Comments

Serena wrote on 3/29/2006, 3:06 AM
OK, nice one. But obviously I haven't been keeping up with current practice. I thought the idea of logos on clothing, cars, and everything was to advertise the manufacturer, so getting logos seen by as many people as possible would seem to be the aim of the game. People then want one like it, and the problem arises when a similar article is fraudulently identified by a counterfeit logo. Is this not the case?
Chienworks wrote on 3/29/2006, 3:39 AM
One would think that would be the case and i'm sure it really is.

I would guess that the pixellation is there for the benefit of the TV show producers rather than the owners of the logos. I think it's more along the lines of, "Well, Pepsi™ and Nike™ paid us for endorsements, so we'll let their logos through unmolested. Coke™, Adidas™, and the Colts™ didn't pay us anything, so we're not going to help them advertise and therefore we will obscure their logos."
vicmilt wrote on 3/29/2006, 3:57 AM
Nope -
the logos are trademarked and you can't show them without permission - which you will not get -
yeh - you'd think they'd want the logos to be seen as much as possible - you'd be wrong.
farss wrote on 3/29/2006, 4:24 AM
I'm not so certain that's entirely correct, trademarks as far as I know aren't copyright. I've seen plenty of commercials that use a competitors trademark when they're saying our product is better. I'm certain the competitor would stop them if they had a legal way to do so.

As far as I'm aware I can have talent in my movie drinking Coke with their trademark clearly visible. What I can't do is sell my own brand of soft drink with Coke's logo on it or any logo that a consummer might confuse with Coke's.

Bob.
PeterWright wrote on 3/29/2006, 5:43 AM
I think maybe Camel were the first ones to make people pay for advertising their product on customers' t-shirts.

Many decades ago, I used to mix mortar for a bricklaying uncle, and I remember the first time he saw me with a logo on my chest. He said (Welsh accent) "Oh - got clothes with a message have you?"

Patryk Rebisz wrote on 3/29/2006, 6:07 AM
I think for the most part showing logos will pass without problems -- the thing is that most networks don't want to give any free air time to any company so they will force the producersto blur out the logos not beacause of fear of the lawsuits but because of their greed.

Just watched a show where the producers decided to put gaffers tape all over the logos -- what a silly sigh watching people walking around with tons of tape around -- oh the funny times we are living in....
TheHappyFriar wrote on 3/29/2006, 6:27 AM
don't know if it's illegal or not but I do know that if a company doesn't want their logo in a certain situation because they feel it would dammage their "reputation" & sue people.

All about the $$. :)
Serena wrote on 3/29/2006, 1:32 PM
Yes, I guess the situation in which the logo appears is the crux of the matter, so far as the owners are concerned. If the logo is worn by people potential customers are unlikely to see as role models (eg participants in reality shows), then the "me want one too" could become "wouldn't be seen dead wearing that".