Hey guys! I know, I said I'd be doing my top castle visits next on my travel blog, but something bigger has came up.
Some of you already know that I sell many of my travel photos in my online Etsy shop. Business has been slow going (my shop has only been open for a couple months). YAY, I have sold two photos thus far!
No, really. It's kind of exciting. It means two people in the world loved my art enough to want to hang it in their homes. Right?!
But I digress...
Yesterday I was informed that one of my photos was removed from my shop. The reason: Trademark Infringement.
Trademark infringement is a trickier beast than copyright infringement, in my opinion.
Copyright:
The artist owns the original works they've created. These works cannot be used without permission from the artist.
For example: I own every photo posted for sale in my Etsy shop, and every photo of a client that's used my services. These are mine, I created them. I personally snapped them with my camera or created the image in a photoshop/editing program from scratch (or with images I already own).
For another to use my photo/art/graphics on their blogs, websites, without permission, whether for profit or not, is a violation of copyright law.
Most photographers understand copyright laws.
Now where it gets fun. Trademarks.
So I already had a good sense of trademark infringement and it's definition, yet I still fell down regarding it. I can admit that I was in the wrong, and innocently so.
It's kind of common artist knowledge that you can't sell something with big business logos; like Coca-Cola, Nike, etc,. The same goes for registered trademarks in small businesses. If it's registered, using it, or a likeliness to the brand or product is a no-no. Simple.
But what's not so simple is the blurred lines of travel photography and trademark infringement laws.
A year or so ago, I was reading through an online article I happened to stumble upon. The article was about the Eiffel Tower in Paris, and how many tourists have no clue that the Eiffel Tower lighting design seen at night is trademarked. Basically, if you want to snap pictures of Le Eiffel for personal use, day or night, go right on ahead. But if you're like me, trying to make a few bucks while traveling to Paris, you'd better not plan to sell any photos of the Eiffel lit up at night; whether it's solid golden or if it's the sparkles at the top of the hour. Once Le Eiffel lights come on in the evening, your images will violate trademark infringement laws IF you plan to distribute or sell them.
So yes, you own the photo of the glittering Eiffel you took (and the copyright to your photo).
But Le Eiffel (and it's lighting designers) own the subject of your photo (because the lighting design is trademark registered by them).
Savvy?
So after reading that article, and knowing I had the intentions of eventually selling my travel photo art, I read up on other famous places that are registered trademarks in the EU countries surrounding me. As it turns out, France, Belgium, and Italy all have tons of rules regarding trademarked architecture.
The other EU countries are not as strict (UK excluded), IF you captured the photo from a public place or setting (I encourage anyone reading to do specific research of their own before assuming).
So, I already knew that I couldn't sell photos of art/sculptures in galleries and museums. Most works in a museum, whether it's a painting or sculpture are also copyrighted/trademarked. This is all over the world, not just in Europe.
I learned that any images I took of the interior or exterior of Versailles cannot be sold without their permission.
I researched more into the Eiffel Tower, and sure enough, the lighting design at night is a registered trademark.
The inside of the Notre Dame Paris is trademarked. The outside facade is not.
I could go on and on.
But one photo I thought nothing of when listing it for sale online: The Moulin Rouge.
So I was kind of taken aback when I received an email form the Moulin Rouge SA, stating my photo for sale (above) of the exterior facade of the establishment is a violation of trademark infringement.
I immediately looked up the Moulin Rouge's registered trademark, and sure enough, I was violating the law. Oh, and because I don't like being duped by anyone, I double checked the name of the attorney for the Moulin Rouge company on their official site under legal. The name from the email is the same, to include her email address.
Oops. My bad, angry French lady.
Basically, the above photo contains a registered trademark for the company, to include their name AND the red windmill.
Posting it here on my blog? It's all good as I'm not distributing or selling it here.
An Example of their trademark:
Let's say I am a no name artist that paints and sells my work for a side income. I randomly paint a landscape with a dozen red windmills in a field of green grass and attempt to sell the painting at a craft fair or online.
Trademark infringement.
Yes, I know, it's crazy. But Moulin Rouge owns the red windmill logo and any likeliness to it. Even if it's not advertised with the company's name, they own the red windmill trademark anyway.
Another fine example I heard about before on a photo blog:
A photog captures a tractor in a wheat field against a gorgeous sunrise. She edits out the tractor's make name and logo. But later, she finds out she is violating trademark laws and is served a cease and desist letter to stop all sales of the image. Can you guess why?
The tractor bears a famous green paint and yellow detailed tires. Yes, John Deere has trademarked their famous green agricultural tools and machinery.
Even though she photo shopped the name out of the image, the green paint is associated with the company.
It seriously makes you consider what, if anything, photographers and artists can sell without violating laws. Everything is owned and trademarked now-a-days. Okay, not everything, but nearly.
Etsy sellers complain about this all of the time. It's not just me. One crafter makes hair bows out of Disney branded ribbons, and was shut down because she violated Disney's trademark with hair bows she made. Seriously.
Another seller complained about a handmade charm she hand made herself. It resembled Pacman, and she was slapped with a violation.
One woman was taken to court for using university mottos for the wood signage crafts that she makes by hand and sells. As it turns out, the words "Roll tide" when put together are owned by the University of Alabama, and using them in craft projects for sale is forbidden by trademark law. Not even kidding.
It does make me wonder why sites like Etsy can still thrive IF damn near everything listed on them is 'originally, unoriginal'.
If companies can trademark even the most mundane things; like words and colors, it feels like it's only a matter of time before someone trademarks the clouds in the sky or a grain of beach sand.
So my advice to travel photogs that plan to sell their images: Research, research, research! If in doubt, go to the official website of the attraction and locate their rules and regulations for photography while visiting. Generally this area will tell you what you can and can't use your photos for.
If you can't find the info there, scroll down on the home page and locate legal information.
If you are still unsure, you can lookup registered trademarks through a legit website OR you can contact the attraction directly.
After receiving my violation, I went through my other listings, noticing one image that I was unsure of. Sure enough, after researching it, the attraction is trademarked. I took it down to avoid another violation.
Sigh.
I'm excited to plan new adventures in the US, but after learning a bit more about trademark violations, I'm wondering if planning to sell any of my photos from travels is even worth it. We'll see.
Hope this post was helpful to someone in photo land!
Comments
Post a Comment