login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > Copyright for book title? Search   Reply
Photographer
DAN CRUIKSHANK
Posts: 1,786
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


I have started a new series of photographs that I hope to one day be able to show in galleries and possibly use in a coffee table art book.

I want to give the series a title, which would also end up being the title of the book. I decided on a one word title that fit the series perfectly. I just did a google search and I found that there is another art photographer (located in the US, while I am in Canada)who has a collection, including a book, that he has given the same title to. The work is in no way similar to mine, but the title is the same word I want to use.

Is this a major issue? Can a single word be copyrighted when being used as a title? I’m just wondering if anyone here has dealt with this.

Thanks.
Nov 07 12 09:32 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kent Art Photography
Posts: 2,737
Ashford, England, United Kingdom


I don't know about Canadian law...

Actually, I don't know much about UK law, either.

I don't think you can copyright a book title, as such, and there are lots of examples of books, and films, tv shows, etc., having the same, or very similar titles.

However, there are rules about "passing off," so it might be a mistake to call your book "Harry Potter And The..."

And you might like to consider whether any confusion that might arise between your book and anything similar could be detrimental to your sales.  I'd say that if you know there's already a book with a similar title then you should think of something else.
Nov 07 12 09:40 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Kev Lawson
Posts: 7,162
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


DAN CRUIKSHANK wrote:
I have started a new series of photographs that I hope to one day be able to show in galleries and possibly use in a coffee table art book.

I want to give the series a title, which would also end up being the title of the book. I decided on a one word title that fit the series perfectly. I just did a google search and I found that there is another art photographer (located in the US, while I am in Canada)who has a collection, including a book, that he has given the same title to. The work is in no way similar to mine, but the title is the same word I want to use.

Is this a major issue? Can a single word be copyrighted when being used as a title? I’m just wondering if anyone here has dealt with this.

Thanks.

As always, I cannot understand why people ask for legal advise in forums. It is best to contact a lawyer who specializes in these matters, and you can usually get a first consultation for free.

Nov 07 12 09:54 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 35,411
San Francisco, California, US


You certainly aren't going to copyright a single word.  Normally the book would be copyrighted, not just the title.
Nov 07 12 10:33 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Leonard Gee Photography
Posts: 16,140
Sacramento, California, US


1. copyright must be for a object uniquely created. there must be some creative act

2. trademarks are unique identifiers for a product, service or brand

3. a book title does not fall under either definition. the title is not an unique object, the title is not a product, service nor brand

4. a slogan, song or combination of words maybe trademarked or copyrighted

5. Apple is a trademark, but you may absolutely title a book "apple". you cannot start a chain of coffee shops named "apple" (without getting sued) there is no copyright on the word, but there is a trademark on what products and brand it represents
Nov 07 12 10:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 12,735
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US


Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
1. copyright must be for a object uniquely created. there must be some creative act

2. trademarks are unique identifiers for a product, service or brand

3. a book title does not fall under either definition. the title is not an unique object, the title is not a product, service nor brand

4. a slogan, song or combination of words maybe trademarked or copyrighted

5. Apple is a trademark, but you may absolutely title a book "apple". you cannot start a chain of coffee shops named "apple" (without getting sued) there is no copyright on the word, but there is a trademark on what products and brand it represents

I think you might be wrong on the coffee shop thing. I think the manufacturer of I-pods and computers would be hard pressed to prove that your coffee shops are an infringement.

I have a trees in my backyard. They bear fruit. I sometimes sell them by the bushel. I call them "apples" and never had a problem. However, if I made cell phones in my basement, I probably shouldn't try to label them "apple". There's a big difference between coffee shops and anything Steve Jobs' company makes.

Nov 07 12 11:05 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Pantelis Palios
Posts: 249
Birmingham, England, United Kingdom


I have heard that there has to be over nine words for it to be copyrighted. So when someone after the Beatles wrote a song with the lyrics "Blackbird singing the dead of night. Take these broken wings and learn to fly." the Beatles were able to sue them.

I can't see that anyone can copyright a single word. Remember, the "author's" name should make them different.

If you looked for another title, that too may already exist ( or even get published after you ) but sometimes spending some time on another name may give you one that is much better than your first one.
Nov 07 12 11:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Kent Art Photography wrote:
I don't know about Canadian law...

Actually, I don't know much about UK law, either.

I don't think you can copyright a book title, as such, and there are lots of examples of books, and films, tv shows, etc., having the same, or very similar titles.

However, there are rules about "passing off," so it might be a mistake to call your book "Harry Potter And The..."

And you might like to consider whether any confusion that might arise between your book and anything similar could be detrimental to your sales.  I'd say that if you know there's already a book with a similar title then you should think of something else.

That's because Harry Potter is a trademark.

Nov 08 12 12:32 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Pantelis Palios wrote:
I have heard that there has to be over nine words for it to be copyrighted. So when someone after the Beatles wrote a song with the lyrics "Blackbird singing the dead of night. Take these broken wings and learn to fly." the Beatles were able to sue them.

I can't see that anyone can copyright a single word. Remember, the "author's" name should make them different.

If you looked for another title, that too may already exist ( or even get published after you ) but sometimes spending some time on another name may give you one that is much better than your first one.

You can't copyright a word. If it's a word, then it's already been authored.

You can't copyright a title, but your example is lyrics, not a title.

Nov 08 12 12:35 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
ME_
Posts: 3,134
Atlanta, Georgia, US


I don't know about Canada but in the U.S., titles of works cannot be copyrighted.

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl109.html
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf
Nov 08 12 06:08 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
D0127H
Posts: 1,135
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada


Probably not, unless it's a fantabulastically unique made-up word. 

Even if there's no copyright issue you may want to consider potential confusion between the books if online sales are a concern (searches, etc.)

Your decision may depend on how commonplace the word is & how distinct the books will be from each other.
Nov 08 12 07:19 am  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
Rays Fine Art
Posts: 6,064
New York, New York, US


What you're looking for is a trademark, which would have to be a made-up word that no one has ever heard of before, and even then it would have to be structured and presented in a specific and unique way such as the logo for TD Bank.  In that case, the "T", "D" and "Bank" are not protected, but the unique arrangement and color are.

Copyright and Trademark laws tend to be murky everywhere, so if you want to pursue this, definitely enlist the help of an attorney, but for a book I would doubt that it's worth the time, effort and money.  While we like to think our ideas are new and unique, the reality is that any idea any of us has for a book, picture or any combination thereof has probably been done by someone, somewhere, somehow.  In the arts, there really is nothing new under the sun.

All IMHO, as always.
Nov 08 12 07:43 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
DAN CRUIKSHANK
Posts: 1,786
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada


Thanks for sharing your thoughts, everyone!
Nov 08 12 07:53 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ken Marcus Studios
Posts: 8,455
Los Angeles, California, US


US Copyright Laws have no jurisdiction in Canada . . .

However both countries are covered by the International Berne Convention which involves copyright.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Conv … stic_Works


KM
Nov 08 12 08:10 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,116
Tampa, Florida, US


UltimateAppeal wrote:
As always, I cannot understand why people ask for legal advise in forums. It is best to contact a lawyer who specializes in these matters, and you can usually get a first consultation for free.

Because it provides a way for others to share their experiences? And because if it's a legal-related thread, ei will always come in and give some very sage advice.

That's good enough for me.

Personally, I can't understand why an OP asks for others experiences on a topic and someone comes in and says to "contact a lawyer." I'm assuming the OP knows we are not lawyers and will take that into account. But sharing our experiences doesn't require a law degree.

Nov 08 12 08:16 am  Link  Quote 
Makeup Artist
BMR-MUA
Posts: 548
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


DAN CRUIKSHANK wrote:
I have started a new series of photographs that I hope to one day be able to show in galleries and possibly use in a coffee table art book.

I want to give the series a title, which would also end up being the title of the book. I decided on a one word title that fit the series perfectly. I just did a google search and I found that there is another art photographer (located in the US, while I am in Canada)who has a collection, including a book, that he has given the same title to. The work is in no way similar to mine, but the title is the same word I want to use.

Is this a major issue? Can a single word be copyrighted when being used as a title? I’m just wondering if anyone here has dealt with this.

Thanks.

The Canadian Copyright Act states that:

“work” includes the title thereof when such title is original and distinctive;

(see Definitions)

and a work can be copyrighted. Please note that this definition states that the work includes the title. A title by itself is not protected by copyright.

Titles, names and short word combinations are usually not protected by copyright. A “work” or other “subject matter” for copyright purposes must be something more substantial. However, if a title is original and distinctive, it is protected as part of the work it relates to.

from A GUIDE TO COPYRIGHTS, page 5 (January 2005) by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office.

See Councillor claims he owns university name. Councillor Robert Lutczyk from Oshawa, Ontario claimed he held a copyright on the name "University of Ontario Institute of Technology." He tried to prevent a local newspaper from using that name in an article about the university.

Nov 08 12 10:08 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


UltimateAppeal wrote:

As always, I cannot understand why people ask for legal advise in forums. It is best to contact a lawyer who specializes in these matters, and you can usually get a first consultation for free.

And after you've done that and know the answer to the question, are you capable of telling someone the answer you were given (in writing)?

What is so special about a person who becomes a lawyer that makes them more capable of understanding the law than someone else? I can't think of anything other than law school. Do you think they spend three years on the subject of "can you copyright a title."? It's a simple answer to a simple question.

What's the speed limit on a highway? 55. Wait, which country, which state? Regardless, even when posted it "conditions permitting". What about states that have a speed limit of 65 in some places? Better ask a lawyer. Do you want your brain surgeon doing your surgery at 16, without going to medical school? Then you really shouldn't get a learner's permit/DL until you've learned the laws by going to law school. Even though there's a sign posted on the side of the road, you shouldn't answer the question of what the speed limit is if you're not a lawyer.


Just because the basic copyright questions are unfamiliar to you, doesn't mean that they aren't as simple to someone else as a question about the speed limit. Some people have lawyers to do their deals and the lawyers explain every paragraph and sentence until you understand what you're signing. Sometimes you want to sue someone and your lawyer explains the situation and how there's no premise for you to win, sometimes you send letters and negotiate based on what everyone knows the law says. Sometimes you sue and find out how the law is applied.

There's no reason that it's not possible to get a fully accurate answer from someone who isn't a lawyer.

It's up to you what standards you want to maintain. Personally, I have access to several lawyers who will answer questions for free. Sometimes I even ask before posting an answer. For the most part there are only 2-3 people here who I consider accurate enough to take their word on something.

And really, the subtext of what people are asking is "as a photographer, you've probably been in the same situation, what did you do and why and are you happy with your choice?" eventhough it's not phrased that way.

Nov 08 12 10:36 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Michael DBA Expressions
Posts: 3,160
Lynchburg, Virginia, US


If you had a dental problem, you'd call a dentist, right?

If you had a mechanical problem with your car, you'd ask a mechanic, right?

If you had a brain tumor, you'd consult a neurosurgeon. Of course.

If you have a legal question, you ask a photographer. Makes perfect sense.
Nov 08 12 04:17 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Gary Melton
Posts: 6,376
Dallas, Texas, US


In the US anyway - titles of books, movies etc. cannot be copyrighted.  Ever notice how there are a few movie titles out there for movies that are completely different?  'Just 2 examples: "Twilight" - 1998 & 2008 - 2 ENTIRELY DIFFERENT stories/plots, and "Bad Boys" - 1983 & 1995 - 2 ENTIRELY DIFFERENT stories/plots.  There are many more examples.

I can make a movie and call it "Gone With the Wind"...so long as it doesn't copy the plot etc. of the very famous movie by that name.  It can also be a problem if I make a movie called "Gone With the Wind"...and then I purposely try to mislead people into thinking it's the famous movie (even if it is nothing like it).
Nov 08 12 04:34 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10,531
Gatineau, Quebec, Canada


Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
If you had a dental problem, you'd call a dentist, right?

If you had a mechanical problem with your car, you'd ask a mechanic, right?

If you had a brain tumor, you'd consult a neurosurgeon. Of course.

If you have a legal question, you ask a photographer. Makes perfect sense.

The problem is that if I jump on Facebook I'm sure I can find at least one 'friend' asking about all of these.  Common sense stopped making sense to people long ago. And for the record I have two applicable canuck law degrees and specialization in IP and will be working in an IP firm soon. But ask me anything about dentistry. my ex-neighbour was studying to be a dentist when I was in my first law school. I was in the same room as his textbooks big_smile

Nov 08 12 04:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Lynch
Posts: 2,483
Bowie, Maryland, US


Michael DBA Expressions wrote:
If you had a dental problem, you'd call a dentist, right?

If you had a mechanical problem with your car, you'd ask a mechanic, right?

If you had a brain tumor, you'd consult a neurosurgeon. Of course.

If you have a legal question, you ask a photographer. Makes perfect sense.

If I have a question, I will ask anyone that I feel would have relevant, useful information.  Sometimes that is someone who works professionally in the area, sometimes not.

That being said, threads about copyright, contracts and releases on MM should generally be evaluated for their entertainment value, not their information content.

Nov 08 12 04:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AVD AlphaDuctions
Posts: 10,531
Gatineau, Quebec, Canada


Robert Lynch wrote:

If I have a question, I will ask anyone that I feel would have relevant, useful information.  Sometimes that is someone who works professionally in the area, sometimes not.

That being said, threads about copyright, contracts and releases on MM should generally be evaluated for their entertainment value, not their information content.

so you are saying, if you want comedy you go to photographers?

Nov 08 12 08:30 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
A Adams Looks
Posts: 4
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US


Nov 09 12 09:14 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Frozen Instant Imagery
Posts: 3,686
Dublin, Dublin, Ireland


Do a search and you will find there are lots of books which share titles.

If you wrote a book and called it "Photography" or "Landscape" or "Portraits", don't be surprised to find that there are  plenty of other books with the same title.

If you called it "Basic Photography", again, probably plenty of others sharing your title.

If you called it "Uncle Winkie's Guide to Cruel and Unusual Photographic Techniques in the Land of the Blind", then you might be the first smile  (feel free to use that title if you want)

BTW: don't call it "Dummy's Guide to Photography" - I think you'd get a Cease-and-Desist letter (but for trademark, not copyright).
Nov 09 12 01:22 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Nico Simon Princely
Posts: 1,742
Las Vegas, Nevada, US


You can not copyright a book, record or movie title. If you have a series of books or merchandise along with it you can Trademark it.

This is how Chicken Soup for the Soul and Harry Potter and keep other people from making a book of the same title.

But as for a single book you can not copyright the title only the contents of the book.
Nov 10 12 02:09 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Harold Rose
Posts: 2,925
Calhoun, Georgia, US


DAN CRUIKSHANK wrote:
I have started a new series of photographs that I hope to one day be able to show in galleries and possibly use in a coffee table art book.

I want to give the series a title, which would also end up being the title of the book. I decided on a one word title that fit the series perfectly. I just did a google search and I found that there is another art photographer (located in the US, while I am in Canada)who has a collection, including a book, that he has given the same title to. The work is in no way similar to mine, but the title is the same word I want to use.

Is this a major issue? Can a single word be copyrighted when being used as a title? I’m just wondering if anyone here has dealt with this.

Thanks.

Is not much of a problem,,,  first you cannot copyright a word.    But the art,  and layout  including font,   can become a  copyright  of the total art...  Trademark might be a clearer  defination

Nov 12 12 07:30 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
KMP
Posts: 4,736
Houston, Texas, US


UltimateAppeal wrote:
As always, I cannot understand why people ask for legal advise in forums. It is best to contact a lawyer who specializes in these matters, and you can usually get a first consultation for free.

I agree!!

You should NOT look for legal advice from a photography forum.  Contact a lawyer who has experience in that particular area, in your country.

Now..from a marketing issue..if this other photographer has a very successful book, you are probably doing more harm to both of you by confusing the general public with the same name.

That would make a strong argument to find another, more unique, name.

Nov 12 12 11:27 am  Link  Quote 
Model
JoJo
Contest Queen
Posts: 24,987
Clearwater, Florida, US


DAN CRUIKSHANK wrote:
I have started a new series of photographs that I hope to one day be able to show in galleries and possibly use in a coffee table art book.

I want to give the series a title, which would also end up being the title of the book. I decided on a one word title that fit the series perfectly. I just did a google search and I found that there is another art photographer (located in the US, while I am in Canada)who has a collection, including a book, that he has given the same title to. The work is in no way similar to mine, but the title is the same word I want to use.

Is this a major issue? Can a single word be copyrighted when being used as a title? I’m just wondering if anyone here has dealt with this.

Thanks.

Canadian Intellectual Property Office
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipoi … f/eng/Home
For information pertaining to Canadian copyright, trademark, servicemark and patents.

The (Canadian) Copyright Modernization Act (June 29, 2012)
http://balancedcopyright.gc.ca/eic/site … f/eng/home


You may not copyright a book title (the word(s) in the title).
You may register the graphic design of a book title as a trademark.
(but the designer/artist of the graphic design may register copyright on the graphic design and, through a usage license, permit you to use his/her creation... and to register trademark)

Suggestion: find an attorney that has dealt with IP law and ask your questions.

Nov 12 12 12:43 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
annelisedk
Posts: 1
Kōbe, Hyōgo, Japan


Ken Marcus Studios wrote:
US Copyright Laws have no jurisdiction in Canada . . .

However both countries are covered by the International Berne Convention which involves copyright.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Conv … stic_Works


KM

Yep, but with one BIG difference: if you copyright your work in the US and someone "steals" your work in Canada, you can sue him, but if you only copyright in Canada and someone in the US "steals" your work, you can't sue him.
That's the tricky part of the copyright and USA. I learned my lesson the hard way sad

Nov 14 12 11:32 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
GPS Studio Services
Posts: 35,411
San Francisco, California, US


annelisedk wrote:
Yep, but with one BIG difference: if you copyright your work in the US and someone "steals" your work in Canada, you can sue him, but if you only copyright in Canada and someone in the US "steals" your work, you can't sue him.
That's the tricky part of the copyright and USA. I learned my lesson the hard way sad

I think you are mis-speaking.  An image is copyrighted, automatically, the moment you press the shutter.  The United States has a unique system where you can register an image, and if done on a timely basis, you can collect a variety of statutory damages in case of infringement.  Likewise, registration is required in order to file an action.

You can register an image at any time, even after infringement.  It makes no difference what country you come from.  So, if you shoot an image in Canada, and you are Canadian, you will have to register it in the U.S. in order to file an action.  If that is what you mean by "copyright" you are correct, you must do it before you can sue. 

The trick though is that most foreigners don't register their images in the U.S. as they shoot them.  The problem is if they don't register them before infringement (or within 90 days of publication), they are barred from collecting statutory damages.

The point though is to not confuse registration with copyright.  Your images are copyrighted and you are able to sue in the U.S. whether you registered them or not.  You will be barred from statutory damages unless you registered them before infringement.

Nov 15 12 12:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
FiveOne November
Posts: 171
Rochester, New York, US


DAN CRUIKSHANK wrote:
I have started a new series of photographs that I hope to one day be able to show in galleries and possibly use in a coffee table art book.

I want to give the series a title, which would also end up being the title of the book. I decided on a one word title that fit the series perfectly. I just did a google search and I found that there is another art photographer (located in the US, while I am in Canada)who has a collection, including a book, that he has given the same title to. The work is in no way similar to mine, but the title is the same word I want to use.

Is this a major issue? Can a single word be copyrighted when being used as a title? I’m just wondering if anyone here has dealt with this.

Thanks.

US law doesn't afford copyright protection for titles of a books.

From the US Copyright Office:

"Copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases."

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html

Nov 15 12 09:02 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Brian Scanlon
Posts: 789
Encino, California, US


Mike Kelcher wrote:

I think you might be wrong on the coffee shop thing. I think the manufacturer of I-pods and computers would be hard pressed to prove that your coffee shops are an infringement.

Actually not true.  Back in the day when Apple Computer came into being the reason that the Steves named it that was in homage to the Beatles whose music publication company is named Apple also.  At the time the Beatles complained and they came to an agreement (I believe this all took place out of court) that Apple Computer would stay out of the music publishing business.  Fast foreword thirty years guess what?  Apple computer is in the music business with their iTunes store.

Nov 15 12 09:23 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Azimuth Arts
Posts: 1,486
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
{snip}

5. Apple is a trademark, but you may absolutely title a book "apple". you cannot start a chain of coffee shops named "apple" (without getting sued) there is no copyright on the word, but there is a trademark on what products and brand it represents
Mike Kelcher wrote:
I think you might be wrong on the coffee shop thing. I think the manufacturer of I-pods and computers would be hard pressed to prove that your coffee shops are an infringement.
Brian Scanlon wrote:
Actually not true.  Back in the day when Apple Computer came into being the reason that the Steves named it that was in homage to the Beatles whose music publication company is named Apple also.  At the time the Beatles complained and they came to an agreement (I believe this all took place out of court) that Apple Computer would stay out of the music publishing business.  Fast foreword thirty years guess what?  Apple computer is in the music business with their iTunes store.

In addition Apple (the computer company) did pursue legal actions with a German coffee shop - though it seems the logo was also a factor.  Not sure of the final outcome, but you can be sued - doesn't mean they will win.

http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/appl … -20111021/

Nov 15 12 09:40 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Mike Kelcher
Posts: 12,735
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US


Brian Scanlon wrote:

Actually not true.  Back in the day when Apple Computer came into being the reason that the Steves named it that was in homage to the Beatles whose music publication company is named Apple also.  At the time the Beatles complained and they came to an agreement (I believe this all took place out of court) that Apple Computer would stay out of the music publishing business.  Fast foreword thirty years guess what?  Apple computer is in the music business with their iTunes store.

Brian,
From what I remember, I think you've got the Apple Records (The Beatles) vs Apple Computers (Steve Jobs & Co.) pretty much right as far as their disagreement and subsequent agreement is concerned. I believe Apple did agree to stay out of the music publishing business. However, after fast forwarding 30 years, Apple isn't in the music publishing business, they are in the music marketing and sales business. To the best of my knowledge they don't create, produce or publish music, and the Beatles don't make computers, I-pods, I-pads, or cell phones.

Nov 16 12 12:19 am  Link  Quote 
Makeup Artist
BMR-MUA
Posts: 548
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


I came across this publication by the Canadian firm ROBIC which might shed light on your question.

WORK INCLUDES TITLE: SOME COMMENTS ON A NEGLECTED COPYRIGHT DEFINITION by Laurent Carrière, LEGER ROBIC RICHARD, Lawyers, ROBIC, Patent & Trademark Agents.
Dec 03 12 09:52 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Looknsee Photography
Posts: 21,138
Portland, Oregon, US


DAN CRUIKSHANK wrote:
Is this a major issue? Can a single word be copyrighted when being used as a title? I’m just wondering if anyone here has dealt with this.

Thanks.

Probably.  I would think that the other guy's entire book is copyrighted, including the title.  I have an essay on the topic in my book, Catch 22.

Dec 03 12 06:30 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Silverstone Productions
Posts: 182
Eugene, Oregon, US


Azimuth Arts wrote:
In addition Apple (the computer company) did pursue legal actions with a German coffee shop - though it seems the logo was also a factor.  Not sure of the final outcome, but you can be sued - doesn't mean they will win.

http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/appl … -20111021/

http://lolsnaps.com/upload_pic/ApplesLegalTeam-6511.jpg

Dec 08 12 08:25 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
The Zone
Posts: 1,131
London, England, United Kingdom


My turn, I have copyrighted many books (copyrighted and published one last Friday between breakfast and jumping in the car to work a whole 20 minutes) and my advice is to make the book first and then figure out a title and copyright it with the government.  You need to set up an account and it will cost you 50 bucks.  Funny thing is that all they ask for is the title and what kind of work it is  along with the usual author and ownership info.  However, copyright a single word for a title: No.

I also have a trademark and it took years.   Almost six years to get it.  You guys have to be crazy to want to trademark, actually a glutton for punishment I guess.  Lesson learned.
Dec 09 12 07:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
UCPhotog
Posts: 984
Union City, California, US


Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
5. Apple is a trademark, but you may absolutely title a book "apple". you cannot start a chain of coffee shops named "apple" (without getting sued) there is no copyright on the word, but there is a trademark on what products and brand it represents

...Not truth

Mike Kelcher wrote:
However, if I made cell phones in my basement, I probably shouldn't try to label them "apple". There's a big difference between coffee shops and anything Steve Jobs' company makes.

...Truth

ei Total Productions wrote:
You certainly aren't going to copyright a single word.  Normally the book would be copyrighted, not just the title.

....Truth

UltimateAppeal wrote:
As always, I cannot understand why people ask for legal advise in forums. It is best to contact a lawyer who specializes in these matters, and you can usually get a first consultation for free.

BEST TRUTH!

Dec 24 12 11:38 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Rick Dupuis Photography
Posts: 6,822
Truro, Nova Scotia, Canada


Peter Benchley couldn't copyright JAWS. You can write another book titled Jaws. You just can't write a book about a shark attacking swimmers in New England and call it Jaws.
You can title a book Hunt For Red October but it better be about hunting a red panda in the fall and not a submarine.
Dec 24 12 04:54 pm  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers