Umbrella logo (Resident Evil) - Is it actually copyrighted?

S

Shauno

Active member
Hello Gang,

I'm in catch 22.

I'm producing a short film, which pays homage to the fictional corporation, Umbrella Corporation from the Resident Evil series.

Now... I want fans of the series to be able to connect with it, but I do not want to break copyright laws and wondered if anyone knew of the legality of using the logo?

I am of course, just wanting to use the logo and I do not want to use the logo in conjunction with "Umbrella Corporation" text, I mean, I imagine that, THAT is blatant infingement of copyright.

However, what is interesting is that I found this image on Wikipedia, which states that it is creative commons because.... well, read for yourself...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Umbrella_Corporation_logo.png

I wondered if anyone could offer a meagre piece of advice.
 
Probably. But then, the Umbrella corp's logo is almost identical to Swedish insurance company Skandia's old logo.

skandia%20logo.gif
 
Definitely agree with David, talk to an attorney. Something to note, though, is that you're dealing with trademark law, not copyright. A trademark must be actively defended in court by the trademark holder, which usually involves the trademark holder proving that your use of the trademarked property has negatively affected their trademark or business, or the public image of their trademark or business. If you're putting the film on YouTube, it isn't likely to be a problem. If you're selling copies on the street corner or running the festival circuit or anything like that, I'd sit down with a lawyer first, or maybe even just contact the owners of the trademark and ask for permission to use it.
 
Fan films seem to get away with a lot of copyright infringement; maybe because they inform the audience from the get-go that they are paying homage to the source material (and not trying to just rip it off). There is also the parody 'loophole'...
 
simonpwood said:
Fan films seem to get away with a lot of copyright infringement; maybe because they inform the audience from the get-go that they are paying homage to the source material (and not trying to just rip it off). There is also the parody 'loophole'...
Click to expand...

Could you please elaborate on this?
 
Last edited:
Fan films get away with exactly as much as the copyright holders tolerate. That can change at any time, on a whim.
 
Wouldn't the fact that your entire idea is based on previously created intellectual property (Resident Evil/Umbrella) be more of an issue than the logo?
 
Josh Bass said:
Wouldn't the fact that your entire idea is based on previously created intellectual property (Resident Evil/Umbrella) be more of an issue than the logo?
Click to expand...

Errrrr.... I don't want to sound like an Irish pleb, but...

I'm not sure if you are joking or not, but to me that seems like you are attempting to pigeon hole me into a crux?

We all know the business, if F.W Marneu where here, he's probably shout something in German, what he would actually shout, I'm not sure, but I'm sure he would shout mate.

You use the words "Entire idea" very precipitously mate, I never once mentioned that the concept of the film is directly based on Resident Evil, I said... I want to pay homage to the fictional corporation, Umbrella Corporation which is in Resident Evil by maybe using their logo in a part of my film.

I'm sorry to get banged up on semantics, but isn't semantics about 27% of filmmaking???
 
just draw it, that way its not exactly the same as it would be if you printed it or something

fan films can be great for business so i doubt they're going to come after you
 
wannabeapilot said:
just draw it, that way its not exactly the same as it would be if you printed it or something

fan films can be great for business so i doubt they're going to come after you
Click to expand...

It's not whether they WILL come after him, but whether they CAN. It's entirely possible that they CAN, and therefore it's a risk. Whether or not the OP wants to take that risk is his decision to make. Consulting qualified legal counsel is always the best idea.
 
If my question sounded rude, I apologize. It was genuine confusion. Perhaps I misunderstood the idea behind the project? You mentioned "paying homage," and then everyone used the words fan film. You didn't contradict any of them, so I assumed you were indeed making a fan film (if you meant something else by "paying homage," my apologies and read no further). In which case, yes, your project, despite any original and unique take on the material, is still ultimately based on someone else's intellectual property. Again, if you are making a fan film, then, it seems odd to worry about using a logo where copyright/trademark infringement is concerned, when the root idea itself is infringing on already existing intellectual property.
 
Shauno said:
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by simonpwood
Fan films seem to get away with a lot of copyright infringement; maybe because they inform the audience from the get-go that they are paying homage to the source material (and not trying to just rip it off). There is also the parody 'loophole'...

Could you please elaborate on this?
Click to expand...


If it is a parody (subverting the original material, generally for comedic or political purposes) then there is no copyright infringement. This is sometimes claimed legitimately and at other times a little more tenuously. I believe the onus is the copyright holder to prove it isn't a parody and as long as there is any genuine effort to make something new out of the source material you're pretty safe. Weird al would be one well known example in music (interestingly copyright applies separately to lyrics and music so he has to alter the tune significantly too - one of the reasons he turns everything into a polka). He generally goes to more effort than necessary to avoid litigation being initiated in the first place. Saturday night live skits and porn remakes (Forrest Hump, Edward Penishands, Swinging in the Rain, Assvatar etc) are video examples. Mad magazine parodies are a print example. So usually but not always parodies are played for laughs often with some element of social commentary. Parody and satire have a lot of overlap.

Unless you want to borrow characters and storyline it won't be a copyright infringement. As others have mentioned it would be more of a trademark thing. As far as bringing the logo into disrepute - don't think you can, with an organisation that unleashes zombies on the world! You can always ask them, or as you say double up on your shots. If its not a major money making project I can't see them having a problem with it but as David advised, if you're concerned ask a lawyer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top