Copyright Infringement?

[ChrisAdval]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it copyright infringement if you're not using photos for non-commercial use? i.e. product photography, I've made product photography photos for portfolio purpose only (public/private/print/online). Would this be considered a copyright infringement at all? In another example, would any photos that are used to be sold in case of stock portraiture, would I need a license agreement to use the clothing even if no logos are visible? i.e. clothing designers, etc?

[graciousness]

Originally Posted by ChrisAdval

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it copyright infringement if you're not using photos for non-commercial use? i.e. product photography, I've made product photography photos for portfolio purpose only (public/private/print/online). Would this be considered a copyright infringement at all? In another example, would any photos that are used to be sold in case of stock portraiture, would I need a license agreement to use the clothing even if no logos are visible? i.e. clothing designers, etc?

Actually, for portfolio use and you are showing it publicly, this may be considered as advertising should someone contest you for it. You will need consent from the companies. It's not only about copyright, but also trademark as you need to get permission for any images that contain trademark logos/products. It's best not to use anything with visible brands just to be safe. If you must use them, however, don't show them anywhere in any public site. For private showings, you should be ok.

If you are selling any images with trademarked logs or brands, you need to get permission. Without a question. Doesn't matter where you sell it.

[andyw]

It is not about copyright it is about trademarks or trademarked items.

For portfolio purposes, nothing to worry about.

There is no permission required from anyone other than the model in the case of a general stock model shoot. People wear clothes, people take pictures of people wearing clothes. If we had to get permission from the clothing manufacturers (whether or not there logo showed) every time then there would a bit of a problem.

For stock it is best not to have logos showing on items within the main focal area of the shot as you would not know what the shots were going to be used for, but in general you do not need permission to publish pictures where the logos or trademarked items are not the main focus of the picture.

We would all be in the brown stuff if we did need that sort of permission.

[ChrisAdval]

Gotcha thanks guys!

If I were to shoot products and hide, remove the logos to reduce trouble with trademark Infringement, wouldn't I have the same issue if the design of the product is trademarked? especially if its a unique design/shape, etc.?

[BuddhaPi]

Originally Posted by ChrisAdval

Gotcha thanks guys!

If I were to shoot products and hide, remove the logos to reduce trouble with trademark Infringement, wouldn't I have the same issue if the design of the product is trademarked? especially if its a unique design/shape, etc.?

yes you would..be careful with anything trademarked as well as copyright.

Decision Tree Freshner Getty

[andyw]

Originally Posted by BuddhaPi

yes you would..be careful with anything trademarked as well as copyright.

Decision Tree Freshner Getty

Reading quickly through that case then yes there was a case. Because the photos of the actual product or very similar derivatives were being put up and suggesting they were air fresheners or deodorants etc.
This is one relevant sentence in the link "the Court finds plausible the allegation that a purchaser and/or user of Defendants’ images could be confused as to the source of origin of the images, believing incorrectly that “they originate from, are sponsored by, are approved by, or in someway are affiliated with Plaintiffs.”

In "normal" circumstances and again, depending on the prominence of the product in the shot, there is not normally a problem unless it is being used specifically to advertise a product similar to the one being depicted.

If you photograph a bunch of old style Coke bottles and use the image to advertise a "cola" then you will have an issue.

If there are a bunch of old Coke bottles in the background of a picture being used to advertise insurance services then there would not be an issue.

There are thousands of trademarked products filmed and photographed on a daily basis without issue.
It is all down to use and context.


a quick WIPO link http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en...icle_0010.html

[BecomeAPhotographer]

At the end of the day, unfortunately anyone can sue you for anything.

While none of us here are attorneys, it comes down to what you are using it for. A great resource on the web is "Photo Attorney". She is a photographer & attorney who also represents photographers' interests. I highly recommend her blog and the articles she shares. It is very practical advice.

Take care,
Aaron @ Become A Photographer