Legality of using a logo in your own artwork

[Rigamarole]

@Anthony_N

Don’t even think that altering it by a little or a lot will change anything. In the creative arts, you must be original to succeed. Gathering inspiration from the history of art and expression is a good thing, but when it comes time to executing on your work, don’t copy.

Poppycock. “The key to creativity is knowing how to conceal your sources.” - Rigamarole.

[Telemark]

It’s an irregular verb, ie:

He steals. You copy. I build upon.

[mazinger_z]

@JonathanTheRed

You sure about this? As I said, IANAL, but it was my understanding that the exception to trademark protection was nominative use, often misleadingly called “nominative fair use”, and that it has little in common with copyright fair use.

Yes, I’m sure about this. Fair use is codified in The Lanham Act § 33(b)(4); 15 U.S.C. § 1115(b)(4). There are about 9 elements, non-exhaustive, and not all 9 have to be met. It’s a test of balance and facts, clearly not a bright-line test. The split is between 9th (there’s a surprise) and the 5th, if you can call it a split (I use the term loosely). Nominative fair use is actually what the statute describes. The other fair uses: parody and classical fair use, are more closely related to copyright fair use, though all three will undergo the same analysis the reach the same conclusion with regards to fair use (similar to copyright law).

The justifications for fair use of a copyrighted work are criticism, news reporting, and scholarship.

You forgot parody. And, there are scenarios, depending on the copyrighted material, as well as the facts on hand, where a mechanical license will be put forth rather than find infringement.

The justification for nominative use of a distinctive/famous mark is using the mark to refer to the product signified by the mark itself, i.e. Apple can’t sue me for trademark infringement if I say “I bought an Apple[sup]TM[/sup] computer.” Or, for a more likely scenario in which a trademark owner might take offense, Apple can’t sue Dell for saying “Our computers are a much better deal than Apple[sup]TM[/sup] computers.”

Saying you bought an Apple computer and nothing else is not descriptive of anything, except a declaratory statement describing what you’re doing (which is not inherently descriptive, because there is no comparison being made in that statement). Saying that your computers are much better than Dell’s, depending on how you say it, can trigger a whole host of complaints, the least of which, in the present statement, a claim of trademark dilution or FTC or other Lanham Act complaint (this will depends on the manner of advertising). Anyway, my plane is leaving to go back home. This was all off the top of my head. If you want case cites, google “fair use trademark law” and you should see a bunch of cites, I’m sure.

Oh, and lastly, yes, a logo can be copyrighted. Again, not legal advice, but the amount of care one should take in using a copyright logo is about the same for using a registered trademark. Dealing with a copyright issue is just another hurdle to overcome when answering a complaint, although a rather big hurdle.

[CookingWithGas]

Here are a couple of examples of fan magazines that use the logos, at least on the online versions. These appear to me to be independent of the manufacturer:

Ferrari Haven (note that it includes Ferrari club logos which also in turn use the Ferrari logo)

5.0 Mustang

I’m sure there are lots of other examples. I also tried Viper Magazine but that says explicitly that it’s published for Dodge. Hmmm. Wonder how long that will last…

I’ll bet if you drop them a line and ask if they have any trouble using the logo they’d respond.

[Dan_Norder]

@CookingWithGas

I’ll bet if you drop them a line and ask if they have any trouble using the logo they’d respond.

Which tells you nothing about whether it’s legal or not.

And the idea offered above (and seemingly withdrawn later) that a trademark concerning cars used on every page in an unauthorized commercial magazine about the exact same cars would not be infringement is just plain nutty, in my “not a lawyer but quite educated about intellectual property law, including having taken college classes, having read multiple books and keeping up on court cases now and then” opinion.

[CookingWithGas]

@Dan_Norder

Which tells you nothing about whether it’s legal or not.

That’s true, and if that’s the bar to clear in this thread then it should be closed and the OP should hire a lawyer.