TimeFest Official Rules

Prominent use of the product with a clear shot of the logo is not recommended.

Simple solution though - shoot the scene so that the logo is obscured; either not in the shot, covered by his hand, or covered by a piece of tape...Or flip the bottle around, or remove the label completely, OR just pour the windex into an unmarked bottle. Lots of options, all easier than writing Windex and asking for clearance.

It's almost impossible to prevent any logos from making it into any of your shots - but as long as they're "incidental" and not displayed prominently you don't need to get clearance. But the example you gave does sound like it would be featured prominently and would require one of the workarounds I suggested.
 
Jared Meyer said:
Prominent use of the product with a clear shot of the logo is not recommended.

Simple solution though - shoot the scene so that the logo is obscured; either not in the shot, covered by his hand, or covered by a piece of tape...Or flip the bottle around, or remove the label completely, OR just pour the windex into an unmarked bottle. Lots of options, all easier than writing Windex and asking for clearance.

It's almost impossible to prevent any logos from making it into any of your shots - but as long as they're "incidental" and not displayed prominently you don't need to get clearance. But the example you gave does sound like it would be featured prominently and would require one of the workarounds I suggested.
Click to expand...

Dang it, and here I had this great idea for my film where a young boy leads a friendly alien back to his house with Reese's Pieces. Just have to find some other way to make that scene work now.
 
Well the Windex example was just that, an example. What if the logo is actually on the front of a car and the shot it is in is a really cool-arse shot, but in that shot the logo being visible is unavoidable? :grin:
 
Some things fall under fair use don't they? I know I've seen plenty of products in previous entries. Cereal boxes, etc... brand names that were quite visible.

I don't know all the boundaries around that sort of thing though.
 
Dang it, and here I had this great idea for my film where a young boy leads a friendly alien back to his house with Reese's Pieces. Just have to find some other way to make that scene work now.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough they tried to get permission from Mars and were denied it for use with M&Ms, and Hershey gave them the money and the rights...though denied the use of their flagship, Kisses.

Reese's are still sold in cinemas today after their 80% jump in sales.

:D
 
Michael Anthony Horrigan said:
Some things fall under fair use don't they? I know I've seen plenty of products in previous entries. Cereal boxes, etc... brand names that were quite visible.

I don't know all the boundaries around that sort of thing though.
Click to expand...

You're right - and my knowledge is pretty limited here as well - but I believe that applies to documentaries and the like. News, events, weddings, docs, etc... David or someone else wiser than I will have to chime in but I'm pretty sure the concept of "fair use" has no application in narrative filmmaking.

In a short film or a feature, if a logo shows up in the background and is not featured prominently, there is most likely not an issue. Fairly certain you don't have to get clearance from Quaker Oats if you have a box of Cap'n Crunch in the cupboard in the background of your shot. Of course I could be wrong. Why does this stuff have to be so complex...? :)
 
Last edited:
You would think it wouldn't matter unless you were casting the company in a bad light, because essentially it is free advertising. Mayble I'll email Chevrolet. Or maybe I will just move right along. Hopefully more people will weigh in...?
 
Er... I think the intention was clearly for visual, but that's an interesting question. I don't think I've ever heard of any film in history titling itself any way other than visual, so -- poins to Mark for thinking outside the box... is it a problem to have it visual though?
 
It's not a problem, just that we didn't really do a title sequence, so as not to waste part of our 6 min. But the very first word spoken in the movie is the title.

I guess I didn't really understand the point of forcing a title onto the movie, so wanted to know if we could qualify without it. But we'll come up with something.

Thanks!
 
Have we figured out if the DVXUser advert can come in the beginning of the show?

I'd much rather have it at the leading end. Just wondering if that is legal.
 
Question Mods: is it okay for us to host a 720p version of our movie after viewing opens? It would be identical except being 720p. Mark seemed to think this wasn't okay but I've read and re-read the rules and there's absolutely nothing prohibiting it.
 
Matty, let me get an official OK on the before the short acknowledgement. Don't see a problem but, let me get an official OK. Myself or another mod will post back here.

Shawneous, sorry no 720 version on your own. We can add that it's not allowed explicitly in the rules from now on but it's implied in the upload process. We host the films which accomplishes the following things:
  1. everyone is subject to the same compression limits, hosting your own outside of those limits is arguably unfair
  2. along the lines of 1 it's, again arguably, unfair in the sense that not everyone even has their own means of hosting at all, let alone in a format / resolution superior to what will be up on User.
  3. it locks the submission content. If people host their own then they could complete that sweet VFX shot they couldn't finish for upload time and then swap the films out on their own server.
 
guess that means that a live screening of the films in a higher quality is out! BUMMER! Maybe we'll screen higher quality versions after the fest is over, or just do a lo res screening!
 
Jack Daniel Stanley said:
Matty, let me get an official OK on the before the short acknowledgement. Don't see a problem but, let me get an official OK. Myself or another mod will post back here.

Shawneous, sorry no 720 version on your own. We can add that it's not allowed explicitly in the rules from now on but it's implied in the upload process. We host the films which accomplishes the following things:
  1. everyone is subject to the same compression limits, hosting your own outside of those limits is arguably unfair
  2. along the lines of 1 it's, again arguably, unfair in the sense that not everyone even has their own means of hosting at all, let alone in a format / resolution superior to what will be up on User.
  3. it locks the submission content. If people host their own then they could complete that sweet VFX shot they couldn't finish for upload time and then swap the films out on their own server.
Click to expand...

Makes sense, thanks! Glad I asked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top