Ownership of Footage?

D

digitalskylight

Active member
I have been asked a number of times over the past couple of years to shoot wedding videos for a photo company. I'm done with weddings and moving on to much more interesting things, and the company asked me to give them all of the footage I've shot so they can make a reel.

I never signed a contract, so I don't have to, correct? The thing that would bother me is the company would be showing off my shooting style for what they can do, but I'm clearly not there anymore to shoot videos in a specific style.
 
As far as I know - without any formal documenting expressing work for hire and the sacrifice of ownership of footage - you are the owner all the footage. But since you were on private property - most likely - you do not have public use rights for that footage. You can use it but you can also get sued very easily for using the footage. without seeking out the appropriate location ans likeness agreements. If i were you I would offer them a reel of your best footage - selected by you - and then require approval for the end use of the footage to prevent them from misrepresenting your work in a manner you deem inappropriate. You could also look at it from another point of view. The company could represent their ability to hire esteemed videographers such as yourself, or show off their eye for talent with your footage. I'm sure if you take the time to meet with them, and express your concerns they will be more than happy to at least listen to what you have to say on the subject.

At the same time they may be sitting on a piece of recently passed appellate law that trumps everything I just said. You could also end up selling them the bulk of the footage for some form of profit. You never know until you address the situation with the party you entered into a business relationship with. There are also things that are understood to be industry standards that can be cited i.e. it is unreasonable for a comic book artist to claim he was denied back end payment because the comic book industry is a work-for-hire industry, with even Mad Magazine writer's working "per page." That was the reason Don Martin left Mad Magazine. With intellectual property there have been massive battles that have made understanding who owns what in the "clear cut letter of the law" a murky swamp of uncertainty.

Also, I'm not a lawyer. Nothing I am saying has any real legal value. If you are truly concerned for your footage and your reputation you should consult an intellectual property attorney immediately.
 
Last edited:
The first sentence of the above post is a good summary; you legally own the footage*. Being on private property doesn't mean you can't use the footage, but you would need permission from the clients before using their images, technically. For wedding videos that doesn't usually happen. If someone complains you can always take it down. So no, you don't have to hand it over, but is there anything that hurts you if you do? You're not interested in wedding videos right now anyway, so this doesn't even seem to be a real concern for you. Why burn bridges for something like this? If you worked for the company it seems perfectly reasonable that they would be able to showcase what you shot as part of their services.

*Based on what you said here. If work for hire was ever agreed on, or there are any emails that indicate you intended them to have the footage in the first place you lose your claim on exclusive right.

I am also not a lawyer, my experience is from years of looking into things like that and a few business law classes. So don't rely on me too much.
 
Thanks guys! I don't really mind burning this bridge - the owner, who only does photography, seems to have a bad habit of spending money, so was always trying to find a new way to take a higher % (it's time to try and reclaim some of that cash!). I knew things were going downhill when he said he still wasn't making enough money from selling video (would try taking up to 30% sometimes), and then he bought a Nikon video-capable DSLR and started asking me questions on how I shoot. That's just someone I clearly want to avoid working for/with again in the future.

Time to jump ship and redirect myself towards much more creative work again!
 
You should offer him some "industry secret" shooting tips like:

1. Always shoot while holding the camera upside down because the colors will drain into the shot better when you flip the shot back over in Windows Media Player.

2. Make sure the audio is reading in the red on the camera. Red means it is set right and you can stop messing with the audio feed.
 
It all goes to contract and copyright law. If you did not have a contract, then the footage is yours to do with what you want (9/10th's). But if there is other content on the footage that would violate someone else's ownership, then you are in a situation that requires mutual agreement.

For example: I shoot a play on my camera. Technically my footage is mine. But the creative aspects of the work, such as the script, the actor's likenesses, the dialog...are not. It is a grey area, whereas you have to come to some agreement on usage. Without a mutual agreement, I cant use the footage, and neither can they. But this really only applies to commercial projects.

You should always have some type of agreement in place for usage on your reel. Failing that, talk to the clients, if you shot something you want to highlight on your reel, they will be more than likely to agree if they were happy with your services. I don't shoot anymore, but my contract with films says I get copy of the final product for my reel that I can cut....for what I now do. Call it a lesson learned from when I was a shooter.

Synopsis: never take on a client without a contract that spells things out. And disregard extremely bizarre comments given as advice, SMH.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top