Screen printing copywrite images or text

[pw66]

If a customer comes into the shop and asks for a print and states they have legal right to it even if it is Minnie Mouse, you can assume and guess they don't but that is all it is. You do not know for certain and the customer claimed he was certain. That would be enough for any court to not put responsibility on you. After all, the court would not be able to assume or guess that individual did not have permission to convict. They would have to prove beyond any doubt.

So if I come into your shop and ask you to print the 'Superdry' logo onto a t-shirt you are going to take my word for it that I have permission? What if I ask for 50? At what stage do you stop offering a print service and become a counterfeiter?

[JMugs]

I printed some polo shirts for the local branch of a political party, the second half of the order was cancelled because head office said they had to come from them and that I was not licensed to use the logo and title. "So much for supporting a small local business" was the local chairpersons response to head office, but towing the party line was demanded.

Janners

[socialgiraffe]

So if I come into your shop and ask you to print the 'Superdry' logo onto a t-shirt you are going to take my word for it that I have permission? What if I ask for 50? At what stage do you stop offering a print service and become a counterfeiter?

Irrelevant whether is 1 or 1 million.

My point is, and continues to be, is that as the printer it is not down to you to police copyright infringement. If you carry out due diligence, which in this is is simply to ask them and possibly sign a form, then you are covered.

Let me throw it back....

If a customer comes in with a photograph (digital or flat) which they claim they have taken themselves. What else can you do except ask them if they own it?

Just to clarify, I am a B2B supplier and do not deal with the public, I doubt it is any different but it might be.

[pw66]

If a customer comes in with a photograph (digital or flat) which they claim they have taken themselves. What else can you do except ask them if they own it?

Just to clarify, I am a B2B supplier and do not deal with the public, I doubt it is any different but it might be.

The copyright of a photograph automatically rests with the photographer ( or the person who commissioned the work, if so agreed). It is quite possible that confusion could arise in the use of photographs. In the case of obscure or run of the mill images any disclaimer you have had your customer sign would be your mitigation if there was any infringement.

But if the photo was a well known image, or a movie still, or something obviously professionally taken of a well known person then no disclaimer will cover you. If there is an infringement that the owner of the image or trademark wants to redress then you can still be prosecuted.

[Quinsfan]

As for the garage owners. VW sued the garage owners who used their logo without permission. Even if they hand out VW mugs out to customers, they don't have a marketing license to do so. Having permission to be an authorised dealer doesn't mean that you are VW themselves and can do what you please. Those mugs would have to come from 'head office'.

The garage was sued not the company that produced them? If so then that means we can produce items for a third party as they are the person who is responsible for its use.
We are just the people who have the knowledge and equipment to place the artwork onto a substrate.
If I was to print it myself to sell it myself then I am in the wrong.
I hope that makes sense [emoji15]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[socialgiraffe]

But if the photo was a well known image, or a movie still, or something obviously professionally taken of a well known person then no disclaimer will cover you. If there is an infringement that the owner of the image or trademark wants to redress then you can still be prosecuted.

Totally irrelevant, as I said, the law is black and white, your comment relies on the printer having some knowledge of the subject area that he is being asked to "counterfeit". I could walk in to 1000 shops with a picture of Drake and they would not have a clue who he is. With the way you are interpreting the law it would be a very grey area whether the printer is liable or not. That is not how law works.

The garage was sued not the company that produced them? If so then that means we can produce items for a third party as they are the person who is responsible for its use.
We are just the people who have the knowledge and equipment to place the artwork onto a substrate.
If I was to print it myself to sell it myself then I am in the wrong.

Exactly

[Quinsfan]

So if I come into your shop and ask you to print the 'Superdry' logo onto a t-shirt you are going to take my word for it that I have permission? What if I ask for 50? At what stage do you stop offering a print service and become a counterfeiter?

How are you to know what they are going to do with them after you have handed them over. It may by blindingly obvious in this case but who are you to police them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Andrew]

So if I come into your shop and ask you to print the 'Superdry' logo onto a t-shirt you are going to take my word for it that I have permission? What if I ask for 50? At what stage do you stop offering a print service and become a counterfeiter?

I don't have a shop and if I did I wouldn't give them the time of day. That is irrelevant to where the legalities are though. If the guy came into the shop in a scruffy tracksuit and 50 garments in a Poundland bag then produced a signed contract showing he had the rights to produce his own suderdry garments, would you then think it is legal? Both trading standards and the courts have to prove beyond doubt. They have vast resources to do this. It is not up to a 1 man band to achieve the same. Doesn't mean you would not get caught if you were banging out regular quantities of fakes like this. There are many grey areas still, but when I have questioned this then it is the above type of answer I have had. If you try and abuse this though I am sure then you will get caught in the end.
How many items of Superdry are being offered for sale on amazon and ebay? The selling platforms do not judge if they have the right to sell them but trust the seller as they agreed to their terms. That is sufficient as far as I am aware.

[GoonerGary]

The garage was sued not the company that produced them? If so then that means we can produce items for a third party as they are the person who is responsible for its use.
.... [emoji15]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In this case, it was use of the VW logo on their shop sign...reproducing the logo without permission. But I'm guessing the legal argument was implying that there was an association between VW and the independent garage.

[GoonerGary]

I'm enjoying the debate and I can see both sides, but how about we find out for sure. If we can spare the time, how about contacting our local Trading Standards and ask them; when is it a printing service and when is it counterfeiting?