lawsuit

bungie halo lawsuit marty o'donnell Video Game Coverage - 8263786240
  • -
  • Vote
  • -

After being terminated without cause from Bungie in April, Halo composer Marty O'Donnell filed suit against his former employer, seeking unpaid wages, benefits and damages. Bungie has now settled with O'Donnell and are paying him $95,019.13.

  • -
  • Vote
  • -

Bethesda has issued a cease and desist letter to the game Fortress Fallout for 'confusion' surrounding their use of the word 'Fallout' in their game title.  For reference, Fortress Fallout is a tower building mobile game, not at all similar to the Fallout series, but given the size of the company making it, they've got no choice but to find a new name rather than fight Bethesda on this one.  

You may remember Bethesda doing something similar to Mojang over the game Scrolls, but Mojang was lucky enough to win their case. As ridiculous as all of this is, if you're an indie developer, maybe just don't use anything remotely related to a Bethesda property in your game title; it's just not worth the risk.  Or, you know, just go all out and call your game The Elder Dishonored Rogue Warrior Fallout: New Scrolls.

  • -
  • Vote
  • -

According to the Associated Press, heirs of songwriter Edith Newlin are suing CBS and The Big Bang Theory for use of Newlin's nursery rhyme without attaining appropriate consent.

Apparently, the show's production company got permission from Willis Music Co., which owns a book "Soft Kitty" is published in, but did not consult Newlin's daughters, who claim to be the copyright holders of the lyrics. 

The nursery rhyme is a long-running gag on the show that has become so central to its fandom that the cast and fans sing it together at conventions and other events. If the Newlin's case pans out, this could turn out to be a very costly mistake for The Big Bang Theory. The fate of Soft Kitty rests on whether or not Willis Music acquired the rights to the song when they bought the book it was contained in. If not, the rights are still with the Newlin family and The Big Bang Theory will likely have to pay out.

Disembodied Head of The Day: 'Donkey Kong' Champ's Lawsuit Against Cartoon Network Thrown Out
Via Eurogamer
  • -
  • Vote
  • -

If you watch Regular Show on Cartoon Network, you're probably aware of a character that goes by the name of GBF, an acronym for Garrett Bobby Ferguson or Giant Bearded Face.

The character is a giant head with tiny arms and legs that cheats at video games and explodes when he loses.

What you might not know is that this character is based on a real-life person, and he's not happy about this portrayal.

According to Eurogamer, actual Garrett Bobby Ferguson, who holds the world record on Donkey Kong and was the first to reach 1 million points on Ms. Pacman, had his lawsuit against Cartoon Network thrown out.

Mitchell objected to this portrayal and so launched a lawsuit against Cartoon Network for damages.

But the legal challenge has now been thrown out by New Jersey Federal District Judge Anne Thompson.

"The television character does not match the plaintiff in appearance," Thompson ruled (via AP). "GBF appears as a non-human creature, a giant floating head with no body from outer space, while Plaintiff is a human being.

"And when GBF loses his title, the character literally explodes, unlike Plaintiff."

GBF will live to explode another day.

call of duty news lawsuit panama manuel noriega Video Game Coverage - 8257245696
  • -
  • Vote
  • -

Manuel Noriega, ex-dictator of Panama, is suing Activision Blizzard over his appearance in Call of Duty: Black Ops II, seeking lost profits and damages. His suit focuses on "blatant misuse, unlawful exploitation and misappropriation for economic gain," claiming his appearance in fictitious events heightens the game's sense of realism, in turn helping boost sales.

disgruntled-moviegoer-wants-to-sue-warner-bros-for-not-including-every-joker-scene
  • -
  • Vote
  • -

The guy who has plans to sue Warner Bros. with his brother (who happens to be a lawyer) kicks off his fiery, inspired rant with just the kind of intro you'd expect...

My brother (who is a lawyer) and I are going to sue WB and DC for false advertising, misleading visual images and gaining a profit from us and millions others due to these acts. Our case has been accepted. We begin 11.08.16

And then he dives deep into all his reasoning for this madness...

"Movie Trailers are like food menus, they give you a preview of what your gonna get. If you look at a McDonald's menu and you choose to get your favourite burger, presented/showcased in a nice picture with pickles, chicken, mild cheese(you're favourite, in-fact...that's the only reason you're getting this burger...because you love mild cheese). So you use your hard worked money to pay for this burger, you get the burger, but only to find out that...this isn't the burger you ordered. Yes it has pickles and chicken...but...it doesn't have mild cheese...it has regular cheese.

Suicide Squad trailers showcased several SPECIFIC Joker scenes that I had to pay for the whole movie just so that I can go watch those SPECIFIC SCENES that WB/DC had advertised in their trailers and TV spots. These scenes are: When Joker banged his head on his car window, when Joker says, ''let me show you my toys'', when Joker punchs the roof of his car, when Joker drops a bomb with his face all messed up and says, ''BYE BYE!''. Non of these scenes were in the movie. I drove 300 miles to London to go watch these specific scenes they had explicitly advertised in their TV ads...and they didn't show them to me. Adding to this, they were also 2 specific Katana scenes they advertised that were also the reason I wanted to go watch the movie. These scenes were: Katana's eyes going black, and a slow motion shot of her and her sword taking souls...in a smokey kind of style. These scenes were advertised several times in the 1st trailer and many TV ads...but they didn't show it to me in the movie. I wasted alot of money paying and travelling to go watch this movie because of these specific scenes they had advertised to me and all of us saying, ''hey, check out our preview! this will all be in our movie, come watch it on the 5th!!''. All lies. I told the theatre about this unjust act and said I didn't get what I came here to see...can I have my money back. They laughed at me and kicked me out. So I'm now taking this to court. I want my refund, the trauma of being embarrassed as I was being kicked out and people laughing at me for wanting my refund, and also the 160 pounds of fuel money I used to drive to London from Scotland.

If you advertise something...give me what you have advertised. Period. This is becoming a habbit with movie studios, showing epic scenes in trailers...but their never shown in the movies. It's unjust.

I just want to say, join me if you feel the same way. Let's stop this nonsense of false bullshitery...and don't let them bribe you with their ''deluxe premium special directors gold extended edition supreme cut'' nonsense. You should get what they advertised as their first theatre showing and what you have paid for based on what they have showed you in their advertisements.

Our court process will begin on 11/08/16 this week."


Why so litigious, bruh?....



Alriiighty then...just wait for Jared Leto to lash out at this ridiculousness somehow.