LazMan Premium Member join:2003-03-26 Beverly Hills, CA |
LazMan
Premium Member
2014-Aug-29 10:49 am
Who didn't see that one coming?» www.q107.com/2014/08/29/ ··· facebookSo, Livegreen's new anti-litter campaign hasn't even been officially launched; and they are already pulling it, due to the brand-owners not granting permission for their logo's to be used; and an unwillingness for the brands to be associated with litter/garbage. Anyone in advertising should realize you need a trademark holder's permission to use it... Wonder how much this cost the city? As an aside, it actually was a pretty clever campaign.
|
|
|
I don't see any Tim Horton's cups, they are everywhere, its actually scary how far into the wilderness you can find them. Shame they didn't have a chance to use them in this PSA.
I say its fair use and since this campaign does not produce a profit and that its a PSA these companies are out of luck. If they care about the environment they would use packaging that actually breaks down into safe natural compounds.
Since this PSA isn't going to fly about about lots of photos of the garbage train that Toronto sends down the 401 day after day. |
|
|
said by Thane_Bitter:I say its fair use and since this campaign does not produce a profit and that its a PSA these companies are out of luck. I agree that these companies should suck it up. And it's actually a clever campaign, and would be good for the various brands, not harmful. But---as a matter of law AFAIK the Canadian fair dealing is more restrictive than the US fair use. » fairduty.wordpress.com/r ··· air-use/ |
|
|
to LazMan
It should be fair use. And if companies object, ask them - in a public way - why are they pro-litter.
They'll soon stop bitching, I bet. |
|
Gone Premium Member join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2014-Aug-30 9:38 am
It's not fair use if their trademarks are being used for third-party advertising, and claiming that they are pro-litter is a quick way to find yourself in court. |
|
|
urbanriot
Premium Member
2014-Aug-30 10:22 am
said by Gone:It's not fair use if their trademarks are being used for third-party advertising, and claiming that they are pro-litter is a quick way to find yourself in court. Yea, I agree... clever campaign idea but whoever authorized it should be fired. |
|
mr weather Premium Member join:2002-02-27 Mississauga, ON |
said by urbanriot:Yea, I agree... clever campaign idea but whoever authorized it should be fired. A city employee get fired? Good luck. |
|
digitalfuturSees More Than Shown Premium Member join:2000-07-15 GTA |
to EdmundGerber
Saying the companies in the ad are pro-litter is like saying car companies are pro-collision since cars regularly crash on the roads.
Logic fail. |
|
dirtyjeffer0Posers don't use avatars. Premium Member join:2002-02-21 London, ON |
said by digitalfutur:Saying the companies in the ad are pro-litter is like saying car companies are pro-collision since cars regularly crash on the roads.
Logic fail. while i agree, in this day and age, there is no reason why the packaging can't be less damaging to the environment...even our coffee supplier has switched from a poly type bag to a more environmentally responsible choice...it now decomposes in a dump in 1 year instead of something like 10,000 (if ever). |
|