DSF

P

Celebraties are another grey area apparantly you can quite happily take a photo of justin beiber and then use this on a mug i would think you can not advertise it as a justin beiber mug because the name is a trademark so you would be in breach but you can use your own picture and advertise it as a really annoying jumped up little shit mug or a popstar mug if you wanna be more pc

Think you might be wrong about this, Bieber's likeness would also be protected.

gorgall2;78803 wrote:P
Think you might be wrong about this, Bieber's likeness would also be protected.

as far as im aware and i probably am wrong but a likeness can not be protected by copyright if this were the case no photographer would be able to reproduce their own photographs of him this would include the press i cant honestly see beiber being able to sue each and every news agency for printing newspapers with a photo of the lovly lad in

Apparently, there is no right to privacy in the UK, which is the law they use in the US. But there are other ways of stopping you and taking lots of your money
http://www.bristows.com/articles/unauth ... d-tom-ohta

What i got from that link was pretty much what is being discussed in this thread . The judge in that case appears to be saying that rihanna has won her claim on that occasion but it doesnt mean she has the right to in effect copyright her image which to be honest is clear as mudin essance you are right and so am i. How both sides of an argument can be right in law is beyond me but thats what that case is suggesting.
Personally and as an ex union official im pretty good at building an argument and a case i would argue that if its illegal tomput a celebs face on a shirt and profit from this then it must therefore be illegal to have the image of a celeb in a news paper as newspapers would profit from this.
This of course would be counter productive to the enhancement of a celebs career as lets face it celebd depend a lot on publicity and as the saying goes theres no such thing as bad publicity.
I do think a lot of clebs want it all ways they are quite happy to be plastered over the front pages when their new film or cd is out. Not quite so happy to be published in a drunken state

I believe in the case of newspapers, it's loosely classed as public interest.

Straight from the jumped up gob sh**e's mouth... well their management company who I work for

You CAN NOT sell a mug (for example) with the title JUSTIN BEIBER MUG
You CAN sell a mug (for example) with the title MUG WITH PHOTO OF JUSTIN BEIBER and you MUST label as NOT OFFICIAL

But there are other considerations. Where you get the photograph is absolutely key...

you CAN NOT use a photograph taken at a concert venue as they are protected under the venue copyright and Justin's own copyright. This is WORLDWIDE
you CAN NOT use a photograph purchased from a stock library as they are for "news" items ONLY and will not be licensed for resale/profit
you CAN use one of your photographs taken of him in a public place

Also

You CAN NOT use a font or logo associated with JB's own merchandise

socialgiraffe;78825 wrote:Straight from the jumped up gob sh**e's mouth... well their management company who I work for

You CAN NOT sell a mug (for example) with the title JUSTIN BEIBER MUG
You CAN sell a mug (for example) with the title MUG WITH PHOTO OF JUSTIN BEIBER and you MUST label as NOT OFFICIAL

But there are other considerations. Where you get the photograph is absolutely key...

you CAN NOT use a photograph taken at a concert venue as they are protected under the venue copyright and Justin's own copyright. This is WORLDWIDE
you CAN NOT use a photograph purchased from a stock library as they are for "news" items ONLY and will not be licensed for resale/profit
you CAN use one of your photographs taken of him in a public place

Also

You CAN NOT use a font or logo associated with JB's own merchandise

As i said mine field !!!!

Thanks for posting that Simon (Now I know how to do it I gave you a reputation point) - I have copied that and printed it off. Useful post indeed.

socialgiraffe;78825 wrote: you CAN NOT use a photograph purchased from a stock library as they are for "news" items ONLY and will not be licensed for resale/profit

In general terms, not specifically photos of personalities, you can license images from stock libraries for print/profit purposes (in the way people on this forum would understand it) but the cost would be so prohibitively expensive you wouldn't go though with it.

In general terms, not specifically photos of personalities, you can license images from stock libraries for print/profit purposes (in the way people on this forum would understand it) but the cost would be so prohibitively expensive you wouldn't go though with it.

You are correct Pisquee and I was very much generalising on that point.