Anyone seen the new Canon logo?

[Joe_Lorenzini]

Saw this over on SportsShooter and I guess someone from DPR found it first...

The new Canon logo:
http://www.pbase.com/markuson/image/89821880/original

[Citex]

Woah thats pretty sharp :P

[CaptainTom]

Some things just aren't funny.

In fairness this is Canon's response: http://www.pbase.com/image/89895412/original

[Joe_Lorenzini]

Originally Posted by CaptainTom

Some things just aren't funny.

In fairness this is Canon's response: http://www.pbase.com/image/89895412/original

For those who don't get it, what does the blue dot mean?

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by Joe_Lorenzini

For those who don't get it, what does the blue dot mean?

The blue dot is associated with 1DMKIII which don't have the focus problem it's on the box....

[Wes]

That's funny.

[LoungeLizard]

I heard they hired a pro that used a Nikon D3 for that shot.

[JohnT]

I'm going to be the fuddy-duddy here and say that I fail to see the humor in jacking with a company's logo--a logo that is protected by copyright. Of course, it's nothing new as very few people seem to care about copyright nowadays.

Now that I've rained on the parade, let the march continue.

[JohnT]

Originally Posted by LoungeLizard

I heard they hired a pro that used a Nikon D3 for that shot.

Now THAT'S funny.

[Detonate]

Originally Posted by JohnT

I'm going to be the fuddy-duddy here and say that I fail to see the humor in jacking with a company's logo--a logo that is protected by copyright. Of course, it's nothing new as very few people seem to care about copyright nowadays.

Now that I've rained on the parade, let the march continue.

Copyright law Section 107 provides that "the fair use of a copyrighted work . . . for purposes such as criticism [or] comment . . . is not an infringement . . . ,''.

[JohnT]

Originally Posted by Detonate

Copyright law Section 107 provides that "the fair use of a copyrighted work . . . for purposes such as criticism [or] comment . . . is not an infringement . . . ,''.

Says nothing about modification, which is what we have here.

[Joe_Lorenzini]

Originally Posted by JohnT

I'm going to be the fuddy-duddy here and say that I fail to see the humor in jacking with a company's logo--a logo that is protected by copyright. Of course, it's nothing new as very few people seem to care about copyright nowadays.

Now that I've rained on the parade, let the march continue.

I disagree. No one is trying to jack with the logo (well, maybe with the blue dot version). This is purely a commentary on the companies recent woes.

Would it be different if it was in cartoon form:

[Joe_Lorenzini]

Originally Posted by JohnT

Says nothing about modification, which is what we have here.

I think you're right John. Even if you work for Canon, you are not allowed to mess with the logo, the way it's positioned, where it's located, background color or two dozen other rules. They have a big binder designed for logo usage and if you want to modify any little thing it has to go through legal (a lot of legal).

I'm sure if Canon has seen this they're none to happy about it and they'll have it removed.

But it's still funny.

[JohnT]

Originally Posted by Joe_Lorenzini

I think you're right John. Even if you work for Canon, you are not allowed to mess with the logo, the way it's positioned, where it's located, background color or two dozen other rules. They have a big binder designed for logo usage and if you want to modify any little thing it has to go through legal (a lot of legal).

I'm sure if Canon has seen this they're none to happy about it and they'll have it removed.

But it's still funny.

Well, as for the commentary use, I did see the humor. Heck, I'm not married to any brand. LOL

[Tom]

Originally Posted by JohnT

Says nothing about modification, which is what we have here.

Totally disagree. You can use it for satire, which is what that is.

Weird Al can use other people's songs, write his own lyrics and not pay royalties because it is satire. He always tries to get the permission of the label/artist, but not always - see the Coolio case.