Are they selling or servicing those products? If so, I don't think there is any problem. Toucan Sam I'd be a little more hesitant.
This is an important distinction. There is a difference between trademark protection and copyright protection. They are not just two "levels" of the same thing. The purposes of the two types of protection are completely different and the standards for infringement differ.
Copyright Infringement
An artist or author has the right to prevent others from copying his or her original "work of authorship." The act of copying an original work without permission is copyright infringement. Copyright law gives the creator of a "work of authorship" a monopoly on their creation. No one else can copy it or even make a derivative of it without permission.
This is only true, though, if the work that the artist created actually qualifies for copyright protection in the first place. It is typical for a logo to NOT qualify for copyright protection in the US. Why not? Because most logos consist of mere lettering and/or common shapes. These things do not have copyright protection according to the US Copyright Office.
The Toucan Sam cartoon is no doubt protected by copyright as a "work of authorship." But is the
Subway sandwich restaurant logo protected by copyright? No. Nor are the
Best Western and the
Geek Squad logos. They don't meet the standard for copyright protection. But the Subway name
is protected by trademark law.
Trademark infringement
"Trademark infringement is the unauthorized use of a trademark or service mark on or in connection with goods and/or services
in a manner that is likely to cause confusion, deception, or mistake about the source of the goods and/or services."—this is from the website of the US Patent and Trademark Office, though I added the italics.
Trademark law is all about preventing confusion in the marketplace. It's part of the body of laws designed to prevent unfair business practices.
Trademark law is not so much about "copying" logos; it is about using logos in a way that confuses people. For example, if you build farm tractors, you cannot put John Deere logos on them. You can't even call them "John Deere," because the very
name is protected by trademark law, not just the logo. You can't paint them green with a yellow stripe, either, because that color combination is protected as a color trademark (for farm equipment). In fact, a few years ago, Deere & Company won a court decision against a Chinese tractor company on this very issue—the paint scheme—and it was in a Chinese court of law!
But what if a farmer's daughter painted the John Deere logo on his basement wall? Would people be confused by this in some way? What if the farmer hung a hand made John Deere banner inside his machine shed? Is it likely that Deere & Company would accuse him of trademark infringement? I suppose it's possible. But I don't think it's likely. Remember, trademark infringement is not strictly about copying, it's about misleading the public, confusing them as to the source of goods or services.
On the other hand, what if the farmer's talented and resourceful son started selling mailboxes and license plates to area farmers with the Deere logo on them? At some point, if it came to Deer's attention, they may tell him to stop. Deere has trademark registrations for a number of goods and services, including mailboxes and license plates. Deere's trademark registration for mailboxes is 5708679.
So...what if the farmer's son simply wants to provide logo files to whoever wants them? Would he not simply be doing what
Brands of the World has already been doing for a long time? This online logo library has been providing logo files to designers for the past 20 years! If you search
Brands of the World for "John Deere" you will find more than a half dozen logo files for download, old and new.
Brad
