Using a similar looking logo

[dlanter]

Yesterday afternoon I had a portrait shoot with a 10 yr old girl. In one set she was wearing a Dallas Cowboy chearleader outfit. I shot these on a white background which looks very nice, but I was thinking it might look even better if I had the Cowboys star logo in the background.

Now, I know that star logo is copywrited and I'm not even going to try to get permission for use and I'm not going to steal it off the web somewhere. But how about if I made a similar looking star myself. If I made a star design that was a slightly different shape but the same colors would that still be an infringement on the copywrite?

Thanks for your opinions

[CaptainTom]

Probably would. How will the photos be used ?

[LDB]

You'd have to do legal research or consult counsel but I believe it's an infringement to have any symbol that could be confused with the original. If you were using the same shape star in a shot advertising tv sets it might be ok because tv's have nothing to do with football. I think there's a provision like that, but again, you'd have to consult a legal authority to be sure. Good luck.

[CaptainTom]

What would be considered infrimgement is a very gray area. It probably would hinge on your final usage of the symbol. You certainly couldn't duplicate the symbol and use it to advertise anything football related.
If you are just using it for a personal photo of a client, I would say you could get away with it. Strictly legal ? Up to interpretation.

[dlanter]

The photos will be printed for the family use and also possibly used for the little girls beauty pageant portfolio. I haven't even mentioned this idea to the parents yet. I thought I should check the legallity first. If it is going to be a hassle, it's not worth the trouble.

I can't post any pics here yet. The parents want to see them first before giving permission to post any.

Thanks

[Howard Barlow]

If she is wearing a Dallas Cowboy cheerleader uniform, why are you concerned with copyright of the star?

[dlanter]

Originally Posted by Howard Barlow

If she is wearing a Dallas Cowboy cheerleader uniform, why are you concerned with copyright of the star?

Because they bought the uniform which I'm sure was licensed by the Cowboys. Anything Cowboys related that I might add to the image would not be.

[Howard Barlow]

Yes, it was licensed for the manufacturer to sell. License does not extend beyond that. Using the uniform is no less a trademark violation than painting your own star. It's not that you may paint the star that becomes a concern, it is trading on their mark. So, regardless of who made the star, them, or you, they don't want anyone trading on their mark.

Otoh, I would not give it a second thought. How often do you see seniors crouched down in front of their Mustang, with the trademarked emblem right over their shoulder? How many times do we see trademark logos on shirts, etc. Same exact thing.

I think we are straining at gnats when it comes to such things. It would be one thing if you were going to sell posters of their licensed products, but selling the image of little Suzy in her outfit, so mom can hang it on her wall, well, like I say, I wouldn't give it a second thought.

[LanceHaynie]

My $0.02 is that since it IS being used for commercial purposes (unless you give the photograph away) you can not use it.

I believe it's an infringement to have any symbol that could be confused with the original.

I tend to agree with that statement. Example when we were filing for our incorporation we had to change our name because our name looked too close to another name. It wasn't even the same name at all, oh well. The point still being that I believe the same thought process goes over to images and trademarks.

[dlanter]

Thanks for all the opinions and information. If this print was strictly for the parents or other family, I wouldn't have even thought twice about it. I would have made the design and shown it to them as an option for their prints. But since it is likely that the picture could be used in her pageant portfolio or used to enter beauty pageants, I have no idea who would end up seeing it. For that reason, I am going to forget about the star idea. It's not worth the possible hassle and I would rather err on the safe side.

[CaptainTom]

Originally Posted by LanceHaynie

My $0.02 is that since it IS being used for commercial purposes (unless you give the photograph away) you can not use it.

.

This is NOT commercial use...
If you put the photo on a billboard and advertise an insurance company, that is commercial use.

A common misconception.

[ShaneKislack]

The real answer is "can you afford to defend yourself against the Dallas Cowboys"?

BTW, Capt Tom is right about commercial use. It should be called "endorsement use" or something a little clearer.

[dlanter]

Originally Posted by ShaneKislack

The real answer is "can you afford to defend yourself against the Dallas Cowboys"?

And of course I can't, that is why I was asking before I made the mistake. Like I said above, I have given up on that idea but on the same subject I have another question.

Hypothetically, suppose you or a client had a background they wanted to use that had the Cowboys, or anyone's, logo on it. For example a sheet, poster, jersey, etc. Would that still be an infringement to sell the photos?