4 ms·

> So could Ford stop me from using footage of a Mustang? Vehicle design and logos are copyrighted. What about a movie wear characters are wearing designer cloth

by wolrah 4y ago

> So could Ford stop me from using footage of a Mustang? Vehicle design and logos are copyrighted. What about a movie wear characters are wearing designer clothing? Those are covered by copyright as well. You may notice how when cars are used in commercials they generally have their logos removed. Likewise when someone wears a shirt with a designer logo or graphic design on TV it'll often be blurred. The line is fuzzy but at least the professional media production world seems to have agreed it's somewhere around there.

phpisthebest 4y ago
This is a somewhat disingenuous statement. If you go back in time you will notice that was not the case, Then Studios got the bright idea of "product placement" so if a brand wanted to be in a show they need to pay for it, if not they would remove the logos. In some limited circumstances a company might be able to sue over the use copyright in another work but for the most part fair use would protect them. The reason they remove the logos today is primarily to extort money from brands not fear over copyright
- Verdex 4y ago
  There is actually some case law about this. The car Elenore from gone in 60 seconds has its rights held by some organization that was going around suing people. Some US district court ruled that cars could not be copyrighted (although this did reverse a previous decision). I think the major distinction is that the car isn't actually a character in the film (and the previous decision was because the rights holders disingenuously indicated that the car was a character in the movie and the court didn't double check that this was in fact the case iirc).
- cmeacham98 4y ago
  > In some limited circumstances a company might be able to sue over the use copyright in another work but for the most part fair use would protect them. Incorrect, or at the very least studios disagree with you, as they act as if the opposite is true. I'm going to trust their (and their lawyers') judgement over that of yours. For example, Apple is infamously controlling about use of its products by villains in media, and studios listen to them: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/26/apple-wont-let-bad-guys-use-iphones-in-movies-says-knives-out-director.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/26/apple-wont-let-bad-guys-use-...
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    There is no indication in that link, or any other links I have read on the topic that Apple is doing this via copyright. Apple could be paying studio's to keep the products away from villain, Apple could be supplying devices or other services for free as a condition if they agree to those terms, Apple itself is a production company so directors and other people in the industry could be voluntary agreeing to it for their own professional reasons... I have not read a single legal expert that claims Apple could successfully sue a studio for copyright or even trademark infringement if a bad guy was using an iPhone in a movie.

by wolrah 4y ago

phpisthebest 4y ago

This is a somewhat disingenuous statement. If you go back in time you will notice that was not the case, Then Studios got the bright idea of "product placement" so if a brand wanted to be in a show they need to pay for it, if not they would remove the logos. In some limited circumstances a company might be able to sue over the use copyright in another work but for the most part fair use would protect them. The reason they remove the logos today is primarily to extort money from brands not fear over copyright

Verdex 4y ago
There is actually some case law about this. The car Elenore from gone in 60 seconds has its rights held by some organization that was going around suing people. Some US district court ruled that cars could not be copyrighted (although this did reverse a previous decision). I think the major distinction is that the car isn't actually a character in the film (and the previous decision was because the rights holders disingenuously indicated that the car was a character in the movie and the court didn't double check that this was in fact the case iirc).
cmeacham98 4y ago
> In some limited circumstances a company might be able to sue over the use copyright in another work but for the most part fair use would protect them. Incorrect, or at the very least studios disagree with you, as they act as if the opposite is true. I'm going to trust their (and their lawyers') judgement over that of yours. For example, Apple is infamously controlling about use of its products by villains in media, and studios listen to them: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/26/apple-wont-let-bad-guys-use-iphones-in-movies-says-knives-out-director.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/26/apple-wont-let-bad-guys-use-...
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  There is no indication in that link, or any other links I have read on the topic that Apple is doing this via copyright. Apple could be paying studio's to keep the products away from villain, Apple could be supplying devices or other services for free as a condition if they agree to those terms, Apple itself is a production company so directors and other people in the industry could be voluntary agreeing to it for their own professional reasons... I have not read a single legal expert that claims Apple could successfully sue a studio for copyright or even trademark infringement if a bad guy was using an iPhone in a movie.