
I had hoped to include this photo of a Coca-Cola vintage advertisement, painted on this Schenectady building, as part of an upcoming self-produced art book called “Ghost Signs of the Capital District.” It was actually one of the first ghost signs (faded brick advertisements painted on old buildings) that I was able to photograph for the project. Since then, I’ve found at least 40 other ghost signs in the Albany, Schenectady, Troy, Cohoes and Gloversville areas. And so, my plan was to put together a self-produced book through the website blurb.com, who would print my book on demand for anyone interested in purchasing it. I could then use the book for promotional / portfolio purposes, as well as making a few extra dollars to sock away for a dream camera lens, a Nikon Noct F/1.2 58mm lens. Oh man, I want that Nikon Noct F/1.2 58mm lens…
But there’s a problem. And it’s right up there on the top of the picture.
The words “Coca-Cola.”
See, Coca-Cola is a registered trademark of The Coca-Cola Company, and they protect their copyright very scrupulously. It would be the same issue if I put a picture of Mickey Mouse or the Beatles or Charlie Brown in an art book. If I don’t get permission from the trademark holders, then – well, worst case scenario would be that my book could get pulled off the market, and I’d be liable for back licensing costs and whatnot.
So, rather than cause a problem, I decided to contact Coca-Cola directly and request permission. I sent a letter, along with a copy of the photograph, to Coca-Cola’s corporate headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. Four weeks later, I received a reply.
Dear Mr. Miller:
Thank you for contacting us regarding the use of our trademark. We appreciate your loyalty and interest.
While we are complimented by your inquiry, it has become necessary for us to limit the number of requests granted by our Company. We regret to inform you that your request does not fit into our plans for the use of our trademark. Please know that this decision is not a reflection on you or your company, but rather a matter of policy.
We sincerely appreciate your interest in The Coca-Cola Company and regret we could not respond in a more positive way.
Sincerely,
/s Tom Barber
Tom Barber
Industry and Consumer Affairs
The Coca-Cola Company
My photograph of the Coca-Cola advertisement in Schenectady was included in the form letter. Bummer.
So this means the Coca-Cola ghost sign photo has to come out of my art book completely. I could still use the photo for artistic competitions if I so chose – i.e., I may re-take the photo with a better angle for consideration as one of my photos for the Altamont Fair photography contest – but I can’t put it in the book.
As much as this is a disappointment, I was lucky to find a replacement photo. A fellow photographer alerted me to the existence of a series of ghost signs for Wilson & Co., a meat and dairy store that operated in a building adjacent to the Albany Pump Station, and I went out yesterday and snapped a few shots of the various ghost signs painted on that building. It may not be the same as Coca-Cola, but it doesn’t mean that I’ve given up completely on the art book project.

Blurb is a nice way to do books, all the cool kids do it 🙂 If you haven’t tried yet, don’t go cheap on the paper choice.
LikeLike
Shows you how stupid corporations actually are. Having their logo in an photography book hurts them how? And you gain financially how?
If the actual owner of the company got your letter, you’d get a “Go ahead!” from him. Guaranteed. It’s actually free advertising, and the picture illustrates how long the brand has been successful for! lol
ps–send this post to the guy who wrote back to you. I’d love to hear how he would refute it!
LikeLike
To me it seems the use of the image of the building with a Coca-Cola ad would fall within “fair use” provision of copyright law. Have a look at some of the case summaries here:
http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/fair-use/case-summaries/#summaries5
LikeLike
This may be a dumb suggestion, or question perhaps, but could you crop it so that the logo isn’t complete? Or does any amount of the logo fall into the infringement category? The wall has so much good stuff on it, that it is a shame to not have it in your book. And yes I understand that cropping it may impinge on your artistic eye, just an idea…
LikeLike
Karyn –
Thanks for the suggestion. As much as I would like to simply “save face” and only use a portion of the ad, the Coca-Cola reference pretty much dominates the wall of the building. What I will probably do at some point is re-photograph the wall for one of several different contests and/or fairs this summer (the photo would actually qualify for four of the five photography fair contests that I hope to enter). It’ll also give me a chance to photograph the ad with more sunshine on it, and maybe with some spring grass in the lot. In other words, I’m not giving up on the photograph – I just have to separate it from the rest of the project, and give it a life of its own.
LikeLike
Interesting. Does this mean you write to get permission for any logo-type artwork you photograph for commercial use? Guess you would have to… Thanks for sharing this; it’s useful.
LikeLike
Coke should have competed for the right to have a product placement ad in your book.
LikeLike
So, if you cannot include it in your book, how is it that you can include it on your blog? I am curious about this, as I found your site while researching copyright law for my own pictures of company buildings, signs, etc…
LikeLike
I can include in my blog because (1) I took the picture, and (2) I’m not making money off the picture by putting it in the blog.
LikeLike
Shouldn’t reasons (1) and (2) also apply to the book?
LikeLike
Okay Dan, I realize you’re trying to be snarky here… operative word “trying…”
LikeLike
They can’t all be like Casper the Friendly Post.
LikeLike