Soda cans & bottles
Drogo Nazhur
Posts: 1,117
I'd like to see a 12oz Mountain Dew soda can and a 20oz Mountain Dew bottle preferable with the retro logo =
Post edited by Drogo Nazhur on
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Those would be protected by copyright and trademark
You have the logo right there, just retexture the can or bottle you want for personal use.
here is a logo https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/996e1615-0f83-4f11-bd6d-d484c9c526dc_1.b45487e7bef38e8c256075c9b3fd71c3.jpeg?odnHeight=768&odnWidth=768&odnBg=FFFFFF
and here is a free 3d can https://archive3d.net/?a=download&id=de66b572
Wouldn't they be happy about the free advertizing? M&M refused to be featured in ET and Reeces Peices was used and their sales skoyrocketed.
Thank you.
No. Companies want to project a certain image, random renders would not do that (especaailly the porn ones). Also, in the case of trademark, they have to protect it to keep it and the admin on doing that for general rendering would be overwhelming.
I see. Too bad. Too sad.
While we are on this topic, does this mean that I can't have my character drinking a can of Mountain Dew even if my story illustrations are completely free?
It would certainly be wise to avoid real brands, because if the owners do by soem chance see the story they are pretty much required to send a take-down notice.
Ah, this something near and dear to me! I thought I would add this set of articles which make for interesting reading:
In short, it is not illegal in a cut and dry way since fair use does allow some use of things like this but (a very big but) the owner of the trademark and copyright can dispute you with a good chance of winning and extracting financial penaties. The summation of best practices is to ask 1) do you need to show the retro logo for your artistic vision i.e. no other soda brand would do, 2) is it required that the viewer see the logo, 3) is it clear that there is no connection to the IP owner or damages the IP reputation i.e. you use the product as an indicator that the character is ignorant, poor, evil, or anything else the brand were prefer not to identified with, and 4) you have legal support ready. It is common knowledge that you can watch a movie or film and identify a character as a good guy if you see the unobscured logo on their Apple product since Apple won't licence their IP otherwise. I would have the character holding the can but obscuring the bulk of the label.
One important differencew, as I understand it, is incidental vs deliberate use - if soemthing is there and just caught in shot, and not the main focus of the image, it is incidental and potentially OK but deliberately placing something in the shot, especially if it is central to the image, is less liekly to be permissible. With 3D everything is a delibertae placement, especially if it is sought out for the purpose, and in this case the use of the particular design is clearly essential to the image.
The magic word is "potentially"; it all becomes a question of setting... you place the Mountain Dew can in a controversial scene just as set dressing, it may not be the focus but it is a deliberate choice of the the set dresser and prop master. The Mountain Dew people may not care but it is their prerogative to decide if they think it is an improper use. With what limited experience I have with IP, I would work on making sure that the specifity of the brand is actually needed or is it a short cut to make the scene more real so that you have the character holding a can that is the label is obscured but it looks like a recognizable brand rather than showing the actual label so that it is easily recognizable. If you actually have to use that particular product, make sure that the use is transformative (Andy Warhol and Campbell Soup cans) or fictional like Duff Beer in the Simpsons. It is not that are hard and fast rules of what you can and can't use and the assumption is that a company has the right to control its own IP. The assumption is that if you use IP without permission or licensing, it is either so unnoticeable that the owner never sees it or it is transformative.