Brand Logo and Festivals

moonshieldmedia

moonshieldmedia

I've seen similar threads about this, but I have a scene where the main character gets on a bus to travel a long distance. I'll probably end up guerrilla filming her actually get onto a Greyhound bus, which will probably have that giant dog logo on it.

If my film ends up getting picked up for distribution and Greyhound takes notice, what's the worst that could happen? Would they ask for some kind of settlement fee? (which I would gladly pay)

Also, Would the logo actually impede me from getting into a festival (say Sundance) in the first place? Or do festivals have a kind of "we assume you've taken care of it and we're not held responsible" policy towards that kind of thing?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I'm guessing that each festival will have it's own specific rules, but since you asked about Sundance in particular, this is lifted from their site.

24) AM I REQUIRED TO OBTAIN RIGHTS CLEARANCE FOR MUSIC OR OTHER COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL
INCLUDED IN MY FILM?
From a legal standpoint, you must clear all copyrighted material included in your film before you can
publicly screen it. However, Sundance does not check to ensure that you have obtained clearance for these
materials at any point during the application process, nor will we be held responsible for any inclusion of
uncleared materials in your film. It is the sole responsibility of the entity submitting the project to secure
permission from the copyright holder of the material in question, whether it is music, stock footage, or any
other elements that could violate an existing copyright. Films that are accepted into the Festival must sign a
waiver stating that materials used in the film do not violate any existing copyright. Quite often, rights
holders offer reduced rates for festival films, so you should contact them directly to avoid any possible
rights infringements.

I hope that helps. Good luck.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It also depends what city you are in. It may be local law (State, city, or township) that distinguishable trademarks visible to the public are public domain to photograph. That gets a little iffy whenever you begin to make money off of this.

You really should figure out what your local laws are on these sort of things, if it's allowed by your local law, then it wouldn't be considered "necessary clearance" that is usually stated in the agreement for festivals.

Also, I've seen the greyhound symbol in so many indie films. They may be one of those companies that sees it as free press and turns a blind eye (or nobody in the company watches movies)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
moonshieldmedia said:
I'll probably end up guerrilla filming her actually get onto a Greyhound bus, which will probably have that giant dog logo on it.
Click to expand...

Surely, you can guerrilla around that big dog. Plan for it.

Don't think for a second you're gonna get permission from Greyhound after the fact. You'll be dealing from a position of weakness and the big dog will win, not you.

Besides, how are you gonna answer this question when it comes from the audience at Sundance.

Good luck.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I've been researching the issue of trademarks and logos in films and I've found two aspects.

1. The law is really on our side. As long as you don't show the brand or product in a negative light, it's legal to have these logos and trademarks in shot. But what we can't do is portray companies/products in a negative way. For example, using your film to illustrate, if your actor got on the Greyhound bus, and the driver then turns it into a killing machine, running over pedestrians, you'd be infringing on the trademark, kinda obvious, right? (I think it's safe to assume that your plot doesn't head in this direction!)

A good article about this can be found here;
http://ezinearticles.com/?Trademarks-In-Film---Best-Practices&id=1954364

the second aspect is perhaps closer to reality:

2. Distributors are paranoid of lawsuits. Big corporations have staff lawyers that don't cost them anything to come after you. So distributors want to play it extra safe and not show anything that has any possibility of being sued. It's definitely a fearful stance. Even when they're legally in the right, lawsuits cost a lot of money. It's called being bullied. The people with the money bullying the people without.

Now having said this, has anyone out there actually ever come across a real life case of an independent filmmaker being sued by a big bad corporation? Or are we becoming paranoid along side the distributors?

I'm personally in a situation where I'm looking for distribution, and it's come to my attention that in one scene, one of my characters is wearing a t shirt with a Superman logo on it. A VERY trademarked and recognizable symbol. I can't reshoot the scene, and to simply blur it out would look cheap and call attention to itself. But I do believe I'm legally allowed to use it because that character isn't going around shooting people while wearing the shirt. BUT, I may find it hard to get Errors and Omissions Insurance because of this, and any potential distributor may insist on a written clearance. I'm an optimistic person, but I don't see DC Comics/Warner Brothers giving me anything in writing, especially for free. So I'll have to wait and see if this trademark creates any obstacles that come my way.

Win
www.thedinnerdatemovie.com
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Two approach suggestions:
1) https://www.google.com/search?tbm=i...1.13.8.0.5.5.0.39.252.8.8.0...0.0.PWNXcpDPyKY
If you have sensible access to a bus stop and someone to test with - goto the station and do several tests to see if you can shoot the scene WITHOUT getting the big grey dog in the scene.

2) Contact their corporate office, ask for their public relations department, and just straight out tell them what you want to do and see if they're accommodating or agreeable to such.
http://www.greyhound.com/en/contactus.aspx

I think Win Edson is spot-on: as long as you're not making any disparaging portrayal of the company or conducting grossly bad events on their property you'll likely get permission just fine.

A "get out of jail free" slip on corporate letterhead is golden.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Isn't it possible to manipulate the colors on the superman logo to make it look like one solid shape? Anyone good with this type of effect?

win edson said:
I've been researching the issue of trademarks and logos in films and I've found two aspects.

1. The law is really on our side. As long as you don't show the brand or product in a negative light, it's legal to have these logos and trademarks in shot. But what we can't do is portray companies/products in a negative way. For example, using your film to illustrate, if your actor got on the Greyhound bus, and the driver then turns it into a killing machine, running over pedestrians, you'd be infringing on the trademark, kinda obvious, right? (I think it's safe to assume that your plot doesn't head in this direction!)

A good article about this can be found here;
http://ezinearticles.com/?Trademarks-In-Film---Best-Practices&id=1954364

the second aspect is perhaps closer to reality:

2. Distributors are paranoid of lawsuits. Big corporations have staff lawyers that don't cost them anything to come after you. So distributors want to play it extra safe and not show anything that has any possibility of being sued. It's definitely a fearful stance. Even when they're legally in the right, lawsuits cost a lot of money. It's called being bullied. The people with the money bullying the people without.

Now having said this, has anyone out there actually ever come across a real life case of an independent filmmaker being sued by a big bad corporation? Or are we becoming paranoid along side the distributors?

I'm personally in a situation where I'm looking for distribution, and it's come to my attention that in one scene, one of my characters is wearing a t shirt with a Superman logo on it. A VERY trademarked and recognizable symbol. I can't reshoot the scene, and to simply blur it out would look cheap and call attention to itself. But I do believe I'm legally allowed to use it because that character isn't going around shooting people while wearing the shirt. BUT, I may find it hard to get Errors and Omissions Insurance because of this, and any potential distributor may insist on a written clearance. I'm an optimistic person, but I don't see DC Comics/Warner Brothers giving me anything in writing, especially for free. So I'll have to wait and see if this trademark creates any obstacles that come my way.

Win
www.thedinnerdatemovie.com
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Regarding lawsuits:

I spoke with an entertainment lawyer who said one of his clients was sued for an actor in his film singing lyrics to a famous song. The filmmaker had to pay a $1,000 licensing fee. But after that the issue was entirely resolved. No big deal. So I guess even in cases where a filmmaker is sued it doesn't ban the film from being shown. Sometimes it's just an extra expense. Well that was just one case I heard of from a good source.
win edson said:
I've been researching the issue of trademarks and logos in films and I've found two aspects.

1. The law is really on our side. As long as you don't show the brand or product in a negative light, it's legal to have these logos and trademarks in shot. But what we can't do is portray companies/products in a negative way. For example, using your film to illustrate, if your actor got on the Greyhound bus, and the driver then turns it into a killing machine, running over pedestrians, you'd be infringing on the trademark, kinda obvious, right? (I think it's safe to assume that your plot doesn't head in this direction!)

A good article about this can be found here;
http://ezinearticles.com/?Trademarks-In-Film---Best-Practices&id=1954364

the second aspect is perhaps closer to reality:

2. Distributors are paranoid of lawsuits. Big corporations have staff lawyers that don't cost them anything to come after you. So distributors want to play it extra safe and not show anything that has any possibility of being sued. It's definitely a fearful stance. Even when they're legally in the right, lawsuits cost a lot of money. It's called being bullied. The people with the money bullying the people without.

Now having said this, has anyone out there actually ever come across a real life case of an independent filmmaker being sued by a big bad corporation? Or are we becoming paranoid along side the distributors?

I'm personally in a situation where I'm looking for distribution, and it's come to my attention that in one scene, one of my characters is wearing a t shirt with a Superman logo on it. A VERY trademarked and recognizable symbol. I can't reshoot the scene, and to simply blur it out would look cheap and call attention to itself. But I do believe I'm legally allowed to use it because that character isn't going around shooting people while wearing the shirt. BUT, I may find it hard to get Errors and Omissions Insurance because of this, and any potential distributor may insist on a written clearance. I'm an optimistic person, but I don't see DC Comics/Warner Brothers giving me anything in writing, especially for free. So I'll have to wait and see if this trademark creates any obstacles that come my way.

Win
www.thedinnerdatemovie.com
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
finderskeepers said:
So I guess even in cases where a filmmaker is sued it doesn't ban the film from being shown.
Click to expand...

Surely you're jesting. A court settlement isn't an automatic greenlight for you to repeat the crime. If anything, at the very least you'll be required to not show the offending part(s) again.

Besides, nobody can ban you from showing/selling your film (except venue owners), what you're doing is gambling that you won't get sued for whatever it was you stole or used inappropiately.

Wise filmmakers would not even turn the camera on until the Superman t-shirt was taken off.

Good luck.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ever since Paramount used a Slip 'n Slide in "Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star", and Wham-O sued Paramount and LOST in court, the law has been in your favor in these trademark cases. As long as you're not smashing up the bus or implying that bad people ride on Greyhound or other bad things then you're fine. Is it just a casual use of a Greyhound bus?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickie_Roberts:_Former_Child_Star
If worse comes to worse it might be very easy to use After Effects to remove the logo, especially if it's a long shot or if nobody walks past a logo. Often it's easy to touch up.
Skip ahead to 1:45 .....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u51-0sIYINU
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I agree completely, 100%. Yes, trademark issues should be avoided like the plague! My only point was some issues can be recovered from. Like surviving a gunshot wound, you can but you want to avoid it obviously. ;)

GuerrillaAngel said:
Surely you're jesting. A court settlement isn't an automatic greenlight for you to repeat the crime. If anything, at the very least you'll be required to not show the offending part(s) again.

Besides, nobody can ban you from showing/selling your film (except venue owners), what you're doing is gambling that you won't get sued for whatever it was you stole or used inappropiately.

Wise filmmakers would not even turn the camera on until the Superman t-shirt was taken off.

Good luck.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Looks like there's a big section on the side of the bus with no Dog logo on it.
Shouldn't be hard to film around it!

greyhound-bus-2.jpg
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top