# New To Printing, Concerned about Copyright laws..pls help



## princessok

Hi Everyone, 

I am confused as to some of the laws for copyright. I see hundreds of websites that sell for example t-shirts that say Ferrari on it or even have like a porsche logo on it. I am talking about websites and stores that have been operating for many years. I also see people selling hockey or football t-shirts/flags with the logo of the teams printed on it, how are these companies able to do this without breaking any copyright laws? I seriously doubt that they have recieved permission from all the teams, or car manufacturers to do so.

Pls can someone educate me better on this, i've tried searching the net and i believe they must have recieve permission.

Thanks


----------



## Jasonda

princessok said:


> how are these companies able to do this without breaking any copyright laws?


Unless they have permission (doubtful), they are breaking the law. Maybe they haven't been caught yet, or maybe they're already being sued. It's pretty simple, really.


----------



## Jasonda

ImageIt said:


> It is the person who uses the picture for a commercial purpose who is responsible.


Actually that's not entirely true. The company printing a copyrighted image can also be liable and at risk for being sued.

The Olympics are coming to Vancouver in a few years, and some people and companies here have tried to get us to print stuff featuring the rings or the official logo. Unless we have a signed document giving them permission, we won't print it. It's just too much of a risk.


----------



## bubba35

Very true Jasonda.And the Olympics are very stringent on their copyrights.They hit Atlanta with a vengance in '96.

It also depends on what you are using and selling.For example; if you print Sr. Class tshirts, and use a copyrighted logo, like an Absolute Bottle,probably no problem at all.Print the same bottle and sell in a retail location,you're asking for trouble.


----------



## princessok

Wow there soo much to consider, thank you all for your posts, it helped me a lot!


----------



## margiestubbs

I have a question..I am very new to this business so forgive me...I am an artist...I paint celebrities,and normal folks but I start with a photograph...from the web,ones my clients took or ones I took...I use the computer to distort themand change them to reflect my style of painting then I paint them...a friend of mine suggested I take the computer images and put them on T-shirts to sell for those who can not afford the painting...I ust built my sight...covered in my artwork from the photographs and relized...is it OK to use these images on a shirt to sell???
It is my artwork it takes me hours to tweak it in the computer to the way I like it..but the are celeb's..mostly dead but now I am about to do a new serieswith hip young stars and now I am afraid...Do I need a copyright for this???


----------



## wormil

That's a good question about celeb faces, one I've been wondering about myself.


----------



## sunnydayz

You cannot use a celebritys picture without there permission. It is illegal.


----------



## mrshadow

They are taking the pictures and selling their magazines with their faces...are they paying the celebs ? I don`t think so...


----------



## mystysue

magazines and tee shirts is like comparing apples to oranges they are not the same thing.. nor is the law anywhere near the same..

A good rule of thumb is that if you have to ask.. its prolly not ethical or legal..


----------



## mrshadow

I think you can print Sawyer in your t-shirt but you can`t use LOST...am I wrong ?


----------



## Jasonda

mrshadow said:


> I think you can print Sawyer in your t-shirt but you can`t use LOST...am I wrong ?


You can't use Sawyer or Lost.

See this thread for a similar discussion:

http://www.t-shirtforums.com/general-t-shirt-selling-discussion/t50010.html#post295081


----------



## mystysue

Good rule of thumb is this.. 
If it looks like a famous person.. - not legal
If its the name of a real person - not legal
If its a name of a character in a show that easy to reconize as it being refering to the show=== not legal
show name - not lega
saying easily reconized as being from a show or movie.. (example: Nobody puts baby in the corner, from dirty dancing) -- good chance its trademarked and Illegal..

willl they catch you.. You never know.. its really not worth the risk..


----------



## Girlzndollz

Basically, if someone else created it, you have to get a license to use it, or it has to be royalty free. Celebrities have the right to prevent someone else from making money off of their image. Copyright isn't an exact science. Alot goes into wether or not the copyright holder is defending their copyright.


----------



## mrshadow

but you can see everywhere the clebs faces. In t-shirt rap, hip hop artists, singers, celebs...
Everybody is paying to them ? I don`t think so.


----------



## Girlzndollz

There is no way to know unless you ask them. Some folks do have legitimate rights to printing. The main question one has to ask oneself is, "Do I have the legitimate right to print this?" If the answer is no, it's the person's own judgment call how to proceed from there. It's like my mother used to say, if everyone jumped off a bridge, would you do it, too? Sometimes our parents made sense. No one is telling anyone what to do or not to do. As far as I can see, people are just trying to explain what is and isn't allowed. What anyone does with that information is their own business. Using copyrighted or trademarked property opens one up to the risk of being hit with an infringment lawsuit, but the C or TM owner does have to initiate the action for it to happen. It's like any other risk people assume. It may not happen, but it could.


----------



## mrshadow

Yeah I understand your point and you are bery right.
But in one side there is a mass production and in other side a person who is a fan and print Sawyer or Jack Bauer on a t-shirt and sold just 5 tees...I know it`s still copyright issue but who cares about the person selling 10 tees...


----------



## jclynn67

Not sure on this ... but my thoughts on this is that they may buy the shirts already done and just reselling ... or buy the heat transfers from somewhere that has the permission already ... thus this would be legal in my opinion. You can buy from someone with permission as long as you are not printing them yourself just pressing them is my understanding atleast ... I may be wrong though ... please correct me if I am wrong!
Jody


----------



## mystysue

mrshadow said:


> Yeah I understand your point and you are bery right.
> But in one side there is a mass production and in other side a person who is a fan and print Sawyer or Jack Bauer on a t-shirt and sold just 5 tees...I know it`s still copyright issue but who cares about the person selling 10 tees...


 
The People that own the design care..
and if caught (and believe me little guys get caught too) they will go after you as much as they will the big guys.....

They can as much as not only take your stock.. but sue you.. and depending on what it is your are printing.. take your equipment and close you down..

Is it worth it.. to make the little bit you do on counterfit designs..


----------



## sunnydayz

You are right there are people who sell shirts with celebritys images on them and they are breaking the law and they may or may not get caught. Media has different rules and they are allowed to take pics and publish them. However for tshirt printers you have what is called the right to privacy of these people and it is against the law for you to print their pictures without their permission.


----------



## jclynn67

I was talking about the NFL and such ... and ordering transfers from like Pro World and others that have the permission to print them ... not printing them myself. That is how I would assume alot of them are doing it and the only legal way to sell them. I have purchased from ProWorld transfers and pressed them and that is legal for me to resell them ... not legal if I was to print them myself and resell them. Correct???


----------



## DAGuide

TV, newspapers and magazines can publish pictures of famous celebs without their permission under the "newsworthy" exception of the right to privacy since these people are considered "public figures". I just taught this in my Business Law I class two week ago. The problem with t-shirts, license plates and other items is it does not fall into this exception. Thus, you need to have permission to do it legally.

As far as the statement there is no real harm for the person that just prints 10 shirts, that is the wrong way to look at it. Look at it from the stance that you have a copyrighted design. Would you be upset if someone that your rights to that design and uses it without your permission and does not pay you for it? Sure, so what is the difference.

Business is all about risk vs. rewards. It is just important to understand that the risk of getting caught might be low, but the penalty if you get caught can be very high depending on how aggressive the rightful owner is (i.e. Disney, John Deer, Harley Davidson,... they are very aggressive). Bottom line - there are plenty of other ways to make money from that for most people...it is not worth it.

Just my opinion.

Mark


----------



## raise

Semi old thread but I have another copyright question to add to this.

Employees of a large corporate entity are asking to personalize their uniforms (single color t-shirt or polo shirt) with the company logo.

As they are employees, am I allowed to add the logo to their clothes for them?


----------



## Jasonda

raise said:


> Employees of a large corporate entity are asking to personalize their uniforms (single color t-shirt or polo shirt) with the company logo.
> 
> As they are employees, am I allowed to add the logo to their clothes for them?


You'll need to get written permission from the boss, or if it's a really big corporation, the IP or press department.

_You_ are liable for whatever you print, not just the people who order it - so always better to stay on the safe side.


----------



## Sheepsalt

raise said:


> Semi old thread but I have another copyright question to add to this.
> 
> Employees of a large corporate entity are asking to personalize their uniforms (single color t-shirt or polo shirt) with the company logo.
> 
> As they are employees, am I allowed to add the logo to their clothes for them?


Are the employees coming to you personally as individuals, or are you working for the company?

I would think if the order is placed through the company that it wouldn't be a problem, but you'd still want them to sign something.


----------



## Sheepsalt

Mark,

Thanks for the explanation of "newsworthy" exception - that makes sense. I had questioned gossip mags getting to use the images, etc.

Now, maybe I'm wrong & should be seeking an attorney on this, but if I have a clause in a contract with someone who's hiring me to print for them that say's they either own or have the right to use/re-produce the submitted artwork, doesn't that pretty much place the culpability on them? I suppose if someone wanted me to print shirts with some obvious nationally-known brand trademark I could be considered negligent to believe they have the rights/license to use it without seeing the paperwork, but for general stuff wouldn't the clause apply pretty safely?


----------



## raise

Sheepsalt said:


> Are the employees coming to you personally as individuals, or are you working for the company?
> 
> I would think if the order is placed through the company that it wouldn't be a problem, but you'd still want them to sign something.


 
They are coming as individuals. Word of mouth that I do garment decoration and I have gotten requests to add the corporate logo to their clothing.


----------



## Sheepsalt

I definitely agree with Fred. If employees are requesting shirts on their own, it should be an easy sell to someone in the office. Get the company involved and all the infringement issues go away.


----------



## SoulDoubt

Just my dos centavos here....i understand and fully agree with the whole "what's legal/illegal" aspect of this thread. However, realistically, most companies will not sue you for copyright infringement if there is not a significant amount of $$$$ involved. This is how soooooo many swap meet vendors and small mom and pop stores get away with it. There just simply isnt enough A) money to go after or B) distribution amount (meaning that these businesses as a singular entity do not sell enough single items of illegal clothing) to warrant a full blown lawsuit. Also, while i am not 110% sure, i feel safe saying that while yes it is possibly illegal to print a logo on an employee's uniform, i doubt that many judges or juries would award even a schilling for such a lawsuit. Specifically since it was at the behest of the employee and also because there is VERY little indication that the printer was trying to be malicious in profitting from said transaction. All this being said...it is almost always illegal to do anything with any type of famous anything on it. But, will you be sued is an entirely different subject.


----------



## Jasonda

SoulDoubt said:


> However, realistically, most companies will not sue you for copyright infringement if there is not a significant amount of $$$$ involved.


There are several "mom and pop" members of this forum who have been issued cease and desist or have had other legal action taken against them for copyright or trademark infringement.

Big corporations already have big $$$. They stand to lose money by going after someone who doesn't have any, and yet they still do. Mostly when they go after small timers they are doing to protect their intellectual property from being diluted in the marketplace.


----------



## VIRIGN-PRINTER

Hi, interesting thing this trademark/copywrite. I am in the UK and would question the use of "LOST", if it were a single word on a plain background surely that does not infringe anyone? If it did, then the smart guy would simply copywrite every word and sue everyone who used them in print, on paper or shirt. Surely it must be shown by the "owners" of a phase or word from such a show that your item DIRECTLY referenced their work? Corruptions of the word Microsoft some to mind, and any of those would surely be sued, the word microsoft is a manufactured one by the owner (it did not appear in the dictionary before BILL), likewise toys r us (I do hate that corruption of the English language). As to celebrities faces, although they surely own them they are part of the general public and as such if you were to take a picture of one (or pay someone to take it) the image becomes yours and you are free to do with it as you wish. 
I used to be an estate agent (real estate) and a neighbour of a client called into the office saying we were advertising his house (we were not), the guy lived next door to a house we were selling and part of his house was in the advertising picture! I checked with a solicitor (lawyer) (you never know these days!!) and he said "if it in public view and you capture the image it is yours and you can with it as you wish", same applies to Cher? Of course selling a Cher 2008 tour shirt would I am sure open the floodgates of hell (for many reasons)!!
All of the above may not apply in the US?


----------



## Rodney

> As to celebrities faces, although they surely own them they are part of the general public and as such if you were to take a picture of one (or pay someone to take it) the image becomes yours and you are free to do with it as you wish.


The laws on this will vary depending on where you live. In many places in the US, this would be illegal under "right to publicity" laws.



> I am in the UK and would question the use of "LOST", if it were a single word on a plain background surely that does not infringe anyone


It depends on a lot of factors. For example, there is intent and how much it might mislead potential customers.

If you are selling a bunch of TV knockoff t-shirts that try to skirt the gray line of intellectual property rights laws and you include a LOST t-shirt in your lineup, you can bet ABC studios will probably come after you. In this case, it would be pretty clear to a reasonable person that you're trying to make money off of a TV show.

If you have a line of t-shirts that are a bunch of one word tees about sad things "LOST", "FORLORN", "UNHAPPY", "MISGUIDED", then ABC Studios *may* come after you, but they probably wouldn't have a case (i'm not a lawyer, so don't take my word on that). In that case it doesn't appear to a reasonable person that you're trying to make money off of their TV show.


----------



## VIRIGN-PRINTER

Sliding away from shirts a little, does this mean that TV/movies etc use only paid extras to fill a background shot? surely not, Joe Public can be seen along. If one of those JP's were Cher would they have to re shoot? pay her? You have freedom of speach but not sight? If one were to photograph ones own car (ford dodger) in front of the empire state building, printed it on a shirt and sold it, would/could anyone sue?


----------



## SoulDoubt

I didnt mean to say that it NEVER happens...in recent memory there are a handful of companies that aggressively protect their trademarks. I think though that by and large, most large companies do not go aggressively after small companies and at most send a cease and desist letter which is basically a really friendly way of saying "if you dont stop or we catch you doing this again, your financial testicles will be on the chopping block". I would NEVER suggest that somebody goes and infringes on copyrights of clothing companies (i.e. like making your own DC or Izod shirts) but, there are differeing levels of danger there as with anything else. If you went and made Kroger tee shirts there is a degree of danger...that being said, if you went and made Nike tee shirts, there is a significantly (and i do seriously mean SIGNIFICANTLY) higher danger involved. Kroger (who is a groercy store chain) isnt in the business of selling clothing while Nike most assuredly is thus, Nike will skewer you alive and eat your entrails while Kroger might not even know that strange things were afoot. I guess what i should suffice to say, if your thinking of breaking copyright laws, at the very least be educated about who you are ripping off otherwise you shall find yourself in a rather sticky situation. believe me, when you get sued for infringement, it isnt cheap or easy to get out of and usually gets into the six figures rather rapidly. is the juice worth the squeeze?


----------



## SoulDoubt

not 100% sure but i believe i read somewhere that if celebrities are photographed in public then there picture is public domain (see paparazzi). Also, if you took a pic of your car and put it on your shirt i highly doubt that ford (for example) could or would say anything about it. MAYBE they could complain about badging, but again, what judge or jury would allow such a case? basically you couldnt take any pics of anything (whether you owned it or not) and post it anywhere other than maybe your living room.


----------



## Solmu

SoulDoubt said:


> However, realistically, most companies will not sue you for copyright infringement if there is not a significant amount of $$$$ involved.


There are a few problems with taking this approach. One, is that it looks unprofessional (which may or may not matter; if you're running a bootleg business it's a non-issue, but if you have bootlegs within a legitimate business it could harm your legitimate business). Two, there are some companies who vigorously defend their trademark: it doesn't matter how insignificant the amount is, they want to pound everyone into the dirt. Three, plenty of companies won't go after everyone, but they will randomly go after a few insignificant fish to make an example to the others. If you get caught in that crossfire (a random gamble) then they will do everything they can to completely ruin your life (i.e. they won't stop until you're bankrupt).

Like all law-breaking it's a gamble what's going to happen. But the fact that you may get away with it, doesn't mean we should advocate it.


----------



## Solmu

VIRIGN-PRINTER said:


> does this mean that TV/movies etc use only paid extras to fill a background shot?


To my knowledge, yes. It's one of the (many) reasons it costs so much money to shoot a film. You need to pay to shut down an entire street, then pay people to come and be in your movie. Perhaps not every movie is shot that way, but it's certainly how it's done by big Hollywood films. 

I've known a few people who've done extras work... it mostly involves sitting around all day waiting for the star to stop having a temper tantrum so the scene can get shot; meanwhile you're playing cards and earning a lot of money eating catered food. Long, dull hours, but not a bad way to earn a quick wad of cash.

Getting into the legalities of what you can and can't do with people's images is a long, boring discussion... and not particularly relevant to the t-shirt forums. Ultimately people are just looking for a loophole, and all we'd end up doing is talking for many pages about why there isn't one. There's big money in this... it's been done to death in the courts... Joe Schmuck ain't coming up with a loophole that a hundred others haven't already tried and had stomped on by Rich Lawyer Guy.


----------



## mystysue

not only do they have to pay the people who are shown on camera.. they have to get a signed release.. for movies and such..
and they have to pay any one who has property in the neighborhood that it affect. We just got paid a few months ago when they filmed a will smith film next door to our shop. even tho the shop was not pictured.. and Yes they do block off the section they are filming in so others are not in the shot.


----------



## Sheepsalt

> _does this mean that TV/movies etc use only paid extras to fill a background shot?_


It's already been answered, but, Yes, absolutely. Every face, every time.

Ever watched "Cops"? See how sometimes they blur out people's faces? That's not a courtesy - that's because those people refused to sign the release to allow their image to be used in a commercial video project. I'm sure you've seen that in other shows as well.

The only exception I suppose would be the "newsworthy" exception for press type broadcasts.


----------



## tshirtn00b

_



does this mean that TV/movies etc use only paid extras to fill a background shot?

Click to expand...

_ 
Sometimes what you may think are extras are really 3D computer graphics. Computer-generated imagery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## PostRenaissance

Hi everyone, i just read all these posts and had a question myself. Sooo, what if someone wanted to get the rights to print on a shirt, how is that done? for example, there are so many Joker Shirts being sold right now, most of them with Heath's joker. These are different companies selling these shirts. They are all over ebay and online. So did they all get the rights to sell those. and if so, How would you go about getting the rights to use those images.

Also curious, if you ask for the rights to use an image, say from DC comics, how does it work in most cases? do you have to pay upfront a certain amount, or would they get a percentage of any sales?

Thankz


----------



## Jasonda

PostRenaissance said:


> there are so many Joker Shirts being sold right now, most of them with Heath's joker. These are different companies selling these shirts. They are all over ebay and online. So did they all get the rights to sell those. and if so, How would you go about getting the rights to use those images.


Either they got the rights, or they didn't. If they didn't, the movie people (and ebay) will probably be coming after them. If you want to get officially licensed to sell that kind of merchandise, you will need to contact the production company that made the movie.



PostRenaissance said:


> Also curious, if you ask for the rights to use an image, say from DC comics, how does it work in most cases? do you have to pay upfront a certain amount, or would they get a percentage of any sales?


It depends on what kind of agreement you would work out with them, but most likely they would want royalties.


----------



## PostRenaissance

Cool. Royalties (%) is way better than paying a lump sum up front.

Also curious, do parody laws protect t shirts like they do other media?


----------



## DonegalTs

im from ireland and i was looking up about copyright and i found something that said things that you copyright here is not copyrighted in america and i was just wondering if it workes the other way too? i would think that the big names are copyrighted everywhere.


----------



## Jasonda

PostRenaissance said:


> Also curious, do parody laws protect t shirts like they do other media?


Not necessarily. If you have parody designs, you need to take them to an IP lawyer to see if they are acceptable before you print anything.


----------



## gabecnc

guys! new to printing t-shirts too. 
Just wondering... what happens with very old piece of art?
Such as... Caravaggio or Michelangelo's paintings?
can they be used on t-shirts or it breaks the law?
and how old should they be? 100 years? for example Picasso?

and on the other hand... let's take for example a Keith Haring drawing. It's illegal if i use it. But what happens if i draw it again by myself? I mean, not exactly copy, but make slight changes?

Can anybody help me?


----------



## wormil

Here is a start:

Digital Copyright Slider


----------



## taricp35

Got a question about about copyrights. I have been asked to make a design that utilizes the Argyle pattern. Is this pattern subject to copyright? I searched the copyright database and I have no idea what I am looking at. Most of it had nothing to do with the pattern but a movie, a bed and breakfast, and similar stuff. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Tari


----------



## drogers12

This is a great discussion, I've found it to be very helpful about questions I've had. I'm more into making t-shirts for personal use (or halloween costumes) and had previously thought that using copyrighted logos on personal garments was not a problem (although realistically, I'd assume that wearing a costume with a logo on it to a party once a year is not likely to get me into trouble). 

I am now wondering how other types of non-copyrighted logos/symbols can be used (for example a t-shirt with a "Route 66" shield). Are there any laws that may prevent private or commercial use of such symbols or the emblem of a public entity (city or state logo/emblem)? This also makes me curious about t-shirts that simply say "Army" or "Navy", bearing a black & gold or navy blue & white color scheme - are these subject to any laws about fair use/licensing? Or what about military symbols/heraldry (coat of arms, military unit patches/crests)? How about drawings/sketches of military equipment - is it free to use graphic depictions of an Army Apache helicopter, or does the contractor Hughes/McDonnel Douglas/Boeing somehow own the rights, since it is their design? 

Finally, do laws cover college or pro sport mascots (for example, a shirt that says "Go Bears" or "Go Lions" and incorporate the team's colors in the shirt and lettering? I wouldn't argue that the shirts are generic, since they do bear the colors of the college/franchise, but would the college/franchise own the rights to any garments that show support for their generic mascot? Last question, if a college is a public university, does that affect how they are able to obtain/retain rights to the use of their colors/mascots/mottos? 

I know I've posed a lot of questions here, but I find this extremely interesting and would appreciate any insight or experience with these matters that anyone can share. Thanks in advance!


----------



## mnhim001

Can I put a clause in my "Terms & Conditions" that the customer takes full responsibility for artwork submitted?

Would this protect my business or myself from getting sued?


----------



## MaximRecoil

I wonder what happens if a celebrity has an identical twin. For example, if you got permission from Daniel Heder or Leslie Hamilton to use his/her face on a shirt, could John Heder or Linda Hamilton do anything about it (given that they are their likenesses as well)? What if the twin wanted to put his/her own face on a shirt? 

How does the concept of owning one's own likeness (right of publicity) apply if one's likeness is shared with someone else?

What about celebrity lookalikes? Some of them look close enough to the celebrity that you couldn't tell the difference in most screen prints. Speaking of celebrity lookalikes who are also impersonators for hire, how do they get away with it; i.e., making money off the likeness and name of someone else?


----------



## inker

What about when you buy software packages that have logos, slogans, trademarks and stuff like that? Did they pay for the licensing? Is that okay?
Super Bowl 45 is coming up in Dallas next year. The NFL has "hoops" for prospective licensees to leap through. I wouldn't dare try without one.


----------



## kimura-mma

MaximRecoil said:


> I wonder what happens if a celebrity has an identical twin. For example, if you got permission from Daniel Heder or Leslie Hamilton to use his/her face on a shirt, could John Heder or Linda Hamilton do anything about it (given that they are their likenesses as well)? What if the twin wanted to put his/her own face on a shirt?
> 
> How does the concept of owning one's own likeness (right of publicity) apply if one's likeness is shared with someone else?


Why would someone buy a shirt of Daniel Heder or Leslie Hamilton? Presumably because they believe it's actually John or Linda. That confusion is essentially the basis for why John and Linda can sue for infringement.

The intent is not what defines infringement, it's the perception in the market that defines it.



MaximRecoil said:


> What about celebrity lookalikes? Some of them look close enough to the celebrity that you couldn't tell the difference in most screen prints.


Same as above. You're just not going to be able to sidestep right of publicity with lookalikes.



MaximRecoil said:


> Speaking of celebrity lookalikes who are also impersonators for hire, how do they get away with it; i.e., making money off the likeness and name of someone else?


Parody for entertainment falls under different laws and jurisdictions than parody or usage of name and likeness on t-shirts.


----------



## MaximRecoil

kimura-mma said:


> Why would someone buy a shirt of Daniel Heder or Leslie Hamilton? Presumably because they believe it's actually John or Linda. That confusion is essentially the basis for why John and Linda can sue for infringement.
> 
> The intent is not what defines infringement, it's the perception in the market that defines it.


Ah yes; in courts, they can simply pretend to be mind readers and call it good. Leslie Hamilton and Daniel Heder have both been in movies; it is possible that they have fans. But of course, judges are clairvoyant and "know" that no one would buy a shirt of either person. 

What about in cases where both twins are famous, such as the Olsen twins? Who gets to sue in such a matter? Also, in such a case, the judge wouldn't be able to do his crystal ball parlor trick to "establish" that no one would buy a shirt of either person, because both of them have a large number of fans.


----------



## dk prints

I want to print a quote from someone famous, and print who said it .
What about that?
or what if I just print what he said?
But to let people know who said it would really be the reason to print the tee in the first place.
Feedback Please


----------



## kimura-mma

MaximRecoil said:


> What about in cases where both twins are famous, such as the Olsen twins? Who gets to sue in such a matter? Also, in such a case, the judge wouldn't be able to do his crystal ball parlor trick to "establish" that no one would buy a shirt of either person, because both of them have a large number of fans.


Bit of a moot point, really. To negotiate license or permission for one twin would probably include guidelines as to usage of that twin plus non-usage of the other. I think the Olsen twin's attorneys are savvy enough to put this one together. So it would be legal to do what is within the agreement, and illegal to overstep the boundaries.

This would basically be the case with any scenario you can come up with. Licensing agreements are very detailed, so little would be left to misinterpretation.


----------



## Louie2010

Slightly off subject, but is it safe to assume that if you are printing using stock transfers they are all legal. Assuming that you use only legit company's, like Wilde Side, Dowling,, Air Waves, etc?

Thanks


----------



## kimura-mma

dk prints said:


> I want to print a quote from someone famous, and print who said it .
> What about that?
> or what if I just print what he said?
> But to let people know who said it would really be the reason to print the tee in the first place.
> Feedback Please


Usage of the name would be illegal. Quotes can be very tricky because they are hard to protect as trademarks for use on t-shirts. It really depends on all the specifics, it's probably best to consult an attorney.


----------



## kimura-mma

Louie2010 said:


> Slightly off subject, but is it safe to assume that if you are printing using stock transfers they are all legal. Assuming that you use only legit company's, like Wilde Side, Dowling,, Air Waves, etc?
> 
> Thanks


I wouldn't assume they are *all* legal. The website should have terms and conditions or other info regarding the license or allowed usage.


----------



## Louie2010

kimura-mma said:


> I wouldn't assume they are *all* legal. The website should have terms and conditions or other info regarding the license or allowed usage.


Thanks, the reason I ask is I noticed many of them have photos of what looks like a Harley although not named or tractors that are green and yellow like a John Deere. I think I even saw a Marilyn Monroe picture. I can't believe that they could sell these for others to print and sell if they were not legal, but who knows?


----------



## HermosaDan

With something pretty substantial like a major motion picture or a DC character where the merch is really big business you are not going to be able to purchase license to use these things or set up royalties. They are already going to have merch agreements with partners which will be exclusive to certain markets. They are not going to go out and enter into agreements with a lot of smaller companies one by one. To even get a meeting with someone like DC comics there would have to be a lot of money on the table just to cover their lawyers and time... so if you just want to make some tshirts and pay them royalties they won't do it.



PostRenaissance said:


> Hi everyone, i just read all these posts and had a question myself. Sooo, what if someone wanted to get the rights to print on a shirt, how is that done? for example, there are so many Joker Shirts being sold right now, most of them with Heath's joker. These are different companies selling these shirts. They are all over ebay and online. So did they all get the rights to sell those. and if so, How would you go about getting the rights to use those images.
> 
> Also curious, if you ask for the rights to use an image, say from DC comics, how does it work in most cases? do you have to pay upfront a certain amount, or would they get a percentage of any sales?
> 
> Thankz


----------



## MaximRecoil

kimura-mma said:


> This would basically be the case with any scenario you can come up with.


Only because the system is corrupt. There are plenty of scenarios which are _logical_ loopholes, and in which — in a court which operated according to logic (which would include a logical standard of proof [mind-reading doesn't count]) — one could never be found guilty of copyright infringement.


----------



## MikeVastex

Just a bit of personal experience with printing a big company's logo. I am in a Volkswagen club, and have printed shirts using the VW logo. All we had to do to get permission to do this was become an official, sanctioned Volkswagen club. Most car manufacturers want their logo used wherever possible, and will allow their official, or registered, clubs to use them. This was in response to one of the comments about a website selling all kinds of t-shirts with car logos/pictures on them. Sometimes it isn't as difficult as it seems to get permission to print something like that.


----------



## kimura-mma

MaximRecoil said:


> Only because the system is corrupt. There are plenty of scenarios which are _logical_ loopholes, and in which — in a court which operated according to logic (which would include a logical standard of proof [mind-reading doesn't count]) — one could never be found guilty of copyright infringement.


My comment was actually about licensing, not copyright infringement. You were asking questions about what would happen in certain scenarios. But most licensing agreements are detailed enough to specify what is allowed. Anything outside of that would not be allowed. So any scenario you come up with would either fall inside or outside a licensing agreement and that would determine what is or isn't allowed.

In regards to copyright laws, I understand where you are coming from. The system isn't perfect or logical. But like it or not, the system is set up to protect intellectual property owners not helping others find logical loopholes.

It's the responsibility of IP owners to aggressively protect their IP. It's the responsibility of the courts to uphold the laws. And most importantly, it's the responsibility of creative professionals to create original and unique artwork.

In my opinion, more time should be spent being creative and unique rather than finding logical loopholes.


----------



## Carol McShane

can you use re-artworked imagery of a section 18th century painting?


----------



## Carol McShane

sorry, I meant to say, a section of an 18th century painting


----------



## astewart

most intellectual property rights from 1800s and before are in the public domain... Artist's life +70 years. I would bet there are some exceptions, but most masterworks are in the public domain.


----------



## killamike

good question, actually I'd like to also know if it is against the law to use the name of a country or emblem, flag and so on?


----------



## kimura-mma

I don't believe country names, emblems or flags are owned as intellectual property. But I would imagine that some uses could cause some issues. Defamation would be one issue. Or using a flag with a hockey puck could infringe on trademarks such as USA Hockey, Hockey Canada, etc.


----------



## hazeremover

Individual countries most likely have laws that pertain to their flag and it's uses but they may vary in scope. I know that the American Flag has a "flag code" with all manner of procedures for respecting it's uses but ultimately it is presented as a guide. The First Amendment protects an individual from prosecution if you violate it's guidelines or just print a traditional flag on tees or some other substrate.

If the US flag is incorporated as a design element as part of a whole graphic composed of other elements, it becomes a unique creation that can be copyrighted. Harley-Davidson tees come to mind. American flags have been used in their design and marketing for years to great effect.

I would think the name of a country or a state is free to use unless again, it's utilized graphically and subsequently registered. Many years ago, The University Of Wisconsin Badger's sports team laid out the word "wisconsin" in caps as an athletic block font, gave it a shallow arc, and printed it one color white on red garments (the school colors). It is a registered trademark.


----------



## KIStrategies

So, if you're a vendor setup at a car show and the car owners would like their car on a shirt, is that considered illegal?


----------



## kimura-mma

If you are just doing one-offs where a customer wants their own car on their own shirt for their own personal use, it should be fine.

Where you would have issues is if your customer wanted to order in bulk so they could re-sell the shirts for profit. Or if you were creating your own unlicensed artwork featuring cars or logos and selling that artwork on shirts.


----------



## KIStrategies

kimura-mma said:


> If you are just doing one-offs where a customer wants their own car on their own shirt for their own personal use, it should be fine.
> 
> Where you would have issues is if your customer wanted to order in bulk so they could re-sell the shirts for profit. Or if you were creating your own unlicensed artwork featuring cars or logos and selling that artwork on shirts.


Thank you.  The operative words "should be", still have me scared. Nothing in this world is safe and I know my luck. )

**BTW!** ***NEVER USE*** a company called "AtlasScreenSupply" for any of your screen printing needs or wants. I cannot begin to describe the various reasons, but in short, they stand for their own before they first care for the customer -even when it's a simple mishap of one of their own employees.

Just trying to help keep our community simple and free of hazardous muck.

***HIGHLY RECOMMENDED*** 
SILK SCREENING SUPPLIES - aka RYONET. 
THE MOST HELPFUL AND THE KINDEST PEOPLE I'VE EVER HAD THE PLEASURE OF DOING BUSINESS! SilkScreeningSupplies.com


----------



## izactan180

Got 1 question here guys , some celebrity is coming to town for a concert , what if we design our own FANS T-SHIRTS to sell , about the design , we do not print celebrity's faces , only WORDINGS related to them. Is it illegal? Thanks for replying !


----------



## kimura-mma

izactan180 said:


> Got 1 question here guys , some celebrity is coming to town for a concert , what if we design our own FANS T-SHIRTS to sell , about the design , we do not print celebrity's faces , only WORDINGS related to them. Is it illegal? Thanks for replying !


It's impossible to tell you how anyone would react if they saw those shirts. Maybe they would tell you to stop, maybe they will never find you. Maybe you will get sued, maybe not.


----------



## izactan180

But it is illegal at first? I'm not using their faces in designing , just the name of the celebrity. and put some feature like ' I love "the name of that celebrity" '.


----------



## kimura-mma

Yes, using the name of the celebrity is illegal. It is a violation of their Right of Publicity. They could take legal action if they choose.


----------



## bijou

I know we are talking bout images but what if I found a quite online doesn't seem to be from a famous person and put it on my shirt is that okay or I have to Change a couple words


----------



## PositiveDave

If the quote can be identified then there is a possibility that action could be taken. If it can't, action could still be taken. Have you considered creativity as an option?


----------



## bijou

most of my designs are done by me but this quote is really good it was written by a rapper on instagram so it wasn't in a song or I don't believe it was copyrighted


----------



## kimura-mma

bijou said:


> it was written by a rapper


You answered your question right here. If it was written by someone else, there is always the risk of legal issues.

Since it wasn't used in a song, it may be insignificant enough where the rapper will not try to take legal action. But it's impossible to know for sure. If you want to use it, go ahead. But you can't use someone else's work and think it's risk free.


----------



## PositiveDave

...and this post could be used in evidence against you...


----------

