Who owns the negative or footage?

F

FilmBoy77

Veteran
By default does the cinematographer own the copyright to the footage he shoots if he was hired and paid to film a project such as a commercial or short film that was written and directed by someone else, etc?
 
Nope, the Producer who's paid for it does. The Cinematographer retains the right to identify themselves as the person who shot those images, but the actual footage, and what happens to it after it leaves the camera is entirely in the hands of the Producer.
 
Correct. Someone doing 'work for hire' has no copyright rights on anything produced. I believe that's true internationally.
 
FilmBoy77 said:
By default does the cinematographer own the copyright to the footage he shoots if he was hired and paid to film a project such as a commercial or short film that was written and directed by someone else, etc?
Click to expand...

This is an issue of 'work for hire', or 'original author'. It depends on the contract, but in all (I'll claim all...) Hollywood productions the cinematographer is working under the 'works for hire' mode, and so, the producer, who 'owns' the film, is the copyright owner for any filming performed for the production.

When one gets to an independent 'film service' provider, say someone who shoots corporate videos, while there may be some contractual wording on 'works for hire', in most cases the owner who is the camera man, owns the material, and provides it to the customer under licensed use. In that case there are two rights involved. The photographer owns the copyright, but the person who is depicted in the film owns their 'right of use' of that image... contracts are useful clarifying who can do what with the material.
 
clang said:
Correct. Someone doing 'work for hire' has no copyright rights on anything produced. I believe that's true internationally.
Click to expand...

It's a bit complex... but it seems that most of the countries have some form of concept of 'contract' which can transfer some rights from the originator to the company. Some places have specific mention of 'film' and that those working under contract for film have transferred their rights, whatever they may have been as independent workers, to the film owner completely.
 
It got confused by the UK ruling that photographers own their images unless contractually assigned elsewhere. No idea if the photography system includes moving images?

The UK rules are here https://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/protect/p16_photography_copyright

The summary of the useful bit is
[h=2]Fact sheet P-16: Photography and copyright[/h][h=5]Issued: 16th March 2005[/h][h=5]Last amended: 16th March 2005[/h]Exploring copyright issues in photography, registration advice and specific considerations that apply to photographers.
  1. Who owns the copyright on photographs?Under law, it is the photographer who will own copyright on any photos he/she has taken, with the following exceptions:
    • If the photographer is an employee of the company the photos are taken for, or is an employee of a company instructed to take the photos, the photographer will be acting on behalf of his/her employer, and the company the photographer works for will own the copyright.
    • If there is an agreement that assigns copyright to another party.
    In all other cases, the photographer will retain the copyright, if the photographer has been paid for his work, the payment will be for the photographer’s time and typically an allocated number of prints. The copyright to the photos will remain with the photographer, and therefore any reproduction without permission would be an infringement of copyright.
Click to expand...
 
paulears said:
It got confused by the UK ruling that photographers own their images unless contractually assigned elsewhere. No idea if the photography system includes moving images?

The UK rules are here https://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/protect/p16_photography_copyright

The summary of the useful bit is
[/LIST]
Click to expand...

It's the same in the US. Namely, unless it's a piece of work for hire or unless it's contractually stated otherwise, it's always the photographer who owns the copyright on the photos s/he takes. However, filming is typically much more complicated than still photographing. It's much less likely that the actual shooter owns the copyright on the footage in his /her camera.


FilmBoy77 said:
By default does the cinematographer own the copyright to the footage he shoots if he was hired and paid to film a project such as a commercial or short film that was written and directed by someone else, etc?
Click to expand...

By default, just like a still photographer, a motion photographer (cinematographer) owns the copyright on whatever footage he shoots. But, once he is hired and paid, that can't be assumed any more. Unless he expressly contractually remains an independent filmmaker who only sells the use of his footage, by default it's now his employer who owns the actual copyright. He is now by default just an (the) "original author."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top