Wed, Sep 02, 2009 | 16:31 BST

EA suing John Dillinger’s relative for use of the name in Godfather series

johndillinger

EA has filed a lawsuit against a relative of 30s bank robber John Dillinger, requesting that a judge award permission to use the name Dillinger on guns included in the Godfather games.

The “Dillinger Tommy Gun” was in the original game, and “Modern Dillinger” was implemented in Godfather II.

According to court documents dug up by GamePolitics, Indiana-based Dillinger LLC, the grandson of the gangster’s half-sister, has trademarked Dillinger’s name and likeness, which Indiana law permits for at least 100 years after someone’s death.

Back in July, a lawyer for Dillinger LLC contacted EA and accused it of “violating Dillinger’s right of publicity and infringing upon its trademarks”, subsequently seeking millions of dollars for use of the name.

EA is counter suing for use of the name so it can continue to develop and distribute the titles without paying out the nose.

Back in 2007, just as a matter of reference, Dillinger LLC tried to sue a hotel in Arizona for holing a “Dillinger Days” event for hotel patrons.

8 comments

Neolucifer
02/09/09, 10:53 pm

ehhhh crooks and gangsters fighting each others!! Just like in the old days!

Phoenixblight
02/09/09, 11:00 pm

Did you not read the article?
Indiana-based Dillinger LLC, the grandson of the gangster’s half-sister, has trademarked Dillinger’s name and likeness, which Indiana law permits for at least 100 years after someone’s death.

The GUy is just looking to get paid because he took his ancestor’s name and Likeness.

Neolucifer
02/09/09, 11:23 pm

LOL actually i did , hence the comment and it’s reason . trademarking the name of a gangster so you could sue others , even if a relative ? The comment is a joke directed at both Ea and that dillinger relative .

M337ING
03/09/09, 3:11 am

BUT. Considering EA’s “not making” anymore Godfather games and they’ve likely stopped making money off of the old ones, why should they care?

Unless SOMEONES’s lying about what they’re doing with their franchise…

Galactic_Barret
03/09/09, 3:36 am

Well, hey, it is his ancestor. If anyone should be making money off of his family name, shouldn’t it be his famiy?

My great uncle created a product that you featured in two of your videogames. You made your money, shouldn’t I get my rightful(?) share? Many of you would do the same exact thing, I know I would in a heart beat.

Phoenixblight
03/09/09, 6:34 am

No… Thats what you call a parasite look at his previous things he tried to sue a hotel because he trademarked which says there is a law that you can only trademark 100 years later of the person death. He is just looking to get paid. ANd he is not even a direct product he a grandson of a half-sister. Again Parasite…

And no I wouldn’t in a heartbeat

Galactic_Barret
03/09/09, 8:28 am

I would. I suppose I have no shame, then.

I probably wouldn’t go for millions, plural, but if there is a chance that doing as much could support my family, why not? My ancestor would probably rather his family get some money off of his name, rather then some corporation that had as much to do with his success as his half grandnephew did. Again, I would.

We all come from different circumstances, its all legal, its his right. I see nothing wrong with it.

Edit: For the record, its at least 100 years, which means that after 100 years, the trademark become public domain, as far as I know.

Neolucifer
03/09/09, 12:58 pm

It is like Phoenix said , he’s a parasite . Besides “he has a right to a product his grand created” ? What product ? The guy was a criminal , while the merchandise value seems obvious , it’s hardly really a product .

Anyway i dont claim to dispute the legality of his actions .. but on a moral standpoint , it’s very iffy .

Maybe a relative of Jack the ripper could start suing every writers and media companies too ?