-
Who legally owns footage??
-
I thought the client would own it as they are paying for it ?
Redefined Media
-
David, the issue often comes down to a legal definition of what exactly the client paid for: the end product only, or the services of an individual.
In the U.S., when a contract says “work for hire”, that means the client is paying to flat-out own the entire work product and all the rights to it. A stills photographer here typically retains the ownership of and rights to the negatives, then charges each time for copies made from that negative, and with digital, you’re just paying for each print made and the right to use what the photog shot on a case-by-case basis.
If its a work for hire, however, you’re telling the photog he or she is handing over the negative and the permissions to use the shot any way the client wants, in perpetuity, and they (the photog) hit the road, never to have any input regarding that image again.
In the case of video, the issue becomes who retains the rights to the raw recordings. Unless you have it in writing, the shooter keeps the raw materials and hands over only a finished product. The service of making a finished product, and a copy of that product, is what you’re contracted to provide. Unless the contract says it is a work for hire: then they own everything, raw or finished, and you are just being paid for your labor.
See the difference?
-
I apologize in advance in case this specific example has already been posted/answered…
I understand copyright/ownership quite well with the exception of this: Let’s say I am a W-2 employee as a full-time lead editor. Upon hiring, the employer contract states that the “company” will provide all necessary equipment (camera, audio, computers, software, etc.)
Over time, however, advances in technology renders their equipment obsolete. So let’s say “company” doesn’t pay to upgrade video editing software, doesn’t purchase a new camera, but rather the W-2 employee is using their serial for purchased software, their personal camera equipment, etc.No contracts of any kind were signed stating ownership of materials, nor was an updated employee contract made or signed about the use of equipment provided (or not provided) by “company.”
In this scenario, what are the rights of the W-2 employee and the footage/published works that has been created with 95% of equipment paid for by the employee?
Especially considering that one such project was a full length documentary that has been distributed… -
The answer in a situation such as yours is probably both everybody and nobody.
Without written documentation specifying otherwise, the person who shot the tape would technically become the AUTHOR of the work, HOWEVER, in the absence of properly assigned rights to the recording’s actual CONTENT any and everyone, (and even every THING shown in the tape) could conceivably poison the ability of the owner to actually use the footage.
Every person in the tape could push back on their performance rights. Everything from the room design to the lighting design to the clothing being worn by the “performers” COULD conceivably be a point of contention in a battle for rights ownership.
The reason that professionals are always talking about rights is that if NOBODY properly assigns them, then they’re ALL open to interpretation and litigation. Art on the walls? Who owns it? Background music playing? Is it licensed? The nice sweater being worn by the lady in the first row, knitted by her grandmother – granny technically owns the rights to her creative work there and you can’t show it in your video unless you properly license it. That’s the technical truth.
It’s not as simple as “I shot it, therefore I OWN it.” Because remember, anyone can sue anyone for anything. The key to proper rights clearances is to document that YOU have a clear and provable right to incorporate what you show into your program. The lack of rights clearance paperwork doesn’t typically make it easier for you to claim ownership, it actually makes it harder. MUCH HARDER.
In the real world, it’s also about power. If you push back against a richer and more powerful entity in a legal tug of war, expect them to bury you. Is it possible to win? Sure. But it’s not easy and it’s not typically cheap. Again, only properly executed rights assignments UP FRONT tend to protect you from getting sued over these issues. And it’s still not a guarantee.
Welcome to the real world.
My civilian 2 cents. Ask a proper IP attorney for actual legal advice, mine is worth precisely what you paid for it.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up