I know copyright law is a big grey area, but I remember reading somewhere that after Warhol did his Campbell soup cans, Campbells actually tried to sue but dropped the lawsuit after all the publicity they got from his work. So because of it I read that if trademarks are used in artwork for art's sake then it's Ok. Now is this true?
2007-03-12 13:54:49 · 9 answers · asked by gbeepastelart 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Other - Visual Arts
Coca-Cola is a registered trademark of the Coca-Cola Company. Any use of the company's trademark must received prior written approval from the company. You should contact the Coca-Cola Company in writing - their address is The Coca-Cola Company, P.O. Box 1734, Atlanta, Georgia 30301. (See additional legalese from Coca-Cola's website cited in the source below)
The Coca-Cola Company has commissioned several artists over the years to produce artwork for advertising and other branding purposes. The list includes: Haddon Sundblom, Norman Rockwell, N.C. Wyeth.
The Coca-Cola Company also has a licensing program. Jim Harrison, an artist based in Denmark, South Carolina, has been a licensee with Coca-Cola since 1995. You can see the calendars and other artwork that featured Coca-Cola logo on his website (cited below) and you can purchase them from bookstores as well as amazon.com
If you create an artwork strictly for personal enjoyment and not for commercial or for-profit purposes, then the Coca-Cola Company will probably be okay with that, but you should contact the company to be sure.
2007-03-13 11:42:04 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I work at a FedEx Kinkos. I am constantly confronted with copyright issues. You need permission from the holder of the copyrighted material before you can do any duplication of it. Some companies may refuse to do so, some will allow you to use their material. As a trade off, they may place stipulations on how it is used. They cannot stop you from using the design for inspiring your own original work. If you go that route, make sure all images used are different enough to where they cannot claim the design as theirs.
2007-03-12 21:24:28 · answer #2 · answered by mac_hunter80 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You can use any image if it is an editorial commentary. A few artists have used barbie dolls in their pieces, and were sued by the Matel corporation, but eventually won.
2007-03-16 10:43:12 · answer #3 · answered by moebiustrip 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you painting is SOLELY for your own usage, they won't sue you, but and if your purpose to portrait their brand in ways to earn money, they will sue until your pants comes off.
eg. if you paint a couple of hundreds of people running around a bush drinking coke, and plan to keep it in the house is okay
eg. if you paint a couple of coke running around the bush and plan to display this painting in public, your pants will be gone
2007-03-12 21:04:54 · answer #4 · answered by Terence G 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too bad it's a grey area, whether in art, writing...
2007-03-13 01:12:02 · answer #5 · answered by the_turp 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no if you do get sued they will only be doing it to make a fuss, and get publicity. they may actually pay you for advertising
2007-03-12 21:25:30 · answer #6 · answered by daniel T 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
as long as you do not make a profit off te logo they cannot
2007-03-12 21:02:28 · answer #7 · answered by Amber P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT , IT WOULD BE THE BIGGEST PUBLICITY YOU'LL EVER GET ! TP. MULLIN
2007-03-13 22:37:40 · answer #8 · answered by popartist 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
2007-03-12 20:57:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋