On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 06:51:32PM -0500, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > There may be trademark problems. For example, Duracell may have a > consider the orange-and-black battery to be trade dress; my > understanding of trademark law is quite limited, but I don't think it > applies to pictures of the trade dress in a different form.
It's also got the plus sign. That's quite clearly intended to be a Duracel battery. The lighter is clearly a Bic lighter, but other lighters look similar to that. It's pretty clear what the intent was -- those are intended to represents specific brands. I have no idea if that's permitted or not. As for the smiley face I've googled it and Wal Mart now owns the "oval-eyed/curvey-mouthed" "ur-smiley-face" that we all think of. I *think* it's okay to draw a smiley face as long as it's distinctly different, just as it's okay to draw a blue battery or a zippo-looking lighter which has a different number of wind vent slits -- as long as you make an effort to distinguish it from the specific brand. I don't think anybody would sue you unless they wanted to. If you used it to Defame the brand-holder I think the judge would have a case. It has to do with "intent."