21

As far as I am aware both these answers are incorrect, but as I am not a lawyer let me quote the World Intellectual Property Organization (part of the UN): Photos of trademarks Unlike copyright law, trademark law as such does not restrict the use of a trademark in a photograph. What it does forbid is the use of a trademark in a way that can cause confusion ...


19

There's nothing in trademark law or copyright law that required the removal of this logo before the campaign could use the photograph. The campaign probably does not want to deal with the possible perception that it is claiming endorsement by the company whose logo it removed. Rather than publishing a disclaimer, they found it simpler to modify the ...


6

Under United States law: Using a trademark solely to refer to files compatible with a trademarked program would be allowed under the doctrine of nominative fair use. The Ninth Circuit sets out the three-part test for nominative fair use in New Kids on the Block v. New America Pub, 971 F.2d 302 (9th Cir. 1992): "[T]he product or service in question must ...


5

A Standard Operating Procedure Influenced by the Law I'm not a lawyer, but I do have years of experience in the graphic arts industry, and when you work in an industry were lawsuits are common, you need to know how to avoid those lawsuits without being a lawyer yourself. From the perspective of the graphic artist, a person can file a lawsuit against you for ...


4

The legal question is likelihood of confusion, in this case, confusion over the belief that the product is endorsed or affiliated with the "good vibe tribe" that holds that trademark. A wide variety of factual details could sway that one way or the other.


4

No Minor changes to trade marks are still the same trade mark.


3

Removing a logo, cropping the photo, or otherwise altering a photo is a "derivative work" of the original and would be a copyright violation if permission was not granted prior to use. There are no exceptions for presidential campaigns. The campaign though may be referring directly to the logo, which could be considered a separate copyrighted work, ...


2

Could they sue? Yes. "Node.js" is trademarked. Would they win? Almost certainly not. "Node.js" is just one of 424 trademarks registered with the USPTO that contains the word "node", and Joyent, Inc. was granted a very narrow set of goods and services that the trademark applies to, namely "downloadable computer software ...


2

Assuming it's this trademark: yes, you're screwed Video cameras and cameras for video conferencing; computer software for voice and video conferencing and data collaboration, none of the foregoing related to mobile phone software or remote surveillance This is a validly registered trademark with international coverage providing goods and services so ...


1

Many organizations CANNOT be seen endorsing candidates For instance a 501(C)(3) organization will have its non-profit status revoked if it is caught endorsing a candidate. (because that would be an end-run around the tax law making its donations tax deductible and political donations not tax deductible). Nonprofits are more widespread than you think. Many ...


1

Yes Trademarks that are "deceptively similar" to another trademark are infringing. In australia, s10 the the Trade Marks Act 1995 says: For the purposes of this Act, a trade mark is taken to be deceptively similar to another trade mark if it so nearly resembles that other trade mark that it is likely to deceive or cause confusion. Other ...


1

Currently, there are 21 barrelhouse Trademarks, 9 of them dead, 13 alive. Among them the following: OLE SMOKY BARRELHOUSE RESERVE - for liquor but not beer. THE BIG EASY BARRELHOUSE & BOTTLESHOP - Bar services BARRELHOUSE STANDARD ALE - beer BEST OF HANDS BREWERY & BARRELHOUSE PROUDLY ESTD. 2017 WEST SEATTLE WA - Bar services & Beer THE ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible