copyrights

[Kevin Clark2227]

Any idea how to get permission to use military logos/seals on laser projects?

[Tim Bateson]

This topic comes up from time to time - Do a search. Basically with only maybe 2 exceptions they are all free to use with no copyright or permission needed.

[Chuck Stone]

Hmm .. I was told just the opposite.. by the various branches of the military.
I was required to get approval to use logos. They didn't seem to worry about
seals, but the main logos of the branches are copyrighted materials and they
reserve the right to approve your work. (just a matter of submitting a sample
and/or photos with the application) That doesn't give you any sort of licensing,
but it does give you permission to use the logos.
This surprised me, since I thought work produced by the government was owned
by the public. Apparently not.

[Mike Null]

There are new regs in place which require permission but who's going to check?

Certain items, such as the seals (not to be confused with the logos) for each branch of service and the DOD may not be used under any circumstances.

[Steve Busey]

Here's a starting point...

http://www.defense.gov/trademarks/

[Martin Boekers]

Things are always changing. If you are selling to the military there usually isn't an issue.
Now if you want to have selections of mugs, plaques etc for "general" sale that's where
you may run into an issue. Refer to the link that Steve posted for more info.

Chuck there is many things the Gov produces that citizens don't have rights to. Most are classified
for official use only.

Marty

[Chuck Stone]

Chuck there is many things the Gov produces that citizens don't have rights to. Most are classified
for official use only.

Marty

true enough, but since the government is us ... and everything is paid for with our money,
I just assumed (and had heard, but a long time ago) that 'work for hire' applied.
Then again, ownership and rights don't always go hand in hand

[Martin Boekers]

true enough, but since the government is us ... and everything is paid for with our money,
I just assumed (and had heard, but a long time ago) that 'work for hire' applied.
Then again, ownership and rights don't always go hand in hand

I was going to ad more, but this has been done before, and results in quite a bit of discussions. ;)
those intereseted in copyrights can do a search here, I'm sure there are hundreds of postings if not
thousands on that. :)

[Kevin Clark2227]

Well,
I just shot off some emails to the various branches seeking permission. We'll see how it goes.

[George M. Perzel]

Kevin;
Good luck on getting an answer- the Navy is still debating over issuing a press release on the Monitor-Merrimac battle and the Army authorizer is the same guy responsible for inventorying the contents of the endless warehouse where the Ark is kept in the Indiana Jones movies.
Best Regards,
George
Laserarts

[Tim Bateson]

Well, I just shot off some emails to the various branches seeking permission. We'll see how it goes.

Seriously??? Your grand kids will be running your business before you get an answer.

Universities and large corporations monitor the use of their logos. The government have no such police with military logos. I know if you were to advertise logos like Ohio State University or Harley Davidson, you are very likely to get caught and pay hefty fines. US Government - there isn't anyone charged with enforcing any copyrights... even if there were any.

I'm sure there are NOW rules for how their logos are used and I respect that. However needing permission, that has not been required/unregulated for so many years, I don't see it as enforceable. Yes, I am openly thumbing my nose at this silliness, and will loose no sleep in doing so.

[George M. Perzel]

Tim;
I am with you and really believe that any government copyright belongs the the people.
Best Regards,
George
Laserarts

[Chuck Stone]

Some of the logos are trademarked .. and yes, they do police it.
Not all of them, some are freely available on military websites.
But if you use the eagle, globe and anchor without approval, you
could be forced to enlist and put on KP

[Kevin Clark2227]

I whole heartedly agree with you George and Tim. It is sad that our country has come to this, but that is definitely a whole other subject. My other business, the FTC is very involved with and they don't shy away at handing out hefty fines of no less than $10,000 for each fine. Can't say I am not trying to coming my A**.

[Kevin Aylward]

You should contact the US Army, office of heraldry. They are the unit that actually holds the license, and does the licensing. You will get a good start here http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/ . They have different types of licensing for commercial and also one for the hobbyist. You can most likely get by with the hobbyist license for limited runs. I do know they are meticulous about the accuracy of the image you will be using. It has to match the logo exactly. I've been working on my graphics for this purpose for over a year, and while I am getting close to acceptance, I still have some small errors to fix.
BTW - Don't even think of using their images without permission. The penalty is severe and Federal, and you would be banned for life. They don't play around. As for the cost . . . It's actually not bad at all for the lower level licensing. The higher levels have all the expected requuirements of proof that you have the capacity to provide product to ALL military outlets, history of business to prove it etc.
Best of luck!

[Craig Matheny]

Military service seals http://www.defense.gov/multimedia/web_graphics/
NOTICE: Department of Defense military service seals and United in Memory Emblem are protected from unauthorized use by law. However, the military services typically approve the use of their service emblem or coat of arms as a substitute. There is no such substitute for the Department of Defense Seal. To request use of the service emblems or coat of arms, refer to our fact sheet (http://www.defense.gov/trademarks/).

[Michael Kowalczyk]

Hey George... I wonder how that would hold up in court.... But your Honor, I paid for that :D

I heard they are cracking down, when they can, because of budget cuts so they need revenue where ever they can get.

CYA and ...

[Cindy Rhoades]

You must have permission to sell anything with their logo "artwork" on it and yes they do check. I have a license to sell products, it is not hard to get and you can find the links on the DOD website for the forms needed to fill out. There are a couple that under no circumstance can be used unless you are contracted to replicate it on items the government is purchasing from you.

[Cindy Rhoades]

Tim

I hate to diagree with you but yes they do have people in charge of enforcing it and they have many people watching for just that thing. The do web site searches and find people who are not complying. I heard they came down on Lazer Buzz for using and selling the logos without permission. They also have people who walk through small town events doing checks. I had some one check on mine once then they found out I was listed in their licensed vendors. The Air Force, Marines and Cost Guard are very easy to get a response and aproval from. The Army and Navy are VERY slow. But as mentioned before if you have something that you want to run just send them an email and they usually aprove it.

[Tim Bateson]

Another 2 cents...
I've read document after document, regulation after regulation on this subject. Some even contradict one another (no surprise). The biggest take-away & I do support these: Any use, must NOT bring discredit or misrepresent to the US government or agency who's artwork/logo/crest... is being used. Also, almost every document/regulation does not provide permission for purposes of advertising without a license. Also any new artwork which uses or changes any of this has to be approved.

[Scott Shepherd]

I'm not inviting it, but I'd almost take that bet too. Not for the obvious reasons, but if I take something that I create from scratch, even if I have it sitting on my desk as a reference, I have created art. You can't stop me from doing that. Last time I checked, tattoo shops were still giving military tattoos. That's no different in what I would do. They may not like it, but it would be my right to do so and I don't think they'll have a leg to stand on if you create your own artwork. Now, if you are copying their artwork by using their files, then I'd be more concerned about it.

[Chuck Stone]

but if I take something that I create from
scratch, even if I have it sitting on my desk as a reference, I have created art.

No, that wouldn't meet the criteria.. By the legal definition, you will only
have copied existing art and created nothing. (it was already created by someone else)



You can't stop me from doing that.

No, they won't stop you. They wouldn't know until you did it.
But they can prosecute after the fact.



Last time I checked, tattoo shops were still giving military
tattoos. That's no different in what I would do.

Tattoo parlors were the holy grail of copyright violators..
until the internet came along..
Policing it is the problem, not the legality.



They may not like it, but it would be my right to do so

Well.. the governments of 165 countries disagree with you



and I don't think they'll have a leg to stand on if you create your own artwork.

Nobody would care if we created our own artwork. But copying someone else's artwork
is not creating anything, no matter how much effort we expend on it, and no matter how
much talent it may take to do so. Unless it is our original idea, the work isn't ours.





Now, if you are copying their artwork by using their files, then I'd be more concerned about it.

Well then you wouldn't be copying it. You'd be in possession of stolen property.

[Keith Outten]

I suggest that if you get caught using any logo, seal or graphic that is controlled by the US Government you refuse to pay the fine and demand a jury trial.
If I was selected to be on the jury I would never vote for a guilty verdict when the defendant owned the property no matter what they did with it.
If the United States Flag is not protected I can't see how any Military emblem or icon would be protected or even owned by the Government. The US Government is simply the custodian of the items and property owned by the public IMO.
.

[Scott Shepherd]

Chuck, I think you are mistaken. If, as an artist, I take a photo, a piece of tracing paper, and a pencil and I use that image to create my base artwork, from hand, then according to the law, I have not copied the work. However, if I take it in Photoshop, and trace over it, I have.

So by taking the image and using it as a reference, sitting on my desk, I have NOT copied their work. I have created a new piece of work that is unique to me. That unique work I create IS actually protected by copyright law.

I would never suggest anyone copy anything directly or use anything that you aren't authorized to use.

[George M. Perzel]

Hi Guys;
Hate to beat a dead horse but sounds like the use of military insignia/logos/seals/etc is anything but clear. I agree 100% with Keith and think its time to take a stand against all these government controls that do nothing to add to the quality of life or have any common sense basis. I freely admit to using some of the military emblems without permission and confess to committing this heinous crime with complete disregard of how it affects my fellow citizens. I make this confession of my own free will and without duress (such as waterboarding) from any local state, or government agency or any of their minions (love that word).
I also confess that anything I produce for any military member, active or retired, or as a gift for same, is done free of charge and I will continue to do so until all of my four lasers die or I draw my last breath-whatever comes first.
If it is ultimately necessary to punish and incarcerate me for my crimes, I welcome the opportunity to spend my days in the comforts of a clean, well lighted cell with three squares a day, free medical care, cable TV, an opportunity to go back to school again- as long as they also have a good library and don't serve tofu.
Best Regards,
George
Laserarts

[Tim Bateson]

You should contact the US Army, office of heraldry....

Each branch seems to have their own office for licensing. For the U.S. Air Force the licensing fees go into their MWR programs.

[Martin Boekers]

There are certain documents and graphics that are FOUO (for official use only) so yes, even though it may be tax payer funded
official use is official use. How about police badges? those are created with tax payer dollars. I am not sure where the issues are with this as
it's easy to get rights to use them. If it's sold to the Gov or representatives of the military there are no issues, with the exception of certain seals.
Again has anyone been turned down with a request? If so why let us know. If no one has been turned down then there shouldn't be concern.
There is a big concern as I stated before about in using Gov graphics, becareful as not to use it if it could possibly imply sponsorship.

[Chuck Stone]

There are certain documents and graphics that are FOUO (for official use only) so yes, even though it may be tax payer funded
official use is official use. How about police badges? those are created with tax payer dollars.

I can help you with that one.. there IS a copyright with most badges (although some have passed into
the public domain or have been assigned there)
The cost of the badge is more than just the metal to have the badge produced.. and I can tell you
from experience, most cities and towns DO NOT want the expense of having a badge die designed,
so they leave that to the dealer. So in many cases, the dealer owns the copyright. The taxpayer is
only on the hook for the cost of having a badge produced.. and that's pretty cheap. Getting the
design done and having the dies produced can run into the tens of thousands. In some cases
(because the city did not want to pay for the work) there was/is only one place to get these
badges.

Now, some cities do pay for that, and then they own the copyright and the dies.
Some had the dealer pay for all the work and then took the designs to someone
else to have the badges reproduced. (often Taiwan or China) Consequently there
are few dealers left who are willing to have dies made on their nickel. And most
badges now are made from 'stock' dies.

[Chuck Stone]

Chuck, I think you are mistaken. If, as an artist, I take a photo, a piece of tracing paper, and a pencil and I use that image to create my base artwork, from hand, then according to the law, I have not copied the work.

I'm sorry, but according to the law, this is EXACTLY what was done.
There is nothing original in the re-creation. It is a copy.



However, if I take it in Photoshop, and trace over it, I have.

The law makes no such distinction.



So by taking the image and using it as a reference, sitting on my desk, I have NOT copied their work.

Untrue.. not unless you have modified the image to be different enough to be a new work.
Amd it must contain a substantial amount of new material to distinguish it from the
original. Even then, to be considered a derivative work, you need the author's permission.
(fair use notwithstanding)



I have created a new piece of work that is unique to me. That unique work I create IS actually protected by copyright law.

This makes no sense to me at all. The original author isn't protected, but you can copy
their work and you ARE protected? That would make a mockery of the concept of
copyright protection.



I would never suggest anyone copy anything directly or use anything that you aren't authorized to use.

Worse yet, with the military logos we're talking about trademarks, not copyrights.

ok, I'm backing out of this one.. these discussions always get heated when people discover
there is a vast difference between what they are allowed to do and what they THINK they
are allowed to do.

[Martin Boekers]

Chuck, I was working of the premise of FOUO sorry if it didn't come across that way.
How about Municipalities logos, that have been created inhouse, therefore paid with
taxepayers dollars. Would I have the right to use that say on a letter head from my
business? I think there will be a problem there. Should I be able to send out a direct
mail piece with the DoD Seal right next to my logo, just because it was paid for with
tax payer's dollars? I think you can see that this use is not official and could implied
endorsment of the DoD. That I believe is more the issue they want to control.
Take Olan Mills for example (of Copyrights) they will give anyone rights that requests
them as long as they crop out the Olan Mills trademark. They don't want a product
out there with their name on it that they can't control the quality. So there are various
reason besides the finacial ones

[Mel Fulks]

Just to point out some irony,the word "replica" was coined to distinquish a work copied by the original artist,rather than copied by someone else.It is now the most used word for "copy" .Wonder how the courts rule on ads for "replicas".

[Scott Shepherd]

I disagree with you Chuck. The art world is full, and I mean full, of people's interpretations of things. There are galleries all over the planet full of works by people that have done just what I described.

The last time I looked into it, you could use tracing paper all you wanted. However, you could not electronically trace anything or use that image electronically to trace over it.

So you are telling me that if I take a piece of tracing paper and lay it over the Mona Lisa, and then I paint it to look just like the Mona Lisa, then I have violated the copyright law? I don't think so.

Of if I take a piece of tracing paper and hand draw the Harley Davidson logo, I have violated the copyright law? I don't think so. There was a time when it was distinguished between hand drawing and digital tracing. The two were considered completely different things, one protected, one not.

Don't misunderstand me, if you copied it exactly, you'd be guilty. I did say that you needed to make it your own.

There is no law against using material as a starting point. You just can't trace it electronically.

[Tim Bateson]

Chuck, Scott, I do believe you are both correct. Depends which court hears the case and how good the lawyers are. People have re-drawn/painted the Mona Lisa with no issues, however try the same with Mickey Mouse and it's a different story.

Now that I think about it this may be a bad example as Mickey is likely a trademark. However, the copyright laws are up to interpretation by the lawyers and courts.

[George M. Perzel]

Yea, just what I want to do- leave everything up to lawyers and judges to decide-aren't they the ones who helped create this mess for their own obvious benefits to begin with?
Best Regards,
George
Laserarts

[Mike Null]

Some things pre-date copyright laws. if you go to the Louvre you'll see students with their easels and paints copying the old masters. As long as they don't try to pawn them off as Rembrandt or Van Eyck the museum encourages them.

[Kevin Clark2227]

Okay,
I got 2 emails back today, 1 from the National Guard and 1 from the Marines.

The National Guard said:
"The National Guard Bureau does control all of its marks and logos but the process for licensing them to private/public organizations hasn't been formalized yet. Unfortunately, I can't approve the use of our logos yet. Please check back with me in 45 days and I may have the authority then."

The Marines said:
"If you display it on a shelf, in catalog, on your website, you must have permission from the Marines. However, if you have a blank piece of merchandise and the customer says, "Hey can you put the Marine Emblem/Logo on this?", then you can say, "Why sure I can?". Basically if you advertise it, you must get permission."

The lady from the Marines was very nice. I actually called her on the number she provided and was quite helpful. Of course, not all branches do it the Marine way.

Thought I would share what I received.

[George M. Perzel]

Kevin;
Of course that all clearly makes sense-the National Guard has been around for 375 years-yea, that's right-but they still need 45 more days to maybe have an answer. The Marine response borders on illogical lunacy-can't wait to hear from the other services.
Best Regards,
George
Laserarts

[Mike Null]

George

I disagree with you on the Marine response. It is generally consistent with the practices of all the branches over the years and permits use of the marks for use on customer ordered items. What it does not provide for is unauthorized speculative use for profit. My first experience came several years ago (shortly after 9-11) when I designed a T-shirt using all the service logos which I planned to sell on my web site. I contacted each branch, sent them a drawing of my design, and was given authorization by each branch in writing. I never did go on to make the shirts but the services were cooperative though a bit slow.

I believe this is what Martin has said also and he is on a military base serving only military customers.