Hi Richard,
Actually I’d been assistant editor, editor for political spots for many years. Only recently have I started to produce. That’s why I ask these questions. I have real world experience as an editor and, given the material I had been handed, in nearly every case i believe the material was NOT generated by the client. Neither I, nor to the best of my knowledge, had any of the clients I have edited for have been sued.
I don’t know whether I should base my practices on use material based on my experience (over 20 years) of editing for producers who had their own practices. In that score of years, not one client has ever produced documentation that they had the right to use any of the material. These clients worked the business side with the post houses I staffed so if there any kind of contracts, it was with the post house.
As Dave’s post may indicate, it’s quite possible the material was generated from publicly distributed PR photos and VNRs by the opposition candidate. I can’t say with a certitude but some materials looked like they were “sourced” from newspaper clippings and news segments recorded from TV. At least that was the “nasty/low resolution” look of the material when I was handed the tapes.
Many have said that such hold harmless clauses wouldn’t hold up in court. Some would ask for documentation proving the right to use material.
The question I would have is if the material came from “publicly” released PR photos or VNRs (given to the media) does that cover the right for an oppositiion candidate to use the material. If one grants a newspaper or tv outlet the right to use certain material that may/or may not mean that others have a right to use the same material. Certainly copyright holders can grant rights to specific “persons/businesses” use and exclude others from using that material.