Because you can say the name, but putting a trademarked image or name on the album cover is a kind of "branding" and opens up the potential to trademark infringement. It's the same way Hootie and the Blowfish sued Best Buy in the South when they put their Cracked Rear View album cover on a promotional lunchbox in the mid 1990s.
Because you can say the name, but putting a trademarked image or name on the album cover is a kind of "branding" and opens up the potential to trademark infringement. It's the same way Hootie and the Blowfish sued Best Buy in the South when they put their Cracked Rear View album cover on a promotional lunchbox in the mid 1990s.
lots of bands use brand names in their songs. i don't really know why it would be legally different for song titles, though...
Because you can say the name, but putting a trademarked image or name on the album cover is a kind of "branding" and opens up the potential to trademark infringement. It's the same way Hootie and the Blowfish sued Best Buy in the South when they put their Cracked Rear View album cover on a promotional lunchbox in the mid 1990s.
Because you can say the name, but putting a trademarked image or name on the album cover is a kind of "branding" and opens up the potential to trademark infringement. It's the same way Hootie and the Blowfish sued Best Buy in the South when they put their Cracked Rear View album cover on a promotional lunchbox in the mid 1990s.