Using names of specific brands/stories in a memoir

[ChaseJxyz]

So I know that using names of real people, like friends, family etc, as well as specific geographical locations is an entirely separate issue, and one that I need to figure out on my own, as I need to figure out how much identifying information I want to give out.

But what about brands? There's a scene with a vending machine, I can specifically say the candy in question were KitKats (was KitKats?), but part of me says "oh, you shouldn't do that, what if The Brand gets upset?" Which is why they never use real brands on tv. But also having the scene and just saying "a specific brand of candy bar" feels really distant and fake, which is a weird vibe for a memoir to have. And making something up is also weird, because what other parts of my memoir could be made up? Which I want to avoid, since the focus of the memoir is something that a fair number of people are adamant doesn't exist. So I don't want to introduce a ton of obviously-made-up elements.


The other part of it is including stories and characters. Is saying "I read a lot of Pony Pals" cool or should I stick with the generic "I read a lot of horse girl books" ? Including specifics gives a better sense of authenticity, and in one or two cases, I would need to go into specifics of the story and how that was relevent/important to me. It would be immediately obvious what the story is for those who know it, but would come off as weird as those who don't.

 

[Woollybear]

"... give me a break, give me a break, break me off a piece--"
"Would you stop singing that stupid jingle?"

This probably is not a useful suggestion, but it was the first work-around that occurred to me. Good luck with this... It's always strange when the problem crops up.

 

[Unimportant]

AFAIK, in both fiction and memoir/biography/non-fiction, it's perfectly okay to use Real Names as long as you aren't disparaging them to the point that they could sue.

It's okay to say you eat at McDonald's every day. It's okay to say you never eat at McDonald's because you don't like fast food. It probably would not be a good idea, though, to say that you never eat at McDonald's because every time you go in there are cockroaches on the floor and mouse poop on the counters and everyone knows the workers don't wash their hands after using the loo, as that would be defamatory of the brand.

 

[Cobalt Jade]

I think it's all right to use brands in an autobiography. I've read many where it's done. Grace Jones, for example, referenced a specific brand of jigsaw puzzle she likes to solve. (I know, Grace Jones enjoys jigsaw puzzles?)

 

[Gramps]

Stehpen King used a Coke machine in "Tommyknockers" and a branded candy bar in "The Stand."

 

[Harry Wotton]

In general, nothing stops you from using brand names. A couple of things that could cause trouble: using a brand name offensively and using a brand name in a confusing or inappropriate way: "Marie spread Hershey's Chocolate Syrup on the wound, saying,'That'll make it feel better.'"

https://sage-answer.com/can-you-legally-mention-brands-in-a-book/

Hey, companies want to have their merchanise mentioned. Look at all the product placement in movies and TV.

 

[Maryn]

For whatever it's worth, writing that has the potential to be offensive--think erotica of every type--has a greater problem with brand-name mentions, even if they're favorable. It's entirely possible that the KitKat people feel their brand is tarnished if it appears in a work containing graphic sex (or anything else that might be offensive, i.e. pro-fascism screed, how-to for murder, or cannibalism) even if the characters savor the product and pronounce it the very best there is.

It's pretty hard to come up with a non-branded name for an awful lot of things, though. On a hot summer night, do my characters enjoy a quiescently frozen fruit-flavored ice bar, or a Popsicle?

Maryn, who had a Popsicle only last night

 

[ChaseJxyz]

It's pretty hard to come up with a non-branded name for an awful lot of things, though. On a hot summer night, do my characters enjoy a quiescently frozen fruit-flavored ice bar, or a Popsicle?

A lot of those words, though, have been "genericized," where people use them in place of whatever non-branded name is for the thing, including not even capitalizing it. Jacuzzi, popsicle, bandaid, kleenex, aspirin. ESCALATOR. Zipper. So we're already doing that all the time, even if we're not aware of it.

 

[Fi Webster]

But what about brands? There's a scene with a vending machine, I can specifically say the candy in question were KitKats (was KitKats?), but part of me says "oh, you shouldn't do that, what if The Brand gets upset?"

I agree with Gramps that Stephen King blazed a trail in this regard. He purposefully uses lots of brand names, many of which have by now become obsolete, to ground his fiction in a specific time and place. Even if you haven't heard of the brand, if a character uses "Pine-Sol" to clean with, it conveys a different tone than if they use "a pine-scented cleanser." Too many brand names can be distracting, but none at all can seem cool or distant, self-consciously literary on the author's part.

I suggest you choose where to deploy brand names with a deliberate approach as to what tone you want to convey. From what I've heard, companies have no problem with it—unlike using lyrics from pop tunes, where you have to jump through legal and financial hoops galore. I mean, if late-night comedians had to pay money to Spirit Airlines every time they made a joke at their expense....!

But also having the scene and just saying "a specific brand of candy bar" feels really distant and fake, which is a weird vibe for a memoir to have. And making something up is also weird, because what other parts of my memoir could be made up? Which I want to avoid, since the focus of the memoir is something that a fair number of people are adamant doesn't exist. So I don't want to introduce a ton of obviously-made-up elements.

An excellent defense of using some brand names. A nonfiction work embedded in real-world specifics that everyone can relate to will have a different "this really exists" feeling from one where those specifics are avoided.

The other part of it is including stories and characters. Is saying "I read a lot of Pony Pals" cool or should I stick with the generic "I read a lot of horse girl books" ? Including specifics gives a better sense of authenticity, and in one or two cases, I would need to go into specifics of the story and how that was relevent/important to me. It would be immediately obvious what the story is for those who know it, but would come off as weird as those who don't.

You have to be aware of how far any specific detail will have penetrated in society. Even people who've never eaten a Kit-Kat bar (I haven't) have heard of them, even have a visual image and association with commercials. I've never heard of "Pony Pals" books, but the title alone tells me a lot about what they're probably like. So the specific title would be richer than a generic "horse girl book" (which could be old or new, for little kids or teens). But if it were something much more vague like (struggling now to make one up) like "Pink Flyer," I would appreciate a word or two about what "Pink Flyer" books are about.

If you're not sure whether people will know what you're talking about, just ask. Here on AW we have folks from all different cohorts.

 

[Unimportant]

For whatever it's worth, writing that has the potential to be offensive--think erotica of every type--has a greater problem with brand-name mentions, even if they're favorable.

Ooooh, good point, I'd not thought of that!

 

[Maryn]

(Wry smile) Past editors have. It took a good bit of work to strip my novels of brand names. I don't use many in my current series, but I fear there are some.

 

[BustedPrinter]

I have seen this in the book block portion of a non-fiction coffee table book that I bought years ago.

I always thought it was a nice sentence because it summed up how most writers feel on the topic.

We recognize that some words, model names, designations, and brand names, mentioned herein, are the property of their trademark holder, and we use them for identification purposes only.

 

[Unimportant]

And yet, lawyers.

IMO, better safe than sorry.

 

[Maryn]

If only it weren't so damned difficult to come up with a non-branded name for some things, though, eh?

It may be a regionalism, but regardless of the brand, I grab a Kleenex, never a tissue. There's not a dialogue-friendly substitute for Jell-O, Popsicle, VWBug, Xerox, Google, and a bazillion more.

Maryn, with a dramatic sigh

 

[BustedPrinter]

If only it weren't so damned difficult to come up with a non-branded name for some things, though, eh?

It may be a regionalism, but regardless of the brand, I grab a Kleenex, never a tissue. There's not a dialogue-friendly substitute for Jell-O, Popsicle, VWBug, Xerox, Google, and a bazillion more.

Maryn, with a dramatic sigh

It is a really hard issue to address as a writer. I mean in some ways companies aspire to be household names like Kleenex. And in movies, when you see a can of Coke turned to face the camera, they paid movie companies to do that. All companies want to be a household name! But then I can understand them wanting to be defensive of that name too so they do not lose that image that they obtained. So I see both sides.

My rule of using names is like using city names. We are allowed to use names of cities of course because being government it is public by nature, and I use real names of towns and cities IF the story paints the city in a good light, or is just a location where the story happened. However if the city is painted in a negative light, say a dark novel about slums, then I use a fictious city.

I do the same with guns. I love guns so I routinely name them by brand, but only if it is an identifier. I do that because having a character hold a Kimber 9mm or a Smith and Wesson 9mm Bodyguard tells A LOT about the character. But I if there is a final shootout scene with three dead bad guys, I do not use the brand name of the gun used. But in a bio the same thing can be said, there is a huge difference between a Kubota Farmer and a John Deere one. Brands do matter because it shows character and motivation.

As with most things in life, applying "BE NICE!" goes a long ways towards peace.

 

[Helix]

I do the same with guns. I love guns so I routinely name them by brand, but only if it is an identifier. I do that because having a character hold a Kimber 9mm or a Smith and Wesson 9mm Bodyguard tells A LOT about the character. But I if there is a final shootout scene with three dead bad guys, I do not use the brand name of the gun used. But in a bio the same thing can be said, there is a huge difference between a Kubota Farmer and a John Deere one. Brands do matter because it shows character and motivation.

The use of brands as a way of creating character only works where the brands mean the same thing to all people.

I know that James Bond's Bentleys and Aston Martins have a certain cachet, and Rovers and Ford Capris were the vehicles of choice in 1970s British cop shows, with Rovers being driven by different sorts of cops from the Capris. (Although I can't remember an Audi used to quite the same effect in the 1970s as it was by Gene Hunt in Life on Mars.)

But I have no idea what the difference is between different tractor brands. What would the character be of someone who drove a New Holland vs a Massey Ferguson?

 

[BustedPrinter]

The use of brands as a way of creating character only works where the brands mean the same thing to all people.

I know that James Bond's Bentleys and Aston Martins have a certain cachet, and Rovers and Ford Capris were the vehicles of choice in 1970s British cop shows, with Rovers being driven by different sorts of cops from the Capris. (Although I can't remember an Audi used to quite the same effect in the 1970s as it was by Gene Hunt in Life on Mars.)

But I have no idea what the difference is between different tractor brands. What would the character be of someone who drove a New Holland vs a Massey Ferguson?

That is very true which is the reason brands can have so much impact.

In a biography situation, someone reading a biography about a farmer is most likely going to know the difference of a Kubota Farmer versus a John Deere one. Or, a New Holland versus a Massey Ferguson. For those that do not know the difference, it will not change the story for them, or if their interest is piqued enough, they might dig into why.

It works the same way in fiction writing. My biggest fan is my 82 year old Mother in Law, and while she does not know the significant difference between a person pulling out a Kimber or a Smith and Wesson Bodyguard, the gun lover who does read my novels WILL pick up on that and it has a deeper appreciation for the story. Does that mean you must be a gun lover to appreciate my novels? No, my mother in law proves that, BUT a gun lover will immediately recognize that the author is a lover of guns.

Brand is a great way to add those minute details. It is also why one of the greatest rules of writing is, "BE BOLD!" We live in a world of watered down, and readers of any genre ant to be pulled out of that. But like anything powerful, it must be used cautiously.

 

[Helix]

That is very true which is the reason brands can have so much impact.

But only if they evoke the same image.

In a biography situation, someone reading a biography about a farmer is most likely going to know the difference of a Kubota Farmer versus a John Deere one. Or, a New Holland versus a Massey Ferguson. For those that do not know the difference, it will not change the story for them, or if their interest is piqued enough, they might dig into why.

This feels like a stretch. I have no idea what sort of person would choose a Kubota Farmer over a different brand and model. What I do know is that some towns only have one dealership, so offer limited choices. More telling would be whether the tractor was brand new, antique and lovingly maintained, or whether the owner was just managing to keep going. That would tell me more about that character than a brand name.

It works the same way in fiction writing. My biggest fan is my 82 year old Mother in Law, and while she does not know the significant difference between a person pulling out a Kimber or a Smith and Wesson Bodyguard, the gun lover who does read my novels WILL pick up on that and it has a deeper appreciation for the story. Does that mean you must be a gun lover to appreciate my novels? No, my mother in law proves that, BUT a gun lover will immediately recognize that the author is a lover of guns.

Brand is a great way to add those minute details. It is also why one of the greatest rules of writing is, "BE BOLD!" We live in a world of watered down, and readers of any genre ant to be pulled out of that. But like anything powerful, it must be used cautiously.

Brand is the opposite of being bold, though. It's trying to use shorthand rather than actually doing the hard work of characterisation.

 

[Brigid Barry]

+1 to Helix.

I honestly think the idea of a reader researching tractors as a result of reading about it in a book is a lot of stretch. The only stuff I research in books is something that I'm pretty sure is an anachronism because I feel like something doesn't fit. Either I was right or I learn something new. There's no reason I'd look up the different between two different brands of tractors and try to extrapolate meaning that I can apply to the book.

And, as an author, if that type of meaning is relevant to the book, it's something I would put in in a "show don't tell" manner rather than hoping my readers went on a side quest for deeper meaning.

In one of my novels I shamelessly brand-name dropped. The MC used a post it, got a drink from an Igloo cooler, etc, and I made reference to a local grocery store that no one outside of New England probably knows about. I said nothing one way or the other about the brand, it was just a thing that existed. It's set in Maine and we're a strange people who don't get to see ourselves in a lot of fiction so some of it is a nod.

Genericized brands where the brand becomes a noun representing all of the thing regardless of whether or not it's by that brand (Xerox, Band-aid, Kleenex, Jell-O, etc) is a thorny trademark issue. To the average Joe calling an insulated beverage container a thermos is no big deal, but the fine folks at Thermos may feel differently. That's a line I wouldn't be interested to cross in my own work. Also not sure how many people didn't take the same Marketing classes that I did to know that it could be problematic. lol.

 

[MAUMAU]

In a biography situation, someone reading a biography about a farmer is most likely going to know the difference of a Kubota Farmer versus a John Deere one. Or, a New Holland versus a Massey Ferguson. For those that do not know the difference, it will not change the story for them, or if their interest is piqued enough, they might dig into why.

I have Kubota tractors and Kubota utility vehicles, and I have no idea what you are talking about.

Please explain what you think the difference is.

This feels like a stretch. I have no idea what sort of person would choose a Kubota Farmer over a different brand and model. What I do know is that some towns only have one dealership, so offer limited choices. More telling would be whether the tractor was brand new, antique and lovingly maintained, or whether the owner was just managing to keep going. That would tell me more about that character than a brand name.

This is spot on.

The biggest factor in selecting which brand of farming equipment one purchases is dealer location. If the Kubota dealer is ten miles away, why would one choose a John Deere dealership that is 200 miles away. If you need service, the Kubota dealer will show up with a fully equipped and stocked vehicle to repair your equipment. It is highly unlikely a John Deere dealer, 200 miles away, is going to do this.

 

[Unimportant]

Brand is a great way to add those minute details. It is also why one of the greatest rules of writing is, "BE BOLD!" We live in a world of watered down, and readers of any genre ant to be pulled out of that. But like anything powerful, it must be used cautiously.

I cannot dispense legal advice, but the wise writer knows that "bold" can cross over to "lawsuit" if they don't understand the definitions and impactsof trademark dilution, infringement, and disparagement. For those seeking more specifics, this is a really good article written by a legal specialist in the field.

 

[Brigid Barry]

Great article! I couldn't remember the phrase but remembered dilution. What I was thinking is trademark dilution. I didn't know that thermos had been genericized!

I have a lot of real things in this particular MS, but the restaurant (which was always portrayed in a flattering light but bad things happened there) was fake. I feel slightly smart now.

 

[Unimportant]

BUT a gun lover will immediately recognize that the author is a lover of guns.

A writer doesn't have to love something, or even like something, to research it rigorously and get the details absolutely right in their story.

 

[Maryn]

It's worth noting that at least some publishers' contracts have a clause that any legal claims concerning trademark and copyright are entirely the author's problem. There's a reason a character may lift a red can of their favorite soft drink rather than a Coke, or sings a classic rock tune rather than Satisfaction.

Other publishers' editors instruct the author to go through the ms. removing all brand names, even those favorably mentioned.

When it's the writer's first trade deal, they tend to comply rather than risk the deal.

 

[lizmonster]

It's worth noting that at least some publishers' contracts have a clause that any legal claims concerning trademark and copyright are entirely the author's problem.

My 2015 contract with a Big 5 publisher had this clause.