Wow, overreactions from some people here. This actually makes sense if you think about it.
Yeah, Kevin Butler, the character, is property of Sony just as Nathan Drake or Sackboy. Using it without permission and not paying royalties, which is probably what Sony alleges, very much makes for a legitimate case.
Non-compete clauses are pretty standard these days, and depending on how restrictive and specific it was, this might actually be a slam dunk for Sony attorneys.
Do you think the president of a advertising company would knowingly break such a clause if it existed in a contract with a high profile company such as Sony?. I personally think Sony suing their mascot is a slam dank of different sort.
Log in to comment