Could I use an image even if it is copyrighted?

[Fred McLean]

Go for it!Doubt very much someone from PIXAR would object!
In fact put in a small "by courtesy of pixar" or something to cover yourself/advertise them 😉

Or have i a total mind blank and it’s DISNEY 😳

[Steve Underhill]

I think on a banner you wouldn’t have many problems, only if you started selling shrek banners or mugs or t shirts etc, a one off isn’t going to hurt anyone.
for a start who from the company that made shrek is likely to see it, and 2 what in all seriousness can they say about it except take it down at worst case scenario.

[Cheryl Smith]

I know this nail bar who uses Jessica Rabbit all over their literature, banners and even shop front……they seem to not worry and get on with it…

[Lorraine Clinch]

Thank you all for your comments, I know Geoff really wants to go with this, but as it’s for the pub I don’t want to get into bother on both sides-1 for designing, & 1 for displaying!

[Steve Underhill]

If you’re worried change it a bit, put a photo shop filter on or something to make it look like you copied it, something you draw isn’t copyrighted by anyone other than you

[Peter Shaw]

quote :

something you draw isn’t copyrighted by anyone other than you

I don’t think that’s quite true. There is a thing called Passing Off. e.g. You can’t use a Ferrari logo without permission just because you drew it.

Peter

[Warren Beard]

quote Peter Shaw:

quote :

something you draw isn’t copyrighted by anyone other than you

I don’t think that’s quite true. There is a thing called Passing Off. e.g. You can’t use a Ferrari logo without permission just because you drew it.

Peter

True, even if what you have is too similar it can’t be used, if it resembles a brand in any way and might be confused for the original then you could be in trouble.

That said, If it was up for a few weeks or months I don’t think any body will say anything and like Steve said I’m sure all that will happen is they tell you to take it down.

[Steve Underhill]

The ferrari logo is a trademark, shrek the movie character probably isnt, the name may be but the animated character probably wont be, thats the big difference.
you can paint a picture of whatever you like,
If I want to paint a picture of shrek I can, so long as I dont label it or pass it off as produced by anyone other than me.
Its been done millions of times before, copyright is a lot different to trademarks.
A fast food joint using a big yellow W instead of a big yellow M is more likely to get in bother than somebody who sells likenesses of a movie character that they themselves have produced.

[Brian Hays]

quote Steve Underhill:

The ferrari logo is a trademark, shrek the movie character probably isnt, the name may be but the animated character probably wont be, thats the big difference.
you can paint a picture of whatever you like,
If I want to paint a picture of shrek I can, so long as I dont label it or pass it off as produced by anyone other than me.
Its been done millions of times before, copyright is a lot different to trademarks.
A fast food joint using a big yellow W instead of a big yellow M is more likely to get in bother than somebody who sells likenesses of a movie character that they themselves have produced.

Are you sure mate? years ago I had a T-Shirt Airbrushed in Florida. I had one of the Teenage Ninja Turtles put on it for my little brother. The guy that did it said he had to be careful. Normally he signed the shirts but wouldn’t with the one he did for me as he feared getting into trouble?

[Peter Normington]

I beg to differ Steve, try painting ronald macdonald on your burger shop, and see if you can get away with it.
Painting is still reproducing, and will still come under "passing off"
the image of shrek, is copyright, no matter how you reproduce it.

Its fine telling Lorraine its not a problem, until the pub down the road reports her to FACT……

Peter

[Nick Minall]

Have a look on BOTW, shrek the movie character is a trademark.

Nick.

[Steve Underhill]

I said make it a likeness not copy it exactly for that reason.
If a child draws shrek do they then get arrested as its their favourite character and they like drawing it.

"Are you sure mate? years ago I had a T-Shirt Airbrushed in Florida. I had one of the Teenage Ninja Turtles put on it for my little brother. The guy that did it said he had to be careful. Normally he signed the shirts but wouldn’t with the one he did for me as he feared getting into trouble?"

I can understand that in America where you can get sued for looking at someone.

Peter,
You in fact reiterated my point on McDonald’s,
my point is its a banner going up for a month, in a worst case scenario and if you were producing them in volume you get a cease and desist order, not dragged off to the tower of London to be executed at dawn for making a likeness of a movie character.
Theres so much paranoia about this issue its untrue.
I had to do a T shirt for someone saying in green "shrek on tour"
no likeness just green words, should I not have done that as it would be seen as copyright infringement?

Its a tricky decision at the end of the day, do you just make the banner and worry about if anyone says anything (unlikely) or not make it and see your customer go to the next guy down the road who will.
I dont print so never have this problem, but I wouldnt worry about it if I did.
they arent being mass produced its one banner, with a picture of shrek on.

The irony of all this is the amount of times I see brands of the world mentioned on this site, every single one either trademarked or copyrighted but still people ask.

End of the day theres only one person to make this decision eh.

quote :

[David Rogers]

quote Steve Underhill:

I said make it a likeness not copy it exactly for that reason.
If a child draws shrek do they then get arrested as its their favourite character and they like drawing it.

If the image is sold or used to generate revenue, advertise ANY business non-profit or otherwise it infringes copyright under ‘passing off’. ie. If you showed it to someone and they identified it as Shrek and not just a green ogre then it’s clearly a copyright breach.

quote :

…You in fact reiterated my point on McDonald’s,
my point is its a banner going up for a month, in a worst case scenario and if you were producing them in volume you get a cease and desist order, not dragged off to the tower of London to be executed at dawn for making a likeness of a movie character.

month, year, 10minutes…makes sod-all difference. Getting a ‘cease & desist’ order is not a fun thing…a customer of mine got one after he insisted I used an emblem which resembled a certain fast food chain if they were both side by side…which he then passed them onto ME to agree an acceptable modification (minor adjustments), I did not appreciate being piggy in the middle.

quote :

Theres so much paranoia about this issue its untrue.
I had to do a T shirt for someone saying in green “shrek on tour”
no likeness just green words, should I not have done that as it would be seen as copyright infringement?

Legally…probably not.

quote :

Its a tricky decision at the end of the day, do you just make the banner and worry about if anyone says anything (unlikely) or not make it and see your customer go to the next guy down the road who will.
I dont print so never have this problem, but I wouldnt worry about it if I did.
they arent being mass produced its one banner, with a picture of shrek on.

If anything like Microsoft or Disney – they don’t look at how may you HAVE done…it’s how many they estimate you have done…and a ridiculous fine for EACH infringement.

quote :

The irony of all this is the amount of times I see brands of the world mentioned on this site, every single one either trademarked or copyrighted but still people ask.

Very often to specifically advertise a product for a retailer. If Pixar approached me, sure I’ll print a Shrek…

This is the very reason I / we don’t print ANY blinds / banners with football logos, cartoon characters, pop stars. (And lost £££s in the process by refusing). Just ONE court summons from Man United / Disney could sink any business! It goes FAR beyond a cease & desist when they make revenue from the image – that also piracy & fees for lost revenue.

quote :

End of the day theres only one person to make this decision eh.

True. I’m all in favour of making a few quid, and will do favours for ‘friends & family’ but absolutely nothing commercial. Making £100 on the job will pale into insignificance…

[Peter Normington]

Steve, the issue is whether or not Lorraine should use the image to promote her business,
Now, if the local competitors saw it they may feel she was using the image to gain a commercial advantage, and so report her. I dont know if they would or not. The big pub chains pay out big money on advertising, and if using copyright or trademarks, pay for doing so.
Your average punter isn’t really bothered, but if my local competitors started using a movie character to promote their business, I may just want to know if they had permission to do so.

Peter

[Berkay]

babes,
what NIKE use to say?
JUST DO IT !!

[John Childs]

quote Steve Underhill:

The irony of all this is the amount of times I see brands of the world mentioned on this site, every single one either trademarked or copyrighted but still people ask.

There are plenty of legal uses for stuff downloaded from BOTW. I get logos from there all the time, but they only ever get used on work for the original copyright holder, or someone else who is licensed to use it.

On the same tack, some logos digitised by me are on a well known logo collection disk. It is perfectly acceptable for any of you to use one of those logos if you get a call from a bodyshop to repair an accident damaged van for that company, but it you use that same logo to promote your own business then you could get into trouble.

Lynn, I think that what you (or rather Geoff) want to do is legally wrong. However, taking a commercial decision on whether you would get caught, or the dangers of whatever action the copyright holder might take, is down to you alone. Do you feel lucky? 😀

[Steve Underhill]

If I misread then oops.

To promote a business I would have said no, you cant use a corporate image of another firm to promote yours, but I just thought it was putting shreks face onto a banner to advertise a party, which I wouldnt be worried about in the slightest if the customer supplied the image.

[Peter Shaw]

You’re probably right. In this case no-one will give a damn but….

Most printers incorporate a clause in their terms & conditions to cover this. Here is an example:

18. Illegal matter
(a) The company shall not be required to print any matter which in his opinion is or may be of an illegal or libellous nature or an infringement of the proprietary or other rights of any third party.
(b) The company shall be indemnified by the customer in respect of any claims, costs and expenses arising out of any libellous matter or any infringement of copyright, patent, design or of any other proprietary or personal rights contained in any material printed for the customer. The indemnity shall include (without limitation) any amounts paid on a lawyer’s advice in settlement of any claim that any matter is libellous or such an infringement.

If the customer is aware of this, there should be little problem legally for the signmaker.

Peter

[Steve Underhill]

Seems like a minefield.
best to get the customer to say they bought it at a car boot or something and it just so happened to have the name of the business on, lucky that.
Just out of interest though what If I wanted to do a painting of Ronald Mcdonald and sell it, if it didnt have Mcdonalds on it its just a clown surely?
as people do stuff like that, maybe not him but they paint David Beckham and stuff or a well known band from a picture they have seen, Ive seen tons of paintings and stuff for sale like this and Im just curious as to how it would be enforced if somebody paints something from memory and not copies it directly.
Im just trying to understand better as I often get asked for stuff like band names and pictures and stuff but the customers bring the pics in, for all I know they could have taken the picture, surely there has to be a little
leeway

[David Rogers]

quote Steve Underhill:

…… Ive seen tons of paintings and stuff for sale like this and Im just curious as to how it would be enforced if somebody paints something from memory and not copies it directly.
Im just trying to understand better as I often get asked for stuff like band names and pictures and stuff but the customers bring the pics in, for all I know they could have taken the picture, surely there has to be a little
leeway

If the ‘artwork’ is a photograph, then the copyright is owned by the photographer. This applies to printing anything EXCEPT items, people or products that trade on that image. (Photo of a ‘branded’ image for business purposes.)

ie. I can’t take a photo of Beckham, Mickey Mouse or a Shrek billboard & put it on T-shirts or shop windows as a significant / relevant feature without the "subject’s" permission.

Capturing people or copyrighted imagery as part of a whole image (incidental inclusion) is permissible (but not to crop it to show mainly that portion).

Photography laws are a bit of a grey area – the law says one thing – but journalistic types obviously flaunt this ‘in public interest’.

About paintings etc. I know a few artist that have done portraits of famous individuals based loosely around sourced pictures and sell those. I doubt that the Elvis or Beatles estate lawyers will pay them a visit. BUT if you opened up a themed cheeseburger cafe & called it "Presley’s" with associated imagery…
(A local bar here was called ‘The Underground’ for many years & used the typical London Underground symbol – taken to court for "impersonating an underground station". http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/uk/227156.stm

[Peter Shaw]

quote :

Just out of interest though what If I wanted to do a painting of Ronald Mcdonald and sell it, if it didnt have Mcdonalds on it its just a clown surely?

If the painting is significantly identifiable as RM, then it is not just a clown. It is a painting of RM which belongs to Macdonalds. It has a value to them, represents their business and quality and is their property. Thus they are entitled to protect their business. If you go into business selling their property it is theft.

Reverse the process – if you came up with a symbol, graphic or logo to identify your business, would you be comfortable if someone else was to use it with the possible detriment to your business?

Peter

[Steve Underhill]

mayeb I didnt make my point clear about the clown.
Clowns look very alike, so how can Mcdonalds have the monopoly on a clown, Ronald Mcdonald looks very similar to a lot of childrens entertainers so they cant just say he looks too much like our clown and try and stop you doing it, hes got orange hair and a white face, IE an average clown.
If you copy it exactly sure, but the point Im trying to make and is being missed, is how close a resemblance does it have to be before people start whining about it being too similar to their product.
Does this mean a picture of a dog howling infringes parlaphone records?
or whoever it was,
I dont think so.

The other point being missed here is that Im not advocating copyright thest, I am just trying to get a picture of what is permissible, in the way of creating things.
If I get asked for a picture of a clown and I give it a white face and orange hair, thats surely my choice, mcdonalds dont own the colour orange or white do they.

Anyway its becoming a pointless thread now way off the original topic.
I dont do coyrighted stuff so I dont even care, I just think people panic too much about if their stuff looks too much like something else.
Like I said about the guy in a burger bar if he had a big yellow letter how can mcdonalds then try and make him take it down if its not a big yellow M?
The reason I keep using Mcdonalds as a reference is that I know they have done it to some Small burger bar in one uk town that didnt even have a Mcdonalds.

[David Rogers]

quote Steve Underhill:

mayeb I didnt make my point clear about the clown.
Clowns look very alike, so how can Mcdonalds have the monopoly on a clown, Ronald Mcdonald looks very similar to a lot of childrens entertainers so they cant just say he looks too much like our clown and try and stop you doing it, hes got orange hair and a white face, IE an average clown….

It’s not so much the clown aspect, it’s the association with a food retail outlet. Get a ‘clown’ for a clothes store or stationers – he could be 90% ‘RM’ but associate it with ANY of the other characters – stripey clad ‘thief’ and they’ll ‘have you’.

quote :

…If I get asked for a picture of a clown and I give it a white face and orange hair, thats surely my choice, mcdonalds dont own the colour orange or white do they.

No – nobody can copyright a signle colour – just as a series of colours as part of a design.

quote :

Anyway its becoming a pointless thread now way off the original topic.
I dont do coyrighted stuff so I dont even care, I just think people panic too much about if their stuff looks too much like something else.

Every trip to BOTW is a potential copyright infringement…some young lad want ‘pioneer’ slapped on his car…cafe sells ‘nescafe’ and wants an ‘A’ board…sell a nice piece of tribal art from a tattoo book for a livery… all belong to the rightful owner and used without explicit instructions & documentation.

quote :

Like I said about the guy in a burger bar if he had a big yellow letter how can mcdonalds then try and make him take it down if its not a big yellow M?
The reason I keep using Mcdonalds as a reference is that I know they have done it to some Small burger bar in one uk town that didnt even have a Mcdonalds.

Had the same near here (years ago) – one grocer used to do bacon rolls and traded as ‘McDonalds’ that being their name. They had been there for 20+ years…still ‘advised’ to cease trading as McDonalds or cease selling food products. (Lest someone say they bought it at McDonalds). It IS a form of bullying by the mighty fist of commerce – but also ‘just protecting their hard won image’ and identity.

[Steve Underhill]

makes good sense as always David.
I do hate big corporate bully boys though.
If you copy a tattoo design though that might be different, if the tattooist has bought the flash he can use it, my shop is right next door to a tattoo shop and once you have paid for the flash sheet you can reproduce the design and as far as I and the tattooist know there is no stipulation they have to go on skin.
So I wouldnt worry about that one, especially tribal designs as they are all very similar anwyay.
But easy enough to draw yourself.

[Warren Beard]

When McDonalds first opened in South Africa there was already a burger place with the name (different branding though) they also had it registered in SA so McDonalds had no choice but to buy them out, some small struggling patty turner became a millionaire over night 😮 Lucky bugger :lol1:

[Steve Underhill]

Lucky Burger.

[Warren Beard]

quote Steve Underhill:

Lucky Burger.

:lol1: That’s what I meant 😉

[Nick Minall]

The other thing is some one on the boards asked for some clip art not so long ago so a kind person posted some for them, only thing was it was part of a logo from BOTW, so be careful what you use!

Nick.

[Steve Underhill]

(mod-edit)

What did I say?

[Lorraine Clinch]

Hmmm… Can of worms eh?

[Steve Underhill]

No i joked about a T shirt I was making with a few "things"
on but it must have been against board rules even though it was a joke.

[John Childs]

quote Steve Underhill:

No i joked about a T shirt I was making with a few “things” on but it must have been against board rules even though it was a joke.

Never mind Steve. I’ll order one of your T shirts anyway. 😛

[Steve Underhill]

Ha Ha
thanks.
I actually have 2 brands of my own so don’t need to copy anyone else, knowing my luck it’ll be me that gets ripped off. 😕