-
Kansas firm sells candid Wal-Mart videos
-
[Steve Wargo] “That would be the Discrete Forum. No need to go elsewhere.”
Yeah, here’s a picture of the ones who are left standing…
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los AngelesPOST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
A forum host of Creative COW’s Business & Marketing, and Indie Film & Documentary forums.
-
That sums it up Walter. It’s good to know that there are a lot of people on this forum that know right from wrong but it’s sad to see that some are siding with Flagler. Someone earlier said that “We don’t know what we would do in the same situation”. Well, I do. And you do too. As well as Boomer and many others. We stand on our reputation and on our honor, no matter what.
Clients have asked us about “Who owns it?” in the past and we have always said that we would guard their interests to the best of our ability and there have been a few times that we landed the client or the job based on our integrity.
I think that if Photography Studios had a sign on the door that said “We own the copyright to every photo we take of you and your family”, they would all be gone in about a month.
Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It’s a dry heat!Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut (not quite PRO) systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck
2-Sony EX-1 HD . -
Four guys and only three names. Ouch! How would you like to be that 4th guy?
Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It’s a dry heat!Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut (not quite PRO) systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck
2-Sony EX-1 HD . -
[Steve Wargo] “I think that if Photography Studios had a sign on the door that said “We own the copyright to every photo we take of you and your family”, they would all be gone in about a month.”
I remember when my wife found out this hard lesson when she paid over $1,000 for some family pictures and years later wanted to have some more prints made. Since she didn’t have the negative, she took the photo to the local photo lab to have them make a negative to make prints from. They refused and told her she needed to go back to the photographer for prints. She called and was given a pricetag of over $350 for what she could have got at the local drug store for about $40.
She has become the woman that every time the subject of photos comes up with her girlfriends, she warns them of her experience. Now she gets the kids pictures taken at studios where they are willing to sign that she owns the copyright.
Robert
-
[Steve Wargo] “I guess it would be OK if someone that used to work for you put all of your private business on the web. right?”
It’s always funny how people’s judgment changes when it is about them or their family or friends.
They hold one set of value standards when weighing others but hate it when anyone applies the same standard to them.
I think the word here, Steve, is hypocrisy.
These guys who agree with Flagler would be morally outraged were it their dirty laundry being hoisted up the flagpole, recorded for all the world to see by someone paid for 30 years as a trusted confidant.
I hate to get crude here but where I live there’s an old saying that people use when expressing their contempt, that I wouldn’t pee on them if they were on fire.
When it comes to Flagler and those that agree with them, I wouldn’t.
Robert
-
[robert reed] “They refused and told her she needed to go back to the photographer for prints. She called and was given a pricetag of over $350 for what she could have got at the local drug store for about $40.”
I’ve done a lot of work in the photo business and this has been standard procedure as long as I remember.
Also, my former employer ended up in a legal wrangle with an agency who would not give up raw footage from a TV spot they shot for us. I ran the internal video department and got to see both sides of the dispute. BTW…in that disputer the agency got to keep the footage and the company was not allowed to use it without paying an additional fee.
I’ve also paid freelancers additional fees to have exclusive rights/ownership to all the footage/negatives produced for us.
Thats why this discussion has been so interesting to me. My experience has always been that lacking a contract stating otherwise the footage belongs to the shooter. Ron and Steve’s position on ownership is contrary to my experience so I’m surprised to see it argued so vehemently…
-
That’s pretty much SOP with higher-end commercial photographers… you hire them for a shoot but they still own the negs and images, unless you have made specific contractural stipulations otherwise. Then you license the specific image for a specific print campaign, or billboard, or whatever.
That doesn’t mean though that even though they technically own the images that they can use them themselves for their own use… especially if there are people photographed.
That’s similar to the way we work in our shop, too, for commercial production. A client owns the finished spot, but we own the footage. Nor can a client take a finished spot and have it recut elsewhere or reuse the footage. It’s all spelled out in their contracts. Part of that is to keep the business in house… but it is also to protect talent and keep from starting a paperwork and redtape nightmare. Say there is an actor in one of our spots… two years later the client recuts the spot themselves and airs it again. Well, then they are using more than just footage, they are using an actor’s performance that they do not have rights to. To stay legal they have to deal with the actor again, or his agent… and might have SAG/AFTRA to deal with as well if he was a union talent. Some people here might think our contracts are restrictive, but in 11 years we have never had a client question it. Only once (that we know of) did a former client use the footage anyway… one phone call got the “Oh, I didn’t know I couldn’t do that” answer. We educated them, and they pulled the footage.
I think this whole 1000-post thread would probably be a non issue if it hadn’t involved an “evil empire” like Wal-Mart, as there is aways some satisfaction with seeing the “bad guys” get what is coming to them. But of course this is NOT the right way to do that.
I’m just dumbfounded that Wal-Mart didn’t have a contract… you know they have a building full of house lawyers. Someone definitely let this fall through the cracks.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
-
[robert reed] “When it comes to Flagler and those that agree with them”
They probably bought some Chinese underwear at WM and it fell apart in the laundry.
Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It’s a dry heat!Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut (not quite PRO) systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck
2-Sony EX-1 HD . -
The shooter owns the copyright but has no right to use the material.
The person who paid had absolute right to use the footage forever.
This just creates questions in my mind. We just tell the clients it’s all theirs. When we do a job for an agency, we ask them to clarify whether they own it or the end client owns it.
Supposedly, there is a clause in the law the states that the copyright belongs to the “creator” of the work. It has always been ASSUMED that the photographer or shooter is the “creator”. With the recent acceptance of the term “Intellectual Property”, look for the term “creator” to be redefined in a court of law. It’s coming. After the recent WGA strike, a lot of heads are rolling on the subjects of “work for hire”, “origination”, “creator” and more.
Steve Wargo
Tempe, Arizona
It’s a dry heat!Sony HDCAM F-900 & HDW-2000/1 deck
5 Final Cut (not quite PRO) systems
Sony HVR-M25 HDV deck
2-Sony EX-1 HD . -
There has be a LOT of talk on the COW lately (not just in this thread) about “Who owns the rights to this?” and “Who owns the rights to that?”
It’s hard to do after the fact, and it’s only natural that those conversations come up.
But to prevent those issues from coming up in the future the obvious no-brainer answer is to start with an iron-clad contract specifically spelling out who owns what, and what rights usages follow whom.
Then it’s easy breezy… with no fuzzy issues.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up