Loading...
> >

Using trademarked brands on clothes

agamersdayagamersday Posts: 101
in New Users

Hello,

I was wondering if it is allowed to take the logo of brands like coca cola or Nike and put them on clothes.

I do like to share my art on deviantart and I don't make any provit doing this. I do see a lot of fanart like this for example https://orig00.deviantart.net/86a9/f/2012/009/7/a/rainbow_dash_drinks_coca_cola_by_thishomeboy24-d4lul0e.png

Is this generally a thing I should avoid to not get into a lawsuit with them or do you think Coca Cola for example wouldn't mind it.

 

Comments

  • BeeMKayBeeMKay Posts: 7,019
    edited September 2017

    As long as you do it in your own four walls and it never sees the public, you are fine, but...

    The safe answer is, no. Don't use anything that has a trademark/copyright on it, without a written prior permission of the trademark/copyright holder.

    There is something called "fair use", which perhaps (or not) applies to posting fanart, but since at least deviant art makes profit from your image by getting money for the advertisement they run, the fair use is on shaky legs. Whether ot nmot other people ar doing it is irrelevant, you don't know if they got prior permission or not. And just because the companies aren't doing something right now, doesn't mean they can't change policy tomorrow, as any Trek fan can confirm. If they wish so, they can send you a cease and desist at any time.

    Or, your image gets famous and then you want to sell it...

    That said, this isn't any legal advice, since I'm not a lawyer. Google reveals quite a few good reads on the topic, like:

    Post edited by BeeMKay on
  • ToborTobor Posts: 2,300

    As Bee says, it's safer if you don't use trademarks. Some companies object only when the mark is used in an obvious fashion that -- without the mark -- would render the work irrelevant. The sample you posted fits this category. The trademark IS the work. Others take exception for anything, however minor. Zippo, for instance, is known to be very agressive.

    Whether or not Coke would object to the use of the mark because it's "free advertising" misses the nature of trademarks and building brands. The colors in that example may not be correct, for instance. The shape of the bottle, which it itself a trademark, is not accurate. To an IP holder, these lapses are often considered to reduce the brand strength of their mark, so they object for pragmatic reasons.

    There are some kinds of "natural" trademark exposure that can occur in the normal events of taking a photograph; someone standing in front of their Ford Focus, for example. In this case, the car and its trademarks are not the main focus of the work. Being a photograph, displaying a possible trademark is a natural byproduct, as nearly all cars bear a mark of some kind. Your renders do not apply to this possible exception, as you would have A) included the trademark intentionally and B) could have just as easily substituted a generic, made-up mark.

    Forget about getting written permission. Most trademark holders don't want to be bothered unless you are a well-known artist or working for a major media firm (and then, you might expect paying of a royalty). They are unlikely to give you permission without seeing the finished work, so if you get that far and they say no, you'll have to remark your art all over again anyway.

    The above is not legal advice.

  • OstadanOstadan Posts: 1,128

    At a science-fiction convention, I once heard Frederick Pohl, in a discussion of 'predicting the future', say that in the 1950s, he predicted that companies would pay people to wear their company logos on their clothes, using their bodies as advertising space.  He said he could never have predicted in a million years that people would pay the companies to wear their logos on their clothes.

Sign In or Register to comment.