datadriven — 2014-02-11T20:47:30-05:00 — #1
Am taking pictures of service trucks having trademark names on them, along with other objects, for example newstand machines with trademarks on their names, drop boxes, etc. They are the central objects within the frame & the main focus of the pictures being snapped.
Intend to put these up on information based websites - not licensing the pictures out.
Have heard that it's okay to do this if the pictures are taken with a "public vantage" whatever that means.
[I]Have seen many of these pictures taken on some of the photo bucket sites but that of course doesn't mean that they are abiding by rightful practices.
Is there a broad sense of what can be posted?[/I]
webcosmo — 2014-02-13T10:44:33-05:00 — #2
You can definately can take and post publicly pictures of outdoor life, having or not having trademarks on them. If someone should complain, you can take them off, no big fuss.
datadriven — 2014-03-11T00:06:08-04:00 — #3
Not necessarily, if you have 90 plus edited pictures you've went out and taken just for this purpose.
karl — 2014-03-11T09:07:39-04:00 — #4
Depends on the context and very much on the trademark holder. For example Transport For London (TFL) do not like their roundel being used anywhere in photographs. So much so any photo gallery/upload site these days will specifically prohibit such photos.
mikl — 2014-03-13T08:03:42-04:00 — #5
Interesting. Clearly TfL own the copyright of the roundel logo, and they clearly want to control how that's used. But are you suggesting they can legally prevent it from being depicted in photos of, say, London street scenes that happen to show buses or Underground stations? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I would be very surprised if that was true.
thereddevil — 2014-03-14T21:08:26-04:00 — #6
This is a complicated issue, which also depend on local law.
In general it mainly depend on the intended use of the photo (commercial or not), the content of the photo etc.
But, yea if the picture is for commercial use and/or the content of the photo is clearly the trademarked item, it could potentially become an issue if the owner decide to sue you. Though, I think Ive only heard about a few cases of this happening the last decade.
There is some more content about this here:
mikl — 2014-03-15T05:13:51-04:00 — #7
Well, in the scenario I described (a London street scene), the logo would not be the main item in the photo. The photo shows a street, that happens to have a bus in it, and the bus happens to have the logo on it. In other words, the logo just happens to be there. I agree that if you took a photo specifically of the logo - if the logo was the central part of the photo - that would be breach of copyright.
As far as your point about commercial use is concerned, I'm not aware of any provisions in copyright law that distinguish between copying for commercial use and copying for other purposes. In general, if you reproduce and re-publish any copyright material, you are in breach of the law, regardless whether you do so for "commercial use" or any thing else. (Of course, we are not talking about taking a photo purely for your own private amusement, which nobody else would see. The important point is the publication of the photo.)