Product usage

N

n1c02

Well-known member
Not sure if this is the right place to ask. We are going to be shooting a film soon. One of the scenes will take place in a small convenience store. We have permission to shoot from the store owner. But with all of the shelf products and everything.. Do I need to get permission from each and every company that will be shown? This would seem almost impossible.


Thanks
Terry
 
This question is best in the business section. However, the simple answer to your question is; if the products are not featured (background) not foreground you are OK.

IF they are featured in a C/U or an actors hand you need to acquire permission.
 
The logos are what you should be concerned about. Do your best to blur them out with shallow depth of field.
 
Are you guys in any way sure about these restrictions? You think if I have someone standing in front of the grille of his SUV I need Ford's permission? Or a closeup of a wristwatch timecheck needs Seiko's approval? Or a Nike cap on the actor's head? In an industry where product placement fees have long been charged - not paid - that would make no sense. OK, no legal degree here, but I'd say if they are legitimate items in a legitimate situation, that is no problem at all. Just don't be making, say, a bomb out of a Pepsi can.
 
If the grill has a logo on it you're reproducing trademarked images. Nike caps are even worse. The free publicity argument doesn't work, since companies still have control over their property. They might not want you to use it. Will you get sued? Extremely unlikely. If it's a small enough production a judge might even side with you, but we're not talking about that- the simple legality is that in most situations trademarked logos can't be reproduced, and you shouldn't use real brand names because that could be libel if you use it wrong.

That said, Nike doesn't have a guy that searches Youtube for instances of their logo. They don't care. Even if you start DVD distribution, selling them, they still won't care. But a distributor will. And Nike might if you get huge.
 
Cassius you might very well be right, but I'm still not buying it. The shot of the SUV is not reproducing the logo, it's a shot that include an item that has a logo on it. If I'd use that Ford logo on the theater poster that's another story. If I make & sell a cap with a Nike swoosh I could be in a heap of trouble, but not if I just photograph someone wearing one. How many Apple laptops with glowing logo have you seen on screen - hundreds? Then there is the whole concept of artistic expression that would be involved. Andy Warhol didn't go out and get Campbells to OK his iconic soup can art before he started selling them. When shooting a music video would you go to Fender, Gibson, Roland or whatever to make sure it was OK if their logo might be seen in the finished edit? Again, I might be wrong but if common sense doesn't rule then we're all in a mess of trouble.
 
As I said, it depends on the situation. There are a lot of exceptions, but the law isn't absolutely clear on a lot of. If it's incidental- like with the Ford example possibly, definitely if the production was small enough that it wasn't a conscious choice to include the Nike swoosh you're probably fine. If it has some relevance to the meaning of the work, like what the soup can thing is supposed to according to artsy people, the rules are different. Generally this does fall under common sense, especially since a judge would decide if necessary, and common sense does rule. All I'm saying is that it's the safest practice to exclude brands wherever possible, or at least make them not too prominent.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that link, excellent conversation.

Funny how he declared that no program would ever top the viewership of the MASH finale. The last Super Bowl did -- how's that for product placement when you buy a $3 million ad in that show?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top