Forum

I was watching my beautiful new Escaflowne blu-ray and noticed this giggle once again. In the scene where Hitomi and Amano are in the infirmary timing the pendant we see the clock. It is a suitably disguised Seiko (okay, I can't remember how and am too lazy to check). Anyway, that's not the funny part. It is a Quarts clock. I could never decide if it is just randomly misspelled, which happens, or it was done deliberately in an excess of caution.

ladybastet wrote:

It is a Quarts clock. I could never decide if it is just randomly misspelled, which happens, or it was done deliberately in an excess of caution.

That's amusing, because quartz isn't a trademark.

-t

jr240483 wrote:

if that was the case then universal pictures let alone the US trademark committee wouldnt be nitpicky about the detective conan manga. for one thing the name conan is extremely commonly used as a first name and its an already existing generic name that have been used for a very long time. but somehow the trademark and "in all of its wisdom" says using the name conan infringes of universal pictures conan the barbarian franchise which is downright and utter BS since conan edagawa aint even a fricking barbarian and it's because of universal's BS is the reason why viz media & Funi was forced to call the manga and anime series cased closed.

Mostly these things come down to who has the deepest pockets to pay the most lawyers, not whose side the law is on.

The first women's bookstore in the US was founded in 1970 under the name Amazon Bookstore. When amazon.com first started out, they were just an online book seller. Eventually the women, god bless 'em, sued amazon.com for infringement, but the fact that the women's collective had been using that name for their bookstore for nearly 25 years before amazon.com came along did not convince the court that there was likely to be any confusion over the two book sellers (though when I first heard of amazon.com I immediately assumed it was the women's bookstore that was now online) and they eventually they had to settle, which included having to license their own name back from amazon.com. Adding insult to injury, when the founders decided to sell the bookstore, the new buyers were prohibited by amazon from using the name any longer.

Also, you can't copyright a title, and yet Cameron's threat of a suit forced Avatar's live action movie to change its name to The Last Airbender (which was probably just as well). Likewise all the song and album titles used in JoJo's, which for some reason scared everyone here to death. Bebop didn't have any trouble with all its episode titles, but maybe that was a less litigious time.

Mitsjol wrote:

Here's a list of fake brands in anime if anyone is interested.

Hey, great post, thanks! I really do get a kick out of this sort of thing, I usually mutter to myself "yeah, yeah, you're not fooling anybody" and chuckle at how silly this seems. I also forgot Rumbling Hearts and the "Sky Temple" family restaurant whose sign and building looked suspiciously like a Denny's and Kumamiko where Machi goes shopping at Shimomura.

^ "Shimomura" was a just barely bland-name version of Shimamura, but Kumamiko also got clearance for some store other store names, like UNIQLO (where I suspect they needed to use the actual store name if they also wanted to get clearance to feature "Heattech" underwear as a plot device) and Village Vanguard, the novelty book store chain.

There is a lot of misconception here about the laws governing copyrights, trademarks, IPs, and the like. That is understandable, because as a law student actually studying this stuff, there is a lot that goes on.

For example, in the Amazon case referenced earlier, I'm going to assume the woman's bookstore was licensed to operate in their own state only. That doesn't mean they can't operate in other locations, but that protections of their name as a business (assuming they even filed the paperwork for that, which you do have to do annually), ended at the borders of that state. Along comes Amazon.com, and they license their name nationwide. Well, when that case goes to court the question before the court becomes, who is more inconvenienced by the need to pick a new name? That's a vague term, but that's the balance they use. Is it the women's bookstore located in one state, with a small footprint and therefore less costs associated with re-branding? Or is amazon.com with its national reach and the cost associated with their re-branding. And this is a question of cost, not ability to pay. That is a critical legal distinction that many folks don't realize about the judicial system - rarely, in any context, does ability to pay influence a determination of how much in damages a party owes.

As for intellectual property, it is defined very broadly for the express purpose that it be a catch-all term so that new concepts aren't left out. "Printed word" used to be in the definition, but that would be too narrow, because if you typed a manuscript on your computer but never printed it, and someone hacked your PC, stole the script, sold it, and got rich, by the definition of "printed word" you'd be out of luck because you never hit "print" and had it in paper form.

Company letterhead, is legally applicable as a signature to whatever document it is on, even if no one from the company signs their name to it. Because letterhead often uses the symbols and names of the company, trademarking or having that registered is a way to protect against fraud. It can get very, very, technical and complex.

My absolute favorite example of brand name swapping is a Snickers bar labeled " Snackies" in BTOOOM.

I mean, it works out so well: " Hungry? Grab a Snackies!"

DRosencraft wrote:

Well, when that case goes to court the question before the court becomes, who is more inconvenienced by the need to pick a new name? ... Is it the women's bookstore located in one state, with a small footprint and therefore less costs associated with re-branding? Or is amazon.com with its national reach and the cost associated with their re-branding. And this is a question of cost, not ability to pay. That is a critical legal distinction that many folks don't realize about the judicial system - rarely, in any context, does ability to pay influence a determination of how much in damages a party owes.

These seem like opposing ideas. If "inconvenience" is determined by how much re-branding will cost a business, then that is very much a question of ability to pay, if the courts rule that it doesn't matter who had the name first or how long, but which party will have to spend (i.e., pay) the most to resolve the conflict.

At any rate, if it was as simple as the reach of the two businesses, I'd think that Amazon Bookstore's lawyers would have told their clients that up front before launching the case, and that amazon.com would have pinned its case on that, instead of asking questions of the owners during pre-trial about their sexual orientation and that of their staff and their intent to promote lesbian ideals.

Rinkwolf wrote:

... Or Pizza Hut in Railgun

And in their second year, the girls at Lillian's Academy suddenly went pizza-crazy, as a marketing tie-in from Pizza Hut got the fourth season of Maria-sama ga Miteru greenlit:

I don't recall whether there was an outside shot when Yumi took Sachiko for her first meal at a fast food restaurant, but from the logo on the drinks cup, the original Maria-sama ga Miteru fast food may well have been a Big Nick at a NcDonalds.

HeeroTX wrote:

MarshalBanana wrote:

It is possible that Japanese copyright laws were different back then, or maybe it was a Coke tie in placement.

The laws have been standard for a while, it's just more "noticeable" to non-Japanese now as anime distribution has increased. On the one hand, I'm inclined to say "Gainax didn't give a ****" considering how early in their life Gunbuster was (and the "no care given to copyright" that was the Daicon animation). On the other hand, it also includes an homage to American comics professional Toren Smith, so it could have been fully cleared.

Given how these were kept in the American DVD release and not the "Charriots of Fire"-homage music, I'd assume they were cleared.

Kruszer wrote:

Vaisaga wrote:

An odd case is Code Geass. It's pretty famous for it's Pizza Hut tie ins, but for the home release all the Pizza Hut logos were replaced.

Yeah, it's really a head scratcher when the same food chain gets their signals crossed like that. You'd think if they okayed it the first time, they wouldn't have a problem the second time.

It may have had something to do with how Pizza Hut caters to its consumers in different markets. The show may have fit the anime-viewing demographic better in Japan than in the US.
I recall hearing the American division wanted nothing to do with the show. The show itself isn't exactly American-friendly.

Tempest wrote:

In regards to your second point, that you can't get sued for including a trademark in a film/anime... read this: http://www.scriptmag.com/features/legally-speaking-depends-trademarks-film

Linked Article wrote:

For example, many people think that if you turn a bottle’s label away from the camera you’ve prevented infringement.

I've suddenly remember the first time I encountered this sort of thing, as a child. I asked why tinned food in The Waltons (I think) all had ripped labels.

Ouran High School Dropout wrote:

Unless I've missed it, I can't believe no one's mentioned the ultimate (?) example of The Devil is a Part-Timer! -- "MgRonalds" and "Sentucky Fried Chicken"!

FINALLY! I read through the whole thread to this, waiting for someone to say this.

That show runs on this joke. They also had Pasta (for PlayStation/PSP), Book On, UniSlo, and a bunch of others.

But my favorite was the Broadway posters in the Love Live movie. Probably because I like Broadway.

You can use Booble to search the Internet in Kuromukuro. And it's apparently a real porn search engine, which I just found out, so maybe they didn't do enough research on that one.

pachy_boy wrote:

It's one thing if it's for parodic purposes if the series/movie isn't meant to be taken entirely seriously. But what about other titles if the purpose wasn't parodic? My question is--why don't they just make up their own brand names for products that characters use? They don't have to be anything epic or memorable, they could even be staff in-jokes (which is what Pixar does). In my opinion, considering the story is taking place in a fictional world or an alternative version of our own world, that option is far less distracting than making up words that sound similar to brand names that we know.

There are two reasons for this, with some level of overlap. The first is that having a modified version of an existing brand name allows audiences to understand what was meant by it and immediately recognize what it is. The characters at a WcDnalds tells you they're at a hamburger restaurant without ever seeing the food, and someone holding a red can with white swirls tell you that character is drinking cola. The second is that it might have originally been the brand name, but the legal team told them to change it. (For instance, it might have been the logo obscured, but it wasn't obscured enough or a lawyer said the spelling must be changed.)

There are some series that do this though. Nintendo's games, with a few exceptions, make up their own brands for each of their universes, a good example being Splatoon. Similarly, some of the characters in Static Shock work at Burger Fool (though that might just be their counterpart to Burger King).

Someone else brought up the issue of if the story is set in a specified real world location, a fantasy world, or a made-up location in the real world though, and come to think of it, I do see patterns regarding that. Never even thought about that before.

HeeroTX wrote:

The laws have been standard for a while, it's just more "noticeable" to non-Japanese now as anime distribution has increased. On the one hand, I'm inclined to say "Gainax didn't give a ****" considering how early in their life Gunbuster was (and the "no care given to copyright" that was the Daicon animation). On the other hand, it also includes an homage to American comics professional Toren Smith, so it could have been fully cleared.

Another possibility is that Gainax may have been small enough at that time to slip underneath Coca-Cola's legal team's eyes, the same way that your local festivals and churches will freely use brand names because they're not high profile enough. (Odds are you've seen at least one mom-and-pop store invite in Pokémon GO players, for instance. They certainly didn't request permission.)

kakoishii wrote:

though not anime related in the least, I was thinking about this fairly recently after a hoarders binge. All those hoarders buy so many things, much of which are still in the bags from the stores they got them from. I remember thinking what a nightmare it must be for the show to contact all these retailers for each episode or if they just say fudge it and take a chance that a retailer may not want their brand featured in an episode.

Hoarders is on A&E, is it? I don't know how A&E works, but Food Network has a small group of people whose sole job is to either turn containers of food and ingredients around so their brand names aren't showing, to replace the labels with their own generic ones, or to create new packaging. If you ever watch anything on Food Network or Cooking Channel, keep a close eye out in the background for shows that would otherwise contain a lot of them, like Alton Brown's refrigerator in Good Eats, the shelves in Guy Fieri's Grocery Games, or the dining areas in Restaurant Impossible. Or the ingredients in Chopped for close-up examples. (As Tempest's link mentioned different brands have different lines. I'm sure the lawyers at Food Network know exactly where those are, and they give instructions to the aforementioned team accordingly.)

In the case of Hoarders, as it's not practical to do this with someone's house, especially when they have piles stacked on top of other piles and these homes are health risks, I'm guessing their approach is careful editing and finding shots that don't happen to have anything, is too small to make out, or is obscured in some way. An important law in US-based film and TV production, however, is that certain copyrighted and trademarked objects CAN be shown if it's unavoidable. The best example is traffic in the background, which will contain many makes and models from many car companies. Otherwise, every live-action production ever set in a modern-day city would cost a fortune from fees paid to every car company. I'd guess something similar happens with Hoarders.

Tenchi wrote:

The All Purpose Cultural Cat Girl Nuku Nuku OVA also had undisguised KFC in the first episode, although that was pretty much a "blink and you'll miss it" shot and not the focus of the episode like the "Benny's".

His fingers are on the top half of the "K." This is very important, because that creates a defense in case KFC goes after them, as they can argue it's actually, say, "RFC." The picture of Colonel Sanders is also drawn and can't be proven that it was intended to actually be him, rather than a lookalike.

Kruszer wrote:

Vaisaga wrote:

An odd case is Code Geass. It's pretty famous for it's Pizza Hut tie ins, but for the home release all the Pizza Hut logos were replaced.

Yeah, it's really a head scratcher when the same food chain gets their signals crossed like that. You'd think if they okayed it the first time, they wouldn't have a problem the second time. Darker Than Black had their Pizza Hut references removed too. I guess it's a case of the right hand of the company not knowing what the left is doing or the English license holding not wanting to deal with the red tape and just painting over the box logos.

My guess is that Pizza Hut only allowed them to use the logo for the broadcast but didn't say anything about home video releases. Best not to take chances on this sort of thing.

Tenchi wrote:

Taco Bell and Pizza Hut are owned by the same company, Pepsi (Pepsico), but, back in 1993, Taco Bell wasn't nearly as recogizable a brand overseas as Pizza Hut. I think they shot alternate scenes for the international market, or maybe it was just dubbed in. (It was kept as Taco Bell when I saw it in English in Montreal, which didn't have Taco Bell at the time as far as I remember.)

I thought Pepsi sold them both off (and KFC with them), with Yum! Foods taking them.

Dfens wrote:

Some times companies will give permission if you ask and not charge for their logos.

From what I've seen, how much they charge is on a case-by-case basis in proportion with the size of the company that wants to use the name (with a few exceptions, but they are largely copyright and trademark trolls, like that Edge guy). The bare minimum seems to be proof that you can finish your project.

jr240483 wrote:

personally both japaneese and the US license holders for detective conan should have told universal to "jump off a cliff" (i would have told them that's VERY NSFW) and used the detective conan title instead of submitting to the whims of the hollywood machine cause i am sure they (universal) have no claims of copyright infringement since both franchise are completely different and the name is definitely not unique at the slightest.

The risk of a lawsuit is something smaller companies would rather not take. Even if they win the case, it will cost a lot of money and will likely take years. During that time, they're supposed to keep away from the productions in question. They can work on other stuff, but by the time the case ends, the property will have gone cold.

Gina Szanboti wrote:

At any rate, if it was as simple as the reach of the two businesses, I'd think that Amazon Bookstore's lawyers would have told their clients that up front before launching the case, and that amazon.com would have pinned its case on that, instead of asking questions of the owners during pre-trial about their sexual orientation and that of their staff and their intent to promote lesbian ideals.

I'm guessing the matter here is more complicated than simply who has more money or who is more inconvenienced by changing their name, considering there is a brewery in Germany called Budweiser, older than the American Budweiser, that was attacked by American Budweiser and won the case, such that American Budweiser was allowed to use its own name in every country except Germany. It got started when German Budweiser decided to start importing its beer into the United States and immediately got the attention of the American Budweiser. (I forget the status of imported German Budweiser though, whether they have to change their name or not.)

Of course, this may be an issue of international law, whereas something set entirely within one country might be quite different.

Back in 1993, when Demolition Man was made, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut still belonged to Pepsi. And the scenes were actually redubbed (and pretty badly), but Taco Bell logo was also edited.

As for Budweiser, it's not German company, it's Czech company from the city of České Budějovice, whose German name is Budweis or Böhmishe Budweis and that's the main point in favour of that Czech company, along with the fact they used the brand longer then ABI did. And the truth is, in many countries it's actually ABI who can't use Budweiser brand, including the whole EU except UK and Ireland, where both ABI and the Czechs can sell Budweiser. In North America, Czech Budweiser is sold under the brand Czechvar and interestingly between 2007-2014, ABI sold it. Now United States Beverage took over the Czechvar selling in North America. The whole dispute is, however, more complicated, since there is another brewery in České Budějovice who uses the brand Budweiser Bier and is now owned by ABI. In the Czech Repulic (and some other areas) they are however forced to use the brand Samson.

Forum - View topic
Answerman - Why Can't Anime Use Trademarked Names?

Crunchyroll Announces English Dub Cast, Release Dates for Wind Breaker, An Archdemon's Dilemma, A Condition Called Love Anime

At 25:00 in Akasaka BL Drama Cast Discuss Kiss Scene, Personal Hobbies at Live Event

This Week in Anime - Are This Season's Isekai Anime Any Good?

Voice Actor Dave Underwood Dies at 57

The Spring 2024 Anime Preview Guide

Fans Say Farewell to Yokohama's Life-Size Moving Gundam

This Week in Anime - What Do You Do When Your Fav Anime Isn't Simulcast?

Ragna Crimson Manga Volume 11 Review

Forum - View topicAnswerman - Why Can't Anime Use Trademarked Names?

Forum

Forum - View topic
Answerman - Why Can't Anime Use Trademarked Names?