Discussion: Trademarks and fine art prints

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/09/2009 09:35:11 PM · #1

I am currently involved in discussions about a picture of mine that has identifiable trademarks in it. Without going into the specifics of my case (because I really wouldn't be taking legal advice from the forum), I find it a pretty interesting area. Every case seems to be slightly different and none seems to entirely speak to me.

We have Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum, Inc. v. Gentile Productions, 134 F.3d 749 (6th Cir. 1998), which said the photographer could use the image of the R&R Hall of Fame. I couldn't tell whether it was being used as "fine art prints" or as posters or what. It also seemed to hinge partly on the fact that the building looked different from different angles (and thus the photographer did not infringe on the exact trademark).

We have a similar issue with the Space Needle and a commercial ad.

Finally I found this: ETW Corp. v. JIREH Publishing, Inc., 332 F.3d 915 (6th Cir. 2003). ETW is the Tiger Woodâ��s case where the publisher distributed limited edition fine art prints of Tiger Woods. The court in ETW made it clear that First Amendment freedom of expression trumps publicity rights when the work is an original or true limited edition fine art. If they were talking about coffee mugs and t-shirts, a different decision would have been rendered.

It's a hard situation because you never know whether putting out the expense of some initial legal advice will pay off and the law is sufficiently complicated that it's probably exclusively the domain of trademark lawyers.

Thoughts?

Message edited by author 2009-12-09 21:36:55.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

12/10/2009 01:18:59 AM · #2

Check out that array of satellite dishes on the building in the foreground!

I think you are getting involved enough in the commercial end of photography to invest in Bert Krages' Legal Handbook for Photographers, which will probably address this and many other of your questions. (See, I didn't even mention Nolo Press!)

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

12/10/2009 01:47:02 AM · #3

Trademarks in Photographs & update to the case mentioned in the article.

Message edited by author 2009-12-10 01:48:57.

12/10/2009 01:51:01 AM · #4

Originally posted by yanko:

Trademarks in Photographs & update to the case mentioned in the article.

Incidently, I found the outcome of that case. The artist won, but it seemed interesting in that really he hadn't painted many of the logos, but did include the uniforms of the football team or band (forget which). That wasn't enough in the court's eyes to infringe.

linky

12/10/2009 01:51:14 AM · #5

Ha, you beat me to it. I found that case to be pertinent, but not completely. I may read the actual opinion and see what it holds.

Message edited by author 2009-12-10 01:51:56.

12/10/2009 01:54:43 AM · #6

Originally posted by GeneralE:

I've always understood the law to allow sale of images containing trademarks, copyrighted structures, or identifiable persons as individual "fine art" prints, but not as bulk-produced items, for commercial use (e.g. ads), or as stock images, unless you obtain a signed model or property release.

You can sell your framed print of the Space Needle, but not turn it into a postcard or use it in an ad. You can also post it here for "educational" use ... ;-)

Check out that array of satellite dishes on the building in the foreground!

I think you are getting involved enough in the commercial end of photography to invest in Bert Krages' Legal Handbook for Photographers, which will probably address this and many other of your questions. (See, I didn't even mention Nolo Press!)

Thanks Paul! My library actually has a copy. I'm gonna check it out.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/10/2009 01:38:31 PM · #7

Hey Paul, I've got a copy of the book in my hands and am devouring it as we speak. Interesting stuff in general.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

12/10/2009 02:15:57 PM · #8

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

..am devouring it as we speak.

Aren't you finding it a little "dry?" Well at least you'll get plenty of fiber! ;-)

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Interesting stuff in general.

Or rather, interesting thanks to the General!

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

12/10/2009 02:27:39 PM · #9

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

My library actually has a copy.

Bah, neither of the libraries close to me has it ... :-(