International pop star Beyonce Knowles is being sued for over $100 million by developer Gate Five. TMZ has the documents [PDF link], which state the singer made an "extortionate demand" for more money during a "crucial moment" in the production of Starpower: Beyonce. Perhaps she couldn't resist the kind of dollars made by games like Halo (3), Halo (ODST), Halo (Reach).
Gate Five claims it's entitled to the $6.7 million it invested and the $100 million in profits it believes it would have made. The company also claims it had to let 70 employees go a week before Christmas due to Knowles' action, and is seeking an injunction that would prevent Knowles from "commercially associating with any other video game" or using "confidential information" she received in connection with Gate Five. But, Beyonce needs to pay her credit card bills, her telephone bills, her automo-bills...
Reader Comments (68)
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:30PM Once known as Shadsy said
For a second I seriously thought Beyonce was getting sued for the PSN thing.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 7:01PM (Unverified) said
@Once known as Shadsy
i think you may have found a powerful solution to this mess
Reply
i think you may have found a powerful solution to this mess
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 9:54PM philmcfail said
@adobe64
All the suing articles recently released are all about Sony. Glancing over the title merely (like I did), you might this one was another one :P
Reply
All the suing articles recently released are all about Sony. Glancing over the title merely (like I did), you might this one was another one :P
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:30PM A Burger said
now this is a good reason to be suing somebody.
not just because you're lazy and expecting a big check
not just because you're lazy and expecting a big check
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:30PM (Unverified) said
"$100 million in profits it believes it would have made"
ok calm down there
ok calm down there
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:39PM foxhound said
@(Unverified)
LOL Srsly, this is a case that even if the courts rule against Beyonce, her "Jay-Z" powered attorneys will slam down to a laughable fine. IF they even get that far. I'm thinking an out of court settlement that won't even make a dent of any kind to her wallet.
Reply
LOL Srsly, this is a case that even if the courts rule against Beyonce, her "Jay-Z" powered attorneys will slam down to a laughable fine. IF they even get that far. I'm thinking an out of court settlement that won't even make a dent of any kind to her wallet.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 7:47PM Seasick Pirate said
@(Unverified)
From now on when something unfortunate happens to me I'll first
consider suing whomever is responsible for $100 million I could have
received instead.
Reply
From now on when something unfortunate happens to me I'll first
consider suing whomever is responsible for $100 million I could have
received instead.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 10:47PM Marco le Polo said
@(Unverified)
They failed to mention that they were going to be releasing the game in 2202 (where ARDS games sell for $500 each), but even I still think for then $100 million is a little crazy especially since Beyonce will have likely been long forgotten.
Reply
They failed to mention that they were going to be releasing the game in 2202 (where ARDS games sell for $500 each), but even I still think for then $100 million is a little crazy especially since Beyonce will have likely been long forgotten.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 11:51PM EbreodiOrso said
@Marco le Polo
Ah, but you're forgetting that Beyonce died 3 years sooner, making the game ripe for sales.
Reply
Ah, but you're forgetting that Beyonce died 3 years sooner, making the game ripe for sales.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:32PM soorma said
Starpower!
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:33PM Truant said
Looks like making a videogame wasn't in her ... destiny.
Doesn't she essentially print money? Why ask a payout from a game company when she can endorse the shake weight and pocket millions?
Doesn't she essentially print money? Why ask a payout from a game company when she can endorse the shake weight and pocket millions?
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:37PM Counterattack said
@Truant You get half points for making half a reference. I'm sorry, but in order to receive full points, you're going to need to work the word "child" into your comment. XD
Reply
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 7:38PM aughscreennames said
Theyve got 99 problems but a.... nope, theyve got 100 problems.
Reply
Posted: Apr 28th 2011 12:47AM Batzarro The worlds WOrst Detect said
@Truant I don't know why Gate 5 doesn't want other developers to say her name, but an independent woman such as her sure could find a developer in the future. She's a survivor. SHe's gonna make it.
Reply
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:33PM Yisrael said
Beyonce was so pretty back in the day but ever since she married Jay z she has been less attractive , do still good-looking but not as much as before
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 9:16PM Come on Chang said
can you really sue on potentiality of sucky ness
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:35PM Counterattack said
Now, I ain't sayin' she's a gold digger, but...
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:36PM SisypheanLife said
100 million in profit for this new IP? At least they're being realistic.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:37PM Come on Chang said
so you can sue now on potential now ?
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:38PM AutobotIronhide said
"her automo-bills"
Oh, Joystiq...
Oh, Joystiq...
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:39PM Mr Hett said
She's still hot.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:58PM Captain Planet Planeteer Power said
@Mr Hett
Meh...not a very good gum to teeth ratio if you ask me.
Reply
Meh...not a very good gum to teeth ratio if you ask me.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:39PM Mortim said
'is seeking an injunction that would prevent Knowles from "commercially associating with any other video game"'
Need it just be video games?
Need it just be Beyonce?
Need it just be video games?
Need it just be Beyonce?
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:42PM MLC said
Damn. They aint playing!
I don't like Jay-Z so sue both their asses!!!
I don't like Jay-Z so sue both their asses!!!
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:43PM JonahStein said
More power to 'em, but there is no way something like this would have sold over two million copies. Even if it was DS shovelware.
Lesson of the day: when dealing with greedy millionaires, get a better lawyer to write up your "binding" contract.
Lesson of the day: when dealing with greedy millionaires, get a better lawyer to write up your "binding" contract.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 7:36PM skeldare said
Never even heard of this developer or the supposed game.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:47PM whookid said
$100M for a game most people don't know exists. Lol, good luck and enjoy the incoming pwnage.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:49PM OneManFreakShow said
I've never even heard of this game. I highly doubt it was worth this much money.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:52PM OneManFreakShow said
That's funny, when I Google the game's title all I get is this article everywhere.
I'm pretty sure they're suing her over a game that doesn't even exist.
I'm pretty sure they're suing her over a game that doesn't even exist.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:53PM The Scout said
What's with all the law-suits this year
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 6:59PM Starcade said
If you're a celebrity, I think you have every right to a licensing fee if a product includes your likeness or in the case, I'm assuming song material, some of which I'm sure she wrote. Whether or not they could deliver the game due to their own financial situation, is immaterial. That's not her fault. If they entered into an agreement, she had every right to believe they would deliver their product.
Now if the contract changed, perhaps they might have a case on that...
But, that they're suing for money they could have made seems to me a hard area to prove. It could have been a flop. Does this company have a proven track record of such sales on prior products?
Anyway, I think they're certainly trying to recover money for a failed project. I'm not sure the celebrity is the person to sue, but whatever... they're going to have to prove that she purposely impeded their project. That they're ARE suing a celebrity, seems to me that they'll lose any chance of doing any such type of product in the future. In the end, I have serious doubts they'll recover anything substantial if at all.
Now if the contract changed, perhaps they might have a case on that...
But, that they're suing for money they could have made seems to me a hard area to prove. It could have been a flop. Does this company have a proven track record of such sales on prior products?
Anyway, I think they're certainly trying to recover money for a failed project. I'm not sure the celebrity is the person to sue, but whatever... they're going to have to prove that she purposely impeded their project. That they're ARE suing a celebrity, seems to me that they'll lose any chance of doing any such type of product in the future. In the end, I have serious doubts they'll recover anything substantial if at all.
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 7:31PM kmcroc said
@Starcade if they can prove A violation of the terms of a legal agreement; Default. Breach of contract allows the nonbreaching party to rescind the contract, sue for damages, or sue for performance of the contract. then the law would have to side w/them weather their a great or amazing company.
Reply
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 7:02PM Misanthropic Gamer said
I hate her phony brand of feminism...
Posted: Apr 27th 2011 7:04PM Dirty said
Why would you get so far into development without a locked down agreement? If they liked it they shoulda put a ring on it.







