Legal issue

Ive said this before...personally If I was CEO of some company I would want all the free advertising I could get.

... but having said that, I still can't recall a movie where they actually used a real interface. I remember there was a windows logo in a james bond movie on the futuristic computer, but that was product placement im sure.

I really hate the way they do the fake interfaces in some movies, they make it look more like an animation program then an OS like Sword Fish, what was up with that... I mean I get it they wanted to make hacking look cool and sexy and a DOS prompt was not cutting it.

Thank you all.

My question stands: will P5 reject my clip if I did not tag it "Editorial"?

"will P5 reject my clip if I did not tag it "Editorial"?"

I don't think so, but I went back and changed the "woman on apple computer" to editorial just in case, but it states clearly in the info for the clip:
Talent release: Yes
Property release: No

honestly I think that clip is ok pictureUK, because in my opinion it's incidental use. Besides apple is cooler than microsoft.

I was told that you could not record a video clip from a movie directly (obviously that's clearly copyright infringement.) BUT I heard you could have a movie playing in the background with the sound off and technically that would be legal because its not the main subject it qualifies as incidental use.
I would not recommend anyone do this.... its kind of pushing it. Especially with releases etc.

but think about it, in TV and movies all the cars have logos on them and as far as a I know they never get releases from GM, toyota or whatever...because the logos are incidental. They are never the 'main subject.'

I am not a lawyer BTW :P but I did stay at a holiday inn express...

If Ford sues someone for photographing the scoop on the side of a mustang and McDonlad's sues a strip club because it's using an M with bumps on top to look like http://www.thelocal.se/18606/20090401/, then I'd try to stay away from anything recognizable.

I know in photographs on various sites it is a no no, so I'd assume that the same rules apply in video. A Trademark is a trademark and if you know just be looking at it what it is, then be sure that everyone else in the world recognizes it as well, so I'd really edit it out

BTW, in many cases (not all, obvisously) it's not that hard to get a release from even major companies for incidental use. If the image you are showing them does not detract from their corporate image, many are happy to provide a release.

My ex-wife used a number of photos in her 3rd book that had logos, screen shots of various software programs, etc... and all of the companies involved provided releases without issue.

Ahh Kim this is why SS and istock clearly don't understand the film/video world. They assume the same thing, thats why they don't allow it in their videos. Just because they have cool site doesn't mean they are competent. Enron had a cool website.

The copyright rules are not the same for video and pictures

If you want more information about incidental use.http://www.artslaw.com.au/LegalInformation/UsingBrandsAndProductsInFilm.asp

Here is an excerpt:
"With respect to product placement in film, a filmmaker will in most cases, have a strong argument when using branded products or well known logos in a film, that such use is “incidental”. A character in a film wearing sunglasses bearing the Gucci logo or eating from a pizza box bearing the PIZZA HUT logo is arguably an “incidental” use of the artistic work in the film. Whether or not the use of an artistic work in a film is “incidental” will depend on a number of considerations including the prominence of the artistic work, the importance of the art work to the script of the film, the duration of time in which the logo is visible. "

Mark, you are correct, for the use in film, TV, etc. but we as stock shooters are "profiting" from the "incidental" use which large corporations frown upon. They as usual want a piece of the pie and if they don't get it, they send their lawyers to collect it for them.

Film making and stock work are two very different ball games and I'd much rather be safe then sorry.

Does marking something 'editorial' still cover our butts?