Question about quoting products in story scenes...?

[naosu]

So I wanted to check what's legal and not in a profession book for when its OK or not OK to quote specific products or their names in scenes?

Its actually amazing how we have to be aware of technical stuff like this.

And this can be challenging to not quote them or use them. For example; I really love camping. And camping scenes. Well when you quote camping scenes you are describing the tents and the gear, and the stuff you'd see as the props at the camp site. This could be an issue because, how are you going to describe tents without saying its X kind of tent. It doesn't paint a picture very well without being very specific.

I noticed in animes they will avoid quoting specific brands... like they'll say McRags instead of McDonalds. (That's also hilarious too.) But they are probably doing this for avoiding legal issues, I guess? But some of the worries over stuff like that should be similar between movies, anime, and books (?)

Do other readers like camping? :)

 

[AMR]

I think it is best to avoid using any actual brand names, so if I were in your situation, I would just describe the tool by name and not the brand.

 

[Empress_Omnii]

It's legal, unless- you are defaming them. Then a defamation lawsuit can be taken against the work.

 

[Ai-chan]

It's legal, unless- you are defaming them. Then a defamation lawsuit can be taken against the work.

Actually there is a term 'genericization' and 'dilution' which refers to making a brand 'generic' through repeated use that makes the brand name interchangeable with the name of the item. Why is this bad? Because of the nature of branding and trademarks. You cannot trademark a generic word similar to how you can't patent a process that everyone already use.

Let's take for example, Coca Cola. Coca Cola is a brand of carbonated drinks. The generic term for such items is 'carbonated drinks' or 'cola'. As they are generic terms, you cannot trademark 'carbonated drinks' or 'cola', but you can trademark 'Coca Drinks' or 'Coca Cola'. But, if everyone calls cola as Coca Cola, then Coca Cola will not be able to renew their trademark. This counts as causing harm to the brand in a similar way as libelious use of the brand name.

However, a single amateur author will not likely make the brand name generic within his lifetime. So this context is probably insignificant. They still can sue you if you're actually making money off the book, though. That's why Japanese authors and mangas avoid mentioning brand names and trademarks. Trademark lawsuits are very brutal in Japan.

 

[Deleted member 84247]

Actually there is a term 'genericization' which refers to making a brand 'generic' through repeated use that makes the brand name exchangeable with the name of the item. Why is this bad? Because of the nature of branding and trademarks. You cannot trademark a generic word similar to how you can't patent a process that everyone already use.

Let's take for example, Coca Cola. Coca Cola is a brand of carbonated drinks. The generic term for such items is 'carbonated drinks' or 'cola'. As they are generic terms, you cannot trademark 'carbonated drinks' or 'cola', but you can trademark 'Coca Drinks' or 'Coca Cola'. But, if everyone calls cola as Coca Cola, then Coca Cola will not be able to renew their trademark. This counts as causing harm to the brand in a similar way as libelious use of the brand name.

However, a single amateur author will not likely make the brand name generic within his lifetime. So this context is probably insignificant. They still can sue you if you're actually making money off the book, though. That's why Japanese authors and mangas avoid mentioning brand names and trademarks. Trademark lawsuits are very brutal in Japan.

I always just make an offbrand name for the product. If I was writing for a book, I could name something Baka Cola, and make it a red can. People will know what brand I am referencing, and I can't get sued.

 

[HisDivineShadow]

Actually there is a term 'genericization' which refers to making a brand 'generic' through repeated use that makes the brand name interchangeable with the name of the item. Why is this bad? Because of the nature of branding and trademarks. You cannot trademark a generic word similar to how you can't patent a process that everyone already use.

Let's take for example, Coca Cola. Coca Cola is a brand of carbonated drinks. The generic term for such items is 'carbonated drinks' or 'cola'. As they are generic terms, you cannot trademark 'carbonated drinks' or 'cola', but you can trademark 'Coca Drinks' or 'Coca Cola'. But, if everyone calls cola as Coca Cola, then Coca Cola will not be able to renew their trademark. This counts as causing harm to the brand in a similar way as libelious use of the brand name.

However, a single amateur author will not likely make the brand name generic within his lifetime. So this context is probably insignificant. They still can sue you if you're actually making money off the book, though. That's why Japanese authors and mangas avoid mentioning brand names and trademarks. Trademark lawsuits are very brutal in Japan.

What about music, titles?

 

[Ai-chan]

What about music, titles?

Titles can't be trademarked. Music also can't be trademarked. Music is covered by the Berne Convention, which means it is copyrighted by the virtue of it existing, though you need to register the copyright to protect it in court in the USA. Music titles can't be copyrighted either. What's copyrighted are the lyrics and the arrangements that make up the melody. There is however a leeway, in the form of parodies that is protected by fair use.

 

[ArcadiaBlade]

Considering how Nitendo can sue a local store because of a name that they didn't own, its best to be on the safe side and avoid trying to name a brand even without any trademarks on them.

 

[tiaf]

It's legal, unless- you are defaming them. Then a defamation lawsuit can be taken against the work.

Depends on country. Mentioning a brand can be counted as advertising. Advertising without directly mentioning this can be fined for hidden sponsoring/advertising in my country.

Some companies are aggressive about their brand name. A small comic creator was forced to change his title “Absolute (something)” because a lawsuit from Absolute Vodka.

That’s why generalizing or altering names is the safest bet for anything that’s going to be monetized.

 

[LuoirM]

vaseline

 

[Ai-chan]

I always just make an offbrand name for the product. If I was writing for a book, I could name something Baka Cola, and make it a red can. People will know what brand I am referencing, and I can't get sued.

Yes, this is a common way of avoiding any chance of a lawsuit. Though the brand owners can still push through if the resemblance is close enough to the point that it makes zero doubt that it's referring to the brand item. Scarlet Johansson once sued OpenAI for using her likeness. The lawsuit didn't continue into a full legal battle, but OpenAI agreed to drop her voice from their app. If the lawsuit had proceeded, it could go both ways.

 

[CarburetorThompson]

If your server is hosted far enough into eastern Europe you may find that there is no such thing as trademark or copyright

 

[CharlesEBrown]

I don't know about the rest of it - you get into a morass of IP law if you look into it too much - I actually asked PocketFM about quoting song lyrics and was told (paraphrasing) "Titles are OK but, you're better off just referencing the song in terms that make it clear what you're talking about - and, unless you wrote the song yourself, do not include actual lyrics at all" (which means a very different chapter of one story will be posted there vs here as a result).

I tend to reference some real world locations in stuff set in a world similar to ours (the hotel for a few chapters in Strange Awakening is one I spent a week at last year, and some of the locations used as landmarks, like the Hancock Building exist, but any building where an "action scene" takes place is a fabrication) - and in The Kaiju System (on Honeyfeed), I kind of lampoon McDonalds but "nobody knows the actual name as that was lost to history," it's just "The Golden M" now.

Much like you'll see some familiar imagery in comic books but then the restaurant is called "Big Belly Burger" or somesuch - best to be "close to" the real thing but not QUITE it (I Blinked and now I’m Famous | Scribble Hub does some cute stuff with this, with MyTube, InstantGram, etc.; several other examples are scattered around Sluggy Freelance webcomic, with MyFace as the major social platform, and a bunch of other blatant parodies, like Stabatard, a movie about blue-skinned aliens and a guy who remotely controls one ... to stab others) - just make it so that a fan (or foe) of the product clearly knows what you're talking about but you don't give it the real name and you'll PROBABLY be fine.

Now, if you get to a point where it might get published by a physical publisher, your best bet is to pass it over to a lawyer who specializes in Intellectual Property law and follow their advice to the letter, EVEN if the publisher has said they will do so - be proactive, just in case.

 

[yeul_e]

I've seen many works quoting actual brands.

 

[Ai-chan]

Considering how Nitendo can sue a local store because of a name that they didn't own, its best to be on the safe side and avoid trying to name a brand even without any trademarks on them.

You're talking about the Super Mario case, isn't it?

 

[Valmond]

It depends where. If it is the U.S, proving defamation is an extremely high bar. Essentially, in terms of fiction.

It could be considered under the line of parody or reimagining, and not having willful intent of trying to spread something intentionally false, while you know the truth.

Keyword, ‘intention’. Proving intention is very hard to do. So at least in the U.S, you’re pretty much safe under most circumstances.

I’d still say to be on the safe side, it might be better to make up an alternative.

 

[Kamael89]

I write historical fiction. When I encountered a brand, it usually an old brand that doesn't exist anymore and I just mention it without any problem.

 

[beast_regards]

It's better to avoid mentioning the brands completely and make up the fictional ones instead.

First, you need to consider a trademark law, which is separate from copyright, and add another layer of complexity you need to be worried about.

Second, you need to worry about defamation (and the similar lawsuit)

You could be sued for praising their product if they don't like the perceived context or association.

It's simply not worth the trouble.

 

[naosu]

Wow. After hearing about the headaches, I have to agree with you that its not worth the trouble. :O