manager concerned about footage

lordybob

lordybob

Well-known member
Was recently filming a doco on a local radio station until my camera fell off its steadi mount and died. to ad to my bad luck the manager wants to meet with me cause hes not happy about filming the work that goes on behind the scenes.

Just out of interest. Seeing as this is a non commercial social project, can I release a version on the web overseas or enter overseas film fests with it? What can I do with the footage if he says I cant use it, can I use it overseas?

Regards
Isaac
 
Like I'm 18 and I diddnt capture anything mind blowing so I dont understand what the problem is. Heaps of employers let and diddnt mind being filmed for two days.
 
Yeah, it can get pretty tricky...and then there is Errors & Omissions. You can actually get E&O insurance, I believe, and companies out there can make sure you aren't infringing on any intellectual property. E&O can also apply to unintentional mistakes, misinformation, etc.

A producer spoke to us during a class back in film school. He told us that there was a local doc that focused on an outreach centre that helped street people and poor kids with training programs and things like that.

One segment had an ex-hooker talking about how the place helped her get off the streets, and how she now gives back to the community by helping out at the centre. During her interview, she wore a mickey mouse shirt.

The people makng the doc were informed by Disney people (or so the story goes), that the footage with her wearing the shirt had to go, because Disney didn't want their image being associated with a woman who talks about having been a prostitute (hello?...Touchstone..Pretty Woman...). The producers explained that the woman had cleaned up her act, and her story was positive, but they were adamant...no Mickey on an ex-hooker's chest. In the end, the shirt was blurred out.

You never know what you may have shot that someone will object to. Even art that you own, logos on your stuff...much of this stuff may have to be cleared if it is noticeably shown in your work.

Always try and get as many releases signed, and documented permission that you can. It can't hurt.

Heck, even the pic in my signature might be an example of something illegally displayed, and whoever owns the rights to it can make me remove it.
 
Last edited:
Was it something special that you were filming at this particular station? If not, contact their competition, there has to be another radio station near by. Then tell him it's no biggie, his competition is happy to get the exposure.
 
ESTEBEVERDE said:
not true


if it is news aka a doc he can


no need for any permission they let him film... he filmed....


check with an attorney but I personally would let it fly and hope for them to take action so I could get some publicity
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is very bad advice. First of all, news in not aka a doc. News and documentaries are two very different things. If you're shooting a documentary and hope to show it in festivals, or on PBS or in theaters or direct to DVD - even overseas, you better believe that you need release forms for anyone featured in your film, or to show the proprietary workings of a corporate or privately owned business.

Checking with an attorney is the one piece of sound advice you gave. That's a very good idea.

But as far as letting fly and hoping that they take action so you can cop some free publicity? C'mon - that's just dumb, macho, guerilla filmmaker wannabe fantasy.
 
Last edited:
Thanks guys. I will talk to Dave (statn Manager) and see whats happening. I have the first draft of the film.
 
Re-edit into satire or parody and it will fall within "fair use" guidlines
Documentaries are technically editorial or opinion and not "news".
 
I believe in freedom of expression. I also believe in common respect and courtesy. So the guy disagreed with your advice. Big deal. Granted, he was a bit ruder than he needed to be in his response, but that happens sometimes. It's nothing to get nasty about, in my humble opinion. You're certainly within your rights to defend your position -- I just hate to see venom injected into it.

But hey, that's just me.
 
Actually, yes -- I'd rather see his work (which he himself says isn't very groundbreaking or, it seems, interesting) fall by the wayside than to see relationships between people descend into crass hostility over a difference of opinion. The filmmaker can always make another film. He can even go back and get releases and re-shoot the same film. The loss of civilized discourse -- complete with respect for those of differing opinions -- is much harder to recover from.

But again, it's just my opinion.
 
Well, there we go -- down into the abyss of the personal attack yet again, simply because we disagree on something. That's a shame.

Ah well, such is life.
 
There are ways to disagree with people without delving into personal attacks.
There is no need for that, and this isn't the place for it. Discuss the issue at hand, its an interesting topic.
But if it can't be discussed in a civilized manner then this thread probably won't last much longer.
 
ESTEBEVERDE said:
If you openly allow someone to film you even in your place of business even with trade secrets about you have consented. You no longer have a reasonable expectation of privacy and that's that. Fair game.
Click to expand...

I would really like to see any legal basis for this claim. Is there a precedent for what you are describing, Estebeverde? Or anyone else out there? I have been reading as much as I can on the internet on this issue, but I haven't found any hard data about this - just conjecture, which I can do on my own :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

To return to the main point of contention here - I think that for individual filmmakers, it is very important to obtain written consent for individuals and for businesses because you never know who might get litigious later. Michael Moore and PBS have the advantage of Errors and Omissions insurance and corporate legal teams - we have nothing. That's why I make every effort to get anyone and everyone to sign a release.
 
What each of us has to do independently is to weigh our exposure to risk.

That is an individual decision.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

If you want to educate yourself start with the links here:


http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=116304
Click to expand...
I did see those in another thread. Do you have any links with respect to privacy and model releases specifically? The links you provided deal with fair use, which is a slightly different issue.
 
Last edited:
Practicing law on the internet is never a good idea. Estebeverde, are you a lawyer?

By the way, crap like this:
ESTEBEVERDE said:
But all in all I have to say that I am indeed appalled at your abhorrent lack of self respect and personal fortitude and even more so at your lack of civic knowledge.
Click to expand...
... falls under the category of personal attacks and will have you shown to the exit pretty darn quick if you keep it up. Please find a way to communicate your points without attacking other members because we don't put up with that.
 
Better than U?

Better than U?

Bus No. 8 said:
But as far as letting fly and hoping that they take action so you can cop some free publicity? C'mon - that's just dumb, macho, guerilla filmmaker wannabe fantasy.
Click to expand...

Sticks and stones may scare the Joneses, but they don't make your words any truer. You will get free publicity if that happens! Whether or not the whole ordeal would be worth it or helpful is another story. And personal attacks won't get to the heart of that story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top