Copyright Questions

[Nathan Campos]

Hello,
I'm writing an ebook about online file managing and storage and I'm putting many company names on it. Like MegaUpload, Microsoft SkyDrive, DropBox and others, then I want to know what I should make for don't infringe the copyrights of these trademarks.

Best Regards,
Nathan Paulino Campos

[HarryT]

There's absolutely no problem at all in using company names in the manner that you describe. You have nothing to worry about.

[Steven Lake]

Well, the registered trademark symbol is important to have, as well as footnotes, if you're making a profit off the book. If it's just going to be a web article or a blog post, then a link to the respective service is recommended, but not required.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Steven Lake

Well, the registered trademark symbol is important to have, as well as footnotes, if you're making a profit off the book.

I have to respectfully disagree, Steven. The owner of a trademark has to use such symbols. If somebody else wishes to say something like "You can backup your data online using services such as DropBox" there is not the slightest need to acknowledge that "DropBox" is a trademark (which I would imagine it is).

[Nathan Campos]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I have to respectfully disagree, Steven. The owner of a trademark has to use such symbols. If somebody else wishes to say something like "You can backup your data online using services such as DropBox" there is not the slightest need to acknowledge that "DropBox" is a trademark (which I would imagine it is).

Ahh. Thanks, now I can continue writing it without worrying about this...

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by Nathan Campos

... I want to know what I should make for don't infringe the copyrights of these trademarks.

Trademarks don't have copyrights.

Copyrights and trademarks are two totally different things, often (as in the US) handled by totally different parts of the government. In this case, it's trademarks you're worried about, not copyrights. The basic concept of a trademark is that it's intended to indicate the origin of goods (or, for a service mark, services). If you're not using a trademark to misrepresent the origin of something you're selling, you're not misappropriating it. You may, however, be infringing on it in a way likely to cause genericization -- that is, the kind of thing that happened to the zipper.

Trademarks, technically, are proper adjectives. The company that makes Rollerblades used to run ads (and still may, for all I know) telling writers that they're not allowed to write "Joe, your Rollerblades look silly"; they have to write "Joe, your Rollerblades brand of inline roller skates look silly." While this mostly made people simply write about any and every brand except Rollerblades, they were the guys with the trademark.

A good way to find out the proper spelling, capitalization, and usage of any trademark is to check the owner's website. Usually they have something tucked away in "legal information" or thereabouts telling how they'd like their trademarks used, and what sort of a disclaimer (the usual one boils down to "people own things they own") they want in the book.

[mr ploppy]

What if I wanted to stab someone with a Guiness bottle? (in a story).

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

What if I wanted to stab someone with a Guiness bottle? (in a story).

No problem whatsoever.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

What if I wanted to stab someone with a Guiness bottle? (in a story).

Well, according to the Rollerblades (or rather, Rollerblades brand of inline roller skates) people, you'd have to stab someone with a broken Guinness brand of Irish dry stout bottle. The example they used was something like prohibiting writing "John was Rollerblading".

I didn't say it made a whole lot of sense.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Well, according to the Rollerblades (or rather, Rollerblades brand of inline roller skates) people, you'd have to stab someone with a broken Guinness brand of Irish dry stout bottle. The example they used was something like prohibiting writing "John was Rollerblading".

I didn't say it made a whole lot of sense.

There is an enormous difference between the way that a company might like you to use their trademark, and the way that people actually do use it in the real world. As I've said in previous messages, these are ordinary words, and provided you aren't using them for "purposes of trade", they can be used in their normal everyday language sense without issues.

[Worldwalker]

The problem isn't that those companies are wrong, or that those companies are jerks (probably on the first, definitely on the second). The problem is they're capable of litigating us "little people" into the ground without blinking a checkbook. I don't know to what extent any given company would try it, or how successful they're likely to be (knowing their fondness for running their opponents out of money, big company versus starving writer, that's not hard), but it's something to be aware of. Along, of course, with the wisdom of giving any free publicity to someone who treats people who give it to them that way. Of course you're not selling Rollerblades, but if the company that is decides to sue you because you didn't say "Rollerblades brand of inline roller skates" in your story, it's possible that you may not be able to afford to defend yourself. Probable? I dunno. But I'd be at least somewhat paranoid.

[mr ploppy]

I think that sort of thing would be more likely for a print book put out by a big publisher who could afford to throw money at a brand owner to make it go away. For a self published ebook they would just send a DMCA to Amazon and have it removed. No fuss, no expense, and no bad publicity. Then the writer could just substitute a competitor's brand name and republish.