Late last year, the musical act No Doubt filed a lawsuit against Activision over the use of the band's likeness in Band Hero. The issue at heart was the ability for avatars of the band to be used in the performance of songs other than the three tracks by No Doubt which appeared in the game.
Yesterday, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Kenji Machida laid some smack down in favor of the artists. In a tentative ruling, he's rejected claims by Activision that they should be protected by the first amendment in this scenario.
I feel like No Doubt is taking themselves entirely too seriously by making the suit in the first place. And while few things please me more than seeing a major corporation being brought to task for doing something wrong, I just can't get too excited over it in this circumstance. It just seems to be taking all the fun out of something I perceive as ultimately harmless.
No Doubt wins round in Activision lawsuit [LA Times]
Conrad Zimmerman is Destructoid's News Editor and home to the busiest mustache in the gaming press. An amateur historian and pop culture fanatic, Conrad possesses a nearly limitless wealth of videogame factoids and a passion for the power of games to teach, inspire and entertain. He enjoys reading, writing and turning things which should be fun into work.
Likes
Mega Man 2, Arcade Games, Books about games, Board games, Having cultural interests that aren't games
Meet the rest of the team
| BBcode help |
| [b]Bold text[/b] |
Bold text |
| [i]Italic text[/i] |
Italic text |
| [url]http://www.dtoid.com/[/url] |
http://www.dtoid.com |
| [url=http://www.dtoid.com/]Web link[/url] |
Web link |
|
| [img]http://www.example.com/robot.jpg[/img] |
 |
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
35 comments | showing # 1 to 35
|
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
5:00 AM on 04.16.2010 | 
You people have gone absolutely DAFT if you don't think this is worth judicial involvement. It'a a violation in much the same way forgery is. Someone is establishing your permission, without your permission.
Jesus GOD in Heaven, I hate the gamer community sometimes. Always ready to make grandiose, ri-goddamned-diculous statements about things they don't have complete knowledge of.
If the avatars were made to perform 2 Live Crew songs, I'd probably be more understanding, but that's not what this is. If it's damaging to No Doubt's image in some way, by all means, they should bring the perpetrators to task for it. I don't think that's what's happening here. At least, not prior to their bringing the suit.
Wel that's more detailed from what I knew about before. Thanks.
Dude, 2 Live Crew . . . I'm writing this through the laughter. That would be fucking amazingly hilarious!
I realize that we don't know the minutia of the contract, but we do know that the court ruled in No Doubt's favor. If the court finds that there was no clause provided to allow Activision use of their likenesses in cases other than those specifically enumerated by said contract, then that's good enough for me. I mean, we have a court ruling. Saying we don't know about the particulars of the contract is a bit moot at this point. :-)
Also, you and I (but more so I) haven't experienced the level of fame associated with their celebrity. Their images are something of a commodity. They can trade their likenesses, licenses them out, etc., to great financial gain. If someone wants to use my likeness to dance/sing 2 Live Crew tunes, I'd laugh at it, think it was cool, and move on, knowing full well something like that would never happen again. Gwen and Co. have to be very protective of this sort of thing, as they actually lose money every time someone misappropriates their likenesses.
That and the fact that Activision, nor any corporation for that matter, should ever be allowed to do what they do without strict oversight. Exploitation is how companies make their money, and unless regulated, would behave an awful lot like a two-year old. "MINE!" I have often gone on record stating my allegiance to all things corporate, which is true, but it's only because of the regulations that I find them capable of my backing. Truly, they are all ill-spirited.
But what if there's an audience full of Kanye Wests? :( You'll never be able to finish your song.
Nah. He's going let you finish, but first . . .
People as commodities just make me sad, honestly. I respect their right to sell their image, I just wish they wouldn't. There's nothing worse to me than the thought of somebody saying before all, "I am a product." Which is what No Doubt's suit says to me.
I agree wholeheartedly with your opinion on the need for corporate oversight, however.
(nice of you to imply that I have some degree of fame; flattering, but simply untrue)
Yeah, I s'pose I jumped that gun. I went ahead and hit the link, and all the court did was essentially invalidate the Defense's First Amendment claims. My bad.
I agree with you that people shouldn't treat themselves as commodities, and we all need to laugh a lot more where ourselves are concerned. Tom Cruise should have laughed when he took a pie in the face in Germany those many years ago . . . but he didn't. It's a sad thing, really.
Also, you may not be famous, but I love you, sweety. ;-)
When are people (and companies) going to realize that the First Amendment is about freedom of speech from the government, not private individuals? This was one of Activision's more asinine moves.
Sends lawyers, guns, and money. Dad, get me out of this.
Amazing how probably less than a day's coding can cause millions of dollars in legal fees sometimes.
Was that ever proven? It's what No Doubt claimed but Activision always claimed the opposite. It's very possible Activision used sorcery and weird wording to give themselves a workaround. In which, sadly, it still works in their favor.
Regardless of what No Doubt and their lawyers thought they were signing I want to know exactly what they were signing.
Don't get me wrong, I love to see more of this happen to Activision, maybe Kotick will get the boot, but I think it's pretty petty of the band to whine about stuff like this.
I felt the same way about the Courtney Love/Kurt Cobain thing, and I am a MASSIVE Nirvana fan. Who is this really hurting ?
Activision Legal: A reallistic lawyer corporation TV Show where our (un)faithful heroes(?) battle the hordes of lawsuits caused by the scandalous administration of ACtivision. It's gonna blow your mind!
If the contract says that the band will only be used to perform No Doubt's songs, and then this happens, then of course Activision overstepped and they should lose. If the contract just says that the band will be used in the game to perform songs, then I don't think No Doubt has a leg to stand on.
Dave Gahan, Paul Rudd, Marilyn Monroe, and Indian Duke Nukem.