For example, if I manufacture mouse for Apple computer, can I advertisement that my mouse is for Apple computer? That is, use the Apple name in my advertisement.

Can Apple prevent me from saying that "my product is for Apple computer"? If that is the case then how can I tell the customer that my product is for Apple computer?


Juristiction has alot to do with this - some countries might say you are infringing, some not.

The law for the most part is there to prevent ill intent - thus, so long as you don't market yourself, your business or your product as having a special relationship with Apple (or whoever) then photo usage could be considered acceptable under fair use. If your mouse took up 5% of the photo and your Apple or other branded products took up 95% of the photo, or you plastered the Apple logo everywhere, then you are leaning a little heavy on the wrong side of the law.

You need be careful of your wording - unless you have Apples endorsements, you should say something like "works on Apple devices" not "approved by Apple".

Newspapers, TV shows don't always pay for brand promotion yet they could well feature brands without the manufacturers permission. This is permitted because the product is not the message but is at best the side salad to a main course.

Sometimes an exact copy of something is not required for you to be considered to be infringing someone else's protection. Think of Samsung's war with Apple where Apple argued Samsung purposely designed their hardware to look like (early versions of) iPad and iPhone. Courts in various countries both agreed and disagreed on this as some folks seen similarity and thus infringement, while others were clear they were different products.

So whatever you do, don't try bend the rules but instead ask yourself what the average joe out there would think - if they misunderstand the message your photo/design/words carry, then you are likely to be upsetting someone who will be in touch. They might argue it in court, they might win, they might not. You just got to ask yourself if its worth the hassle.

  • 1
    Fair use is a copyright concept - the risk here is primarily trade mark infringement for which fair use is not a defence – Dale M Sep 18 '16 at 21:48
  • 1
    True, but I purposely avoided using copyright, trademark or patent and instead explain that laws and infringing on someone's rights has more to do with the intent or interpretation of usage. An image can be used so long as it does not imply an endorsement. Similarly, there are other protections aside from images that have exceptions to their protection, and those exceptions can be triggered when a special relationship is not implied. My intent was to explain a general understanding on how the law is applied to give the reader an understanding on how to consider their situation. – fiprojects Sep 19 '16 at 11:29
  • a copyrighted image cannot be used without permission or without fair use protection regardless – Dale M Sep 19 '16 at 22:32
  • So when the Financial Times writes a story and uses an product image or logo of GE, HP, DELL or others, they are infringing the law? – fiprojects Sep 21 '16 at 16:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.