Using well known brands in literature

[Chip Peterson]

As we've all seen in so many supplier's catalogs, well known brand names are often used in their samples. I've seen established banks, credit cards, soft drinks, etc., etc.

So I've been wondering if releases/permissions are needed from these companies to use their brands. As an example, if I want to use the Coke name and logo in a sample that I make to display and/or include in my literature (but not sell), do I need to get their permission.

Research on a photography web site turned up the following, but I don't know how accurate it is:

"If you have a photo that happens to include the Coca Cola logo, (or any trademarked item), the question as to whether a release is required has nothing to do with your having the image, nor your ability to license the image; but rather, how the person who buys the image puts it into use. If that use implies an association, or relies upon the good will of the logo, then a release may be required or desired. But that decision is made by the licensee, not the photographer."

Anyone have any thoughts on this matter?

[Darren Null]

Probably, yes you do.

If you're burning a photo that has a coke ad as an incidental part somewhere in the background, then you're OK. If the coke logo is the focus of your image then you should get permission really.

Use of somebody's logo implies approval from that company; that you've done work for them.

It goes on all the time and mostly nothing happens...you are, after all, giving company X free publicity. But if they decide to have a crackdown and you're the unlucky one they choose to make an example of, then right will be on their side.

Credit cards are slightly different- it's a logo AND it's a universally-recognised symbol that that facility is available, so you'd get away with that if you take credit cards.

I note that in the bit you quoted from the site, licence holders have claimed rights over photos with the logo in the background. They are on much shakier legal ground here, and much would depend on context.

Permission can be as simple as just dropping the marketing dept an email and getting a "sure, go ahead" reply. If they mess you about, you can always try for permission from their competitors. You're also allowed a logo-a-like for satire purposes, but I'm not sure if that would apply here.

[Dan Hintz]

In partial agreement/disagreement with Darren...

If you are not providing the actual logo as a product enhancement (i.e., you're only showing a sample of what a logo might look like on a particular piece), you're in the green.

If the logo was provided to you by the customer and no image edits happen at your end, you're (mostly) in the green. At that point you are simply a contractor and the legal action would be against the company actually selling the product (your customer), not you.

If a picture of you has a Coke logo in the background, you're green. If you're pointing to the logo, it is now considered a "main focus" and you're no longer in the green.

Credit card logos are not as simple as they once were. In fact, earlier this year I received a notice from the companies as a whole saying logos posted on websites must conform to specific sizes, no animations except yadda yadda yadda, etcetera etcetera. Using them in advertising, except as listed above, is definitely not in the green, even if you think it would make them more money through free advertising.

[Scott Shepherd]

In partial agreement/disagreement with Darren...

If you are not providing the actual logo as a product enhancement (i.e., you're only showing a sample of what a logo might look like on a particular piece), you're in the green.



I'm in disagreement with that statement. Where'd you get the logo? It's illegal to use the logo to create anything without permission. If they didn't give you permission to use the logo, and you aquired it through the internet or some free logo site, then you are far from being in the "green" in my opinion.

I think people do it all the time, and probably the worst thing that will happen if you do use it is that they will contact you and ask that it be removed. They could sue you, but they would probably just ask for it to be removed and see if you comply.

Just my opinion.

[Joe Pelonio]

Let's use Epilog as an example. In their marketing they provide samples including in at least some cases a laser engraved/cut Harley Davidson Logo.

On their website there are samples showing the Chicago Cubs, Colorado Rockies, and AOL logos. Probably others but I just took a quick look. I would be surprised if they have written permission from all of these organizations.

They are not selling these objects, which would require permission. I'd compare it to Sony or HP showing a photo with Coke or Starbuck's in the background as an example of what their digital camera can do.

[Chip Peterson]

Joe those are the types of examples I am reffering to. When I look at any awards, laserables, dye-sublimation catalogs or web sites, I always notice very recognized brands listed there.

Two thoughts come to my litigation-adverse little mind:

1) If I use the logo that they have in the catalog (with their permission) and there is an issue with the brand's owner, am I as culpable as the supplier?

2) If I want to use a brand that I've not seen before in those catalogs but it means something to my specific market and I won't put that sample up for sale, do I need the brand's permission. Let's say I want to sell to ABC Shrimp Company. Can I use Bubba Gump's logo in my literature?

I did use an impressive logo from a supplier recently to illustrate an idea. It was used with their permission. Interestingly, the customer was impressed that I did that for that big name customer. Mums the word!

[Joe Pelonio]

The best thing obviously is to do some work for one of those big companies and take pictures of it. Luckily I have done that with work at one time or another for most of them, often sponsorship banners for a big company that donates to a local charity group. Another "trick" I have used is to make a gift item with logo on it and send it to companies as a sample of your work, offering to provide them with your services, then use a picture of that.
I would think that would be hard to be in copyright violation since it was given to them.

Without being a lawyer, but having taken a class that discussed it, a company can exercise it's copyrights and have the court issue a cease and desist order if they want to. This kind of use does not put out a red flag and attract the same wrath as selling items with a logo, so your chances of ever being contacted by them are very slim, so it's a calculated risk.

[Dan Hintz]

I'm in disagreement with that statement. Where'd you get the logo? It's illegal to use the logo to create anything without permission. If they didn't give you permission to use the logo, and you aquired it through the internet or some free logo site, then you are far from being in the "green" in my opinion.
Scott,

I believe you misunderstood what I was saying.

If you are not providing the actual logo as a product enhancement...
By that I mean if you are not the one providing the artwork, as in the customer hands you a disk with a corel file on it and requires no touch-up work. If that is the case, you are simply doing "assembly" work as a contractor and are not responsible for the legality of the pieces.

[martin g. boekers]

This is a very grey area. Coming from a commercial photography background much of what you use it for has a bearing on it.

If your bottom line is to display a "Coke" logo in a way that may imply you did the work for "Coke" and you didn't. Like printing it on a brochure or displaying it on a web page, first off that is a bit unethical and second it is illegal and you can become liable for that. Why else would you use a highly recognizable brand if your just showing off you laser talents?:rolleyes: (Typically on smaller scales you may get a cease and desist letter. Continue on and that very well could lead to a lawsuit.)


Selling a product with a trade marked or copyright is a definate no-no unless an agreement is in place.

If a client supplies you artwork make sure they sign a letter saying they have rights to use it. Sometimes it's best with prominate images to have them produce the letter specifing their rights.

Typically when I do a photo shoot a contract is signed defining the clients rights and usage as well as my own. It is best to have it in righting.

If I do a shot for an in-house calendar (say for 500 copies) I charge them accordingly. If later I find that they used it as an international campaign poster (100,000 copies), they are liable for that usage and I have the legal right to be paid for it. The new usage fee would be substatially more as it now became part of a larger marketing plan.

Be careful of major league and college sports they take this kind of thing very seriously.

Just look how serious the music industry took to kids copying songs for personal use.

Bottom line you can make the choice on what you use to promote your work,
and if you ask yourself first, what are my motives in doing this you'll get the answer you need.


Marty

[Joseph deCroy]

Here is an article that may help in understanding the use of logos.

http://www.irmi.com/Expert/Articles/2006/Warren04.aspx (http://www.irmi.com/Expert/Articles/2006/Warren04.aspx)





Here are the policies from two companies

http://www.sun.com/policies/trademarks/ (http://www.sun.com/policies/trademarks/)
http://www.aisconsulting.net/fair_use_guide.html (http://www.aisconsulting.net/fair_use_guide.html)