Usage and Copyright Query

[Anson]

Had encountered a post on the Net today about an artist asking the videographer to take down a video clip that he had taken during a paid photoshoot and posted in Youtube. Was wondering if the artist had the right to do so as it was a paid shoot ( assuming the videographer paid the organiser/artist), assume no prior agreement is made/sign?

Source: http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/e...d-me-take-down-her-youtube-video-4547565.html

Disclaimer: I am not in connection with any of the parties method in the article

 

[sjackal]

She was paid.

Content creator/commissioner of the shoot own the right.

No need model release. Unless it was misrepresented that the shoot was for hobby photoshoot but in fact for commercial gain, and that she was compensated improperly, she might have a case, but the burden of proof is upon her and where is the commercial gain in the first place?


Take another scenerio on the road, Vehicle A's Go-Pro camera capture Vehicle B (which happens to bear the branding of XYZ company) driving dangerously on the road and posted the video to youtube or any social media or stomp with title "XYZ company driver so reckless". Such video postings happens everyday. Having the branding of XYZ company can not prevent people from posting the video. Its merely saying an observation or a fact. Vehicle B driver was not even paid and neither does that matter.

 

[catchlights]

I got no time to watch an hour video and won't want to waste my time.

in the first place, is she a contract artist of Mediacorp Artiste?

if yes, how was she being engaged with the shoot?

if she was sent by the company, than any issue is settle between the company and the videographer, she is not suppose to take any action on her own.

if she was being hired without the company consent, than very good luck to her.

 

[catchlights]

Just notice the videographer is sgvideoman........... :what:


asking a girl walking in a park and taking video of her, produce 1 hour 18 minutes long footage without any storyline and concept.

I think we better put our time on more meaningful activities.



thread moved to Kopitiam.

 

[Anson]

She was paid.

Content creator/commissioner of the shoot own the right.

No need model release. Unless it was misrepresented that the shoot was for hobby photoshoot but in fact for commercial gain, and that she was compensated improperly, she might have a case, but the burden of proof is upon her and where is the commercial gain in the first place?

That my first thought as well, hence I was puzzled about the statement posted in their chat. :think:

in the first place, is she a contract artist of Mediacorp Artiste?

if yes, how was she being engaged with the shoot?

Based on what sgvideoman wrote on HWZ, this happened in 2011 which she is not contracted to Mediacorp den, hence which lead to another puzzled. What rights does her current company have to ask the videographer to take down the clip from youtube?

thread moved to Kopitiam.

The reason for my post in Photo Biz section -> http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=95 is not seek comment and criticisms with regards to the videographer's work or motivation. Rather it's to discuss whether the subject or her current company have any grounds in asking the videographer to take now the youtube video legally.

 

[Octarine]

The bold assumptions of rights when knowledge and some checks could help ...

 

[catchlights]

That my first thought as well, hence I was puzzled about the statement posted in their chat. :think:




Based on what sgvideoman wrote on HWZ, this happened in 2011 which she is not contracted to Mediacorp den, hence which lead to another puzzled. What rights does her current company have to ask the videographer to take down the clip from youtube?





The reason for my post in Photo Biz section -> http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=95 is not seek comment and criticisms with regards to the videographer's work or motivation. Rather it's to discuss whether the subject or her current company have any grounds in asking the videographer to take now the youtube video legally.

Model release is needed only when the photos or footage are using commercially, since sgvideoman has no intention selling the footage, and both parties are engaged with a shoot on their own personally capacity, (sgvideoman not using his company to hire her, the model did not sent by her company) beside, I don't see this footage has any commercial value.

simply put it, whatever they do, has noting to do with photography or videography business. So I move it out from Photo Biz.

anyway, if you ask my opinion, here it is; she has no ground to make such claim, with or without model release, does not make any different in this situation. What she has is only an inflated ego.

 

[daredevil123]

1. If no money exchanged hands, and nothing is signed between the two parties, the copyright belongs to the creator.

2. If videographer/photographer is paid (whatever amount), and nothing is signed between the two parties, the commissioner of the work owns the copyright to the work.

3. And in this situation... work is done before the girl was with Mediacorp... How can she get Mediacorp to get involved?

 

[catchlights]

that is right, she can't use her company name to threaten sgvideoman.
Her company won't do anything, they probably ask her to clean up the mess herself, as this was taken place before she sign with her current company.

 

[kandinsky]

...I don't see this footage has any commercial value.

:cheers:

 

[Sion]

I got no time to watch an hour video and won't want to waste my time.

in the first place, is she a contract artist of Mediacorp Artiste?

if yes, how was she being engaged with the shoot?

if she was sent by the company, than any issue is settle between the company and the videographer, she is not suppose to take any action on her own.

if she was being hired without the company consent, than very good luck to her.

But you have wasted 2 hours thinking about this and making youself a cup of coffee and turning on your PC and waiting it to start up and posting this message.

It would save you time to just watch the clip. :bsmilie:

 

[Sion]

asking a girl walking in a park and taking video of her, produce 1 hour 18 minutes long footage without any storyline and concept.

I think we better put our time on more meaningful activities.

If the girl has nothing on there could be more storyline than you can think of. :bsmilie:

Most Japanese AV starts with a girl walking in the park......

 

[kei1309]

If you've watched the video, you would have seen a familiar face at the beginning and end :bsmilie:

And once again touching the "model" in sensitive places :bsmilie:

 

[Sion]

If you've watched the video, you would have seen a familiar face at the beginning and end :bsmilie:

And once again touching the "model" in sensitive places :bsmilie:

How come the camera so jerky one?

 

[catchlights]

I think Anson already gotten the answers he is looking for.

we shell not discuss some strange behaviours of the videographer nor should we give him the attention his seeking for.

Check out my 635 photos taken at candleghost's sailor costume photo shoot at Japanese Gardens, Singapore with Sherena Ng, Serene Heng, Florence, Bernice, and Meixin.

if anyone interested to know more about sgvideoman, can search for the threads started by him.




this thread closed.