RE: Re: Coipyright in the Hollywood Sign

From: Scott Butcher <s_butcher[_at_]jdbe.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 16:30:46 -0400

I do a bit of photography ... Freelance, art prints, short-run posters.

I've always been concerned about trademarks and knowing when a property release is required. From everything that I've come to learn, it seems like something normally viewable from a public space can be photographed and used without property releases, licensing fees, etc.

This forum has been useful to me when I've previously posted questions. I can recall one question I had a while back about photographing murals on the sides of buildings. If I zoom in ONLY on the mural, which is protected by copyright, and crop out everything else, I can't sell that work because it is clearly a reproduction of the mural. But if I zoom out, and take a photo of a building on which the mural is located, I'm apparently permitted to sell it without fear of copyright violation.

I know that members of this forum have previously referenced a Warner Brothers case in which a work of art (again attached to a building) appeared in a movie (Batman, perhaps?). The Rock-n-Roll Hall of Fame was another case often referenced.

And while a sign is not a building, wouldn't the concept hold true? If I take a picture of the hill on which the Hollywood sign sits, how am I infringing upon a trademark? No one owns the trademark to the hill.

A member of the forum included a link to an aerial view of the sign. Aerial views throughout the United States, and world, are now available and for sale on the Web (e.g., www.terraserver.com). Would not the same Hollywood Chamber argument apply? If the selling of a photo of the Hollywood sign is a trademark infringement, does it matter from what vantage point the photo was taken? In fact, the aerial cameras go where normal cameras can't. But I'm not familiar with a "slew" of lawsuits that should have resulted. And how many movies have you seen with sweeping cityscapes ... Buildings, fountains, statues, public art, signage, etc.?

If EVERYTHING in your photo other than the Hollywood sign was cropped out, revealing only the letters, perhaps there is an infringement. But if your photo shows the context of the sign (the hillside), and was taken from a public place, I have a hard time understanding how there can be any infringement.

You may want to also contact the American Society of Media Photographers (www.asmp.org).

Scott Butcher
York, Pennsylvania

-----Original Message-----
From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property [mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org] On Behalf Of Joseph Pietro Riolo Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 4:00 PM
To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: [CNI-(C)] Coipyright in the Hollywood Sign

On 6/15/05, Richard G.McCracken <R.G.Mccracken[_at_]open.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> We've received a request to pay licensing fees for use of the
> photograph from the Hollywood Chamber of Commerc, claiming that the
> sign itself is protected by copyright.

My feeling is that the writer of the request, which I presumed to be a stupid lawyer, doesn't know the difference between copyright and trademark.

Here are the steps to find out what trademarks that Hollywood Chamber of Commerce own:

1. Go to http://www.uspto.gov/
2. Click on "Search" under "Trademarks" in the left side.
3. Click on "New User Form Search (Basic)" in the middle of the web page.
4. Enter "Hollywood Chamber of Commerce" in the box for "Search Term".
5. Select the field "Owner Name and Address" in the pull-down list next to "Field".
6. Click on "Submit Query".
7. You will get a list of 26 records. As a sample, click on the number 2118638 under the column heading "Reg. Number".
8. You will see the image of the mark showing "Hollywood" in shape and form similar to what is seen on the hill.

Based on the above, it is my feeling that the issue is trademark, not copyright. I don't know about your country but in my country, using trademarks in non-commercial ways is almost always legal. However, your case borders on commercial area (your university is in business selling education to earn profit to pay professors and so on) and I don't know how prominent is the picture of Hollywood sign in your education. Trademark is not my area and I better stop now.

Joseph Pietro Riolo
<josephpietrojeungriolo[_at_]gmail.com>
<riolo[_at_]voicenet.com>

Number of days left until 1-1-2019 when all knowledge of 1923 in the land of the U.S.A. will be freed from their copyright owners' prisons: 4,947

Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain.

#############################################################

This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to   the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>

Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>. Received on Tue Jun 21 2005 - 00:30:46 GMT