pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Swiss Knife used by iSyndica. Intellectual Property, no???  (Read 9264 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: June 08, 2010, 18:26 »
0
My first topic.

You see the ad here on top for iSyndica?
It is Swiss Knife.
It is allowed to use that picture for stock and ad? I thought Swiss Knife is like Eiffel Tower, etc. Very recognizable Intellectual Property. There is only one Swiss Knife.
Can someone correct me? Thank you.


« Reply #1 on: June 08, 2010, 18:52 »
0
almost 900 pictures on SS searching swiss knife!

« Reply #2 on: June 08, 2010, 19:20 »
0
almost 900 pictures on SS searching swiss knife!

Wow, now I am confused. They say you cannot use some products because they are unique and recognize, so they are Intellectual Property infringement. Like automobile luxury item because they make only that by the company.
I know there is no other product looking like Swiss Knife. So this is very confusing that they allow this and not the others. Same reason for computers and cell phone,etc. 
Really confusing now.

« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2010, 19:36 »
0
almost 900 pictures on SS searching swiss knife!

Wow, now I am confused. They say you cannot use some products because they are unique and recognize, so they are Intellectual Property infringement. Like automobile luxury item because they make only that by the company.
I know there is no other product looking like Swiss Knife. So this is very confusing that they allow this and not the others. Same reason for computers and cell phone,etc. 
Really confusing now.

I know what you are talking about, I got a few that were removed because of this...

I guess swiss knife is for NOW good to go.. :P

« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2010, 20:41 »
0
You see the ad here on top for iSyndica?
No. I use the Adblock Plus 1.2 addon in Firefox. I don't see any ads.

« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2010, 21:04 »
0
Don't think of every agency rule as law .. it's company policy. For example some sites will not take an image of a lego product ... however you can run into a cheap discount store and buy generic building blocks nearly identical to legos and these are technically ok to shoot .. but will all agencies accept your lego knock-off? No because their rules are company policy not law. Is it confusing .. LOL ummm yeah but that's microstock.

« Reply #6 on: June 09, 2010, 04:44 »
0
Well the Swiss Knife is a type of knife, similar to what the Swiss armed forces have. The term "Swiss Army Knife" is a trademark but, there are more manufacturers so the appearance of one probably isn't

« Reply #7 on: June 09, 2010, 06:55 »
0
Well the Swiss Knife is a type of knife, similar to what the Swiss armed forces have. The term "Swiss Army Knife" is a trademark but, there are more manufacturers so the appearance of one probably isn't

Plus the logo is removed and they changed the color to green, so maybe that's how it can fly by. I am certain there are Swiss army knife knockoffs. Sometimes they call them multi-purpose tools, not Swiss army knives.

« Reply #8 on: June 09, 2010, 08:07 »
0
I thought Swiss Knife is like Eiffel Tower, etc. Very recognizable Intellectual Property.

Just to get the facts straight: Eiffel tower is not copyrighted, the microstock sites are full of pictures of the Eiffel tower. (However the nighttime lights are copyrighted and an image of eiffel tower by night cannot be used commercially without permission)

« Reply #9 on: June 09, 2010, 08:09 »
0
Swiss Army Knife is a very old design, dating back to 1897.

The term "Swiss Army knife" is a registered trademark owned by Wenger S.A. and Victorinox A.G., longtime suppliers of knives to the Swiss Armed Forces.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Army_knife

« Reply #10 on: June 09, 2010, 09:43 »
0
But is not the purpose of Intellectual Propety because it is extremely recognizable?
Same like the problem with infringement of ad using Tom Waits copycat voice to be infringement?  Or a design that only is unique? like door of Ferrari, specific design of new computer Apple, ipod,etc?

Maybe like Perry say the design is old 1897 so trademark is no more. But I thought you can renew trademark registration.  Excuse for ignorance. It is because some time I get photos rejected by Istock for possible trademark infringement, so it is better we reject this image for the protection for everybody,.something like that.

« Reply #11 on: June 09, 2010, 09:52 »
0
"One of the main functions of a trademark is to prevent consumer confusion."

What comes into play, imo, is that iSyndica is not selling pocketknives.  There is no attempt at confusing people to buy a knife from IS instead of Swiss Army.

« Reply #12 on: June 09, 2010, 10:04 »
0
"One of the main functions of a trademark is to prevent consumer confusion."

What comes into play, imo, is that iSyndica is not selling pocketknives.  There is no attempt at confusing people to buy a knife from IS instead of Swiss Army.

Ha! good point. Thank you sjlocke.
So, if photo studio buy picture of man with camera or wedding shot from microstock or mid stock or any stock,
and use for photo ad it is misleading too?  Maybe some wedding photographers are using stock photos . But we have no control or no evidence of consumer confusion.
Other posible is interior decor from stock photo for ad,
or pretty girl for dating agency on internet. But I am sure it is being used for that already.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2010, 10:06 by lefty »

« Reply #13 on: June 09, 2010, 11:33 »
0
(clip) It is because some time I get photos rejected by Istock for possible trademark infringement, so it is better we reject this image for the protection for everybody,.something like that.

I have gotten trademark or copyright infringement rejects on IS before, and after doing a search for exactly the same thing, found many that had been accepted, both before and after mine. The rejects are not always consistent.

« Reply #14 on: June 09, 2010, 13:31 »
0
(clip) It is because some time I get photos rejected by Istock for possible trademark infringement, so it is better we reject this image for the protection for everybody,.something like that.

I have gotten trademark or copyright infringement rejects on IS before, and after doing a search for exactly the same thing, found many that had been accepted, both before and after mine. The rejects are not always consistent.

In IStock case, I think this is possible, cclapper. I read on site that IStock is in process of deleting many existing pictures due to trademark problem possibility. For this reason, I think many of these inconsistency will be removed.

RacePhoto

« Reply #15 on: June 09, 2010, 15:18 »
0
(clip) It is because some time I get photos rejected by Istock for possible trademark infringement, so it is better we reject this image for the protection for everybody,.something like that.


I have gotten trademark or copyright infringement rejects on IS before, and after doing a search for exactly the same thing, found many that had been accepted, both before and after mine. The rejects are not always consistent.


No really, you're the first one. (where's that sarcastic warning button when I need it?)  :)

When they started with the cars and removed many, rejected most and some people who didn't make the cut took a look, the IS portfolio is packed with single cars as the subject and all kinds of infringing images, according to their new rules. Now if we can do a simple search a year later and find all of these in minutes, why can't IS seem to find them? Small wonder that people squawk when they see the same thing for sale, that was removed or rejected.

The Hoffritz design is very specific and so is their quality. I did superficial research the other possibility that "Swiss Army Knife" is like Kleenex, escalator, aspirin, gramophone, linoleum and Scotch Tape. I did discover that Dry Ice and Roller Blade also lost they private rights because of common use.

Here's the answer:

The plaintiff, Forschner Group, is the United States distributor for one of the two Swiss companies which manufacture and supply to the Swiss Armed Forces the distinctive, red, multi-function pocket knives known throughout the world as "Swiss Army knives". Neither Swiss manufacturer has ever attempted to obtain trademark protection for the term "Swiss Army" for knives.

(more)

http://www.ladas.com/BULLETINS/1994/1194Bulletin/US_SwissArmyKnife.html

« Reply #16 on: June 09, 2010, 18:49 »
0
(However the nighttime lights are copyrighted and an image of eiffel tower by night cannot be used commercially without permission)
It's only the nighttime light show that is not allowed.


« Reply #17 on: June 10, 2010, 07:17 »
0
(However the nighttime lights are copyrighted and an image of eiffel tower by night cannot be used commercially without permission)
It's only the nighttime light show that is not allowed.

Thanks for correcting, that's what I thought also but wrote otherwise :)

« Reply #18 on: November 23, 2010, 12:27 »
0
"One of the main functions of a trademark is to prevent consumer confusion."

What comes into play, imo, is that iSyndica is not selling pocketknives.  There is no attempt at confusing people to buy a knife from IS instead of Swiss Army.

It might also be a question of whether a trademark is used to lend credibility to another brand's product/service. For example, if you used LEGO characters to demonstrate one person leaping off a bridge, another calling a suicide helpline and choosing not to as an advert for the helpline, I feel it would be unlikely that anyone might believe 'Don't Jump Line' would be selling LEGO, but they might well believe that LEGO endorses them, and also associate suicides with LEGO in a way the trademark owner might not wish for (since it's a child's toy).

It's more than simply suggesting that another company is selling the same product.

I haven't seen the ad, but if it doesn't show the trademarks (which could be the logo, the name, or even the shape/colour/function - depending on trademark application), then it's no problem.

It's also worth noting that some trademark owners are not as anal as others, and are quite happy for you to show their trademark so long as you do so in a way that does not denigrate their product. 

Incidentally, LEGO are well known for denying use of their products in advertising, so they make a good example here.  Legally, you MAY use photos of your LEGO products that you own (but not the packaging which includes their copyrighted designs, artwork and photos) to advertise anything you darn well pleasey,  so long as the photo is not taken in such a way as to overly emphasize the LEGO trademarks or draw specific attention to them in such a way as to encourage the idea that LEGO is in any way associated with your marketing/product/service.  It remains a tricky area, and is best avoided, IMHO.

With regard to Victorinox/Wenger - who knows when they might choose to be more aggressive in defence of their trademark?  Surely it's easier to avoid the situation. 

« Reply #19 on: November 23, 2010, 20:49 »
0
One funny rejection I got was when you zoomed in 300% to see a computer keyboard (at an extreme angle) you couldn't see the Microsoft logo on the Windows key, but from its position on the keyboard you could infer that those slightly visible, blurry, gray lines "must be" the logo.  Easy to remove, once they pointed it out to me, but I never would have found it otherwise.

In one series (of a completely unrelated subject) I removed the actual logos from the various places where they were found on the object, but because the object as a whole was identifiable, ONE of the shots was rejected, the others were accepted.  And there were other shots already in the database which were similar, and which used the company name to identify the product in the title, description and even in the keywords (they used an homonym for the company or product name).  It wasn't an Apple (computer) product, but it was as if they used "apple" as a keyword for a picture of a Mac or iPod.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
18 Replies
11908 Views
Last post September 15, 2011, 06:05
by ShadySue
9 Replies
5481 Views
Last post September 21, 2015, 12:46
by Tryingmybest
5 Replies
3729 Views
Last post September 24, 2015, 15:25
by MarcvsTvllivs
2 Replies
2817 Views
Last post January 03, 2016, 05:48
by suz7
4 Replies
2092 Views
Last post February 20, 2016, 09:02
by steheap

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle