Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Image rights question?

profile picture
Mstchief
Posts: 751 - Karma: 524
This is kinda a legal question. Who retains the rights to a skiers image when used in movies and pics; the skier, the photographer/videographer or the film company ? To use an example: T-wall hits a rail, Freedle Coty films it with his camera, and it is for a segment in Berman's movie.
I would assume it was Berman but i keep seeing various Pros 08/09 segments which feature alot of shots from major movie companies(Rage, TGR, Level 1 etc..) and there Videographer edits out there too. Does that mean that they have to get permission from those companies to use the clips, or can they just use them when ever and how ever they want.
Obviously this does not apply to smaller film companies but i am guessing the bigger guns of the industry take this shit pretty seriously. WME lawsuit against Level 1, while not directly related to the question, is a good example of how quickly companies react to infringement on what they view as "their property"
Dec 16 2009 1:07AM
0 0
profile picture
AdrenalineGarage
Posts: 261 - Karma: 244
That's an interesting question. The answer is that everyone in the scenario could have some rights to the video, but here is how it typically breaks down.

Level 1 (and all film companies) should have all their athletes sign a "Likeness Waiver/Model Release." In that document, that athlete signs off their rights to the video. Most smaller companies don't do this, but the big ones definitely do.

Legally, the person that captures the video (Freedle in your example) owns the image. However, Freedle probably has a "Work For Hire" contract with Level 1. In that case, any work Freedle creates while he is under the employ of Level 1 belongs to Level 1.

So, if Level 1 has all the legal paperwork completed, they own the video. They can then choose to license or sell that video to any one else for any purpose they choose. Who owns the video then is determined by the terms of that license. If they don't have the paperwork, the athlete or Freedle can get involved and go after some of the money Level 1 is getting for the licensing or block it all together.

I'm not a lawyer, but working in the field, this is how it seems to be structured based on the contracts, waivers, releases and licenses I have to fill out.
Dec 16 2009 1:47AM
0 0
profile picture
R.Fahey
Posts: 8602 - Karma: 539
For some reason I don't seeing it being so professional. 
Based on 99% of what goes down in the Ski Industry, I would assume it's just a rule of thumb thing. 
A).  If you filmed the shot (Freedle) don't go posting it in forums, online edits, etc. (especially before the movie or final product comes out, and without someone higher up's consent (in your example, Berman)). 
B).  If you're a rider, don't ask for the shot so you can post it online, or sell it to someone else.  It'll look better for you to have fresh shots in a movie than waste it online in an edit.  And athletes who film know not to screw over the filmer and take it and sell it somehow. 

It seems like more of a friend relationship in the ski film industry, where people don't want to fuck other people over just because they're friends, or will lose their job/opportunity to work with those people in the future. 
Dec 16 2009 1:53AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)