legal question

[Stan35mm]

I want to print and sell a calendar to a close-focused group of people (Canada, US, world).
(German) car pictures, and the car name is going to be used in it. Do I need to get the car manufacturer's permit to do it?
Are car names, etc. copyrighted?
This is the first time I'm trying to sell pictures, and I don't want to end up being sued...
Thanks, Stan

[mvrekum]

The short answer: YES

You are, or are about to, sell pictures of what is called "intelectual property" of someone else or simply anything man-made that is not made by you. That includes cars, brand names, logos etc.

So, make a picture of the car, send it to the manufacturer, explain what you want to use it for (calendar, number of copies, intended audiance) and ask permission to use it. File the letter of permission and you are in the clear.
When the calender is finished, send each manufacturer a copy.

Good luck,
Martin

[Stan35mm]

thanks for the reply.
it's not the answer I hoped for, as it may kill my little project.
I wonder what is the source of your knowledge, and if there are variations of this interpretation throughout the world.
Naively thinking (apparently wrong), I expected that the manufacturer would sell the cars with "all rights" included. I thought one could use a car (or its image) for any purpose. The exception would be patented issues.

[stopbath]

I think your fine to use an image of a car for editorial purposes, but for profit endeavours I would follow Martins tact. Better safe then sorry (especially for current model cars.)

The producers of consumer goods don't want photos sullying their product. It's all a matter of preception. If the customer can preceive the image in a good light, the car is in a good light...

I don't see how getting an OK letter from car makers would kill the project. It's only paper work. You might want to get an ok from them before you even shoot. Send them a nice letter with a few samples of previous photos, and say here's a sample of my work, I plan on this and this, and here is a reply form and return envelope, thanks. Use a reply form and return envelop to ensure speedy replies. Giving them the option of final proof might help too.

You say you want to avoid a lawsuit. This should do it...

If you do pick up the ire of an auto maker, you're at their mercy, they have more money for lawers...

[TeraGram93013]

I wonder what is the source of your knowledge, and if there are variations of this interpretation throughout the world.

Well of COURSE there are.

The fact, however, is that you're in Canada and the laws there are probably the laws you need to follow the most closely.

Let's talk about an extreme example...

... the law in Canada is probably such that it is ok for you to take and sell photos of an adult nude woman (assuming you have her consent and cooperation), posed in a relaxed if not artistic manner and draped suggestively with a silk scarf.

... in Abu Dhabi the rules are very different.

Now the question is, are you going to shoot pictures of your model there in Canada with a mind on the Canadian or Abu Dhabi laws?

I've just spent 30 minutes trying to figure out Canadian Copyright Law to get a short answer for you, too.

Here's my short answer: the first reply you got was right on the money. Ask for permission. This is one of those times when begging forgiveness is NOT easier than gaining permission.

[Stan35mm]

OK, looks like it's a clear cut here - I need to get the permission.
It probably isn't that hard; I was just afraid that a big company wouldn't be overly interested in giving such permission, unless I paid some monetary fee. The catch is, the anticipated profit is a few hundred $, and this is not a meaningful amount for most companies
Thanks

[stopbath]

OK, looks like it's a clear cut here - I need to get the permission.
It probably isn't that hard; I was just afraid that a big company wouldn't be overly interested in giving such permission, unless I paid some monetary fee. The catch is, the anticipated profit is a few hundred $, and this is not a meaningful amount for most companies
Thanks
I don't see any reason for them to charge you (but I've been wrong before...) What you are proposing is actually an advertisement for them. They might even assist you in some way (provide cars to shoot, access to assembly lines...)

Have fun with the project.

[mvrekum]

I wonder what is the source of your knowledge, and if there are variations of this interpretation throughout the world.


The source of my knowledge is first of all article 23 of the netherlands copyright law, secondly a document from the dutch photographers federation about copyright, and the monthly photography magazine Focus for which I have a subscription. The last has been publishing copyright issues and court results for a few years.

Of course there are differences between countries, but basicly they are the same. The mayor problem is always: "What are you going to use the images for?" Now, for your project there are 2 mayor concerns:
- ... sell a calendar ...
- ... car pictures, and the car name is going to be used ...

So, you make money out of it. How much is of no concern.
And, you are going to use trademarks, car names, shapes, etc.

I got this little one from the BMW website:
Unless otherwise indicated, all trademarks on this Web site are subject to trademark rights of BMW AG, including marks, model names, logos, and emblems.


Ok, no company will sue you for publishing a picture of a car on the net. But if you sell pictures of there cars and make money out of something they created, then you are at their mercy.

So as I said in my first post, make your picture first. Send it with a detailed letter of your intentions to the car company and ask for permission. If you get it, you get permission for that image only and only for this one project. For another project or another image you have to go to the whole loop again.
Last but not least, mention the company(s) on a credit page and add a copyright line like "all trademarks are copyright of the respective company", or something like that.
When the project is finished send a calendar to the companies as prove that you respected their permission.
Only then you are clear to market your calendar.

Good luck with your project,
Martin

[Stan35mm]

Thanks guys,
Martin, this was a very elaborate response. Following your suggestions, I'll contact the company before attempting to sell it.
Stan

[teekay]

"...You are, or are about to, sell pictures of what is called "intelectual property" of someone else or simply anything man-made that is not made by you. That includes cars, brand names, logos etc."

I'm rather surprised at the unanimity of the answers here. If they are correct, where does it end?

Do you mean to say that if I take a photo of a house, a new office building, public art (e.g. a statue) or *any* man-made thing in a public place, and selling my own photo without permission of the makers of the thing, then that is technically illegal?

I think not! Seems to me that the photo I create and sell is the copyrighted newly created thing that is mine to do with what I wish - within reason.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Teekay,..

it's a rather simple deliniation in this case,..

The Car's name is copyrite protected,. the design is copyrite protected,. and the manufactureres name is as Trade Marked...

... your hypothetical house and possibly statue have none of the above...
Surely we can all understand the difference between "Ferrari" and "Frank's house" :)

So the subjects are not comparible.

[mvrekum]

Do you mean to say that if I take a photo of a house, a new office building, public art (e.g. a statue) or *any* man-made thing in a public place, and selling my own photo without permission of the makers of the thing, then that is technically illegal?

Technically, yes. But like CDS says, sujects are not comparible.

Suppose, you take a picture, frame it and hang it on a wall in an exposition. Now I pass by and take a picture of your picture and sell it. Now who is doing something illegal here?

I think you can answer the question yourself!

Martin

[TeraGram93013]

. Now I pass by and take a picture of your picture and sell it. Now who is doing something illegal here?


Oddly enough, if you're in the US, you're not doing anythying illegal.

There was a test case involving Ansel Adams where a woman took a photograph of one of his framed images on a wall and called it "art".

She prevailed in court.

[teekay]

"...The Car's name is copyrite protected,. the design is copyrite protected,. and the manufactureres name is as Trade Marked... "

If I take a series of photos of my own car in each month of the year in diffrerent settings and in snow and sun etc. and somehow make a funny calendar out of them to sell, do you guys still say I'd have to get the car makers permission?

[IndyJeff]

Stan as has already been stated and you agreed with, contact the company first by letter stating the purpose of using their car in the picture. Describe in detail the calender, the amount of distribution, and offer to send them a few copies if they will sign a release.

Good luck, and who knows they may like the calender and want to order some to distribute themselves.

[mvrekum]

This might be interesting to all of you asking the "IF" questions:

Travel Photography and the Law (http://www.photosecrets.com/p14.html)

and it contains some interesting links too.

Happy reading,
Martin

[stopbath]

"...The Car's name is copyrite protected,. the design is copyrite protected,. and the manufactureres name is as Trade Marked... "

If I take a series of photos of my own car in each month of the year in diffrerent settings and in snow and sun etc. and somehow make a funny calendar out of them to sell, do you guys still say I'd have to get the car makers permission?

It would be 'recommended.'

You could spend a few hours up front, and get their YES/NO. If they say NO, you've just saved yourself lawer costs, a printing run you couldn't sell, and maybe some damages costs....

If they say YES, you need not worry about anything...

If you don't get their blessing, and they have cause to halt your production, you could loose more than you would like...

As long as it's all in good taste, it's not likely they would try to clamp a cease and desist order on your publication, but who knows what's their definition of 'good taste'... (and what is funny to one may not be funny to another...)

Gotta remember, they are SELLING the car. If they 'perceive' they could loose sales, you'll hear about it.

[Jesper]

Do you mean to say that if I take a photo of a house, a new office building, public art (e.g. a statue) or *any* man-made thing in a public place, and selling my own photo without permission of the makers of the thing, then that is technically illegal?

I've read an article about the well-known opera building in Sydney (Australia) - people were taking photos of it and the architect wanted money from them because of the intellectual property rights.

So in principle, YES, I guess it's technically illegal if you sell photos of *any* man-made thing without the permission of the makers.

If you just make photos for yourself, and you don't sell them, there's probably no problem at all - but if you take photos for commercial purposes, things will get very different and you'll have a lot of things to deal with.

I was in a museum yesterday, I was invited for the opening of a new exhibition. I had my big fat 10D with me and someone came up to me to ask if I was taking photos just for myself or for commercial purposes. When I told her it was just for myself, it was OK.