As if, in this world of economic hardship and international strife, you need another thing to worry about. iPhone developer Storm8 has been accused of stealing the phone numbers of players that downloaded its apps like Vampires Live and Zombies Live in a suit filed in San Francisco on behalf of Lynnwood, WA resident Michael Turner.

The company acknowledged the number harvesting in August, calling it a "bug," though the suit claims only specific code could have recorded and transmitted the numbers. So ... apparently that's a thing that happens. Have a great Saturday!

Each week Mark Methenitis contributes Law of the Game on Joystiq ("LGJ"), a column on legal issues as they relate to video games:
Well, after the incident with Courtney Love and Kurt, it looks like the whole issue of famous musicians in games is back in the press with No Doubt suing Activision over Band Hero. A one time event is an anomaly, but twice in just a few months suggests something else. Of course, both of these all tie back to the contract, and since I'm a transactional attorney who spends the majority of most days negotiating and drafting agreements like these, I'm hoping I can shed a little light on what might be causing the problems. Since I wasn't involved in these particular negotiations nor have I read these contracts, all of what I'm presenting is speculation.

But before I begin, I suppose I should answer the simple question, "What is a contract?" I assume that most people reading this have at least some idea, but just in case, it's worth describing in detail. A contract is a legally binding agreement between two parties to perform certain promises in the future. In theory, to form a contract there are five elements: Offer and acceptance, consideration, intent, capacity, and formalities. In reality, it's fairly simple. The parties must have a meeting of the minds, that is agree to the same terms, which is often viewed as an offer by one party and acceptance by the other. Each party must put up something of value, called consideration, for the contract to be valid. The parties must intend to enter into a contract, and be of the appropriate mental capacity to enter into the agreement. And then the agreement is generally recorded in writing, as most jurisdictions have rules that require written agreements, which is then signed by the parties. And that is how a contract is born, in theory anyway.

The multi-platinum rock band No Doubt has filed a lawsuit against Activision in a L.A. County Superior Court claiming its likeness was "transformed" into a "virtual karaoke circus act" in over sixty songs in the recently released music title, Band Hero. According to TMZ, No Doubt claims gamers were only supposed to be able to use their likeness with three of its own tracks; however, the band is available as playable characters through the game's entire music catalog.

Of particular note is lead singer Gwen Stefani's displeasure that her likeness can be used to sing "Honky Tonk Woman" by the Rolling Stones -- a song which references sex with prostitutes -- using a male voice and mannerisms. For its "circus act" inclusion, No Doubt is seeking an injunction to halt the "unauthorized use" of the band's name and likeness, as well as an unknown amount of damages (aka mad monies). Seems like Activision can't keep rock stars happy, dead or alive.

[Via TeamXbox]

THQ announced today that World Wrestling Entertainment has extended a deadline that allows the publisher to renew its licensing contract. The extension lasts until December 21, 2009 -- the original deadline was November 1. If signed, the agreement would be good through December 31, 2014.

THQ is cool with the WWE, but it's not very chummy with JAKKS Pacific, its longtime partner in the WWE licensing venture. The wounds also run deep between JAKKS and the WWE. When asked for comment on the license renewal and further details regarding the three-way deal, a THQ representative told Joystiq that the publisher plans to renew its contract with the WWE, and then added, "Beyond that, I cannot comment."

The business, politics and legal issues are certainly complicated. We spoke with Wedbush Morgan analyst Michael Pachter who laid out multiple scenarios, but in the end he believes the most likely outcome is that the joint venture between THQ and JAKKS will be terminated. If JAKKS enforces its (believed to be one-year) non-compete clause, then no WWE games can be produced. Neither side would benefit from that, however.

Pachter suggests that the WWE's renewal deadline was extended to give THQ and JAKKS time to settle their issues. What it sounds like to us: THQ and WWE want to move forward as a couple, and the previous arrangement, featuring JAKKS as the third wheel, has worn out its welcome. Check out Pachter's complete analysis after the break.

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. Erik Estavillo made headlines in the gaming blogosphere last summer for his $55,000 lawsuit against Sony, launched in retaliation for being banned from the PlayStation Network. As predicted, the judge dismissed his case after determining the First Amendment did not apply to Estavillo's claim.

Estavallo isn't going to be stopped by a mere district judge's ruling, though. In addition to filing an appeal, Estavillo is also filing another lawsuit against Sony -- this time, a civil suit seeking $180,000 in damages; more than three times the amount of his original, dismissed suit. According to GamePolitics, Estavillo will once again opt out of using a lawyer, choosing to represent himself for both upcoming cases. We wish Estavillo the best of luck.*

*Ed.'s Note: While we'd normally end on a punchline, our fear of irrational and baseless lawsuits prevents us from doing so.

The infighting between Fallout's father and newly adopted guardian continues. According to a forum post by supposed Interplay stockholder frymuchan, Interplay has been given a 10-day extension to answer a preliminary injunction filed by Bethesda, which claims Interplay no longer holds rights to sell the original titles in the series. Following the release of Fallout 3, Interplay began selling the original titles across multiple PC-based digital distribution services.

Previous court filings by Bethesda claimed that Interplay's plans to develop a Fallout MMO -- codenamed Project V-13 -- were no longer valid because Interplay did not commence development prior to an agreed date of April 4, 2009. According to the post by RagingBull forum user "frymuchan" -- who claims to have received the information from official court documents -- Interplay claims it did issue a letter to Bethesda prior to the April date outlining details of a Fallout MMO, but Bethesda told it "for no apparent reason" that Interplay was no longer allowed to develop the game. Interplay believes that Bethesda's interference with licensing agreements to make the original titles in the series available digitally is unreasonable based on the current contracts in place.

Frymuchan also claims that Interplay has filed a countersuit versus Bethesda over statements it made to third party companies to whom it was attempting to license the original titles. According to the post, Bethesda released statements to companies such as GameTap and Good Old Games, claiming Interplay had no rights to license Fallout 1, 2 or Tactics for sale on its services. Interplay's counterclaim maintains this "unreasonable interference" puts Bethesda into breach of contract and makes the license sale "null and void," therefore reverting the agreement back to a sub-licensing deal between Interplay and Bethesda. In short, Interplay claims Bethesda now only holds rights to Fallout 3 with options for a fourth and fifth game in the series.

It's an argument of apocalyptic proportions and we're expecting more details when the extension expires next week.

[Via GamePolitics and Destructoid]

The patent suit brought by Gibson against Harmonix and other parties related to Guitar Hero and Rock Band was stayed due to the US Patent and Trademark Office deciding to reexamine the patent. According to Patent Arcade, Harmonix and a group of retailers have asked a Tennessee court to continue proceedings -- of the case against them.

Why is Harmonix engaging in this seemingly self-destructive (but not in the cool rock star way) behavior? When the USPTO looked into the patent again, it changed the definition of "musical instrument" to include the characteristics of being "adapted for making musical sounds" and "the instrument audio signal comprising an electrical signal output by the musical instrument that varies in response to operation of the instrument by the user of the system."

Harmonix apparently believes that because of this new definition, and because of the precedent set by Gibson's other case, against Activision, the case will go in its favor in the end. If the stay is lifted, Harmonix will then file a motion for summary judgment of non-infringement.

According to a report on Cleveland.com, the lawsuit filed against Electronic Arts by Cleveland Browns fan John "Big Dawg" Thompson has been dismissed. The suit had been filed on the grounds that EA featured Thompson's likeness in Madden NFL 09 without his permission. More specifically, the game featured the likeness of Thompson wearing a dog mask and orange hat, a costume he's worn to Cleveland Browns home games for years.

Thompson's lawyer, Alan Parker, noted that his client was happy the matter was closed, but noted that details of the dismissal are confidential. Thompson had been seeking damages "in excess of $25,000," so that's one thing he might be happy about. If his Big Dawg mask is sporting some gold teeth and a diamond encrusted hat during the next Browns home game, we'll know for sure.

Faced with The Truth that – regardless of what sorts of anti-piracy technology it folds into its DS platform – pirates will invariably hack the dual-screened handheld, Nintendo has buddied up with Capcom and 53 other video game publishers in Japan to file suit against four resellers of the popular R4 flash cartridge.

Earlier this year, a Tokyo court banned the sale of the devices; however, Capcom now says that "legal action has had no meaningful effect in the intervening period" and that sellers would "ignore" its warnings. Enter: a new lawsuit, which Capcom hopes leads to a ruling that acknowledges "our company and other software manufactures have sustained [extreme] damages from proliferation of illegal instruments." Seems pretty cut and dry to us, but we'll let the courts decide.

What's New? For one: a class action lawsuit filed by John Kennedy, who accuses Sony's 3.0-version PlayStation firmware update of breaching implied warranty and signaling an act of negligence (among other complaints). As detailed by Courthouse News Service, the suit alleges that "thousands" of PS3 owners downloaded the update, only to find that it caused the system to malfunction and suffer damage to hardware.

While Firmware 3.0 was reported to be problematic (particularly in unison with Naughty Dog's popular action game, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune), Sony soon issued an update to quell concerns. The manufacturer was also quick to separate hardware failures -- such as disc drive errors -- from the firmware update. It's the resulting $150 repair fee that provided impetus to Kennedy's suit, which aims to determine appropriate restitution during trial.

[Via Gamasutra]

He might be known for wearing a bug-eyed dog mask and representing the most hardcore of Cleveland Browns fans, but John "Big Dawg" Thompson isn't down with his likeness being used in EA Sports' Madden NFL 09. No, not just because it misrepresents his jersey's number (98 in real life, 92 in the game) -- it's because EA Sports is using his likeness without ever having actually asked permission.

So John Thompson (not to be confused with that other Thompson) has filed a complaint at the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas seeking restitution "in excess of $25,000." He's also looking to block EA's ability to sell the game or use "the Big Dawg character" without his expressed permission in the future. We hate to tell you, John, but that game kinda came out last year.

PalTalk Holdings is feeling pretty zesty following its legal victory over Microsoft this past March, so it's decided to take its patent infringement suit against a few major players in the MMO market. Turbine, Sony, Activision Blizzard, Jagex and NCSoft are all staring down the barrel of PalTalk's litigation cannon -- which, after forcing Microsoft to come to a settlement earlier this year, now has a substantial amount of precedent supporting it.

PalTalk purchased two patents from a company called HearMe in 2002 for technology which shares data between networked computers, allowing users to see the same virtual space as they interact with one another in real time. One could construe that to mean PalTalk owns the patent on online multiplayer altogether -- but we're sure Activision's beefy legal team will have a few arguments to the contrary up its sleeve.

Each week Mark Methenitis contributes Law of the Game on Joystiq ("LGJ"), a column on legal issues as they relate to video games:

The well publicized dispute over the use of an avatar of Kurt Cobain in Guitar Hero 5 has provided a good backdrop to discuss the 'right of publicity.' For anyone who doesn't want to take time to read the stories, here's a summary. Guitar Hero 5 includes Kurt Cobain as an unlockable playable avatar, much like previous titles in the series have done with other rock stars. Shortly after release, Courtney Love expressed her distaste at the use of Kurt, and Activision has stated Love signed an agreement allowing the use. Since then, other former Nirvana members have stated they think the avatar should be limited to performances of Nirvana songs.

Kurt's in-game likeness is governed by the part of the law called the 'right of publicity,' also called the 'right of personality' or 'personality rights.' In the US, that is unfortunately a complicated subject. Unlike other intellectual property rights, the right of publicity is governed by the states, not federal laws. So, unlike copyright or trademark, the exact rules of the right of publicity game change in every state. This, of course, makes the topic difficult to discuss and analyze, but there are some general theories about the right that can be discussed on a universal level.

Things weren't looking good for Interplay earlier this year and, uh, much hasn't changed since then. Even though the company had virtually no money, it still wanted to make the Fallout MMO, Project V-13. Well, Interplay's got another hurdle now: Bethesda. The Oblivion and Fallout 3 developer claims that Interplay infringed on its trademark, court documents show. Interplay disagrees, obviously, and says it still holds the rights to develop the title with Masthead Studios, even though it failed to commence the stipulated full-scale development by April 4, 2009.

Gamasutra has more info on the lawsuit, which also mentions Interplay's licensing of the original Fallout games for digital distribution through services such Steam, GOG.com and GameTap. Bethesda says this has caused "immediate, substantial, and irreparable harm." But, hey, it's not all frowns and sad faces. Above this text is a neat piece of concept art for Project V-13 from Natiq Aghayev. Man, we never thought post-apocalyptia could look so good.

Source - Court documents [Via VG247]
Source - Gamasutra

This morning, we reported on Courtney Love's tweeted allegations that the ghastly Kurt Cobain avatar was included in Guitar Hero 5 without her consent. Though the company didn't mention whether or not the lawsuit has actually been filed against them, Activision just sent us a statement refuting Love's claims:

"Guitar Hero secured the necessary licensing rights from the Cobain estate in a written agreement signed by Courtney Love to use Kurt Cobain's likeness as a fully playable character in Guitar Hero(r) 5."

Maybe Love did sign off on it, but just doesn't remember. There, we said it. We were all thinking it anyway.