Hi I am currently working on my first real game that I hope to get published. Its a 3d twisted metal type game for the pc. I added lots of different interactive objects such as a coke machine in the first level. I used a pic of a real pepsi vending machine for the textures. Would I get in trouble for using something like that? Am I aloud to have stuff with brand names on them in my game? thanks for any response. heres a pic if anyone wants to see it. http://www.alltimepartytime.com/nicksrus/images/rc.jpg

I''m not sure what the law is in a case like this, but it''s certainly possible for PepsiCo to sue, which is enough to cause you much trouble. Not too long ago there was a story somewhere about airline companies suing flight-sim makers for trademark infringement (the games used real brands and logos). A travesty of justice, but sadly the reality of out legal system.

quote: Original post by kingy
Strange isnt it, you would think they wouldnt mind because the more people see their products the more it helps their brand recognition.

Spectre Software - RPGs, strategy, puzzle games, programming

Companies spend millions on researched, targeted advertising campaigns. They like to have total control on how their brand name is seen by the public, and outside of the press, government, education and private speech they pretty much can (legally). My suggestion would be to not use logos or product names. For instance you could say "He got away in a Dodge pickup", but if you said "He got away in a Dodge Ram" or used the their logo you might end up sued (if they ever see your game).

Perhaps it''s understandable, but it''s hardly fair. I don''t care how much money companies spend building a brand, using that brand name within a creative work should be an act protected by the first ammendment. The only forbidden use should be the naming of products by competitors using trademerks similar or identical to those of competing products. Coca Cola should not be allowed to sell a softdrink named Pepsi^2, but people should be able to refer to Pepsi in creative works in any way they wish, except for telling lies in non-fiction works. Indeed, the use of brand names without permission is likely protected in things like parody and criticism, and under an ideal fair-use law this would apply to all creative works. Too bad it''s not that way.

Corporate attitudes toward trademark have much to do with the fact that trademarks cease to be valid if diluted. I''d replace this outdated common-law system with a system requiring registration of any protected trademark, with a renewal requirement every so many years and a "must market" requirement to prevent the hoarding of trademarks by unscrupulous companies.

I agree, understandable but very much unfair. Thanks for the input all

You could always just ask them for permission.
It couldn''t hurt and they just might say yes.

Obscure,

Of course Pepsi would mind if people used Pepsi in such a context, but should they have a right to prevent it? Not in my opinion. You can''t compare it to using a person''s name and address because that has certain privacy implications that a trademark case does not. What you''re left with is a "defamation" case where "parody" has been used as a legitimate defense in many cases. Sure, making fun of Barney might cause the producers to lose viewers and profits, but parody is protected by the first ammendment, lost profits or not. I say the same protection should be given to all works of fiction.

"It tastes just like Pepsi" said a character in a comic strip back when Coca-Cola altered its classic formula, pissing of customers. Unfair to Coca-Cola? I think not.