 |
 |
|
#1071
08-16-2012, 02:48 PM
|
||||
|
||||
They probably have to pay them
Not exactly the same situation but kinda similar There's a wrestler in wwe who have a pepsi and a gi joe tats but In the video games none of them are in because of the copyrights ( except this year they a did a replicas so they can get away with it , THQ are lazy  )Last edited by melovelily; 08-16-2012 at 02:53 PM.. 
|
|
#1072
08-16-2012, 03:10 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
She is not doing an appropiaton of a trademark for commercial purposes so she would not have problem with that...
And she is not that big to be involved in these legal issues, because normally the chance of getting in trouble for copyrights it depends on how much money is involved. I never heard of any problem with tattoos in the music industry, but in the sport world there was a few examples recently. I remember Hopkins, the boxer, wearing a big temporary tattoo on his back only for commercial purposes, he was advertising something and there was some controversy. And I remember other problems with R.Wallace and the NBA for some tattoo he had.
|
|
#1073
08-16-2012, 04:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Some sportsmen have the olympic symbol tattoed, and the olympic rings are a common example for strange trademark laws.
So no problems, I guess.
|
|
#1074
08-16-2012, 04:30 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I asked my boyfriend because he works in advertising. He said "If used in a commercial capacity which is she, then most likely they would need to cover them up. The use of commercial imagery generally requires licensing regardless of territory, but her label should know what to do though, they ain't dumb."
|
|
#1075
08-16-2012, 05:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, but what about the dudes with the olympic rings?
Please ask him :P
|
|
#1076
08-16-2012, 05:24 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Okay, he said the key is whether or not they're doing it in a commercial capacity, as in they're in a for-profit video or presentation.
Edit: He also added "Commercial use of copyrighted material usually requires licensing or at least express permission, since Alizee and her studio are making money from the venture." Last edited by Euphoria; 08-16-2012 at 05:24 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doubleposts
|
|
#1078
08-16-2012, 09:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Don't know either. Many times brand names are blurred out in videos. But then again on the 'Michel Berger' thing earlier this year, Sailor Moon was right there with us on TV when Alizée sang 'La déclaration d'amour.' What does it all mean....
 
|
|
#1079
08-16-2012, 11:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Here is the answer on the Tattoos if it is licensed image. Alizee will only get sued if she is using it as a commercial product. Like on the album cover, you cans see Sailor Moon. Because now your using that image to promote your product to make money.
The real person who they will go after is Tin Tin for selling licensed image like Disney / Sailor Moon Tattoos for profit to make money. Another bad thing is he is taking licensed images and adding things to them like Guns. Now your giving Disney the ammo they need to say your taking licensed images and giving our product "Snow White" a bad image. I know "Scruffy" does not like Tin Tin and it would be VERY damaging to him if someone notified Disney that he is selling Disney Tattoos to make money. I'm not telling anyone to DO that...but Disney would go after him in 2 seconds to protect there image... For those of you who ask how I know this, I work for a Tattoo promotion company. Disney has gone after my ass many times, but I have the paperwork to prove they give me the license to use there image for there promotions. I assure you Tin Tin does not have this permission to do this.
|
|
#1080
08-17-2012, 01:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
  no tin tin, no new tattoos for alizee? 
__________________
|
 |
| Tags |
| chronology, dates, events, misc., questions, timeline |
|
|
 |
 |
Linear Mode
