For all those who ask if they really have to get permission for stuff

You also have to realize that these are two college kids who have worked with A&P for a while. They haven't been taught about all the legalities of shooting on location. This wasn't a film production in the sense that we all think of one. This was a few kids with a handicam making a movie to make fun of the rap industry, and they used the best props they could find.

They broke some rules, but they're just kids having a little fun. Yes, its understandable that they were fired. But to sue them for 1 million+ dollars? We're talking about litterally ruining these kids' chances at getting a college education. That's going overboard, even for a mega-company like Atlantic & Pacific.
 
The video went on too long, but it does show promise.

Firing them might be wrong, since they were acting in good faith. They thought it was okay to shoot because the manager said so. Perhaps he didn't know the script or content, or have authority to say yes to these two, but who is at fault there?

Suing them is nuts. $1 million is even more nuts. Just make them take out any reference to A&P, if there ever were any, and be done with it.

Errors & Omissions. Plain and simple.
 
My grandma told me about this... I think she was worried I was going to get sued some day.
 
SeanEmer said:
You also have to realize that these are two college kids who have worked with A&P for a while. They haven't been taught about all the legalities of shooting on location. This wasn't a film production in the sense that we all think of one. This was a few kids with a handicam making a movie to make fun of the rap industry, and they used the best props they could find.

They broke some rules, but they're just kids having a little fun. Yes, its understandable that they were fired. But to sue them for 1 million+ dollars? We're talking about litterally ruining these kids' chances at getting a college education. That's going overboard, even for a mega-company like Atlantic & Pacific.
Click to expand...

I think all of this will be taken into account during the process. Big retail companies are turning up on the internet with these kind of videos and they are sending a message. More egregiously kids were throwing spiced food at drive through employees and posting it. (different case and illegal but it speaks to a phenomena) It is total overkill and in the end these kids will be fine, legally though, A&P does have a case however misguided it may seem.
 
SeanEmer said:
You also have to realize that these are two college kids who have worked with A&P for a while. They haven't been taught about all the legalities of shooting on location. This wasn't a film production in the sense that we all think of one. This was a few kids with a handicam making a movie to make fun of the rap industry, and they used the best props they could find.

They broke some rules, but they're just kids having a little fun. Yes, its understandable that they were fired. But to sue them for 1 million+ dollars? We're talking about litterally ruining these kids' chances at getting a college education. That's going overboard, even for a mega-company like Atlantic & Pacific.
Click to expand...

I agree - it is going overboard.
But that's exactly what I was trying to point out when I posted this thread.
If you're shooting ANYTHING that you plan on distributing then make sure you cover your ass (for lack of a better term). Many times people on here ask about whether or not they really need to get permission for X, Y, or Z. And often times the response is, yeah you do but no one is really going to care if you don't...or something to that affect. Right or wrong - they're getting sued. And it could have all been avoided - or at least made easier on them - if they had properly cleared everything before shooting or at least distributing.

I'm not defending A&P in this - I'm just saying that you never know where something is going to go - and the whole indie idea of "its easier to ask forgiveness than permission" doesn't always hold true, as is clear in this case.

Like I said before - it's not about being able to 'win' a case - its about staying out of the courtroom in the first place.
 
bosindy said:
A&P does have a case however misguided it may seem.
Click to expand...

True, and what's more, I wouldn't be surprised if A&P's GC isn't looking at this as "sending a message" or "setting a precedent." They know they aren't going to recover 1 million in damages. That's not really the point. The point is that is a big axe hanging over someone's head and they want the message out that their not afraid to wield it.

Just my .02
 
IMHO, crap like this just gives capitalism bad name. Lawyers should only get involved after consulting PR.

In the end it's going to hurt the kids (maybe), but also A&P (for sure). Because you know what? After reading this, there is no way I am going to put my foot anywhere in A&P store - there is plenty of competition around.

MOD: To clarify: the reason I am not going to A&P is not because of the kids video (haven't seen it), but because of the uber-stupid reaction from A&P.
 
Last edited:
"A grocery store is not "intellectual property."

The photocopied novel analogy is not accurate. A copy of a book/movie/cd loses sales for the owner and creator, obviously. Are people not going to shop at A & P because they can go see the store logo for free in the unauthorized video? Different types of property and different useages."

You don't get to debate the motivations and reasoning. A violation is a violation.

" This case has nothing to do with intellectual property nor copyright..."

That is incorrect.
 
XCheck said:
In the end it's going to hurt the kids (maybe), but also A&P (for sure). Because you know what? After reading this, there is no way I am going to put my foot anywhere in A&P store - there is plenty of competition around.
Click to expand...


it's a terrible move for A&P. two things that average joe american hate are frivolous lawsuits and large corporations picking on the little guy. the more attention this case gets, the worse it is for business. i imagine they'll drop their lawsuit when they come to their senses.
 
bosindy said:
Incorrect for someone who is obviously clueless about the law.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about the logo, not the libel. Don't attack me personally with that kind of insulting comment when you are clueless about my background. Stay on topic. No personal attacks please.
 
You can not copyright a trademark, any 1L would know that. I wasn't attacking you just discrediting you. There is too much bad info when these topics come up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top