Photographer
Vance C McDaniel
Posts: 7609
Los Angeles, California, US
James Jackson wrote:
BUT you CAN trademark a style http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/do … _defin.htm I am curious, How coould she trademark her style as a model? I beg the question, wouldnt every model then be able to trademark a particular style? How can this be done?
It seems to me there are only so many "styles" and combinations...How many models have ever trademarked a style? And has anyone ever been sued or had to pay to use a style in modeling?
Just curious..this is interesting...
V
Photographer
Nerie
Posts: 162
Candice Jim wrote:
The gothic "scene" [music/lifestyle] was spawned in the late 1970's - early 1980's by the merging of the Punk and New Romantic movements
and following with that, here are all the blue haired 80's goth gals I've found..... gosh i don't have a life..... None of those photos featured anyone with black out contacts.. they are all photos of people with a blue tone to their hair, some short, some light blue, some fake, some with a mohawk.. Are you understanding the point of her original post? Did you even read any of her comments? About how the person actually admitted to liking her look? (not Darenzia's, not anyone elses with blue hair.. Ugly Shyla's look).
All of those girls (except for the Jap musician you posted..yeah I actually checked all those photos because I was curious as to who has the same look as Shyla) aren't even recognized alt. models, (except for Darenzia) and I've never seen a photo of her in black contacts. I don't mean black or grey that covers the irises.. I mean black like Shyla's that cover the whites of the eyes too.
The post specifically talks about Ugly Shyla's look. Her entire look. Not just the fact that she has blue hair. So either explain to me why a bunch of pictures of people (who aren't even established alt. models-besides Darenzia) with blue hair holds any weight. That's just one part of her look and she isn't pissed about that. I'm sure there's a photo of her with red hair on her portfolio and she isn't going around saying "Szandora stole my look!" or better yet, "Yolanda stole my look!"
No that isn't what this is about. This is about some creepy guy liking her specific look (and probably her as a sex object- no I'm not guessing, he made this clear when he told her that he liked her "look") and making a photo of a girl that looks like her out to be sexual in nature, and the girl posing in a pornographic way.
If she was just ranting about how the girl in the photo sorta kinda looked like her and that pissed her off, that would be ONE thing. (And by the way, talking about goths and clubs and the goth look outside of the modeling world and photography has nothing to do with what she is talking about. In my years of clubbing, I remember I was the first to have V-bangs in my entire scene.. then a week later. Every girl had them. In all shapes, all colors.. Did I complain? NO. Why? Because I'm not an alt. model, or even established. And it isn't as if they went around pretending to be me and acting slutty. You are comparing typical goths who dress up to go to night clubs and she is talking about her established modeling look.)
She is one of not very many published alt. models that doesn't do any nudity or pornographic/standard fetish type stuff. To me that says a lot.
And I respect her for looking out for her image, because I know when I first got started (and a lot of the models I've photographed that were trying to make a go in the alt. world..granted they weren't like 14 year olds, but you understand my point) were very upset to learn that most of their favorite models do some softcore-fetish type stuff to make it work. And there aren't many in between..If you're young and impressionable and just starting out, it sorta gives you the feeling that if you want to be where they are, you have to follow in their footsteps. I understand it's a personal choice but come on look at the influence.. a lot of mainstream models go into Playboy and a lot of young amateur models just starting out also try and go that route. Some as a personal choice, but others as a way to get in the backdoor. It's the same in the alt. world.
I can understand where Shyla is coming from. And quite frankly, I'm really annoyed at how everyone is commenting to her OP as if she's just ranting on about her specific goth "look". There's more to it. Go take a look at her credits. She's established in the alt. modeling world, and it wasn't for posing for Blue Blood or Suicide Girls.
Just my two cents.
Model
Candice Jim
Posts: 35
Dallas, Texas, US
you're a little obsessed, don't you think?
i mean yes yay, good for ugly shyla that she can parade around without her boobies flooping out for all the world to see. she is a pillar of the goth/ alt porn modeling community, yippie, clap clap move on to the next model who does have her boobies flopping out, because really, that's all we disgusting pig human beigs want to see.
and who cares if some guy horridly photo manipulated that girl to make her have crying black mascara eyes, it's a crappy gothic good charlo i can't spell their name band, he's prob trying to generate a ugly goth whatever fanbase.
and black contacts and blue hair has been done before mainly by a mrs/mr brian warner and by every j pop star alive, who cares, nothing is original anymore let's all just get over the whole 7th grade "your copying me" phase and chat like adults, not creepy stalkers.
Model
Candice Jim
Posts: 35
Dallas, Texas, US
and if you want to rant without assholes posting their opinions like me, do it in a blog, otherwise, face my useless provoking writing. in the morning or night when you wake up, i really don't think it will matter that some guy wants to do it with you. carmen electra wakes up every day with the knowledge that men want to do it with her, and she doesn't get pissed off an write little pissy rants
Photographer
Nerie
Posts: 162
Candice Jim wrote:
you're a little obsessed, don't you think?
i mean yes yay, good for ugly shyla that she can parade around without her boobies flooping out for all the world to see. she is a pillar of the goth/ alt porn modeling community, yippie, clap clap move on to the next model who does have her boobies flopping out, because really, that's all we disgusting pig human beigs want to see.
and who cares if some guy horridly photo manipulated that girl to make her have crying black mascara eyes, it's a crappy gothic good charlo i can't spell their name band, he's prob trying to generate a ugly goth whatever fanbase.
and black contacts and blue hair has been done before mainly by a mrs/mr brian warner and by every j pop star alive, who cares, nothing is original anymore let's all just get over the whole 7th grade "your copying me" phase and chat like adults, not creepy stalkers. If we were to chat like adults, you'd be excluded from the conversation.
I'm a creepy stalker because I understand where she is coming from? What?
Try reading the post.
Model
Candice Jim
Posts: 35
Dallas, Texas, US
and i am happy that you had the first v shaped bangs in your crowd and it was so astonishing that every girl had to go out and chop up their hair just like yours.
i had the first twat, so you are copying me
Photographer
- null -
Posts: 4576
James Jackson wrote:
Eric Muss-Barnes wrote:
You can't copyright an idea:
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wnp BUT you CAN trademark a style http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/do … _defin.htm Wrong.
From the very link you provided:
"A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others."
Hence you can NOT trademark a "style" or a "look" or the way you dress.
If you could do that, Alice Cooper would have sued Brian Warner (a.k.a. Marylin Manson) a long time ago ...
Model
theda
Posts: 21719
New York, New York, US
The model in the picture in question isn't wearing black-out contacts. Her eyes are closed. It's a chick in a blue wig with a great deal of black eye make-up on playing with innards. Perhaps it was inspired by Ugly Shyla, but it's obviously not her or close enough to any of the work she's done to constitute any kind of IP violation.
This is really an absurd complaint.
Photographer
Dan Howell
Posts: 3602
Kerhonkson, New York, US
theda wrote:
This is really an absurd complaint. Listen to Theda. She's one of the smartest models I've met. I wanted to state the same sentiments, but I'm glad a respected model said it first.
Model
Brenna Dee
Posts: 4
Shreveport, Louisiana, US
The two photos you posted were the same... but it just looks like someone in a wig, honestly. I couldn't tell it was you. There's always going to be someone to come along and copy your look, it's just how uncreative people are; they have to spoil the fun of being unique. I wouldn't worry about that photo though, it's pretty awful the whole way around and doesn't hold much weight in the photography / modeling world.
Photographer
Vance C McDaniel
Posts: 7609
Los Angeles, California, US
Eric Muss-Barnes wrote:
James Jackson wrote:
Eric Muss-Barnes wrote:
You can't copyright an idea:
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wnp BUT you CAN trademark a style http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/do … _defin.htm Wrong.
From the very link you provided:
"A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others."
Hence you can NOT trademark a "style" or a "look" or the way you dress.
If you could do that, Alice Cooper would have sued Brian Warner (a.k.a. Marylin Manson) a long time ago ... That's what I was thinking.....
I just cant get my head around trademarking a style. In and as far as modeling goes, it just seems to broad a stroke to trademark a style.
Yes?
NO?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm..
Photographer
Olaf S
Posts: 1625
Allentown, Pennsylvania, US
theda wrote:
The model in the picture in question isn't wearing black-out contacts. Her eyes are closed. It's a chick in a blue wig with a great deal of black eye make-up on playing with innards. Perhaps it was inspired by Ugly Shyla, but it's obviously not her or close enough to any of the work she's done to constitute any kind of IP violation.
This is really an absurd complaint. THANK YOU for some sanity!!!
Photographer
John Pringle
Posts: 1608
New York, New York, US
Let us not continue to deconstruct the things we fear the most, when putting our personal seal of approval on God's Sheep... Or just live in a convent, or with the Monks, no pun intended. Being a role model is a great thing, being fearful of the task ahead or trying to escape the real role in favor of a personally approved set of achievement markers is just plain fear... Those who follow you are not in the race (about) making themselves feel approved, but being able to overcome the many obsticles ahead, even the ones that have no clearly defined finish lines. If your choices are of the divine, then perhaps there is your strength. As for the real world, there is the Law, and so far, your detractor is working within the confines of the Law... 
Photographer
Creative Image
Posts: 1417
Avon, Connecticut, US
Hold it guys! This may be a copyright issue. But, beyond that, if the head is a copy of a picture of you, whether you hold the rights to it or not, there is a high probability that you have a great case of invasion of privacy causing humiliation, loss of income and about twent-five other things. If there is a way to tell whether or not that is a pirated pic, do it, with a lawyer.
My impression is that someone thought it was use from a comment that was left. Record that.
Ron
Model
Savvy1007
Posts: 796
Ugly Shyla wrote:
Well I don't find it flattering since it's a almost pornographic pic.As a artist I'm sure you would understand how aggravated it would make you,if somebody copied one of your photos,It's just a annoying things,and I don't understand why people feel the need to do that.
I really don't think she looks like you.
On an offside, I did a search on one of my poems, and I came across a Savannah Churchill and she has quite a few of my poems on 2 of her free public poetry sites that says they are hers. She even gave them different titles.
But in the long run, the exposure my poetry gets on the net is far more important than being paranoid of having them out there.
Photographer
James Jackson Fashion
Posts: 11132
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US
Eric Muss-Barnes wrote:
Hence you can NOT trademark a "style" or a "look" or the way you dress.
If you could do that, Alice Cooper would have sued Brian Warner (a.k.a. Marylin Manson) a long time ago ... Well...I've been wrong before, so I may be wrong again.
I could have sworn I'd heard of someone doing this recently though.
Anyway... Best to consult a lawyer on the whole thing.
Photographer
American Glamour
Posts: 38813
Detroit, Michigan, US
This is an interesting thread. Shyla is concerened that somebody, by using a style similar to hers is going to mislead people as to what she will do. She wants to protect her image, which is a good thing. First, I understand her concern. The problem is that the more recongnizable you become, the more likely it is that people will mimick your style. The problem is that there has been a lot of bad advice and good advice in this thread. I am going to try to summarize it. Eric Muss-Barnes wrote:
So, you are saying that the photo is NOT an image of you. But it bothers you because it looks SIMILAR to something you MIGHT create?
Um ... You can't do anything about that. You can't copyright an idea:
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wnp James Jackson wrote:
BUT you CAN trademark a style http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/do … _defin.htm Eric Muss-Barnes wrote:
Wrong.
From the very link you provided:
"A trademark is a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs, that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods of one party from those of others."
Hence you can NOT trademark a "style" or a "look" or the way you dress.
If you could do that, Alice Cooper would have sued Brian Warner (a.k.a. Marylin Manson) a long time ago ... James Jackson wrote:
Well...I've been wrong before, so I may be wrong again. Eric is totally right and kudos to James for acknowledging that he might have made a mistake. How about Elvis Costello and all the Elvis impersonators? What you have is an idea which you have exploited first. It is flattering that people are willing to copy you. The suggestion though that you can trademark it, isn't going to happen.
theda wrote:
This is really an absurd complaint. Dan Howell wrote:
Listen to Theda. She's one of the smartest models I've met. I wanted to state the same sentiments, but I'm glad a respected model said it first. I don't think the complaint is absurd, because you are concerned. Theda's comments though are to the point and reflect the reality of the situation. I do think both Theda and Dan are right. It is just a fact of life.
In the movie American Beauty, they had that shot of the model posing with rose petals all over her. How many knock offs of that shot have we seen? So many that there have been threads on this forum pleading with people to stop.
How many shots have you seen with caution tape? The same applies.
Try not to let it bother you. If people are looking up to you that won't change becasue someone has copied your style. People aren't going to confuse that image and think it was you. It may even improve your following since now people are mimmicking you.
Good luck to you.
Photographer
Bruce Caines
Posts: 522
New York, New York, US
theda wrote:
This is really an absurd complaint. ya think????
Model
Ugly Shyla
Posts: 90
Austin, Texas, US
You know I think you were one of the ONLY people on here that both agreed with some points I said,and also disagreed with some things I said,but did so in a ADULT manner.
And didn't act like a whining little 12 year old,that didn't say diddly squat about the question I asked,but just told me I was ugly *imagine THAT* and I had cooties and run off.
Photographer
Click Hamilton
Posts: 36555
San Diego, California, US
Ugly Shyla wrote:
I'm having a weird issue here If they used your picture without a model release, then look into defamation of character.
If it's not you and they did not use your photos, then your worry about association is irrelevant. Blue hair, pale makeup and dark eyes is not unique or unusual.
Photographer
Dean Solo
Posts: 1064
Miami, Arizona, US
I know it must suck to feel violated, but I am confused? Is that an actual photo of you that was manipulated or are you simply stating your case based on the resemblance? I looked at both your profile pics and the manipulated images and the only resemblance I see is the blue hair. Surely there must be other models out there with blue hair.
Photographer
AZZARA
Posts: 933
BRONX, New York, US
I think it looks like any of 150 models I either know or have seen. In NYC this is not an unusual look. I dont mean to sound insulting--I seriously dont--but arent you being just a little bit self absorbed to:
A) think people are trying to look like you.
B) assume everyone knows who you are.
C) Most importantly, think you either created or own this look.
Once again I'm not trying to insult you in any way but its very much like saying anyone in 1968 who had long hair and wore bell bottom jeans was trying to BE or look like me.
Bottom line is You know You.
You know it's not you and anyone who knows you knows it's not you. Those who dont know wont think anything at all.
Photographer
Mann Made Imagery
Posts: 5281
Lubbock, Texas, US
I feel where you are coing from but personally are first glance and I wasn't even paying attention to the photo it was quite obvious that it wasn't you. It's probably just some stupid parody by someone with no talent. I wouldn't be worried at all. You can always ask them to take it down or something if you feel so strongly about it. Plus, you aren't the only one that looks like this, heck there's people in my city that even have the blacked out contacts and blue hair and they don't have a clue who you are, go figure...
|
