Maroon 5's Adam Levine sues Activision

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 5 August, 2011

Over 2009 game Band Hero.

Maroon 5 frontman Adam Levine is suing Activision over 2009 music game Band Hero.

Levine is upset that the game allows users to make his motion-captured avatar sing other artists' songs, according to Reuters.

When this is done, the voices of the artists behind the songs being played are heard – meaning Levine's avatar can sometimes pump out a female singing voice.

Levine also claims he wasn't paid as much as other artists who appeared in the game.

This isn't the first time Activision's suffered a lawsuit over Band Hero.

In 2009 No Doubt sued Activision over the use of their avatars in the Guitar Hero spin-off.

Gwen Stefani and co said they gave permission for their avatars to perform three of their own songs only. "Without the band's knowledge or approval, Activision turned the group into virtual karaoke players by having them perform over 60 additional songs by other musical groups," said the band's lawyers.

No Doubt requested this be changed, but claimed Activision refused, saying the change would be "too expensive".

Also in 2009 Courtney Love threatened to sue Activision after it was discovered Kurt Cobain's avatar could be used to perform any song - not just Nirvana's - once unlocked in Guitar Hero 5.

Eurogamer's Band Hero review sang a 6/10. "Band Hero is a technically solid product pitched at a demographic that does presumably exist - people who don't like Guitar Hero's music, but still want to play along - but it sets a dangerous precedent," wrote Keza. "Where Guitar Hero 5 hauled the series up to a quality plateau, adding a load of features that fans of the series can really appreciate, Band Hero is nothing more or less than a reskin. And even though it's a reskin of a superb game, the lack of concern for the credibility of the music and presentation can't help but cheapen it."

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (49) Latest comment 10 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • karooo #1 10 months ago

    So he sued because the game offered users a lot of options? Usually I don't like Activision and wanna see them burn but fuck this guy.

  • FireMonkey #2 10 months ago

    "Levine also claims he wasn't paid as much as other artists who appeared in the game"

    You signed the fucking contract!

  • Djimm #3 10 months ago

    Someone who uses that amount of autotune should be very careful when complaining about having his avatar's voice altered...

  • Gearskin #4 10 months ago

    Can't remember any Maroon 5 music, tbh. Which means they do not exist. Which means he does not exist. MIS-TRIAL!
    Edited by Gearskin at 05/08/11 @ 10:18

  • andywilkie35 #5 10 months ago

    Agree with karooo, never thought I'd see a situation where I'd want Activision to win

  • Golgo #6 10 months ago

    The ability to sing any songs others than his own should be considered an improvement.
    Maroon-5 were genetically engineered offworld to achieve optimum blandness.

  • ThrowingTuba #7 10 months ago

    Is it possible for them both to lose?

  • Stompy #8 10 months ago

    Post deleted at 23:13:35 17-04-2012

  • Ultrasoundwave #9 10 months ago

    Something tells me that if Maroon 5 had ever been a decent band and made a decent amount of cash, he wouldnt be going through with this.

    Desperation is an ugly thing - Kotick will probably give him the cash he finds in his sofa and that will be the end of it.

  • vyseofhr #10 10 months ago

    Some 'celebrities' need to get to get a fucking grip.

  • arcam #11 10 months ago

    Well, I'll be a lone voice of support for Levine then.

    I don't like Maroon 5, but then what does that have to do with anything.

  • Thunderbolt #12 10 months ago

    In response to another column this is a win-win situation for us. Bad company vs bad singer, whoever loses we win

  • carlitoswagon #13 10 months ago

    What a money grabbing prat.

  • Shinetop #14 10 months ago

    Way to be current, Levine. Maybe you could've joined the others and complained when this was still relevant. Also, read the contract next time.

  • optimusprym8 #15 10 months ago

    *Moron 5

  • Porcupine_I #16 10 months ago

    Bah! my Avatar can't perform ANY song, and it isn't even included in the game!!

    NOW GIVE ME SOME MONEY!

  • addugg #17 10 months ago

    I like this guy and I loved Skater Boi.

    What?

  • Limimi #18 10 months ago

    "Levine's avatar can sometimes pump out a female singing voice."

    And sometimes the avatar has to sing songs by other bands nyuk nyuk nyuk

  • Singularity #19 10 months ago

    I always remember the review in the Guardian or something, which said that Maroon 5 is music for people who don't like music.

  • arcam #20 10 months ago

    No Doubt are going to win their lawsuit: [link url=http://news.softpedia.com/news/No-Doubt-Win-Band-Hero-Activision-Court-Battle-140114.shtml
    ]http://news.softpedia.com/news/No-Doubt-...[/link]

    Activision main defense is that using the characters' likeness in other songs comes under the protection of free speech from the 1st Amendment (that argument has been rejected). They're also counter-suing No Doubt for their refusal to promote the game.

    Frankly I cannot understand why anyone is supporting Activision here - they're being total dicks and it's quite clear from their defense that they have no proper licenses and the contract did not state Kurt Cobain models would be singing the fucking Spice Girls.

  • Stompy #21 10 months ago

    Post deleted at 23:13:35 17-04-2012

  • arcam #22 10 months ago

    @Stompy

    I've already said I supported Levine's argument too, so it's got nothing to do with someone being dead or alive.

    Besides, I think it's more likely that Cobain would never have signed the contract in the first place. Nirvana's music didn't start showing up in adverts and games until after he died - that's no coincidence.

  • Eighthours #23 10 months ago

    Maroon 5 vs Activision. Whoever wins, we lose.

  • Svalbaard #24 10 months ago

    @the EG author : Your article mentions 3 other occasions that Activision were sued over this sort of thing by artists but fail to mention the outcomes... can you update. Thanks.

  • TruSmiles #25 10 months ago

    Breach of contracts can be a serious thing, especially if Maroon 5 didn't consent to having their likeness being used in a way they didn't agree to. That said, I don't think it's a big deal having an avatar likeness singing other songs or what have you. It seems the issue is just that they didn't give permission.

    Complaining about the pay is a stupid argument though, they've been in an industry that involves contracts, they should have checked this contract closer and did some research before hand so they know what their content is apparently worth.

  • arcam #26 10 months ago

    they should have checked this contract closer and did some research before hand so they know what their content is apparently worth.

    I think his point is that Activision actually got permission from other artists to use their likeness in other people's songs, and those people got extra money, presumably partly because of that.

    For him, they didn't seek permission, and they didn't even give him the extra money that using his likeness all throughout the game would surely have got him.

    @tjtj

    It's simple matter of getting permission. Maybe some of these artists would have agreed, maybe some wouldn't but it seems only fair that you would ask them first. Image is so important in pop music - it's hardly surprising that artists would like to have control over it.
    Edited by arcam at 05/08/11 @ 11:46

  • Zombie-Hamster #27 10 months ago

    I don't have anything in particular against Maroon 5, but the timing of this is a bit suspect. Haven't they just released a track with Christina Aguilera...? I guess maybe there's a new album out there too? may explain doing this so many years diown the line.

  • Stompy #28 10 months ago

    Post deleted at 23:13:35 17-04-2012

  • FogHeart #29 10 months ago

    I'm not particularly behind either side on this debacle, I'm just very surprised that Activision's legal department didn't take one look at the feature during planning stage and draw a thick red line through it with a remark full of jargon but essentially means 'No'.

  • Bluetooth #30 10 months ago

    Your brother Kevin is far more honourable.

  • chrisjm #31 10 months ago

    its taken him this long to review the product which he got paid to be in to find out he didnt read the contract properly which he signed. i bet they even gave him a copy.

  • nooneyouknow #32 10 months ago

    One thing that's not pointed out here is that although he didn't give permission, did the contract state specifically that Activision couldn't? I imagine that Activision has some pretty shit hot lawyers (given the amount of work they do!) and would be surprised they left something like this out.

  • arcam #33 10 months ago

    Why do people keep saying he didn't read the contract?

    There's no evidence this was in the contract in the first place, and the fact that Acti are being sued for breach of contract actually suggests the complete opposite.

  • cowell #34 10 months ago

    Shouldn't he be concentrating on making Bioshock Infinite?

  • Makeem95 #35 10 months ago

    A whining singer suing Bobby Kotick - don't think I could care less.

  • SirDespard #36 10 months ago

    Bit late now to whinge, No Doubt at least got in over a year ago. Taylor Swift can also sing other artist's songs, why has she not sued? I guess Maroon 5 aren't selling many records, so time to try and get an easy pay day. Maybe Adam should sue as he thought he signed to appear in "Bland Hero"?

  • superdelphinus #37 10 months ago

    FogHeart
    05/08/11 @ 12:03
    Ignore poster | #36
    +1
    I'm not particularly behind either side on this debacle, I'm just very surprised that Activision's legal department didn't take one look at the feature during planning stage and draw a thick red line through it with a remark full of jargon but essentially means 'No'.

    Wouldn't surprise me if that did in fact happen, but you can't tell a client what to do, only options and potential results.

    As for the pay, I suspect it's rather more complicated than a contract saying you get paid x amount, him getting x amount and then complaining

  • FireMonkey #38 10 months ago

    In the video he says how great the game is. Did he play it? If so he would have known how it worked in 2009. If not he was lying to us. Either way he should more careful what products he endorses and signs contracts with.

  • arcam #39 10 months ago

    If not he was lying to us.

    Are you kidding? It's a celebrity endorsement of a product, surely you understand that when a celebrity is being paid to endorse a product that it isn't actually true. Or do you believe Iggy Pop really loves car insurance and Sam Fisher always chews Wrigley's airwaves before a mission? This is the real world, we have to discuss the situation in real world terms.

  • blackbriar101 #40 10 months ago

    'THIS LOVE IS TAKING' I turned off the radio and started crying.

  • Stompy #41 10 months ago

    Post deleted at 23:13:35 17-04-2012

  • cyber_nicco #42 10 months ago

    "Levine's avatar can sometimes pump out a female singing voice."

    So does Levine.

  • whatfruit #43 10 months ago

    YAY for Lawyers!

  • Slipstream #44 10 months ago

    Levine, just like the rest of 'em in the end. (Must be near the end if he's this disperate to poke his finger into Acti's pie)

  • acuratebob #45 10 months ago

    Put yourself into the shoes of a famous band, ANY band, (just cause some people dont like Maroon 5 it isint a reason to say he sould lose, I dont like Maroon 5, i think there quite bad TBH, by i digress), put yourself into his shoes, hes the one who performs HIS songs, if he wrote them that is, im not sure.

    He sings HIS songs, not anybody elses, if Billie Joe had come on stage and started to sing a Eminem song id be outraged for him, but i imagine he'd be pissed off too.

    The artists put a lot of effort, and even some personal experience into creating a song, so if they are lucky enough to actually get an avatar in a game, would you want to be sining Holla' Back Girl if you were him? I didn't think so. You want to see your avatar sing your songs.

    I hope He wins, activision should have done things properly too, Rock Band style...Billie Joe sings for himself and for Green Day, nothing else.

  • alcides #46 10 months ago

    "Maroon 5", does this name sound bloody stupid to native speakers too?

  • callum9999 #47 10 months ago

    Does it really matter if it seems trivial or not? There is an alleged breach of contract and someone (him being a singer is irrelevant) has a chance to benefit financially from it. Anyone who doesn't sue for that is a moron (excluding ethical reasons - like charities or small businesses etc.).

  • Stratix #48 10 months ago

    Someone is a little late to the party...

  • eviroboy #49 10 months ago

    That guy from that band that, possibly, had one good song, once, isn't happy? Shame.

    Surely he should be more flattered by the fact other artists have let HIS avatar sing THEIR songs. Must be a step up for the lad to be singing decent [somewhat] material, male or female vocals. Lol.