Forum Groups
  All forums
    Help & Feedback
      Questions
      Work in progress
      Finished Art
      Non-Max related
    Community
      Offtopic
      News
    Hardware
    Photography


Featured Threads
  inspiration alert!!!
(37 replies)
  Indespensible MaxScripts, Plugins and 3rd Party Tools
(37 replies)
  The allmighty FREE Resources Thread !
(17 replies)
  spam alert!!!
(4886 replies)
  Maxforums member photo gallery index
(114 replies)
  Maxforums Member Tutorials
(89 replies)
  three cheers to maxforums...
(240 replies)
  101 Things you didnt know in Max...
(198 replies)
  A Face tutorial from MDB101 :D
(95 replies)
  Maxforums.org Members Gallery
(516 replies)
  SON OF POST YOURSELF
(637 replies)
  Dub's Maxscript Tutorial Index
(119 replies)

Maxunderground news unavailable

 
First page  Go to the previous page   [01]  [02]  Go to the next page  Last page
 
associated brand usage?
show user profile  STRAT
suggestions please?

in my roomset imagery i frequently use props like Molton Brown, Kiehl's, Jo Malone etc etc. named famous branded items. These props are purely modeled by myself, but i use their official company branding to texture them. my roomsets then appear on my own clients public marketing literature.

strictly speaking by the law i appreciate this is probably not entirely legal without prior agreement and permission from all parties concerned, but sometimes this isnt possible.

so, what ideas for alternatives would you suggest?

for instance, just changing a logo letter or font or colour isnt going to solve my issues, legally. it's a grey area. also, i dont have time to 'invent' and create all my own prop brands when i need too.

what do you think?





SJLEWORTHY.COM











read 808 times
4/13/2015 3:51:48 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 3:55:18 PM)
show user profile  BishBashRoss
I'd use nice refillable containers in their place. Often with recognisable designs (for cars for instance) I've had to change them up a fair amount to meet an agencies legal department requirements (for advertising use).

It is a dodgy/grey area for sure.

My advice is to err on the side of caution and leave them out. Or contact the brands themselves and see what they say.





read 794 times
4/13/2015 4:02:34 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 4:02:34 PM)
show user profile  STRAT
i notice people like Evermotion change individual letters in official branded names, but in court dont think thats going to cut it these days, depending on the judge, or what kind of day hes had, or how many hookers he's scorned for instance.

in the olden days there wasnt an issue, but these days everyone wants a pound of flesh.





SJLEWORTHY.COM











read 792 times
4/13/2015 4:05:32 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 4:06:22 PM)
show user profile  BishBashRoss
Yeah. Brand is so important these days, particularly with those that you've mentioned. You can't really blame them for wanting to remain completely in control of how they are presented or perceived. I think it's much more about that than trying make a few quid in court.





read 786 times
4/13/2015 4:13:03 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 4:13:03 PM)
show user profile  ScotlandDave
I think even turbosquid now require models to be flagged if they are clearly based on or similar to an existing design..

You'd think a designer or company would be happy to have their products being effectively marketed for them, but on the flipside of that you are using their IP to help sell someone else's product..

My guess would be, if its quite high profile then take a step back or use the old 'if its 20% different its fair game'..


Website | Blog | Contact | Vimeo

read 779 times
4/13/2015 4:29:26 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 4:29:26 PM)
show user profile  BishBashRoss
"You'd think a designer or company would be happy to have their products being effectively marketed for them"

But it's also about choosing which products or brands you want your product to be associated with. There are lots of reasons you might not want to be associated with a certain brand.





read 773 times
4/13/2015 4:37:13 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 4:37:13 PM)
show user profile  STRAT


one of Evermotion's re-hashes





SJLEWORTHY.COM











read 764 times
4/13/2015 5:00:05 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 5:00:05 PM)
show user profile  Nik Clark
Ah, the prancing goat.





read 758 times
4/13/2015 5:12:00 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 5:12:00 PM)
show user profile  BishBashRoss
Wow that is rank. Who buys that shit?





read 756 times
4/13/2015 5:13:10 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 5:13:10 PM)
show user profile  mike_renouf
I prefer Hugo Bross.




read 736 times
4/13/2015 6:03:52 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 6:03:52 PM)
show user profile  ScotlandDave
Yeah completely agree Bishbash, certain amount of damage control not associating with certain brands, which is exactly why the law will be on the side of the product owners..

With the evermotion thing above, surprising they even get away with that tbh. But in saying that, there are plenty of 'very similar' products being sold in highstreet stores and elsewhere, that are blatant ripoffs, and they obviously get away with it ( although maybe not indefinitely ).

Here's a model i looked at when researching the Chesterfield sofa i created in C4D. It is an example of a model on turbosquid where they declare that it is 'associated with' a known product, and that editorial uses are allowed but extended uses may require clearance:

http://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/maya-photorealistic-chester-sofa/673686




Website | Blog | Contact | Vimeo

read 732 times
4/13/2015 6:14:59 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 6:14:59 PM)
show user profile  BishBashRoss
That's pretty interesting. I thought classic designs like that were out of copyright and that's why you see so many cheap knockoffs about. I think with design, copyright is only 25 years or there abouts.





read 723 times
4/13/2015 6:32:20 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 6:41:09 PM)
show user profile  Garp
Just noticing that Ferrari's logo is a ripoff of Colt's (the firearm manufacturer).






read 717 times
4/13/2015 6:57:55 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 7:02:07 PM)
show user profile  chillywilson
I would change it around almost to the point of parody.
If you can claim parody you should be safe.

Just changing a letter or number is usually not enough.

read 711 times
4/13/2015 7:07:19 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 7:07:19 PM)
show user profile  LionDebt
While it does add a level of realism to your bathrooms or kitchens having nice Molton Brown or other "recogniseable" products dotted around the place... I can't help but get that cringey "product placement" feeling that you see in films (y'know, the centershot, slightly out of focus apple logo on a laptop, the recogniseable red coloured can of popular carbonated softdrink...)

BBR hits nail on head: generic, refillable containers... Or if I had the (time / inclination / requirement / skill) I'd create a mockup branding (from my own CG/VFX identity/company/portfolio) and lather that on products in scenes I render. Shame(less) self promotion. And for situations where I can't do that, go generic.

Edit: But Strat, I was under the impression a lot of your renders are for catalogues? Surely then this issue of associated branding is put into the hands of the publisher/print house - let their offices source the permission(s) / agreement(s) for you :)
read 702 times
4/13/2015 11:28:41 PM (last edit: 4/13/2015 11:31:23 PM)
 
First page  Go to the previous page   [01]  [02]  Go to the next page  Last page
 
#Maxforums IRC
Open chat window


Support Maxforums.org