Would I Get Lawsuits Hurled At Me For Doing This?

There are legal issues, political issues, financial issues... all of which can be avoided by not showing trademarks. It's too complicated, and potentially problem-causing, to try and figure it out yourself.

Foir instance, I was on Scientific American Frontiers with Alan Alda, demonstrating some robotic behaviors on a University football field, and we had to be careful to avoid the name of one of the football team's sponsors in any shots, because it was also a sponsor of Scientific American Frontiers. Not a competitor, the main sponsor of the show... but it would have violated PBS's sense of propriety to include the logo of one of their sponsors. Other logos were OK!

Now, who knows if Fidelio will ever check in again... this discussion is far out of range of his little short... but in there's a even a small possibility that a company can consider any use of it's trademark to be harmful, then of course a big production will want to avoid using such trademarks in any way. And if we now, for better or worse, live in a world where product placement is a commodity, then there are financial reasons not to give it away. I don't think "idiocy" factors in, llamacháy!
 
Complicated? Trade Mark law is one of the simplest on the books. I keep looking for more pages, but they just aren't there.

Copyright law is the one that will get ya. Plenty of examples of that in court cases. Film and trade marks? Not so many. (Won't say none...I just gave up looking after not finding any after a handful of search results pages...none that are akin to what we're talking about here, anyway. Can't make Star Wars, can't make Ninja Turtles, etc. Well, duh.)
 
if this is a student production.. and not for profit as you say.. then just shoot it.

when I was working on my first short I had this idea.. that if we somehow used 'product names' in the frame... then the big companies would come after me...

The reality is.. unless you're big enough to make money off you'll either a) be asked to refrain from screening it or b) nobody will care cause nobody is going to know about it.

And if you had the money in the first place, you'd be getting the clearance required anyways.

I suppose if your film is entirely based around attacking this particular company.. then not a good idea.. otherwise... you'll have enough trouble just getting people to watch your work without worrying about the big corporate suits.
 
taormina said:
You're dreaming, amigo. Real movies have people that work on them whose job doesn't involve anything but covering up trademarks.

I once had a label on my blue jeans covered in gaff tape when I had to fill in for a missing featured extra. It's the real deal and those guys don't screw around.
Click to expand...

The reason trademarks get covered up is because product placement has become valuable to the production and there are no free rides. It has nothing to do prohibition, unless you are, as I said before, casting the trademark in a negative light.
 
Wow, I never knew that such a question can spark so much discussion; I suppose that we've all been disenchanted with the legal side of filmmaking?

Why I've wanted to use the actual name card of the modelling agency is because I'm looking to be authentic. I know that sounds somewhat frivolous, considering the amount of legal issues behind doing so, I have just been very disappointed with the pseudo-realities presented in narrative films.

Though understanding the legal complications involving copyright/trade mark uses in films, I am always distracted and frowning upon the fakery that so prevails narratives, or the queer absence of pop culture in a film supposedly set in a contemporary space saturated with pop culture.

Now here comes my question: I've seen in some major features, though I don't recall any particular ones at the moment, that do have trademark usages and whatnot; I suppose that they spend a healthy portion of their budget securing these rights, or did they somehow manage to strike up a product placement deal?

Back to the short: the entire world of the story is pretty much real life - there are uncleared posters, fashion magazines and soda pop and such within the shots, and the protagonist isn't exactly doing anything derogatory to anything of those things, aside from using it in its intended use.

As for the card, in the story she simply wants to make a call to book an appointment but she doesn't out of fear. And that's it.

What I'm frustrated with is the fact that there is the possibility that you can be sued for just about anything. Then how the hell are we supposed to craft realistic stories set in our post modern times?

Even if I had the agency card cleared or made a fake one, I might not be able to clear the Coke, or the Vogue, or the Johnny Depp poster. And if I was to go into the festival circuit, the general advice for me is to stay safe. So what's next... fake Cokes, magazines and photo manipulation? That or a bare room.

I just want to know where the line is drawn.
Sigh... what a frustrating arena of the filmmaking business.
Talk about killing creativity.

Fidelio
 
http://www.thefilmlaw.com/cgi-bin/board.cgi?page_to_show=8&lang=

#234 (about halfway down the page)


Person Asking the Entertainment Attorney said:
......with the help of family and friends I was able to produced a no-budget suspense flick shot at 24p in HDV from a script that I wrote. It was originally conceived as a "just for the fun of it" summer project......
.....a bunch clipped......
What happens if the front of an automobile can be clearly seen in the movie, do we need an OK from the manufacture? Do I need to remove any scenes (there are only 2 that I can think of) where product labels can be seen?
.....a bunch clipped.....
Click to expand...

ANSWER:
Entertainment Attorney said:
....a bunch clipped.....
By front of the automobile, you mean the logo like Chevy or Buick? If so, the logo or car name is a trademark and you do need clearance. The good news is most of these companies give the clearance for free. 4. Maybe. Again, most companies will give free ok to use their logo or product in the film unless the use is derogatory of the product etc.
....more clipped.....
Click to expand...

http://www.thefilmlaw.com/
 
GenJerDan said:
Complicated? Trade Mark law is one of the simplest on the books. I keep looking for more pages, but they just aren't there.
Click to expand...

Not the law itself, but the potential for lawsuits. As in this case (just purely hypothesizing), Ford Modeling Agency gets upset at being portrayed as extremely intimidating, and makes a claim that the number of applicants has dropped 20% after gthe movie depicting a girl too frightened to call them. Far-fetched, sure. Unlikely. But something a large production involving muco moolah will want to protect itself against.

Fidelio - OK, if you're going to include copyrighted material like fashion magazines, then the card is the least of your worries....
 
Fidelio said:
I just want to know where the line is drawn.
Sigh... what a frustrating arena of the filmmaking business.
Talk about killing creativity.
Click to expand...

Killing creativity? Because you can't rip off other people's work? Interesting theory!

Make a critical satire, and use your target's materials legally under fair use!
 
If you are able to craft an interesting story with believable performances from your actor, nobody will ever give a crap about the lack of "realistic" products in a film. If people start wondering why they never see a coke can or a People magazine, you got bigger problems.
 
...a short one minute student film that'll be distributed by DVD (but not for profit)
Click to expand...
A one minute video on a DVD?!?! Who are you "distributing" your video to? Because it doesn't sound very practical..... Unless your video is part of a larger collection of other students films. Is that it?

Because, if not, and you're just going to make copies of your short video to give to friends and family, then don't worry about any of these legal issues. Also, if you just plan on using the video to get a job (give to producers, film fests, etc.) then, once again, don't worry about anything. Just make your film and send it out.

BTW Have you considered using this new thing called the "Internet" to distribute your video? I've never used it before but I hear it's cool.

:) :)
 
Last edited:
Strictly speaking, the only films you are allowed to make without getting things cleared consist of naked actors in empty rooms or unspoiled wilderness.
 
Recall the guys last year who made a short (after hours) in the grocery store where they worked and posted on Youtube? They got sued by the store because of some visible items that identified the store.
 
You can do whatever you want, just be aware that festivals do ask about rights clearances and it can bite you in the ass. I know several people who have had issues not only with festivals but they had trouble selling their shorts in markets because of it.

If this is a short film that no one will see and that you'll screen for your friends late at night in the basement with milk and cookies, go for it. But if you want a wider audience it might be worth working around it.
 
taormina said:
You're dreaming, amigo. Real movies have people that work on them whose job doesn't involve anything but covering up trademarks.
Click to expand...

Weirdly enough, they spend a lot of time covering up trademarks that the production actually has permission to use, too...

...General Dynamic and Lockheed, by the way, are the most difficult large companies that I have ever dealt with, in terms of getting simple information and access-to-trademark. Which is odd when you consider that the market for multi-million-dollar flying death machines is quite small, and not particularly sensitive to media depictions of the products...
 
I don't know of any 1 minute short films that our bought or sold. There is no money in one minute videos unless they are commercials. I'm guessing he's wanting to give it to friends/family, use it as a demo reel, or give to film fests (which is the only one you need to be careful about).

The YouTube supermarket video was a bad idea because the idiots were doing stuff with the produce (in the song and visually) which made the store look bad. You don't bite the hand that feeds you. But I don't think he's going to have time to make this modeling agency look bad in a one minute video.
 
Fidelio said:
Wow, I never knew that such a question can spark so much discussion; I suppose that we've all been disenchanted with the legal side of filmmaking?

Why I've wanted to use the actual name card of the modelling agency is because I'm looking to be authentic. I know that sounds somewhat frivolous, considering the amount of legal issues behind doing so, I have just been very disappointed with the pseudo-realities presented in narrative films.

Though understanding the legal complications involving copyright/trade mark uses in films, I am always distracted and frowning upon the fakery that so prevails narratives, or the queer absence of pop culture in a film supposedly set in a contemporary space saturated with pop culture.

Now here comes my question: I've seen in some major features, though I don't recall any particular ones at the moment, that do have trademark usages and whatnot; I suppose that they spend a healthy portion of their budget securing these rights, or did they somehow manage to strike up a product placement deal?

Back to the short: the entire world of the story is pretty much real life - there are uncleared posters, fashion magazines and soda pop and such within the shots, and the protagonist isn't exactly doing anything derogatory to anything of those things, aside from using it in its intended use.

As for the card, in the story she simply wants to make a call to book an appointment but she doesn't out of fear. And that's it.

What I'm frustrated with is the fact that there is the possibility that you can be sued for just about anything. Then how the hell are we supposed to craft realistic stories set in our post modern times?

Even if I had the agency card cleared or made a fake one, I might not be able to clear the Coke, or the Vogue, or the Johnny Depp poster. And if I was to go into the festival circuit, the general advice for me is to stay safe. So what's next... fake Cokes, magazines and photo manipulation? That or a bare room.

I just want to know where the line is drawn.
Sigh... what a frustrating arena of the filmmaking business.
Talk about killing creativity.

Fidelio
Click to expand...

Needing to use an actual agency kills your creativity ?

Look, you have 3 options:

1. Call the company up. You've spent more time waxing about pop culture and psuedo reality in narrative film than what could have been done with a phone call.

2. Create your own brand and identity; it's done all the time and your audience will get the jist and not think twice

3. Do it anyways and brace yourself for the outcome.

If not being able to use a real company is making or breaking your project, then you have bigger issues to contend with I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top