[epicide]

I'm not a lawyer and only vaguely familiar with trademark law, so I'm genuinely curious how some of this works.

> if they believe that the game's use of their branding would cause confusion or harm the identity of their mark

My understanding is "confusion" is centered around people trying to make similar products that seem like they are made by a famous brand. This would be more like if somebody opened a furniture store in a blue box-like building, yellow vertical striped shirts, Scandinavian themed, and named NOKEA[0].

"Harm the identity of their mark" is interesting. It seems intentionally vague, which makes sense[1]. I wouldn't be surprised if the word "harm" is used in the legalese, but it can't possibly cover all cases of potential harm, right? If so, I couldn't review any IKEA product as that arguably "harms the mark" [2].

Basically, I'm curious what "harms" are generally acceptable and which are not. I'm sure this is a really big subject, but in my non-lawyer opinion, it feels like IKEA has a weaker case here because it's a video game and not a furniture store[3].

[0]: Might actually be infringing on two for the price of one!

[1]: To the dismay of programmers everywhere, having hard and fast rules for trademark infringment doesn't really make sense. Those just become instructions for how to infringe legally.

[2]: Tying into previous parts, even if I don't use the word "IKEA", it could still (reasonably) be tied back to them.

[3]: Assuming the game maker removes the purported direct usage of the word "IKEA".

[actually_a_dog]

Yeah, I think what you say definitely has some merit, but you & I both know that the law doesn't always work the way non-specialists think it does. While there's certainly a common sense argument (completely apart from the parody angle) that goes something like "@actually_a_dog's truthful review didn't harm $COMPANY's mark; $COMPANY did so by providing a consumer experience that enabled @actually_a_dog to write such a review truthfully," I don't know if or how that comports with the law or not.

So, sure, if I opened up a Swedish-themed store that sold cheap furniture and Swedish meatballs, then called it MyKEA or something, and had the employees wear shirts with yellow vertical stripes on them, I'd be an idiot not to expect a nastygram from IKEA legal regarding my infringing use of their mark in commerce. The question seems to be "Does depicting a store and using recognizable elements of its brand identity in a commercial video game count as 'use of the mark in commerce?'" To that question, you & I may answer "no," but IKEA, and possibly the law, might answer the other way.