Fringe Fiction Unlimited discussion
Questions/Help Section
>
Product placement
date
newest »
newest »
I think that could be seen as slander or libel (not gonna lie, I never remember which is which). Not sure how Apple handles it, but I've heard Disney is very protective and have targeted indie books with passages as innocuous as someone getting sick on a ride at Disneyland. Name dropping is probably okay with the standard disclaimer, but I would probably use vague terms if you're going to knock the product. Maybe say 'overpriced hipster accessories' instead of 'Apple shit' or something similar.
I have to strongly disagree, sorry Christina. While it's true various corporations in recent years have been trying to pull all kinds of stunts, fiction is 100% protected by freedom of speech laws in all countries, whether anyone likes that fact or not.Slander is the attempt to defame one's reputation with anything spoken out loud. Libel is the same as slander, only in the written word. A non-fiction book could possibly be proven as defaming a reputation, but in fiction, it can't be proven. Businesses can try to intimidate with threats of libel law suits, but it's not even legal. Sadly, with lesser known authors, they often don't have the resources to take it to supreme court, so they give in to the intimidation.
I would highly recommend disregarding.
Anyway, I am very sorry for the legal and off-topic lecture. I would prefer to see this topic discussed from the perspective of authors or readers.
Eh, I'm no lawyer. I only have other author's words to go by. From the perspective of a reader, it would depend on if it reads like a sponsored advertisement or not. "She drank a Coke." is fine, but "She drank a cool and refreshing Coke." sounds a bit odd.
Hehe, completely agree with that, no obvioua ads.It's often called name-dropping. I think it's fine as long as the dropped brandnames aren't used a substitute for developped prose. Just my two cents.
J D Robb in her books uses diet pepsi, her mc drinks it.I think brand names are acceptable, but I wouldn't slag them off in my book. We need a lawyer in this group.I do know for sure that you cant use the lyrics from a song/poem etc without consent and then you pay buckets and buckets of money for it. You can mention the name of the song and the band, but no lyrics else you'll get your ass sued.
@Yolanda: this one has actually been HELL of an advice as I was (past tense since I guess I've actually already given up on that one) working on a collection of short stories based on some album with some verses as an epigraph to each one. So, now, I'm pretty sure I'm gonna drop it for good!Anyway, my first two stories I've ever got published had also had lyrics as an epigraph yet nobody made a big deal out of it (most likely because it was for Polish market only so barely anybody knew). Probably all depends on your market.
This raises another question though: I've seen plenty of works that have got the fragments of poems as an epigraph or just put somewhere in the text (mostly some really old pieces like Shakespeare or Dickinson). Is it because intellectual property rights have already expired or is there any other reason?
//edited a little
Uhmm - big name authors get PAID for product placements. Not sure what JD Robb gets for shilling pepsi, but it's an endorsement and she gets paid.I've always kind of wondered what EL James collected from 'Blackberry.' When she first wrote the serial, probably nothing. By the time FSoG was released - Blackberry was head to head in a survival battle with Apple & the smart phone. (Guess who won?)
I'm pretty careful to avoid specific product names. Mostly because there are enough commercials out there already, and partly because the genre I write is more likely to draw the ire of a big brand (even though the chances of getting noticed are almost non-existent).
99% of the time if you just ask the band/artist/author for permission they'll happily say yes for free. It's free advertising for them. But! That's only for using quotes, like you often see as a part of the chapter title. For prose, it's a non-issue. Anything goes for fictional prose. A character prefes diet Pepsi or smokes Malboro, that's just a part of the fiction, and no one needs permission to write fiction.Also, many things are now public domain, just because it's that old. Shakespeare quotes for example, 100% free and no one needs permission, because, you know, the guy is kinda dead.
One of the things that drew me to Stephen King's works when I was in junior high and high school was that he used everyday products in his stories. Kids ate Doritos and drank Coke, fathers drove Oldsmobiles, mothers smoked Viceroys, etc. It grounded me in the reality of the story and made it easier for me to identify with the characters. I have no problem doing the same thing in my writing.
Good topic, Jacek. Good advice, Lily.Sometimes, for me, product placement is essential. If I write about a character who smokes Newport cigarettes or drinks Diet Mountain Dew, you can already guess what kind of person that's going to be, which is half the fun.
@C.: that's probably the main reason I tend to use everyday products in my works (to some extent, of course). As a reader, I'd rather go for a story when the characters smoke Marlboros and drink Coke instead of smoking SOME cigarette and drinking SOME fizzy drink so as a writer, I try to provide the same for my potential readers. Adds to the reality, I guess.
Sometimes it's unavoidable lol Many products or brand names have become nouns, or in some cases, verbs. Googling. We're to google. I googled that. As examples. All of which are more than allowed.
Gem, sorry, I missed your comment. You're half-right. Endorsements are paid. But that's behind the scenes stuff, deals that are made before the book is written. I can guarantee EL James received nothing in endorsements since she was an unknown author before. How much endorsements are being paid for the movies, well, that's another specalutive topic :)
I think Lily is correct that even if the work of fiction disparages a product, it's protected. In the movie "Rain Man" there was that whole bit about 'K-mart sucks.' K-Mart didn't like it much, but there wasn't anything they could do about it.I think Lily is also right that for some products or brands, the common usage pretty much makes it impossible to avoid without jumping through hoops.
Since I write alternate universe sci-fi, I don't have this problem. No Coke or Marlboros in that galaxy. ;D
No, dammit, I should wrong about something...Never mind.
I loved the creepy-realistic fake products inSix Dead Spots
The effect was perfect, compared to having real ones, for this particular book. I use the occasional real product in my books, mostly Ford vehicles, but one of my characters is a mechanic with a partiality for Fords. Otherwise I haven't felt much need to mention brands.
I don't use name brands in my stories and make up some when needed. (there's plenty in SIGNET see if you can find them! ). otherwise my characters are smoking unfiltered menthol cigarettes and downing colas. lolz
I avoid disparaging brand names because, even if I might prevail in a court of law, I can't afford going to court to prove my point. I do use brand names in neutral contexts though, and many times I enjoy it when other authors do as well.
Stephen King's use of Moxie in 11/22/63 is one of my favorites. (I loathe Moxie, but that was half the fun--I probably shuddered more whenever Moxie was mentioned than I did at any point during the rest of the book. Moxie's fairly regional, so that added to the feel of the story taking place in Maine. It added to the development of the setting.)
On the other hand, William Gibson's Spook Country got a little tiring with the brand-name dropping. If a brand made something, the brand was mentioned, never a generic term. Nobody ever just wore sneakers, not even in subsequent mentions. I think once you establish that a character's sneakers are Nikes, you can refer to them as just "sneakers" after that.
I understood that was part of his point, but after a while it got in the way of getting into the story (for me). (And so, as a result, I'm always worrying about going overboard in my own fiction. Everyone's car tends to have a make and model, for instance, because what you drive says things about you: your level of income, your level of practically, how you see yourself (and want other people to see you), etc. And if the story takes place in a particular time period, it helps to ground that too. People don't drive Trans Ams so much today (though it would say something about a character if she did), but in the 1980s they were everywhere. I always have Spook Country crouching at the back of my mind when I use a brand name: "Don't turn this into another Spook Country!")
Stephen King's use of Moxie in 11/22/63 is one of my favorites. (I loathe Moxie, but that was half the fun--I probably shuddered more whenever Moxie was mentioned than I did at any point during the rest of the book. Moxie's fairly regional, so that added to the feel of the story taking place in Maine. It added to the development of the setting.)
On the other hand, William Gibson's Spook Country got a little tiring with the brand-name dropping. If a brand made something, the brand was mentioned, never a generic term. Nobody ever just wore sneakers, not even in subsequent mentions. I think once you establish that a character's sneakers are Nikes, you can refer to them as just "sneakers" after that.
I understood that was part of his point, but after a while it got in the way of getting into the story (for me). (And so, as a result, I'm always worrying about going overboard in my own fiction. Everyone's car tends to have a make and model, for instance, because what you drive says things about you: your level of income, your level of practically, how you see yourself (and want other people to see you), etc. And if the story takes place in a particular time period, it helps to ground that too. People don't drive Trans Ams so much today (though it would say something about a character if she did), but in the 1980s they were everywhere. I always have Spook Country crouching at the back of my mind when I use a brand name: "Don't turn this into another Spook Country!")
Ok, don't know if this helps to answer your question about using specific detail vs. using vague detail, but here goes:I think, if a specific detail points towards something (also specific) that you are trying to reveal about a particular character or setting, if you are trying to evoke a particular mood, etc., then absolutely use specific detail.
What you don't want to do is bombard your prose with detail so much so that it distracts the reader from the plot. However, you feel that out through reading good literature and developing your own sense of writing style.
bah I can't do all that name brand dropping. I get pretty generic because I had generic things growing up and hit up the thrift stores. I wouldn't know what's trendy if I tried. I don't know the class differences between someone who had Nike's or someone with whatever other shoe that's popular (fila? lolz) or someone with a Honda versus a Kia. its not that hard to find generic terminology. remember Xerox and Kleenex are not generic names for copiers and tissues!
Lily, I hate to be controversial but you are giving out bad advice. First of all, brand names are copyright protected and a company can sue an author for misrepresentation. Granted, they can't find every example but it can happen. Using brand names in fiction does not fall under free speech. The only thing that is protected under free speech is opinions but if you write in a book your opinion of a brand name they can bust you for stealing their copyright. As for getting permission from other artists to use their work - that's not as easy as you would think. Most musicians don't own their work - it's owned by a recording company just like your book is often owned by a publisher. And it can be horribly expensive to pay the rates for using song lyrics in your story.
I know there is a really good article out there about using song lyrics but I'm not sure where I read it. However, here is a great post on using brand names in stories written by a copyright lawyer. http://www.betternovelproject.com/blo...
that's a great article. however in my writing I get paranoid so I make my products either generic or made up.
Sara, brand names are trademarked, not copyrighted. (There's an enormous difference in how these things are treated in the law.) Brands can't bust you for "stealing their copyright," but they can go after your for disparaging/tarnishing their trademark. Neutral use of trademarked names completely falls under free speech—your characters can smoke Marlboros, put One Direction posters on their walls, and text their friends on their iPhones. What will get a lawyer after you is if say that Philip Morris puts asbestos in their Marlboros, One Direction is a group of pedophiles, and Apple is using the camera on its iPhone to spy on users.
Song lyrics, on the other hand, are copyright-protected, and you're right that often it's not the musicians you have to contact for permission but the music publisher who owns the rights to those lyrics. (This is because musicians get an advance--and then royalties when the advance is paid off--when they sell the rights to a music publisher, plus they then don't have to deal with everything that's involved (from negotiations to invoicing and collecting payment, etc.) with every request to use a song in a movie, or a snippet in a commercial, or lyrics in a book.)
Song lyrics, on the other hand, are copyright-protected, and you're right that often it's not the musicians you have to contact for permission but the music publisher who owns the rights to those lyrics. (This is because musicians get an advance--and then royalties when the advance is paid off--when they sell the rights to a music publisher, plus they then don't have to deal with everything that's involved (from negotiations to invoicing and collecting payment, etc.) with every request to use a song in a movie, or a snippet in a commercial, or lyrics in a book.)
Thank you, Z, you saved me a lot of trouble.I'm sorry, Sara, but you are misinformed. If I mention that I can't stand the taste of Pepsi, I haven't broken any laws because my opinion is protected by freedom of speech. If a character in a book mentions they can't stand the taste of Pepsi, no laws have been broken because fiction is protected by both freedom of speech and freedom of expression.
Now, this topic is about Jacek's question of how to handle products or brand names as an author. Readers' perspectives are certainly welcome.
However, please stop hijacking this topic in order to turn it into a politically satuated legal forum, especially condisering the fact that posing as a lawyer is federal crime. Know your rights, but don't act like a lawyer.
I'm sorry to go on, but I'm afraid I'll have to start deleting if this hijacking keeps happening, and I really don't want to do that. Please cooperate, thank you.
Anyway - I'm not even sure I chose the best term to describe it, but how do you feel about using the real brands in your stories? Is it anything better/worse/whatever to put an emphasis on the fact that, for example, "she lit a Marlboro" instead of "she lit a cigarette" (by the way, I somehow noticed that whenever my characters smoke, it's usually Marlboro; don't even know why, but apparently something I should pay attention to next time)?
Also, maybe even more - is, let's call it, "negative" product placement anything bad? For example, one of my stories contained this:
She turned her iPod on [...].
Her MP3 player broke down even before Gdańsk Train Station. She was pretty positive she had recharged a battery before leaving but as far as that Apple shit goes, you can never be sure of anything. By the way, do you know how their cars would look like? They would have no windows and would break as soon as they would touch the ground. [...] A phone – this time something more solid than a stuff with a fruity logo – rang in her overloaded pocket.
Are such things something to be denunciated?