I am actually studying the area of intellectual property and
entertainment law and can answer your questions.  Since I am pre-law, I
can not practice, but do know quite a bit about IP and more specifically
copyright/trademark law.
 
Much of the United States copyright/trademark law is actually established
through international treaties.  In order to be a member of the UN a
country must abide by all copyright laws, so this means that their
companies can not infringe upon any registered copyright/trademark
material.  Even in another country there is still the possibility of
causing confusion with the consumer market.  Copyrighted and trademarked
logos/titles/pictures do not have to have the copyright symbol anymore.
Sometimes things are taken on accident, such as names of establishments.
With the case of an actual picture being taken though it's a slam dunk
case of infringement.  The hurt company can even ask for all court fees
to be paid in the end if the picture was taken maliciously on purpose.
The lawyer fees before receiving any settlement are often a burden
though.  Of course the US has much better luck and compliance with some
countries compared to others.  Many Asian countries are notorious for
blatant knock offs and bootlegged videos, but have recently at least
attempted to crack down on the problem due to pressure from other
countries.  I believe the original post said that the infringer was in
Australia?  With properly educated lawyers on IP the IFC will no doubt
prevail in this case, but there are many crappy IP lawyers out there that
don't know anything and sue for the wrong reasons.  Hopefully with this
being such a black & white case it will be settled quickly, although it
being international will make the process longer.  Of course I am
assuming that the IFC logo was the original (as in they didn't take the
image from the public domain, such as clipart images on the internet) and
that they are already registered and intend to use their logo.  Many
times the Library of Congress doesn't catch infringements because they
have so many applicants and it is up to the rightful party to take legal
action.  Good luck!
[Posted in FML issue 4422]