Zenimax is Being Sued Over the Use of "The Wanderer" in Fallout 4 Ads

ffronw

I am a meat popsicle
Oct 24, 2013
2,804
0
0
Zenimax is Being Sued Over the Use of "The Wanderer" in Fallout 4 Ads

//cdn.themis-media.com/media/global/images/library/deriv/1417/1417476.jpgZenimax is now being sued by Dion, who says the use of his song "The Wanderer" in Fallout 4 ads was objectionable.

If you watched any television or internet videos in the months leading up to the launch of Fallout 4, you probably saw the ads for the game featuring the song "The Wanderer. First released in 1961 by Dion DiMucci, the song appeared in a number of trailers for the game.

According to a report on The Wrap [http://www.thewrap.com/fallout-4-lawsuit-zenimax-the-wanderer-dion/], Dion has filed a suit saying that he never signed off on the use of the song in those ads. While DiMucci did enter an agreement through UMG Recordings to license the song for the commercials, the suit claims that he also had the right to separately negotiate a better deal with Zenimax himself.

The suit alleges that Zenimax failed to separately bargain, and did not obtain his advance consent before airing the commercials. This is the crux of the claim, as DiMucci says that the ads were "objectionable" due to their violent nature. The suit reads,

"Defendant's Commercials were objectionable because they featured repeated homicides in a dark, dystopian landscape, where violence is glorified as sport. The killings and physical violence were not to protect innocent life, but instead were repugnant and morally indefensible images designed to appeal to young consumers."

DiMucci's suit says that had Zenimax sought his consent, he could have either convinced them to change the scripts of the ads, or negotiated a higher fee to "safeguard himself against the potential loss of goodwill."

The suit is seeking general damages in excess of $1 million.

We have reached out to Zenimax for a comment on the suit, but as of publication, we have not received a response. If we do receive a response, we will update this post with it.

Permalink
 

Pyrian

Hat Man
Legacy
Apr 21, 2020
1,399
8
13
San Diego, CA
Country
US
Gender
Male
Live by the terrible lawsuit, die by the terrible lawsuit. Wait... $1 million-ish? Just settle.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
"The Wanderer" being used to promote rampant violence? Can you imagine?

Can't they just allow it to remain a song about bragging about rampant sexual infidelity, as its creator intended?
 

Charli

New member
Nov 23, 2008
3,445
0
0
FUcking yes. Do you know how many times a day and how many days I have had to sit through that FUCCCCKKKING advert (its my job). I hope both it (the song) and Zenimax die in a fire for that atrocity of an advert.
 

Estarc

New member
Sep 23, 2008
359
0
0
Why did it take so long to file this suit? It should have been filed as soon as the ads came out without his approval. This seems a bit sketchy to me. Additionally the idea that he approved the song to be on ads about a violent videogame as long as the ads were misleading and didn't showcase the violence is fucking weird and also sketchy.

Still if Zenimax broke the terms of their contract then that's on them.
 

direkiller

New member
Dec 4, 2008
1,656
0
0
Anti-American Eagle said:
I would have sued for more than a million...
I think it's because they did licence the song via the recording studio which is often just a standardized contract. So it's on shaky ground to start, and if the lawsuit is successful UMG is going to end up paying out in the end if this, as they would have committed contract fraud, and it's best not to bite the hand that feeds.
 

truckspond

New member
Oct 26, 2013
403
0
0
Callate said:
"The Wanderer" being used to promote rampant violence? Can you imagine?

Can't they just allow it to remain a song about bragging about rampant sexual infidelity, as its creator intended?
Where pretty girls are, well you know that I'm around
My god, I never even noticed that!
 

Rope Arrow

New member
Jul 10, 2013
11
0
0
Callate said:
"The Wanderer" being used to promote rampant violence? Can you imagine?

Can't they just allow it to remain a song about bragging about rampant sexual infidelity, as its creator intended?
Even better:

'DiMucci's suit says that had Zenimax sought his consent, he could have either convinced them to change the scripts of the ads, or negotiated a higher fee to "safeguard himself against the potential loss of goodwill."'

To me, this says: 'I find these ads morally objectionable, but my morality can be bought.'
 

Tanis

The Last Albino
Aug 30, 2010
5,266
0
0
MEH.
'Walking dead seeks money from game because he's a washed out nobody'.
 

MeatMachine

Dr. Stan Gray
May 31, 2011
597
0
0
ffronw said:
The suit alleges that Zenimax failed to separately bargain, and did not obtain his advance consent before airing the commercials. This is the crux of the claim, as DiMucci says that the ads were "objectionable" due to their violent nature. The suit reads,

"Defendant's Commercials were objectionable because they featured repeated homicides in a dark, dystopian landscape, where violence is glorified as sport. The killings and physical violence were not to protect innocent life, but instead were repugnant and morally indefensible images designed to appeal to young consumers."

DiMucci's suit says that had Zenimax sought his consent, he could have either convinced them to change the scripts of the ads, or negotiated a higher fee to "safeguard himself against the potential loss of goodwill."

The suit is seeking general damages in excess of $1 million.
Faking outrage to extort money.
NEVER HEARD OF THAT BEFORE.
 

distortedreality

New member
May 2, 2011
1,132
0
0
He should have done his research before licensing the song tbh.

Nobody to blame here but himself (or his lawyer).
 

Naldan

You Are Interested. Certainly.
Feb 25, 2015
488
0
0
I bet they told him this was an actual fully-fledged RPG.
 

Xyebane

Disembodied Floating Skull
Feb 28, 2009
120
0
0
I'm pretty sure that he doesn't have much of a case. UMG holds the rights to the song, and Bethesda licensed the song from them lawfully. Just because he had the right to independently license the song as long as he gave UMG a cut, doesn't mean that Bethesda or UMG had any obligation to him.