White Lion Pub Copyright Issue
mwokee
Posts: 1,275
in The Commons
I can't say if this crosses the line or not but you need to be careful of copyright issues. I like the product but will never purchase because it's too close in my book for causing legal issues for artwork I sell commercially. FYI
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Lion,_Covent_Garden
https://www.daz3d.com/the-white-lion-london-pub
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Built in 1888, so it should be safe if it is like most copyright - life plus 70 years. The product doesn't copy the signage, which might be a newer element since it is likely to have been renewed since then. But, if in doubt always check with a qualified professional - this isn't a topic we can settle here.
It's not modelled on that pub. It's similar to but not the same as another London pub with a different name. Lots of London corner pubs share similar architecture. There are more than 130 pubs in the UK called The White Lion.
It might not be a case, but in this kind of scenario if it could reasonably (that's the magic legalese word) be an example of copyright infringement, it's a safe bet to sell it with an Editorial License to protect the PA. Doesn't help us users, but it'd at least give us a heads up to use it only recreationally.
You would have to check if the name is actually trademarked or not. Is the White Lion a franchise like McDonalds?
Aside from both being corner pubs with the same name, the product and the real pub are unalike.
As oddbob says, there's a lot of similar architecture when it comes to London corner pubs (here's a Reddit post with a gallery of several) and there's a mess of White Lion pubs in the UK. (There used to be one on the canal near me, until someone bought it and boarded it up waiting for it to fall down so they can reuse the land while pretending that they've not violated the historic building listing by actually driving a bulldozer over it).
As far as some detective work, there is a Welbeck Street in Westminster, but Google Street View shows no pub like that on it. (And if we're talking copyright, I note that the street sign does not use the copyrighted font of a true City of Westminster street sign; the letters here are much wider). Hunting around, if I had to guess at a specific reference, it might have been the Golden Eagle (also in W1 Westminster), which is in a similar red and black with similar windows and light over the door... but it's definitely not exact, and these are fairly common design elements in London corner pubs, and Street View shows the Golden Eagle was actually painted in green before 2015.
In my (admittedly completely unqualified) opinion, the pub in the asset shares elements with real pubs, but we're talking about a common style of building, the name is about as generic as any British pub name can be, and these buildings were built long enough ago that copyright on the building has almost certainly expired any way. As Richard says, specific signage might be an issue... but if you look on Google for "White Lion pub sign", it seems like nearly every pub called the White Lion has almost exactly that design (with minor variations) of prancing lion for its sign anyway, and if that doesn't constitute a legal issue, I can't imagine it will here.
No, it isn't, and it would be hard to pick a more generic British pub name.
Indeed, the most common British pub name is "Red Lion", and "White Lion" is also on the top 50 list.
Pretty sure that's the basis. Location is more or less correct, and the individual elements are close if not the layout. Plus there are a load of ref photos on Shutterstock.
Bog standard pub name, some flavour of heraldic animal. Other faves are nods to royalty, crushed enemies and public figures of the day like Gladstone or Nelson. Locally we have Ye Olde Leathern Bottel. That's five hundred years old so we let them off with the spelling.
Yeah, it seems fairly likely. Similar styling, some matching elements, etc. Still, definitely not exact, and the look of the real pub has changed within recent years (so it's not an ultra iconic look that's being preserved as part of the branding), and you could basically pick out all of those elements out of the design of the many other similar pubs in London.
So while it's definitely plausibly an inspiration, I wouldn't confidently say it's definitely one. There's something like 3,500 pubs in London, so it would be genuinely difficult to create an authentic looking "London pub" asset which didn't end up looking rather like one or other of them through sheer chance.
Which, judging by later posts making more precise comparisons, is what has been done.
What about it is supposed to be covered by copyright?
I will reiterate, there're about 3500 pubs in London, and many of broadly similar designs in other British cities. There's basically no way to come up with a design that is both authentic and wholly unique.
On the one side we have you saying it bears too much resemblance to a real pub and that you cannot buy something if it's not completely unique (but, if I am honest, you linked a pub that's very different as far as the look of a London corner pub - other than the name, which is one of the most common and generic British pub names) and on the other there are people saying "Ahem, that's not a proper renaissance dress. The neckline is from the 1590s, but the skirt shape is from the 1640s. I'm not buying this trash. Use some proper references, why don't you?"
If the PAs were to try to cater more to you, then the other crowd would throw their toys out of the pram.
Personally (although, again, I am not a lawyer), I do not see any reasonable way that copyright on this is a concern. Even as far as the closest building we've been able to identify, it's a non-exact copy of a building that was originally designed and built while Queen Victoria was still on the throne.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/copyright-notice-duration-of-copyright-term/copyright-notice-duration-of-copyright-term
The only way this could break copyright law is if it's an exact or near identical replica of the specifications in a original building's blueprints/architectural drawings. That's because architectural designs and the realisation of them are considered creative works under UK law. The likelihood of this product having copied rather than been inspired by a single architectural design - and the likelihood of any design that was copied still being within the copyright timeframe - is rather slim. And that's on the product creator, not us.
Where we could get into bother is under trademark law, except we can't because The White Lion is one of the most common pub names in England and nobody owns it within that context. Only within the context of it being attached to a product class or logo that it's also attached to in real life could we fall foul under trademark law - for the UK, this means attached to shoes, clothing apparel, whisky or, ahem, cannabis products. And there will be other laws we could be vulnerable under if we make a clear association between an indentifiable legal entity and some reputational claim, which is why a production company will often insist on renaming any real pub that is an integral part of a creative work.
Within the context of image production, you're permitted to commit to film, image or artistic works any external, publicly facing building, including signage. It's only once we, as storytellers, integrate those works in a way that impart some meaning to the subject that we could, theoretically, fall foul of law. For example, if we bring a business into disrepute or use another's trademark to sell our own work.
Anyway, as it's a rendering of a generic London pub, it's not something that necessarily needs to be worried about in most uses if we're taking a UK perspective. And if we, as image creators, are concerned about the markets we're selling into, then it's on us to square off the law, however unlikely it is that someone outside of the UK holds a trademark for The White Lion attached to the pub depicted. Potentially attached to any pub, I suppose, and potentially attached to a rampant lion logo, but once we get into those speculations we're doomed. This is very clearly a London pub, so I wouldn't personally look any further than the UK. Which isn't legal advice, only an opinion.
To WHICH actual business? To WHICH of the countless While Lion pubs in England. Certainly not to the one in the image you posted.
And a pub name is NOT copyrightable anyway.
I believe I know where the real building is and the vendor has changed the name of the business - already fairly generic - to something as generic as it gets. They've also moved it two streets away from its actual location. Some of the brickwork has been replaced with a different type, although the paintwork, windows, doors and facade are nearly an exact reproduction, at least down one side. I doubt the building is still under copyright, but if your agency could get upset at a name that doesn't belong to that building anyway, then that'll the least of your worries and it's probably best to let it go.
Change it. But you don't have to. Whoever designed the architecture died and has been dead a few hundred years. I have travelled a ton, England, France, Venice, Rome and I can assure you this looks exactly like a pub in Newfoundland built in the 1800's.
Edit: I have seen this corner building style in all of those places. Used as shops, hotels and bookmakers Only the sign differs.
with the restrictions imposed by their agency, I doubt mwokee could use any of Aureiio's buildings or most other things in DAZ3D or other 3D asset stores
to be fair the world is still reeling from the restrictions placed on works by Leonardo Da Vinci and others by Italy so pretty much any made by humans is off the table
including likely a table
Like mwokee, almost all my work is commercial, and for all the reasons other people have mentioned, I would be perfectly happy to use this asset. So not all commercial customers are put off.
If I was to make a render that implied all owners/architects of White Lions pubs were serial killers, or the like, I might reconsider using it, but such a render is definitely not on my TODO list.
So as long as you don't kitbash a barbershop above it you're probably good. =P
If You do, just remember to put Meat Pies on the menu.
Apart from creating an entire thread called "White Lion Pub Copyright Issue", I assume?
I think it's basically impossible that anyone could actually launch a non-frivolous copyright claim over this. And while it's not out of the question that someone might try anyway, it seems exceptionally unlikely.
If your agency genuinely won't allow you to use this asset, then they are being excessively overcautious in my opinion. (Although from how you've phrased it so far, I think you're more assuming that than have a hard answer from them)
When the near-non-existent level of legal hazard associated with a vendor using a completely generic pub name and *maybe* referencing a pictures of building that's over 130 years old is enough to make a product unusable, then so much of the store should be inaccessible if subjected to an equivalent level of scrutiny as to make Daz as a product completely unusable. I'm certain many of the decent clothing assets on the store have referenced genuine, and much more recent, items to an equal or greater degree (although I'm also sure many assets have *not* bothered with references, hence why half the bras on the store either have no idea what a clasp is or what it should look like), but proving what has or hasn't is basically out of the question. (At least here we can very confidently state that it's not based on the White Lion you linked. The designs share only an extremely common name and the absolute loosest elements of their design).
There is no way every vendor can cater to the small minority of users like you whose use case seemingly forbids the use of any references. Maybe some can cater to you, but other users want well-researched and genuine assets, so it is inevitable that not every product that comes out can meet your extremely demanding standards, and you cannot reasonably complain that not everything does.
Ohhhh .. I had a pint in there about a month back .. small world ..
For the record - there's also a pub across the road called "The Nags Head" of Only Fools and Horses fame (I had a pint in there too .. <hic>) - so I'm pretty certain you'll be ok with a pub that looks completley different, with a different address albeit with the same name
There are Gushet Buildings in Glasgow with all types of businesses on the corners of them. Change the name and say it is in Glasgow :)
https://www.google.com/search?num=10&newwindow=1&client=opera&hs=6Wc&sca_esv=f014507a79619248&q=gushet+buildings&udm=2&fbs=AEQNm0Aa4sjWe7Rqy32pFwRj0UkWd8nbOJfsBGGB5IQQO6L3J7pRxUp2pI1mXV9fBsfh39Jw_Y7pXPv6W9UjIXzt09-Y4xDT-KDyF1HC73ptExr6GTYMaMPqf50iLXmRZR6xjtHpEvjJq3sVz0_POqghMVAnw5chJhRZjKvQQiZ1vtqZ4N_pxSx3j-PcF0HzJlNi6RmUuFiPBZmnjCyKTUMP6eG-e5PKhA&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjzpb6dz9GKAxU4QUEAHU_CJdkQtKgLegQIERAB&biw=1306&bih=580&dpr=1.47
Then don't use it, don't buy it. Seriously, if the artist who made it is smart, he just won't care. For every potential customer who thinks a product is too realistic, there's another customer who thinks it isn't realistic enough (you don't want to know how often people asked for specific car models, or complained how some guitar looked like it had elements of different brands of guitars, but didn't exclusively match their favourite brand), and ten more customers who think it's perfect for what they want. It's rather pointless to complain about released products not being what you want them to be. The PA's make what they enjoy making, what they're competent at making, and either we buy them or we don't.
Even if there is some communication between the customers and some of the artists here at DAZ, it's better to view DAZ as a Walmart, where you get to buy products of the shelf, than to think the artists at DAZ are like local tradesmen who cater to your specific requirements or who you can ask for specific customizations. On rare occasions they might, if you ask really, reallly nicely in a non-condensing or accusing manner, but even then, it's quite rare and should be considered a bit of an honor.
In general: if you want something fitting specific parameters, get the closest thing you can, and edit it yourself: add or remove props, change textures, use characters, props, camera angles, and whatever other tricks you can come up with to obscure parts you don't like. It's great if things work out-of-the-box, but always be ready to customize. And I know it can be a pain, I'm quite bad at Photoshop myself, so even retexturing a simple bookcover in the corner of a scene can take me a whole afternoon, but it is what it is.
tl;dr: If you can use a product in the DAZ store, then get it. If you can't, then don't. Complaints about product aesthetics are pointless, and may only frustrate the artists: let the artists do what they do without interference.
Weighing in, strictly my two cents on the matter. Where do you draw the line on not using a name that's been used for a real thing? It's a fool's errand to try to come up with a meaningful, non-contrived name for a common business that has never been used in the history of planet Earth. It's reasonable and important to avoid trademarked or obvious famous things, but at a certain point, you (and one's employer) have to realize that someone, somewhere, has already used that name*.
Re: "Adjective Noun Pub/Inn/Tavern". As a for-instance, in my story WIP, I have a place referred to as the "Dusty Goat." I made that up out of thin air 30 years ago. Today, I can Google that and see that there is a "Dusty Goat Farm" which is happy to deliver fresh microgreens to your door, as well as other businesses using "Dusty Goat." While there is no "Dusty Goat Tavern/Inn/Pub" that Google can find now, there's no reason to be 100% confident that over the last several centuries there was never one somewhere in the Anglosphere. What if someone opens one tomorrow? Is that person bound to check all of the world, all of history, to make sure that's never been done? Do I then have to change my book because even though there wasn't a Dusty Goat 30 years ago (afaik) or yesterday, now there is one today? Where does it end? You can keep chasing ad absurdam, ad infinitum - and never get anything created.
* Yeah, there's probably never been an "Xity Ynever Zeezeebubu Place of Rest and Refreshment For Tired Travelers" but ... you get the point. Avoiding trademarks and famous things - sure. But it seems wholly unreasonable to demand that someone writing a story or doing art for a creative endeavor cannot use something bland and generic because there is or was a real place called that. You can be sure that somewhere, sometime, there has been a real "Adjective Noun Pub/Inn/Tavern" referencing every common color/descriptive trait and animal. Unless you are going out of your way to invent a sillyworld (nothing wrong with that, just saying), you want realistic things in your cityscape. Realistic = been done before.
UK pub names are often tied to heraldry and were established in an age when many were unable to read or write even basic english. Richard II passed laws that every pub must display signage as early as 1390's and his symbol was a white hart (White deer buck). Today their are over 300 pubs in the UK known as The White Hart. The White Lion is most likely a reference to the Mortimer lion and it's connection to the house of York. (The signs were instituted as part of the regulations around quality assurance. See: Ale conner etc)
As far as building style goes most pubs in the UK tend to be a major historical style such as Tudor or Victorian right through to more modern building styles. Many White Hart pubs are in the Tudor style as Richard the II was a late medieval king, but it is not uncommon to see the name used on new pubs even today.
The white lion pub in the product is a victorian style building(Common in central london) right down to the red pub style bearing a well known pub name related to the House of York. So the pub style and name are unlikely to be any real issue and would be generally considered as generic. (Not legal advice, just personal opinion based on experience)
The only real concern I would have with this product, based on the promos, is one very small detail that I know does require licencing and has some protections in place for certain forms of distribution or commercialisation. But even that would be up for legal debate as to whether the protections extend to this form of product or distribution or images created from it. Photographs bearing the same are generally considered okay for commercial usage.The laws had a very specific usage target in mind but could be considered more generalised across the board. (Bonus points if you can guess what I am referring to here).
What would send major alarm bells is any pub with a name inferring Royal (UK only),historic institutions or trademark breaches. Or any product that copied wetherspoons particular branding or trademarks. And really I cannot see any of that here.