Copyright or trademark saying????

I am in the process of getting some stuff made and just realized something.

My picture is unique - commissioned an artist to make it. However, I'm not sure on the saying. For instance my saying (not real saying, but example) is, "Bob went to the store" and then below it "To buy some milk".

Now I have been looking online (could not find anything from a cursory search on trademarks/copyrights - though copyrights are a little different). The only thing I could find online which is currently being used for shirts, cups, etc. is this, "I love golf:" and then below (or on the same line) "To buy some milk".

Is the fact that the second portion is exactly the same as mine (though the context and initial portion of the saying is different) reason enough to abandon this idea? I guess I could slightly change the second portion, but I don't think it would have the same "impact". Thoughts?????? Thanks!


I could always change the second part. The second part is a negative phrase, yet the 180 degree opposite of this is positive - sort of like "I hate thieves" to "I love the honest" - any preference as to how to proceed? The "positive" or "negative" version????

I'm not a copyright lawyer, but I believe you can use the actual phrasing to ask your question. It falls well within the Fair Use guidelines to use the actual words you're asking the question about. For instance, you could say: "Did Paris Hilton actually copyright the phrase 'That's hot'?" (Which, of course, she did.)

It might make it easier for someone to advise you....

Second part if the phrase in question is: "Fighting Tyranny Since 1776"

Originally posted by Ex_CT2
For instance, you could say: "Did Paris Hilton actually copyright the phrase 'That's hot'?" (Which, of course, she did.)

Actually no she didn't, the request was denied. You can not copyright common phrases. She has a federal trademark for use on clothing.

What makes a phrase "common"???

Originally posted by pityocamptes
What makes a phrase "common"???

It's use in everyday language.

For something to qualify for a copyright it has to be an original work of authorship. You can't copyright individual words, shot phrases, or common ideas.

Originally posted by Wally Hope

Originally posted by pityocamptes
What makes a phrase "common"???

It's use in everyday language.

For something to qualify for a copyright it has to be an original work of authorship. You can't copyright individual words, shot phrases, or common ideas.

So how would you interpret the phrase I posted? Thanks!

Originally posted by Wally Hope

Originally posted by Ex_CT2
For instance, you could say: "Did Paris Hilton actually copyright the phrase 'That's hot'?" (Which, of course, she did.)

Actually no she didn't, the request was denied. You can not copyright common phrases. She has a federal trademark for use on clothing.

D'OH!

Originally posted by pityocamptes

So how would you interpret the phrase I posted? Thanks!

Short phrases can not be copyrighted.

Why do you want to copyright it anyway? Your OP is a little confusing. If you want to use your phrase on t-shirts etc., you don't have to copyright it, you can trademark it for use on t-shirts etc. You can protect the use of the phrase associated with your product, or the way it looks if it is made into a logo, but you can't own the phrase.

If that golf/milk slogan has a trademark, that would mean you can not use that exact phrase on a t-shirt, but using just part of it would be fine afaik.

I'm no expert btw, I just know a little from being in the music business.

Originally posted by Wally Hope

Originally posted by pityocamptes

So how would you interpret the phrase I posted? Thanks!

Short phrases can not be copyrighted.

Why do you want to copyright it anyway? Your OP is a little confusing. If you want to use your phrase on t-shirts etc., you don't have to copyright it, you can trademark it for use on t-shirts etc. You can protect the use of the phrase associated with your product, or the way it looks if it is made into a logo, but you can't own the phrase.

If that golf/milk slogan has a trademark, that would mean you can not use that exact phrase on a t-shirt, but using just part of it would be fine afaik.

I'm no expert btw, I just know a little from being in the music business.

Thanks. A little confusion. I saw where it was already being used for a t-shirt, but my phrase incorporates the phrase in partial as explained above. Can I still do it? I don't want to get sued! Thanks!

OK, reread your post and I think I understand. So if the phrase letters were part of a logo, then I could not use it. However, if its just a phrase of words which I will use and someone else is using it, then I should be ok as long as my phrase is unique in artistic appearance and associated with a unique logo/drawing? Thanks!!

Originally posted by pityocamptes
Thanks. A little confusion. I saw where it was already being used for a t-shirt, but my phrase incorporates the phrase in partial as explained above. Can I still do it? I don't want to get sued! Thanks!

OK, reread your post and I think I understand. So if the phrase letters were part of a logo, then I could not use it. However, if its just a phrase of words which I will use and someone else is using it, then I should be ok as long as my phrase is unique in artistic appearance and associated with a unique logo/drawing? Thanks!!

No you can use the words. You can't use the logo. A logo is a graphic.

If someone else has a trademark on a design, that uses a phrase, on say a t-shirt, and you use the exact same phrase, and design, yourself on a t-shirt they could sue for trademark infringement as you are just copying their work on a t-shirt. If they didn't trademark it for use on say hats, then you could claim the trademark for hats, but even then you can't use the same design, or logo as that would be trademark infringement.
That is why companies making different products can have the same trademarked name.

For example dairy producers sued someone for trademark infringement for making 'got milf' t-shirts because the font used was the same (for an obvious parody) of the original. You can make t-shirts that say 'got milk', they wouldn't be happy, but if you use a different design, font, they would have a hard time suing you.

But I could always be wrong, so it would be wise to check with a lawyer.

Originally posted by Wally Hope

Originally posted by pityocamptes
Thanks. A little confusion. I saw where it was already being used for a t-shirt, but my phrase incorporates the phrase in partial as explained above. Can I still do it? I don't want to get sued! Thanks!

OK, reread your post and I think I understand. So if the phrase letters were part of a logo, then I could not use it. However, if its just a phrase of words which I will use and someone else is using it, then I should be ok as long as my phrase is unique in artistic appearance and associated with a unique logo/drawing? Thanks!!

No you can use the words. You can't use the logo. A logo is a graphic.

If someone else has a trademark on a design, that uses a phrase, on say a t-shirt, and you use the exact same phrase, and design, yourself on a t-shirt they could sue for trademark infringement as you are just copying their work on a t-shirt. If they didn't trademark it for use on say hats, then you could claim the trademark for hats, but even then you can't use the same design, or logo as that would be trademark infringement.
That is why companies making different products can have the same trademarked name.

For example dairy producers sued someone for trademark infringement for making 'got milf' t-shirts because the font used was the same (for an obvious parody) of the original. You can make t-shirts that say 'got milk', they wouldn't be happy, but if you use a different design, font, they would have a hard time suing you.

But I could always be wrong, so it would be wise to check with a lawyer.

edit on 29-5-2011 by Wally Hope because: (no reason given)

OK, I believe I understand. The phrase can be used, just not the same font, logo, style, etc.? Mine is completely different. Thanks again!

It is confusing, to be sure. Context may be everything. A trademark, for example, can be a single word. "Sony" is a good example. Sony, the electronics firm, has a trademark on the word "Sony" No one else can use it in a business setting. A woman named "Sony" opened a restauranmt and called it "Sony's restaurant." Sony sued and won. Sony, the person, spent $20K in legal fees and lost anyway. She was upset she couldn't use her own name, but she still lost.

Trademarks go through phases. The mark must be used in INTERSTATE commerce, not just intra-state commerce. When you first apply for a trademark you put "tm" after it, like this: "Schuyler-tm" (That's just a 'tm' above the trademark. All that means is that I'm making the claim) If I use the trademark long enough and widely enough I get on the "register" list and then say: "Schuyler(r)" (That's 'r' with a circle around it in case this system turns it into an emoticon.) At that point is just about impossible to dislodge my trademark, but I must aggressively protect it. THAT'S WHY you see lawsuits on thsi stuff.

For example, "kleenex" is a registered trademark, but just about everyone uses "kleenex" to descrive every tissue out there, no matter what brand. Kleenex the company has more or less lost the exclusivity of their term, though to my knowledge no other tissue company has decided to call their product 'kleenex'. Coke vs Pepsi is another issue. Coke has "spotters" that go around to restaurants that serve Pepsi and ask for a Coke. If the server says nothing, said restaurant gets a letter from Coke. The server is SUPPOSED to say, "We don't seve Coke; Will Pepsi be Okay?"

Copyright is equally weird. usually it is said this way: "You cannot copyright an idea, but you can copyright an expression of an idea. So phrases, unless they are unique, are not copyrightable, just as titles to books or articles are not copyrightable.

BUT (You're gonna love this), you can trademark a phrase. Pepsi once had an ad campaign that said, "Pepsi! For those who think young!" That phrase was trademarked and reached the register.

Here's another good one. The Olympic Committee owns the word "Olympic" EVEN THOUGH the Olympic Mountain Range is in Washington State. There was an ISP here that named sthemselves "Olympic Internet Services." after the mountains which you can see from their headquarters, of course. They got a letter from the Olympic Committee and changed their name. They might have won. They might have lost. The Olympic Committee has deep resources and the small company did not, so they folded.

OK, now I am REALLY confused!!!!

Here is the shirt I found that has the secondary phrase "Fighting Tyranny Since 1776". My primary phrase that precedes the secondary phrase is completely different, as is the artwork, font, etc. Am I screwed from using this, or should I go with my plan B phrase that does not seem to be out there? Thanks!!!!

www.zazzle.com...

Look, pity. We've given you quite a bit of information here. What you see above is about as good as the collective minds of ATS can or will do for you. If it's not enough for you to make a decision, or if you are even more confused, I suggest you contact a copyright/trademark lawyer. No one here can tell you with complete certainity what you ought to do.

reply to post by pityocamptes


Because someone put that on a shirt doesn't mean it's trademarked. I don't see a trademark logo anywhere. That is the first thing you need to check.

BTW right wing extremists fighting tyranny? Isn't that an oxymoron lol? Right wing extremism is fascism, one of the most tyrannical systems known to man. Remember Mussolini, Franco, Hitler? I must be missing the joke?

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by pityocamptes

 

BTW right wing extremists fighting tyranny? Isn't that an oxymoron lol? Right wing extremism is fascism, one of the most tyrannical systems known to man. Remember Mussolini, Franco, Hitler? I must be missing the joke?

Yeah, you are. Left-wing extremism is communism, one of the most tyrannical systems known to man. Remember Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Guevera? Add up the dead and compare.

Originally posted by schuyler
Yeah, you are. Left-wing extremism is communism, one of the most tyrannical systems known to man. Remember Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Guevera? Add up the dead and compare.

But that doesn't make the right any better does it?

Why do you think I would support tyrannical anything, left or right? Why should one form of tyranny be used as an excuse to allow another?

Fascism is by it's very design an oppressive tyrannical system for the people. Communism is it's true form is not tyrannical at all. The so-called communist countries are really not communist at all. USSR was a republic, China is as capitalist as the US. None of those countries practiced communism. America claims to be democratic, but in reality it is a republic, which means the people have a limited vote and the stuff that really matter is out of our hands.

The whole communism thing was just a way of demonizing an enemy in order to justify the expense of the military. 'Communism' has been replaced by 'terrorism' for the latest boogie man.

I'm not a communist, but I am aware of political history and how the population is manipulated by the state in order to achieve its agenda.

There are alternatives to all this No one will learn from history if they allow themselves to be MSM educated on it.