Permission while shooting in public?

[Jack Kelly]

OK, sure - that sounds bad. Thanks for bringing it to light.

But, erm, has it ever happened?

[Paul Tauger]

Originally Posted by Sverker Hahn

In March 2008 my wife and I were in New York, and we went to Times Square. Having read about video regulations in this city, we placed our tripod and the EX1 on what we thought was a perfect spot.

After some 15 minutes two policemen told us not to use a tripod there. "Yes, you can do it in NY, but not in Times Square".

So we took another shot close by with the camera on the concrete divider between the car lines. Too much concrete in the bottom of the shot, but that was easy to remove in post.

But back in Sweden, our agent now says "hmmm, probably too many trademarks in the picture". I think that these companies should be happy getting these trademarks published for free.

LentoVision: New York City

I can't speak to Swedish law. However, in the U.S., the primary barriers to showing 3rd party trademarks in a film are trademark infringement, i.e. consumer confusion as to source, sponsorship or affiliation, and dilution by tarnishment, e.g. using a 3rd party trademark in porno film. Obviously, without seeing your film and knowing the context in which it would be used, I can't give a legal opinion. However, as a general rule, use of a trademark per se in a video is not necessarily a problem.

[Grinner Hester]

I make the animated billboards on Times Square for Budweiser and Michelob Ultra. It would be absolutly fine to have them in the background of a shot if no reference were made to them.
...and as easy as a phone call otherwise.
Very few companies will ever have a problem with free advertising. Heck, they have teams that arrange and pay generously for product placement. I'm not saying they'd pay you but often they'd surely not say no.