Lambert wasn't wearing a "Kevin Butler" suit for Bridgestone Wii, just his own face! Should he undergo plastic surgery and totally change his peculiar acting style to work for anybody else but Sony?
Sorry, I surely defend Sony about silly accusation on Move, as motion controls were first invented in research centres not owned by or exclusively working for console producers, not at Ninty, but this case, even if it had enough legal bases, is a PR suicide.

I'm still wondering why Sony stopped using Kevin Butler in the first place...

nintendo will get flo from progressive

Wow, this must be an excuse to hate on Sony, or what? Really, this is pretty standard, and they are primaily taking this action to stop the ad dead in its track before another one airs or causes more "damage". While Kevin Butler being the property of Sony is one issue, the most pressing issue is that Jerry Lambert most likely is legally not allowed to make ads featuring any competitor's hardware (possibly even software) for a specified period of time. This is called a non-compete clause, and is designed to protect the trade secrets, or in this case advertising secrets, of the employer

Sony has a whole legal team and crew of lawyers, and they would have looked over the whole contract before making this move. Clearly Lambert is still restricted by his contract. This would include working with the competition in anyway, meaning no telling them his advertising strategies or creating characters for them, etc. Sony may come across as a bully, but not taking legal action encourages this shady business practice. I trust Nintendo or Microsoft would do the same. Jerry Lambert just made a stupid decision. If he didn't like the terms of his contract, then he shouldn't have signed it.

I was starting to think I was the only one who didn't think this was all Sony.

That comparison is so ridiculous and so invalid, it doesn't even deserve a response.

Right or wrong, and I think it's wrong, it's bad PR.

They just burned a character that was loved by fans and was the face of the brand for so many years.
Kevin Butler will now be known as the poor actor who has been sued by greedy Sony.

Next (s) "Top 10 evil things in video games" already have a nice spot for this case.

Someone who was desperate for a point in an argument could use to to argue an admission of guilt, maybe that lawer guy off the Simpsons for example. Any normal person would simply interpret it as an oversight and using common sense to avoid any unnessasary potential hassle down the line.

This is indeed a duplicate thread. And the arguments are getting a little personal for my liking

Locking.