-
Who legally owns footage??
Hi
Ok i have read a few posts on this and am a little confused so if you can help clear it up here is the situation.
Recently i worked on an indie horror film.
the director was the script writer and producer, only problem was he only really wrote the script and pulled together lighting, cast, crew and accomidaton.
we are having some pretty heated discussions regarding roles etc.
Basically i have been editing the production but had to hand over for someone to finish as paid work came up. i didnt send immediatly and i received a legal notice instructing me to hand it over, i had already posted the footage. so now its been finished
the owner of the camera who was dop, 1st Ad and effectivly director received the same notice and told me not to send the footage as he legally owns it as it was filmed on his camera, stored on his memory cards and no contract was signed which would legally give ownership over.
now we are trying to arrange a chat with the script writer to discuss roles as we feel he shouldnt plaster his name all over this production as director and producer but he is refusing to comply. basically we dont want him getting all the credit when its complete as we did all the work, all he had was a script, some producing and no real direction.
wher do we stand?
Cheers
D
-
14 Replies
-
[Dean Gatenby] “the director was the script writer and producer, only problem was he only really wrote the script and pulled together lighting, cast, crew and accomidaton.”
Hmmmm…. so he ONLY directed, wrote, produced, pulled lighting gear, cast it, organized crew, and arranged accommodations?
That’s a pretty big “only.”
[Dean Gatenby] ” we feel he shouldnt plaster his name all over this production as director and producer”
Again, a little confused… wasn’t he the producer and director? Why shouldn’t he be credited as such?
Not trying to be snarky, and maybe this wasn’t the case at all (not knowing all the behind the scenes details), but on the surface it sure sounds to me like this guy is getting his film hijacked.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
-
Sorry…on feature films, the DP doesn’t own the footage. Nor does the editor. It’s all owned by the producer/production company. Always. You are brought on as “work for hire,” even if you aren’t paid. As such, the footage isn’t yours, but owned by the company that hired you.
And yeah, I’m with Terry…that’s a lot of “ONLY’s.” He appears to be the circus master, producing, directing, hiring people, arranging things…producing the film. Thus the footage is his. PERIOD.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Hi guys cheers for the replies but i think you missunderstand, though i do see your point so allow me to expand.
He didnt direct anything he was clueless, evertime there was a decision to make he walked away, there was no storyboard or plan we were left to do it all ourselves, he didnt communicate the entire cast and crew almost walked but the dp and myself kept it together… He has given no input at anypoint with regards to the edit or soundtrack, evertime i have asked for his input i get back zip
To be honest im happy its off my hands, i’m just posing the question for the guy who was effectivley director, 1st AD, DP and shot it all on his camera and stored on his memory card.
If my description of this guys incompitance does not paint a very clear picture of the individual and the reasons for the grievence then…. well…
So if there was no contract and the entire thing was shot on a camera that was not contracted or paid for then where does he stand?
I myself am fully happy to have this out of my life, just need some advice for a friend
Cheers
-
Incompetent or not, sounds to me like he was still the producer and still owns the project.
Competence is not a prerequisite for ownership.
And once again, shows the importance of contracts/agreements that spell out exactly what everything is.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
-
The producer is the producer is the producer. Good…bad…doesn’t matter. He’s the producer. He conceived of the idea, and hired you all to execute it. The footage is his.
The editor nor DP never own the footage in situations like this. Not unless they have a contract specifically stating that they do. It’s work for hire…you are hired to shoot, or edit…or whatever. The footage belongs to the incompetent boob that brought you all on board.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Ok cool, cheers for the info I’ll relay it, such a shame that he gets all the credit for being a boob, well I guess it will all show if he gets hired to do the same for someone else… Karma will always get it’s man.
Thanks again
D
-
“And yeah, I’m with Terry…that’s a lot of “ONLY’s.” He appears to be the circus master, producing, directing, hiring people, arranging things…producing the film.”
We prefer the term: “Auteur”
🙂
That this happens on an indie is not that surprising: we could come up with twenty or more big budget Hollywood features that match this guy’s description. I’m not sure why the DOP is fighting so hard for credit on what will undoubtedly be an immense turkey that may never see an audience anyhow.
I’m going to give a somewhat contradictory opinion to the others, though I should remind you I’m not an entertainment lawyer or any kind of lawyer. But my reading of the work for hire laws in the US is that the magic three words “Work For Hire” must be in writing, or the court’s default assumption in absence of a contract or memo saying different, is the old default ownership/rights situation of classic still photographers: that the shooter owns the raw footage. HOWEVER: the flip side is that the shooter has no rights to use that footage without the client’s permission, so it’s a stand-off situation when you get to this kind of conflict.
“Just give us the raw files, and walk away…”
This kind of conflict is the core of the case of Flagler vs. Walmart, or Walmart V. Flagler, I’m too lazy to look up which way it was now. Flagler shot years’ worth of internal meetings and trainings, etc. as a Walmart contractor, but there was never the magic three words in their contract. One day, Walmart kicked Flagler to the curb for a cheaper supplier. Shocking, I know. In an example of what NOT to do, that should forever be taught in management schools, as the “First, pants, THEN shoes” theory, only THEN did the Walmart lawyers and HR people ask for all the potentially highly incriminating and formerly confidential archived stuff Flagler was storing for them. Court upheld that the footage was Flagler’s. Flagler wasn’t able to make much out of it, though, without Walmart’s permission, so to date only a few snippets of Flagler’s tape library have been aired, used by lawyers in various suits against Walmart to show what they were really thinking and doing in various cases of discrimination or whatever.
The take-away:
GET IT IN WRITING FIRST, NO MATTER HOW TRIVIAL THE JOB. -
[Mark Suszko] ” I’m not sure why the DOP is fighting so hard for credit on what will undoubtedly be an immense turkey that may never see an audience anyhow.”
That’s pretty much what I was thinking, also.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
-
That’s pretty much what I was thinking, also.
T2
_____
It remains a relatively small, tight world we work in. What goes around, comes around. Word of mouth is very powerful in this business; If the DOP did great work directing, but was un-credited, it WILL get around, eventually, to people that matter. That’s often worth more than an actual credit roll appearance. If he takes credit on a stinker, it can take decades to live it down, and it may even become an obstacle to better future things.
I’d say, let this one go.
-
You should consult an actual attorney.
You have some weird stuff going, legally, and it is caused by the weird world of microbudget filmmaking.
It’s generally applicable that the photographer owns the work unless a particular agreement supersedes that First Amendment right (in the US). In the weird world of microbudget filmmaking (a venture to avoid, imo), everyone is considered a collaborator, not an employee, not a contractor. Being either of those requires actual agreements; and those actual agreements require worker’s comp insurance and proper labor conditions and so on. Microbudget filmmaking is not a work for hire agreement.
But wait there’s more…
Copyright laws designate a work. The person who creates the work holds the copyright. Any work created from the original work is called a derivative work. So here you go: The writer owns the script, the original work, and the photographer collaborated and now owns the photography, a derivative work.
So the footage just sits. No one can do anything until there is an agreement — which is obviously why people have agreements first.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up