Do stock footage licenses hold up to reality? (Enjoining & injunctive relief)

binba

Active member
If you're looking for review of the latest Sony camera, you'll find dozens of them. If you're looking for distribution information... good luck.
I've been looking for a competent review of stock footage companies` licenses, and Google gave me the stink-eye. This may be the world's most active forums on distribution, hence the best place to ask.


1. Many of the stock footage firms started upselling much more expensive licenses, and a main "feature" is that they're for a "company" as opposed to an "individual". Personally, I couldn't figure out anything in the license itself that makes that distinction; and mind you, in the US, the moment you issue an invoice to someone, congratulations, you're a company.


2. The last feature I worked on sold to one of the mini-majors, and I helped with clearances. The studio required a waiver of enjoining / injunctive relief: "All [stock footage] licenses shall include language that prevents injunctive relief and shall preclude the licensor from terminating the license." (They explicitly required it in all contracts & agreements, stated 5 times throughout the distribution agreement...)

- Have you heard of this requirement before? Is this a real issue relevant to all filmmakers out there, or a quirk of their lawyers being stricter than prevailing distribution terms?

- Are you aware of any stock footage company that offers this term as part of their standard license agreement? (Last time, for example, I had to contact Audio Network to issue us a custom license addendum.)
 
Back
Top