Apple wont let bad guys use iPhones in movies, director says

edit: barrkel posts a comment that links and explains the Trademark law around this. search for it and upvote!

You could just use Apple devices and pay for them, and then Apple would have no say.

My theory, too, is easily falsifiable -- check whether the movies you linked have "promotional consideration provided by" lists that include Apple.

There was a lot of attentiveness to phones as class signifiers throughout the movie though. The maid's phone has a broken screen, for instance, and she uses an Android. Meanwhile all the rich people have the newest model iPhones in immaculate condition without cases.

If anyone is curious about some of the details https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNuGdv536mM (starts around 2min in)

It has been reported by people in the business -- quite a few times -- that Apple does not pay for movie or television appearances. At least not directly. Instead they provide hardware for free to be utilized for placements, at least if they're good with the content of the show and format of the placement.

"Apple products do not appear on screen by accident."

If your movie or show is about American upper middle class teens, they're probably going to have iPhones. Apple doesn't need to pay for that to be true, though competitors need to pay for that to not be true.

I mean, tonnes of times you see Apple hardware and the show goes out of its way to occlude that fact (e.g. the MBP with the Apple logo covered). There just happens to be a lot of Apple stuff in the business, and it's what people are comfortable with.

I assume companies can say, no random director you cannot use a Microsoft Surface to nuke the world.

There must be something about it showcasing a product in a negative light.

Trademark owners may object to the use of their trademarks in fictional films or other media productions without their consent, and seek to enjoin such uses by filing a trademark infringement action under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)), unfair competition in violation of the common law of New York, under the Federal Trademark Dilution Act ("FTDA"), and dilution of trademark in violation of New York's anti-dilution statute (section 368-d of the New York General Business Law).

A show/movie/series is in the process of being financed and you have sales teams going around to Media Agencies and/or direct to brands (usually media agencies are the first contact) and they pitch the show with the available placements for product placement.

Cars, clothes, drinks, food, shampoo, you name it - everything that's on screen it's sold.

If it's not sold it's unbranded, even if you recognize the product by it's shape, the logo can't show.

So basically what happened so far is that the sales team approaches Apple Media Agency or Apple directly and pitch them the movies/shows and the characters with enough relevance/screen on time, and ask if they want to place their product with that character.

Probably it's even a guideline nowadays that the agency account manager doesn't even let villains, crooks, etc placements even reach Apple brand management because they know the brand guidelines to not be associated with "Evil Characters".

After some time they don't even pitch those placements to them because they know it's a direct "No".

If it's a yes then there's a series of meetings to show the script/story board where the product is actually placed and shown, and some brands even have a say over the directors in some shots.

In some sets there are usually brand representatives with the respective media agency contact.

No idea if it's like this on Hollywood, but should be something in these lines.

You could give a bad guy an iPhone for $1000, but you might rather have Motorola pay you to use their phone instead.