ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

9 years, 3 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin

The EXACT answer can ONLY come from your own lawyer - someone you pay and so whose professional negligence insurance covers their advice to you if it's wrong. You should never rely on any free template as whoever wrote it did not know your particular circumstances when they did.

In general terms, a release is legally spurious in itself (no consideration), but it does spell out the interviewees intentions and knowledge that they're being filmed, so they can't claim later that your were tricking them. Ideally, it'll also give the context in which the footage will be used (documentary film as opposed to reedited into a comedy feature that makes them look stupid), but that's more for the benefit of the interviewee. If you operate the camera, you own the copyright in the footage.

9 years, 3 months ago - John Lubran

Paddy's answer is bang on. It reminds of a discussion here recently about contracts in general. Unless one aquired a sense of the underlying principles of English Law, as opposed to the minute of its often lengthy extrapolations in lawyer speak, then get a lawyer.

Mostly though it comes down Common Law of Tort conciderations. First ensure that the subject knows what sort of film they're getting into. That their part is not limited in future time and territory (universal is good) or distribution media. They should understand that they participate freely without expectation of payment or reward. If there's likely to be any issue arising or following from their contribution such as controversy or truth ensuring that they agree to be truthful is important too.

An agreement of release can be a simple, clear and inclusive document that they sign and date but any other uncontravertable evidence, such as actually recording such an agreement on film is also effective. However, and it's a big however, if you want to have your film accepted by broadcasters and other distributors then any clearances will need to meet with their often unnecessarily convoluted and over cautious requirements.

Getting back to the basic underlying Law of Torts thing is that ultimately in a test of law in a High Court or above the issue will include; was the subject given a clear and true perception of the films remit and how their contribution would be used. Also was any harm or damage done to the subject that would not have been anticipated by any reasonable person? This does not mean that one can't 'attack' a subject and cause them harm if such is consequential to truth, or how else could controversial stories be told. Indeed it's not essential to have any release created No loss or harm is done other than in the cause of provable truth.

9 years, 3 months ago - Lana Asfour

Thank you very much for those two answers. I'm worried that the template legal documents are indeed wordy and frightening to ordinary people who are happy to give interviews for the film but don't fully understand the documents. I'm not legally trained, so I can only explain them in a general sense. I'm trying to write a simpler document that would contain what the templates do in a far shorter, more accessible fashion, but you're right, I can't do that without a lawyer. And since I'm filming abroad at the moment with time restrictions, all I can do is get them to sign a form that is comprehensible, but I'm not sure whether it would meet the legal standards required by broadcasters and distributors or the law itself.

9 years, 3 months ago - Lana Asfour

So, surely I don't need a lawyer just to answer this question: what permissions/release forms do I actually need for a documentary full of interviews with people in their homes?

9 years, 3 months ago - John Lubran

I once had a commission to produce a series of short films for Channel 4, who insisted that we used their release form, which was an appallingly drafted thing that appeared to be wholly one sided to the detriment of the subject without offering anything nice to them. We had to use this form across several cultures and jurisdictions. I spent a lot of effort appologising for the agreements along the lines of "they're just standard across the industry". The actual fact was that Channel 4 relied upon idiot lawyers who simply had no idea how to finesse such a form and by reflection the senior producers who ignorantly acquiesced. Just because some folk get into powerful places is no guarantee that they ought to be there. During the course of many other TV projects I've drafted my own forms that quite comfortably cover all the vitals without reading as if written by utter b......s. It really isn't that difficult and with a modicum of Common Sense in Common Law ought to do very nicely.

9 years, 3 months ago - Lana Asfour

Thanks John. If you can recommend a lawyer or a civilian who can help me write my own, easy-to-understand forms that still cover the legal vitals, than please do. This is my first documentary and I don't know enough about the what's required, or about Common Law to write them myself.

9 years, 3 months ago - John Lubran

I'm sure there's some fair and decent lawyers out there but I stopped using lawyers long ago, so can't recommend any. Without knowing precisely what you project entails I wouldn't be able to suggest any specific form. Nevertheless, even though I agree with Paddy that adapting a template from the Recourses here might not be best for those lacking Common Law Common Sense; it would be better than nothing. But Lanarkshire, it really isn't that difficult. If the notion of Common Law seems too arcane then ordinary common sense and plain English is a good place to start.