Restrictions on selling photos of cars/bikes?

NikonsandVstroms

Is there any restriction on selling images with the primary focus being a motorcycle/branding from a certain company?

I know it has been done a lot, I just would like to avoid any possible headaches.

vintagemxr

NikonsandVstroms wrote: »

Is there any restriction on selling images with the primary focus being a motorcycle/branding from a certain company?

I know it has been done a lot, I just would like to avoid any possible headaches.

My wife does watercolor paintings and has had some success over the years selling her work. Our understanding is that Harley-Davidson is particularly fanatical about protecting it's name and logos against unlicensed commercial use, hence, she's only done one Harley painting and it still hangs in our living room.

Amongst the car companies, my old employer, Volkswagen, is well known for defending their trademarks even sometimes going after obscure bloggers for "misuse" of the VW logo. I know some years ago VW used legal department interns just to browse the web looking for misuse of the company logo.

One could make the case that a logo isn't the primary focus of the photo but when a "little guy" gets too prominent and gets a cease and desist letter from a multi-national corporation it's pretty much an automatic win for the people with the deep pockets and a corporate legal department.

Doug

promoguy

General Motors is very protective of their brand. As someone already mentioned don't even think about getting anything close to like HD. Oh and on a side note, if you're doing this for an auto franchise dealership they in almost all cases have no right for individual use of the manufacturer logo/trademark.

NikonsandVstroms

The logo is a key feature in the image for sure so I'll hold on this one:



The other issue, beyond the logo is I know someone with a few Ferrari's and was going to do a couple "car porn" shots. Is the vehicle alright to use as long as the logo is not the key feature?

Something along the lines of this:

promoguy

All manufacturers have a licensing department or a company that handles licensing. For example, some universities handle their own but a majority use the services of Collegiate Licensing Corp. You are better off calling and finding out how these issues are handled. There are those out there that will tell you, oh don't worry about it. Well, you don't have to worry about it if you don't have any serious assets, but otherwise it is best to be safe. I have a promotional products company and am very cautious when a client asks me to reproduce an imprint that I suspect they do not have the right to use. Oh, and bottom line, if you're client says it's okay, tell them to produce the 'OK' letter.

Angelo

NikonsandVstroms wrote: »

Is there any restriction on selling images with the primary focus being a motorcycle/branding from a certain company?

Selling to whom?


.

Glort

Go to any race track.
All the cars are covered in branding and there are truckloads of photographers shooting them. You don't think the companies require every pic with their car ( logo) in it to be approved in where it ends up and how it can be used do you?

I have shot heaps of top level, national series races and no one ever asked me to hand over my card before I left to check and approve my images.

Remember, when you ask a question on forums you will always get the most ultra conservative, legally safe beyond question, never get anything done replies.

Reality can often be very different.

RogersDA

Angelo wrote: »

Selling to whom?
.

Yeah - that and for what purpose?

I can take a photo of Ford's logo (or any logo) and essentially sell that to whomever I wanted.

However, I can neither use that Ford logo (or any logo) for any commercial advertisement, nor could I license that photo for any commercial advertisement. Note that displaying the photo on a personal SmugMug site is not "commercial advertising" per se as long as it is being sold for personal use and not for commercial use; e.g., the commercial digital downloads that SmugMug offers.

NikonsandVstroms

RogersDA wrote: »

Yeah - that and for what purpose?

I can take a photo of Ford's logo (or any logo) and essentially sell that to whomever I wanted.

However, I can neither use that Ford logo (or any logo) for any commercial advertisement, nor could I license that photo for any commercial advertisement. Note that displaying the photo on a personal SmugMug site is not "commercial advertising" per se as long as it is being sold for personal use and not for commercial use; e.g., the commercial digital downloads that SmugMug offers.

It would not be commercial downloads but possibly 10-50 prints realistically. A lot of the people who are interested in my overall work right now I have met through motorcycle and Ferrari circles and they have talked about interest in such shots.

The big thing I am wondering is I get that shot 1 some companies will care others wont (I have another reason to stay away from Harleys now ) but is the second one good to use?

BradfordBenn

Just remember when in serious doubt the value of the legal counsel one gets is often related to how much one pays for it. (Basically if you read it on the Internet for free it might not stand up in court.) If you are really concerned a 15 minute conversation with a lawyer can solve this question. You can show that you have done due diligence and limit your personal liability and if something really goes wrong there is the lawyer's insurance....

Now having said that, after being raised by lawyers (the modern equivalent of wolves), I would say that the motorcycle shot is a good example where the logo is not the focus and you are selling images of the bike not the logo. And if you are shooting the owner's car for their own enjoyment... you are being paid for your services not the logo since they already own the car. I think most companies are more worried about their brand image being diluted by improper usage rather than enthusiasts including it in their pictures.

I know from personal experience that BMW has been cracking down on motorcycle clubs using their logos improperly, it is not the issue of using the logo, it has been the issue of using the logo in the wrong way. So that if you are leaving it in tact on the item you should be following their guidelines.

But once again I am not an expert, I am just retelling what I know.

ImageX Photography

RogersDA wrote: »

Yeah - that and for what purpose?

I can take a photo of Ford's logo (or any logo) and essentially sell that to whomever I wanted.

However, I can neither use that Ford logo (or any logo) for any commercial advertisement, nor could I license that photo for any commercial advertisement. Note that displaying the photo on a personal SmugMug site is not "commercial advertising" per se as long as it is being sold for personal use and not for commercial use; e.g., the commercial digital downloads that SmugMug offers.

This post says how it is.

Angelo

FactoryPhil wrote: »

I would think that if it were not a big deal, the logos would appear on the cereal boxes that are siting on the table while your favorite sitcom actor is doing a skit on TV.

So far, I have not seen any logos on the products, just taped over or blurred out images.

To me, that tells me all I need to know :ivar

product placement and implied endorsement still fall under "commercial use" and are quite different than selling individual prints.