ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

9 years, 10 months ago - Jane Sanger

I think that as people have said above you need a clause in your release forms which I have now incorporated to all cast and crew that they are not allowed to keep footage or use it without my written permission anywhere (but in more legal terms) Get them to sign before or just before shooting, no sign , no job. This same thing happened to me on my very first film and so now I am much more wary.
Also that very nice lawyer/film maker above Geof Wolfenden has offered to help you so good, but be aware just a letter from a lawyer can cost £hundreds and the time you waste on chasing this person plus all the negative energy, sometimes its less stress to just let go. Work out costs against what you will possibly gain. Luckily for me my daughter is now a pupil barrister and I shall check everything with her in future.
Also in varying ways I have been compromised by people in the industry several times so have set up a facebook page called actors and crew blacklist www.facebook.com/actorsandcrewblacklist. I am fed up with some of the unprofessionalism shown and I thought it would be good for us all to alert others to prevent future misfortune..
Please Mr Wolfenden can you look at this page and tell me if naming and shaming is legal as I think it should be!

9 years, 10 months ago - Marlom Tander

Hi,

First up, have you agreed a PRICE with the broadcaster? That's the key thing.

Second - you've put a trailer on YouTube but expect a judge to believe you wouldn't have wanted the publicity provided by the broadcaster? That's a hard sell, (unless it was in the context of a program saying "and this is the kind of filth that we really want to ban"). You def can't be greedy.

Thirdly. You've implied that if your bluff is called, you can't follow through. So you def need to make it an easy call to pay you.

Fourthly, here's a special one off licence for retrospective use, in full, gratis.

"I, broadcaster, broadcast the TRAILER on DATE. I agree that this broadcast was done without permission, and in order to retrospectively licence it, have agreed to pay IVO £££££ in full and final settlement.

I agree NOT to use the material again in any shape or form, and if this should occur (e.g. in a repeat broadcast or an editor of another program using it) an additional sun of half £££££ shall be paid.

I also agree to ensure that the infringed content is excised from all the library and archive copies, to avoid accidental reuse in the future. "

Finally - I never paid my lawyer anything. I used his name, and the agreement was simply an exchange of plain english letters in which they agreed a fee and to remove the infringed material. He was never involved. This approach might work for you too, no expensive special licence required.

9 years, 10 months ago - Geof Wolfenden

I've been working as an IP lawyer for over 10 years now, and I'm also a filmmaker, I'd happy to try and help you out...one thing to be weary of; template agreements; there can be issues of knowing what you're asking/getting into - the phrase "its just boilerplate" sends chiils up my spine...anyway, good luck with it and happy to help if you need it...geof.wolfenden@gmail.com

9 years, 10 months ago - Ivo Marloh

Thank you for this, Marlom! I didn't make it clear. They used parts of our trailer in a completely different context, without saying that it's a trailer, just because they needed some footage that you'd have to go to Outer Mongolia to achieve, which they knew they couldn't do. They didn't in fact provide publicity for our film, but in effect if anything devalue the project by just using the bits that didn't flag the upcoming film, so no I have no problems taking it all the way if needs be but want to also not have to deal with a court case on top of finalising the movie and everything else.
Thanks again do much though, very helpful thoughts!

9 years, 10 months ago - Yen Rickeard

Hi Ivo, all of the above is great advice. But just to confuse things further, you have another option.
Don't ask them for money. ask them for an interview. Tell them how exciting the film is and how hard it was to make. It'd be a great interview! Fill a blank spot in their prime time topicals.
Get a ton of publicity for the cost of what I am assuming is a short clip that won't get you a ton of money.
Try it out and see what they say, if that floats your boat.
Either way, good luck with it.

9 years, 10 months ago - Tony Franks

I can recommend a media lawyer, if you want to contact me direct.
Tony

9 years, 10 months ago - Ivo Marloh

Thanks again everyone for getting involved and offering advice. It's not really a question of crediting us. The fact is that this footage was shot in a very remote place and you cannot get it on stock libraries. They knew that, which is why they took it. We filmed with a crew and aerials, and this is a very expensive endeavour. So it's not about being credited. They took something that wasn't theirs to take, and crediting won't make it go away. They have to pay for it, and they will. :-) Thanks you also, Yen, for your suggestion. We've already done a lot of interviews and have over 22k likes on FB, so we don't need their publicity. In my opinion this is the kind of thing everyone tries to pull these days anyway — can we use your creative work in exchange for the great publicity that you will get? No, frankly, you cannot. Sorry, that turned into a bit of a rant. I will update all of you on here about the developments. Geof Wolfenden has been most helpful!!

9 years, 10 months ago - Daniel Cormack

I don't think it's a question of Youtube versus Vimeo, but of a copyright *exemption*. In this case, they do not seem to have followed the very basic rules of crediting a clip (even though you do not have to pay a licensing fee under fair dealing), so they may not be covered under the exemption.

9 years, 10 months ago - Mät King

We had something similar happen to us recently. The broadcaster seemed to think that as it was on YouTube it was okay to rip it for broadcast. They also thought the copyright was YouTube's. They also sought permission from someone who had no rights for the footage just to confuse matters even further.
We took a credit on the programme broadcast link as it was a few seconds worth of material.
We have now made a lot of our YouTube material private, as we think broadcasters tend to have more respect for vimeo.
Good Luck

9 years, 10 months ago - Ivo Marloh

Hi everyone,
Thank you so much, you've all in your own way been very helpful! I'll get in touch with you individually. Jane, I hear what you're saying, I once had a shooting draft script stolen and put on docstock "for educational purposes" by a hacker who sold it for £30 per download. This one tho I won't let go, they already held their hands up and admitted the unlicensed use, it's just a question of getting what I think is fair. And I will, thanks to all your advice! :-)

9 years, 10 months ago - Hank Starrs

Hi Geof, yes, that's a very good point. I shouldn't have used the phrase "template". What I meant was, a specific agreement for licensing my own footage for broadcast, that has been used in the past and could potentially be adapted merely by changing the payment terms, terms for the length of use, the allowance of various platforms for broadcast etc, to suit this case. In this way maybe Ivo could avoid that 1K fee. It's not a template or boilerplate - it's my person document that I'm willing to share in this case.

9 years, 10 months ago - Daniel Cormack

It happens all the time under the fair dealing exemption. What they should have done is credited you with a copyright notice.

9 years, 10 months ago - Patrick Steel

Hi Ivo. I was in a similar situation a couple of years ago (publisher rather than broadcaster) and used James Jackson at Jackson Law. On the fee, as I remember it we had them bang to rights and they paid the lawyer's fee as part of the settlement. http://jllawfirm.co.uk. Feel free to message me via SP if you want more details.

9 years, 10 months ago - Ivo Marloh

Thanks Marlom! That's very spot on and is exactly what I have done. But need to draw up a special one-off licence agreement with them in retrospect (they already broadcast it obvs). But yes, I looked at costs per second, and a charge for the fact that they used it unlicenced and would not have been granted rights even if they'd asked (it's a trailer for one of my movies). I do know a great media lawyer but the agreement alone is 1k, plus he's £465 PER HOUR (I'm in the wrong job). SO I was wondering if anyone knew a trustworthy — cheaper — lawyer. Otherwise I'll go with him. Thanks again!

9 years, 10 months ago - Mät King

I wouldn't suggest it is a vimeo vs YouTube situation but it seems that some believe that anything on YouTube is tantamount to a Creative Commons Licence, and as such able to be used for whatever purpose. Perhaps, I'm mistaken but vimeo seems to project a different image.

9 years, 10 months ago - Marlom Tander

A long time ago I had some javascript stolen.

Step one - I spoke to a friend and asked if he knew any damn fine scary expensive copyright lawyers. He did, I phoned him and said " I don't want any of your time yet, for now I'd just like to be able to say that you're my lawyer when I contact the ripoff company. If they mess around, I'll come back and need a letter from you."

2) The lawyer agreed.

3) I phoned the pirates up, explained that they needed to settle, and told them who my lawyer was.

They offered a settlement which was higher than expected so I took it and had the money in three days.

The big question is how much to ask for. If it's footage that you have a price for, or for which a reasonable industry price exists, then pricing is easy. If there isn't, then you need to start playing with numbers, but what you want is for their lawyers to say "look, we ripped him off, he's asking a fair price for quick settlement, and if we mess around he knows whats what because CopySharksRUS are his lawyers. Commercial decision, settle for his offer or counter offer close enough that he takes it".

good luck

9 years, 10 months ago - Hank Starrs

Hi Ivo,
I know a couple of lawyers and also have a license template you can use. Feel free to message me via SP or post your contact email here.

9 years, 10 months ago - Daniel Cormack

See http://www.channel4.com/producers-handbook/c4-guidelines/fair-dealing-guidelines - in particular the section on Sufficient Acknowledgement:

Film

The studio, producer and principal director e.g. 'A Clockwork Orange'/Warner Brothers Inc./Polaris Productions Inc./Stanley Kubrick

Broadcasts

The Broadcaster and Production Company e.g. 'Big Brother 6'/Channel 4/Endemol Productions

Online/UGC Clip

The creator (often, but not necessarily, the uploader) and the original name of the clip e.g. Gnewstv/'Arson Backfires as Biker Sets Fire to Himself' or Stephennewton/'Manchester Bollards'

The Courts have held that the where a clip features an on screen broadcaster's logo this was sufficient to identify the broadcaster as the author of the work, in spite of the fact that the broadcaster was not named in an on screen aston.

The Courts have also held that oral statements that accompany the clip, e.g. an interviewee's sync, which acknowledges the author, would equally constitute a sufficient acknowledgement.

The acknowledgement must be large enough to be legible and on screen long enough for viewers to be able to identify the title and author of the work.