[Glenboy]

Hi

Im in the process of starting my t-shirt business and have spent the last 4 months designing shirts, researching equipment and garments, planning a marketing strategy and most importantly Branding my company, This is where im worried!

I have a business name and purchased the .com and .co.uk domain names, I then set to work on designing a logo.
I came up with a design that I was super happy with and it represents my company perfectly.

Now here's the problem.........

The name for my business is simple and totally says what my business is all about but it also refers to a certain celebrity.
My logo is just text but with a cartoon type plain black Silhouette that bares a resemblance to said celebrity and im not sure if this is gonna be a problem.
It is not a picture of a celebrity and not even a cartoon with features or anything, just a Silhouette that combined with the text makes an obvious reference
But legally im not sure if an image that could be something because it resembles it loosley would be subject to copyrite infringement when it is also clearly relevant to what my business is.


This probably makes no sense to anybody and i know your gonna say you cant tell without seeing the image or knowing who im talking about but i want to keep my brand under wraps until im ready to launch

I you do have any idea what im on about please advise

Thanks guys

Glenboy

 

[tcrowder]

Hi


just a Silhouette that combined with the text makes an obvious reference

And you still need to ask?????

 

[Louie2010]

And you still need to ask?????

Simple direct and to the point answer. Nothing I can add to that, but wanted to agree.

 

[neilb]

I don't see where the problem with the silhouette would be, if a photographer takes a picture of a celebrity the photographer owns the copyrite not the celebrity.

The problems would arise I think if it was seen that your name inferred some sort of endorsement by the celebrity.

 

[Louie2010]

I don't see where the problem with the silhouette would be, if a photographer takes a picture of a celebrity the photographer owns the copyrite not the celebrity.

The problems would arise I think if it was seen that your name inferred some sort of endorsement by the celebrity.

IMO, here is the problem:

"combined with the text makes an obvious reference"

Then add the fact that he/she will be profiting off of the celebrity likeness would be the issue.

 

[neilb]

IMO, here is the problem:

"combined with the text makes an obvious reference"

Then add the fact that he/she will be profiting off of the celebrity likeness would be the issue.

But again making reference to a celebrity is not a copyrite issue, as I said implying some sort of celebrity endorsement would be where problems would arise.

 

[Louie2010]

But again making reference to a celebrity is not a copyrite issue, as I said implying some sort of celebrity endorsement would be where problems would arise.

I could be wrong, but I believe profiting off of a celebrities likeness without permission is also illegal.

 

[neilb]

I could be wrong, but I believe profiting off of a celebrities likeness without permission is also illegal.

If that was true there would be no 'candid', pictures of celebrities in the media at all.

 

[Louie2010]

If that was true there would be no 'candid', pictures of celebrities in the media at all.

The media is considered news, which is very different then putting a celebrities likeness on a product and then selling it.

 

[neilb]

The media is considered news, which is very different then putting a celebrities likeness on a product and then selling it.

Not all media can be considered news but I agree that selling products using a celebrities image could cause problems .

My point from the start as I said was that it isn't a copyrite issue.

 

[Glenboy]

so could there be some sort of disclaimer stating that it has no connection or endorsement from said celebrity?

 

[Enrique]

Why would you do this at all? If I'm starting a business and it has nothing to do with a celeb, why the hell would I even HINT at the celeb? If you're doing it just to get noticed, it pretty much tells me your product/service is not worthy of notice by itself.

And yes, you will get sued if the celeb gets wind of it. You have to have someone's permission, celeb or not, to use their name and/or likeness. If it even KIND OF looks or sounds like them, you will get in trouble. There have been numerous instances of celebs suing because someone did a parody of them or had an impersonator in their commercial, etc.

 

[kimura-mma]

I don't see where the problem with the silhouette would be, if a photographer takes a picture of a celebrity the photographer owns the copyrite not the celebrity.

If the silhouette originated from a copyrighted photo, then the photographer can still take action to protect their intellectual property. It doesn't matter that the image has been changed.

But again making reference to a celebrity is not a copyrite issue, as I said implying some sort of celebrity endorsement would be where problems would arise.

Correct, the use of the celebrity's likeness is not a copyright issue. But in the US, there are Right of Publicity laws that make the unauthorized use of a person's likeness illegal.

Right of Publicity grants each person the exclusive right to profit off their own name and likeness on merchandise. The OP should look into similar laws in the UK.

Not all media can be considered news

In the eye of the law, it is. When a photo gets published to a newspaper, magazine, website, etc (including tabloids), the law considers this a form of communication. This is why the paparazzi can legally take and sell their photographs.

But when an image is printed on a t-shirt, it is considered a salable good. And salable goods are governed under the Lanham Act which protects against intellectual property infringement.

 

[kimura-mma]

so could there be some sort of disclaimer stating that it has no connection or endorsement from said celebrity?

No, this would not make it legal to infringe on intellectual property (including Right of Publicity).

 

[neilb]

If the silhouette originated from a copyrighted photo, then the photographer can still take action to protect their intellectual property. It doesn't matter that the image has been changed.

I agree but as the op clearly states

a cartoon type plain black Silhouette

I take it that is not the case.

 

[Glenboy]

yer, This is not an image that has been produced from tracing a Silhouette from another picture it is my own artwork and a cartoon Silhouette. it does not in any way resemble an actual photo of a celebrity

 

[taricp35]

The name for my business is simple and totally says what my business is all about but it also refers to a certain celebrity.
My logo is just text but with a cartoon type plain black Silhouette that bares a resemblance to said celebrity......

I think you have received the best answer to your question as Tim is very knowledgeable in this area. Since you still need clarification I think you need to (dare I say it) contact an Attorney! Your brand refers to a celebrity, the design resembles said celebrity, be prepared for a possible lawsuit from this celebrity. It may happen, it may not but do you want to take that risk? Does not matter if the design is a red dot that you sketched by hand if the celebrity wants to file a suit he/she can and it will be up to a judge to decide for which you will have to spend money defending. LIG!

 

[Louie2010]

Since you still need clarification I think you need to (dare I say it) contact an Attorney!

Best advise yet.

 

[Glenboy]

Thanx for all the opinions,

I will obviously be looking into this further and researching the laws in the uk etc

this is not any infringement on intellectual property because its been created by me and doesnt resemble any existing photo or artwork out there.

Its just the fact that it is a loose likeness of a famous person and thats what i need to look into.

Will let you all know how it goes

Glenboy

 

[Louie2010]

Its just the fact that it is a loose likeness of a famous person and thats what i need to look into.

When you look into it keep in mind that you said when combined with the text it was an "obvious reference" and no longer a "loose likeness".

Good Luck with your venture