question about product placement
- Thread starter Ponty301
- Start date
If you want to sell your film, you betcha. And yes, you'd have to contact the legal department of each product.
Nah, I think you're cool. The 48HFP (at least in my city) does not give a damn about product-placement.
Disclaimer: I'm absolutely NO expert on law, so consult a lawyer, blah blah blah.
Anyway, with disclaimer out of the way, I can report that I heard from a source that I feel is reliable (on this forum) that if a product is being used for what the product is manufactured for, there is no law that says you have to blur brand-names, etc. Perfect example -- a convenience store, where brand-names abound. That's why the displays, etc., were created. So, legally, I believe you're okay.
I repeat, I'm no expert, so if anyone feels this needs correction, please correct it.
As far as selling the film is concerned, I believe GuerillaAngel's advice is wise. But, if this is a short, for the 48HFP, you don't really think you're going to sell it, do you?
NO permission needed if it's just stuff in the background that decorates your set. Imagine if you had to clear out an entire store of products? The law doesn't work that way thankfully. I had one shot in my movie that clearly showed a bunch of camel cigarettes right behind the clerk. An entertainment lawyer told me that it was all fine. The only thing that might be a concern is when actors reference products. You can use products as long as they are used as intended, but beware of unsavory associations. For example if a child molester character buys Budweiser beer Anheiser Bush (or whoever owns Budweiser now) might not appreciate the direct association.
Also avoid showing anything that is "art" that might invite a copyright complaint. Examples: a fancy vase, a statue, a bed spread, a painting, etc.
Also avoid showing anything that is "art" that might invite a copyright complaint. Examples: a fancy vase, a statue, a bed spread, a painting, etc.
Was going to send you a link to a past thread but thought I'd just copy and paste instead.
This is by Michael Donaldson who's an entertainment attorney.
The important part of a trademark is what the mark represents. A trademark represents the source - it identifies who made the goods you are buying or who provided the services you are enjoying. So the big question remains, "Can I use someone else's trademark in my film?"
The good news is that as a filmmaker, your right to include a trademark in your film is clear. You have a right to include the trademark in your film as long as the trademark or the product bearing the trademark is used as it was intended to be used without any consequences of its use being abnormal or out of the ordinary. Therefore, as long as a filmmaker is using a trademark or logo as it was intended to be used, and do not disparage or tarnish the trademark or logo in your film, you may include such trademark or logo without asking permission to do so. Simple, right?
Like any other rule, there is always one caveat. You as a filmmaker do not have the right to commit trade libel, not even in the name of entertainment. Trade libel occurs when a product or service is falsely accused of some bad attribute. For example, if you showed someone in your film eating a McDonald's hamburger, then that person immediately keeled over because the food was poisonous, that would libel the trademark.
Another major question that arises sounds something like this, "So if I can use a trademark in my film in a non-libelous manner, why would I want to pay a license fee to clear it?" While the law does not require the filmmaker to obtain permission to use these items in film or television shows, there may be some good business reasons to do so anyway. For instance, broadcast television is an advertiser- supported medium. Therefore, if you used Coca-Cola labels on every beverage, and these beverages are prominently visible on the television screen, you have essentially given Coca-Cola free airtime.
I do not think the network broadcasting your show would be too thrilled giving away free airtime. Additionally as a filmmaker, you may potentially create more than one film. By showing goodwill and possibly paying or asking permission to use a trademark in your current film, the trademark holder may be willing to support, or even finance a portion of your project (assuming of course the trademark holder liked the use of their product or trademark in the film). So while permission to use a logo or trademark may not always be necessary, it might make good business sense to get permission anyway.
Michael C. Donaldson is an entertainment attorney who has been fighting for independent filmmakers for over thirty years. His book Clearance and Copyright, the third edition of which was just released, is used in over 50 film schools and has become the standard reference book for the industry. Visit: [http://www.clearanceandcopyright.com]
Hope this helps.
*
This is by Michael Donaldson who's an entertainment attorney.
The important part of a trademark is what the mark represents. A trademark represents the source - it identifies who made the goods you are buying or who provided the services you are enjoying. So the big question remains, "Can I use someone else's trademark in my film?"
The good news is that as a filmmaker, your right to include a trademark in your film is clear. You have a right to include the trademark in your film as long as the trademark or the product bearing the trademark is used as it was intended to be used without any consequences of its use being abnormal or out of the ordinary. Therefore, as long as a filmmaker is using a trademark or logo as it was intended to be used, and do not disparage or tarnish the trademark or logo in your film, you may include such trademark or logo without asking permission to do so. Simple, right?
Like any other rule, there is always one caveat. You as a filmmaker do not have the right to commit trade libel, not even in the name of entertainment. Trade libel occurs when a product or service is falsely accused of some bad attribute. For example, if you showed someone in your film eating a McDonald's hamburger, then that person immediately keeled over because the food was poisonous, that would libel the trademark.
Another major question that arises sounds something like this, "So if I can use a trademark in my film in a non-libelous manner, why would I want to pay a license fee to clear it?" While the law does not require the filmmaker to obtain permission to use these items in film or television shows, there may be some good business reasons to do so anyway. For instance, broadcast television is an advertiser- supported medium. Therefore, if you used Coca-Cola labels on every beverage, and these beverages are prominently visible on the television screen, you have essentially given Coca-Cola free airtime.
I do not think the network broadcasting your show would be too thrilled giving away free airtime. Additionally as a filmmaker, you may potentially create more than one film. By showing goodwill and possibly paying or asking permission to use a trademark in your current film, the trademark holder may be willing to support, or even finance a portion of your project (assuming of course the trademark holder liked the use of their product or trademark in the film). So while permission to use a logo or trademark may not always be necessary, it might make good business sense to get permission anyway.
Michael C. Donaldson is an entertainment attorney who has been fighting for independent filmmakers for over thirty years. His book Clearance and Copyright, the third edition of which was just released, is used in over 50 film schools and has become the standard reference book for the industry. Visit: [http://www.clearanceandcopyright.com]
Hope this helps.
*
You don't need permission for items in stores if they are in the background, regularly stocked in that store, and you are not focusing on a specific brand. That is what we've been told in the past by a variety of entertainment lawyers in Arizona when we were filming a horror flick in 2005.