Using real brand names?

Perfectly okay, as long as you don't say anything demeaning about them. It's done a lot (see Stephen King). The only caveat is that if you do mention a trademark brand name, it should probably be something that will be familiar to most readers.

caw

Ian Fleming is credited with starting to use brand names in James Bond's adventures in the early 1950's. Since then it's quite acceptable if you do it OK.
However, if it's an alternative world, you could play around with brand names.
I remember in Bill the Galactic Hero, people drunk Heroin Cola

You can mention brands as long as you're not fucking with them (saying bad things about them, having people murdered in McDonald's locations all over the place, etc.) If it serves a purpose, like characterization, mention. If it doesn't, make it up.

In your situation, I got halfway through the post and was like 'make them Morleys! Make them Morleys!' but I'm odd like that.

Do it all the time, though not overboard. I was told by a writing instructor that using name brands bring realism to a story.

Your characters can go to see Superman Wonder Woman at the movies. He She cannot come off the screen and join your characters on their adventures.

Your characters can drink a Coke, but you cannot say that a mistake in the mixing of a new batch of Coke started the zombie apocalypse and resulted in the deaths of 98% of the population.

Your characters can drive a Mercedes. They cannot say that Mercedes will cause anyone who drives them to commit murder within twenty-four hours.

Mention the brand, sure.
Use the brand, it depends.
Disparage the brand, definitely not.

I manage several registered trademarks in my day job. We really don't care about our marks being used, even incorrectly, in fiction. The main purpose of a trademark is to identify our products to consumers and differentiate them from our competitors. The only time we get excited about use of our mark is when a competitor tries to use it, or something very similar to it, in order to confuse consumers.

In the Robert Redford movie All Is Lost, the main character used our product in an attempt to repair a hole in his boat. The repair later failed disastrously, moving the plot along. We didn't even get upset about that.

I'd suggest spelling the brand name right and capitalizing it. It's amazing how wrong we can get brand names that we think we know. (Is it Vernors or Vernor's? Modge Podge or Mod Podge? Carharts or Carrhart's or Carhardts?) Don't bother using a TM (ETA or the (R))in fiction because it will throw your reader out of the story and look like a product placement. A TM-owning company is not going to bother allocating TM defense resources by beating up on fiction writers unless the writer is really slandering the products terribly.

Just throwing this out there ~ Christine was a Plymouth Fury and Cujo only became a problem because of a piece of crap Ford Pinto.

Carrie in PA said:

Just throwing this out there ~ Christine was a Plymouth Fury and Cujo only became a problem because of a piece of crap Ford Pinto.

Click to expand...

Well, and the rabies.

blacbird said:

The only caveat is that if you do mention a trademark brand name, it should probably be something that will be familiar to most readers.

Click to expand...

I recently completed a historical romance where the characters use Bryant and May matches, Wild Woodbine cigarettes, Rigby rifles and so on. I don't know if most readers are familiar with these, but it makes the setting a bit more authentic for me.

Another caveat is don't use the brand name when you want the generic. Don't use Kleenex when you want facial tissue, Xerox when you want a photocopy, Starbucks when you want a cup of coffee, etc. These companies have to defend their brands lest they lapse into public domain.

As far as I know, referring to a trademark by name is fine in fiction. Creating a competing brand and calling it by that name isn't. Defaming a trademark in fiction is dicier, though some have pointed out examples where it's been done. I remember a scene where a Ford Pinto exploded after being barely tapped from behind in a movie (maybe it was Top Secret), and I can't imagine that Ford approved of that. Did they get sued?

BenPanced said:

Another caveat is don't use the brand name when you want the generic. Don't use Kleenex when you want facial tissue, Xerox when you want a photocopy, Starbucks when you want a cup of coffee, etc. These companies have to defend their brands lest they lapse into public domain.

Click to expand...

I've definitely read books where people referred to facial tissues as kleenex and so on, so I don't know how often trademark owners go after authors or publishers for this kind of thing. It would be weird to read a book set in the US where someone called it a facial tissue, in fact. Everyone calls them kleenex here, just as people in the UK refers to vacuum cleaners as "hoovers," even when they're another brand. I've seen British shows and read British books where characters referred to "hoovering their flats."

Context in a story would likely make it hard for a reader to tell whether or not the kleenex being used was, in fact, a kleenex brand tissue or another brand of tissue anyway.

There definitely are cases where companies have lost the right to defend their trademarks, though, because the word became so genericized. Aspirin, cellophane, escalator and so on. I'm no sure use of the term in fiction would be fingered as the causative event, however, as fiction tends to reflect usage that is already widespread. It can vary by country too. The word "Aspirin" is still owned by Bayer in some countries, but not in the US.

There are also trademarks that are still, technically, protected, but they are used generically so widely it's only a matter of time. Adrenaline is one. I've certainly seen that used in books (instead of the proper word for the hormone/neurotransmitter, which is epinephrine), even in cases where it's completely anachronistic to do so (in settings where no one would use the term yet, or even have any understanding of endocrinology or neurobiology). It's weird to read about a person in a pre-industrial setting who feels the "adrenaline pumping in my veins."

I don't know of the movie, but I'd wager Ford wouldn't go near that.

It'd be hard to defame the Pinto by implying it exploded if you hit it from behind, as it... exploded if you hit it from behind, heh. You know what I mean; you can't defame, or libel, or slander with the truth. Thus, for Ford to pursue a case, they'd probably have to show up in a court and explain how the Pinto exploded if you hit it from behind but not THAT gently, which doesn't seem like the best pr move.

Roxxsmom said:

I've definitely read books where people referred to facial tissues as kleenex and so on, so I don't know how often trademark owners go after authors or publishers for this kind of thing. It would be weird to read a book set in the US where someone called it a facial tissue, in fact. Everyone calls them kleenex here, just as people in the UK refers to vacuum cleaners as "hoovers," even when they're another brand. I've seen British shows and read British books where characters referred to "hoovering their flats."

Click to expand...

This is correct and it's very common usage. I hoover my flat with a Dyson hoover. I usually just call it a hoover though, unless someone asks me what brand hoover I've got.

It's a Dyson V6 Animal hoover, which I got because both my daughters are allergic to dust mites and it's the best hoover for getting rid of the little dusty gits. It even has an attachment so you can hoover mattresses and upholstery.

There are also trademarks that are still, technically, protected, but they are used generically so widely it's only a matter of time. Adrenaline is one. I've certainly seen that used in books (instead of the proper word for the hormone/neurotransmitter, which is epinephrine), even in cases where it's completely anachronistic to do so (in settings where no one would use the term yet, or even have any understanding of endocrinology or neurobiology). It's weird to read about a person in a pre-industrial setting who feels the "adrenaline pumping in my veins."

Click to expand...

In Britain, adrenaline is the generic term used in science and medicine. When I was at uni, one of the lecturers had to explain to everyone that adrenaline is called epinephrine in the USA, and not to get confused by the fact it's called epinephrine in American journals. In all the textbooks over here it's called adrenaline and on my daughter's prescription (she has to have Epipens for multiple food allergies) it says "adrenaline auto-injector". The NHS always uses generic drug names on prescriptions, not brand names.

Carrie in PA said:

Just throwing this out there ~ Christine was a Plymouth Fury and Cujo only became a problem because of a piece of crap Ford Pinto.

Click to expand...

And Mr Mercedes has the car brand in the title, and the antagonist is called Mr Mercedes for using a Mercedes to kill people.

There's a note at the end of the book saying that you can't actually break into a Mercedes using a method referred to in the book. I was never quite sure whether that was there for crime prevention or not defaming a brand name reasons. Probably both.

neandermagnon said:

This is correct and it's very common usage. I hoover my flat with a Dyson hoover. I usually just call it a hoover though, unless someone asks me what brand hoover I've got.

It's a Dyson V6 Animal hoover, which I got because both my daughters are allergic to dust mites and it's the best hoover for getting rid of the little dusty gits. It even has an attachment so you can hoover mattresses and upholstery.



In Britain, adrenaline is the generic term used in science and medicine. When I was at uni, one of the lecturers had to explain to everyone that adrenaline is called epinephrine in the USA, and not to get confused by the fact it's called epinephrine in American journals. In all the textbooks over here it's called adrenaline and on my daughter's prescription (she has to have Epipens for multiple food allergies) it says "adrenaline auto-injector". The NHS always uses generic drug names on prescriptions, not brand names.

Click to expand...

FWIW, I never refer to tissues as Kleenex; dunno why, just don't. I don't think my parents did either. They're tissues.

You know Hoover is a vacuum brand, right? In the US we don't use Hoover as a generic, interestingly enough, though the co. is American. It's one of many brands. Saying what brand of Hoover you've got would be like saying 'what type of Audi do you have? A Honda?' Or it'd be like the soda thing -- the generic names for sodas (carbonated, sugared beverages), vary in the U.S. I believe on the coasts it's soda, in the upper midwest it tends toward pop, and there's a strip of the south, which I think is mostly Texan, in which the generic is coke. So waitstaff or people ask 'do you want a drink?' 'Yes, a coke please.' 'Ok, what kind?' 'A Pepsi.'

blacbird said:

Perfectly okay, as long as you don't say anything demeaning about them. It's done a lot (see Stephen King). The only caveat is that if you do mention a trademark brand name, it should probably be something that will be familiar to most readers.

caw

Click to expand...

The story in my book was set in the late 1960's and involved a lot of the drug culture of the time. At one point I wrote that pot smokers were only dangerous in their consumption of Hostess Twinkies -

In short, it's no problem unless its defamatory.

I try to remain generic - saying facial tissue instead of Kleenex, copying instead of. Eroxing. I think that is due to my journalistic background where lawsuits are always a possibility

If I were in your shoes I would abstain from doing so. Aforementioned product placement, defamation and other legal issues might be unnecessary burden unless you feel that it is absolutely indispensable to create the ambience of your story. In that case you'd better consult a lawyer

BenPanced said:

Another caveat is don't use the brand name when you want the generic. Don't use Kleenex when you want facial tissue, Xerox when you want a photocopy, Starbucks when you want a cup of coffee, etc. These companies have to defend their brands lest they lapse into public domain.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Stay in POV. If your character eats Pop-Tarts, "fruit filled toaster pastries" is going to toss your reader right out of the story.

I think one of the books in the Twilight series used DumpsterTM and it threw me out of the story every time. Although to be fair, there were a lot of things throwing me out of those books.

As I mentioned upthread as someone with a lot of TMs to defend in my day job, the vast majority of businesses couldn't give a crap less about the random use of a trademark in fiction, and it's hardly a defensible position for them anyway because the fiction writer is not in competition with them. To win such a case, the complainant would have to prove actual lost profits or make a very strong case for potential lost profits and/or marketplace confusion risking lost profits. Preventing anyone from ever uttering your product's name is not at all what TMs are for.

cornflake said:

I don't know of the movie, but I'd wager Ford wouldn't go near that.

It'd be hard to defame the Pinto by implying it exploded if you hit it from behind, as it... exploded if you hit it from behind, heh. You know what I mean; you can't defame, or libel, or slander with the truth. Thus, for Ford to pursue a case, they'd probably have to show up in a court and explain how the Pinto exploded if you hit it from behind but not THAT gently, which doesn't seem like the best pr move.

Click to expand...

One of my favorite things ever is this accurate custom flame job on a Pinto.

Use whatever brand of aftershave, shower gel, car, hotel chain, restaurant, etc., the POV character uses. So long as in your narrative you don't trash the product - you'll be OK. When did you last read of a rich guy character driving a made-up brand of car?

Let common-sense prevail.

You can't possibly do this worse than Dan Brown, so as long as it's in keeping with the story/character and not disparaging the brand, I'd say go for it.

I wouldn't have a character smoke crack out of a name brand cola can.

Cindyt said:

I wouldn't have a character smoke crack out of a name brand cola can.

Click to expand...

I would.