Clothing brands copyrighted?
- Thread starter The Norm
- Start date
As far as I know, logo's on clothing or cars would be the same as using any other brand: if it's incidental, it's okay, i.e. if the fact that Mr.X is wearing a Nike t-shirt while driving his VW Beetle doesn't really matter, if it has no bearing on the story and the shots you use aren't explicitly focused on the logo, you should be good to go.
Actually, no. It's still copyright infringement if the logos are visible/recognizable at all. You can say the name, but you can't show it.
Same with cars, don't show the logo, and if it gets in the shot, blur it out.
Same with cars, don't show the logo, and if it gets in the shot, blur it out.
I would lean more toward this response:
However, blurring it out is ghetto. Real men replace it with something better in After Effects.
There is some wiggle room however. I can't find the web page of a clearance lawyer I read, but it wasn't so cut and dry as above.
If you're shooting in a public space and in the background a sign is in the shot, because the sign exists there (instead of you placing it there), then it can be okay. This is all open to challenge in courts, and so therefore the opinion of an entertainment lawyer is a good thing to have, but still not the final word.
Any logos or brands that you have control over (like a t-shirt on an actor) are treated differently than advertising found on the street in public.
That said, the opinion of the site I read was that if products are used in the intended fashion, and not disparaged then it was okay. Any negative associations or negative characters associated with products was bad. Etcetera ad nauseum. There are dozens or hundreds of things to consider.
Best approach is to control what's not in the frame and keep it simple, legally, so that you stay out of court and on the set filming. An error like this could sink the profit potential of the project.
There is much you can do with fake brands.
"Actually, no. It's still copyright infringement if the logos are visible/recognizable at all. You can say the name, but you can't show it.
Same with cars, don't show the logo, and if it gets in the shot, blur it out. "
Same with cars, don't show the logo, and if it gets in the shot, blur it out. "
However, blurring it out is ghetto. Real men replace it with something better in After Effects.
There is some wiggle room however. I can't find the web page of a clearance lawyer I read, but it wasn't so cut and dry as above.
If you're shooting in a public space and in the background a sign is in the shot, because the sign exists there (instead of you placing it there), then it can be okay. This is all open to challenge in courts, and so therefore the opinion of an entertainment lawyer is a good thing to have, but still not the final word.
Any logos or brands that you have control over (like a t-shirt on an actor) are treated differently than advertising found on the street in public.
That said, the opinion of the site I read was that if products are used in the intended fashion, and not disparaged then it was okay. Any negative associations or negative characters associated with products was bad. Etcetera ad nauseum. There are dozens or hundreds of things to consider.
Best approach is to control what's not in the frame and keep it simple, legally, so that you stay out of court and on the set filming. An error like this could sink the profit potential of the project.
There is much you can do with fake brands.
If the character is an unsavory one, like a drug dealer, womanizer or something like that then Nike might not want to be associated with it.
It is really easy to touch up something like that with After Effects. I've done a lot of that kind of touch up work so I speak from experience.
It is really easy to touch up something like that with After Effects. I've done a lot of that kind of touch up work so I speak from experience.
So, what if you're reviewing a car? (Come on, we all want to be Jeremy Clarkson, don't we?) is showing the vehicle's logos names etc pushing it?
Thanks guys.
It appears the best thing to do is just avoid logos.
If you can just see "CELTICS" on the front of the jacket, that would be okay though, wouldn't it?
I've got another sort-of related question that I've only been able to find conflicting information on the net about.
Two of my characters are performing a sing-a-long to a well known pop song. If I change the lyrics completely (but keep the rhyming patterns) will this be okay?
Or do you think I'd need to alter the melody slightly as well?
Thanks again.
It appears the best thing to do is just avoid logos.
If you can just see "CELTICS" on the front of the jacket, that would be okay though, wouldn't it?
I've got another sort-of related question that I've only been able to find conflicting information on the net about.
Two of my characters are performing a sing-a-long to a well known pop song. If I change the lyrics completely (but keep the rhyming patterns) will this be okay?
Or do you think I'd need to alter the melody slightly as well?
Thanks again.
If you can just see "CELTICS" on the front of the jacket, that would be okay though, wouldn't it?
If it's a green jacket with the trademark font, I would think you would be at the mercy of the Boston Celtics.
Two of my characters are performing a sing-a-long to a well known pop song. If I change the lyrics completely (but keep the rhyming patterns) will this be okay? Or do you think I'd need to alter the melody slightly as well?
I think this would be dangerous territory. If you're trying to get the audience to recognize the song, chances are the copyright holders will notice as well.
If it's a green jacket with the trademark font, I would think you would be at the mercy of the Boston Celtics.
Two of my characters are performing a sing-a-long to a well known pop song. If I change the lyrics completely (but keep the rhyming patterns) will this be okay? Or do you think I'd need to alter the melody slightly as well?
I think this would be dangerous territory. If you're trying to get the audience to recognize the song, chances are the copyright holders will notice as well.
The melody is more recognizable than the lyrics, usually.
Specific notes in a certain order can be copyrighted. As can color + font + layout combinations. The goal of these copyrights/trademarks is to allow a company to control how their product is presented to their consumers. If you misrepresent their product, you are liable for any potential lost revenues they may incur as a result.
Once again, I offer this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OAQe5UlpGI?rel=0
No clearances were obtained for use of the trademarks. You can bet McDonald's wasn't happy about the portrayal of their character.
And, oh yeah, it was nominated for an Oscar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OAQe5UlpGI?rel=0
No clearances were obtained for use of the trademarks. You can bet McDonald's wasn't happy about the portrayal of their character.
And, oh yeah, it was nominated for an Oscar.
An interesting precedent, though, eh? If a filmmaker gets taken to court over unauthorized use of a logo, one might consider using the "Logorama defense". 