Shooting video in a location, didn't get a release, can I use the footage?

[mr_Goodbomb]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? WV

I'm a videographer, and I'm shooting my first feature film. It's extremely low budget. We essentially gave the roll of "assistant director" to the renter of the property that we spot a good portion of the film in. She recently became very upset about shooting conditions, and has been sending me messages telling me about how angry she is. Most recently she sent me a message saying she is revoking all rights for us to use the footage shot in that location, and if we release the film with that footage intact, she'll have the landlord sue (remember, she rents). I assume there's no legal basis to any of this. She's not the property OWNER, and she was, originally, a part of production, but has just recently changed her mind. I just thought I'd get a solid answer. Should we have any concern for using this footage? As predicted, this isn't some blockbuster film, anyway. It's a low-budget film that'll be shown at a few festivals, and released to DVD. No one is being paid, for acting or for crew positions.

 

[quincy]

Can you use the footage? Yes.

Should you use the footage? It depends.

There are so many factors that are looked at with videotaping and publishing that it would take an attorney's review of what exactly you shot to determine whether you face legitimate legal risks by using what you have already filmed.

And, even if your film appears to nicely avoid invasion of privacy issues, defamation issues, or any one of myriad other legal issues that can arise from the publication of a video, you can still be sued by your former "assistant director" or her landlord/the property owner, for no other reason than they don't like you or they are the litigious sort.

I suggest you have the content of your film reviewed by an attorney in your area. There is no way anyone here can tell you whether your film is legally safe to use or not.

 

[mr_Goodbomb]

I guess I should be safe. For one, the landlord isn't going to give a single damn about some low-budget film shot in one of his rentals. He wants his rental money every months from his tenants, and that's that. It'd take him thousands of dollars to sue over the rights to the footage shot there, and what will he gain? Part of the returns from the film when it's released? I don't expect it to make as much as he'd be paying for legal fees. He stands to gain nothing but trouble and a cheesy movie.

Beyond that, it's clear that we didn't break into the location to get this footage. A good portion of the film is shot there, we probably spent several hundred hours prepping and shooting there, and there's outtakes of the previous AD holding boom or stepping into shot to fix things, so to any judge or jury it'd be quite clear that she was a part of the production, decided she was no longer interested, and wanted to make trouble and reneg her obligation and contribution. Tough luck, I guess.

 

[quincy]

A vital part of filmmaking is obtaining all necessary consent and release forms prior to shooting. Lesson learned, huh?

As for what someone has to gain in a suit should they win a judgment against you? The attachment of assets, present or future, and the attachment of wages, present or future. This could be worth the costs involved in initiating an action.

Again, however, it all depends on all of the facts, facts best reviewed by an attorney in your area.

Good luck with your film.

 

[mr_Goodbomb]

A vital part of filmmaking is obtaining all necessary consent and release forms prior to shooting. Lesson learned, huh?

As for what someone has to gain in a suit should they win a judgment against you? The attachment of assets, present or future, and the attachment of wages, present or future. This could be worth the costs involved in initiating an action.

Again, however, it all depends on all of the facts, facts best reviewed by an attorney in your area.

Good luck with your film.

Who am I supposed to get consent from in this case? The renter has no right to the property other than living there month to month, and the landlord mostlikely doesn't give a hoot.

 

[quincy]

I don't know who you would need consent from. I haven't seen the film. Getting permission from the landlord would make your former assistant director's threats of having the landlord sue you moot ones, however, and that could be a start.

 

[mr_Goodbomb]

What difference does the content of the footage make in who consent is needed from? That's not a sarcastic remark, I am genuinely asking and interested.

 

[quincy]

Well, I don't know what difference the content of the film would make in deciding who you would need consent from because I haven't seen the film. And that's not meant as a sarcastic answer.

A review of ALL of the facts would be necessary (and reviewing the footage you shot is part of those facts) in order to determine whether your footage is at any legitimate risk of facing any legal action at all. While I could list a whole bunch of scenarios where lack of consent could get you sued, that is getting into hypothetical situations and we do not do hypotheticals here.

As a most general rule, however, to use photographs or videos that are taken inside a person's personal residence, you need permission from the resident. To not have this permission can be seen as an invasion of their privacy, which in turn can result in a lawsuit. Usually an action would be based on surreptitious photographing or filming, but that is not always the case. Audio that accompanies videotaping can also spawn problems.

Again, mr_Goodbomb, I suggest you have an attorney in your area go over ALL of the facts with you, including a review of the footage you shot, to determine what your risks are (if any) of using the footage, having not obtained any consent or release forms or signed contracts of any kind from anyone who has any connection at all with your film. See what the attorney says, and proceed from there.

All I can tell you from this distance, and without a review of the film and all of the facts surrounding the making of the film, is that your low-budget film has the potential of costing you blockbuster amounts of money in court, if you find yourself fighting a lawsuit.

Good luck.

 

[mr_Goodbomb]

I spoke with the landlord and he signed off on the release form. There's nothing the tenant could have done without spending a considerable amount of money, which she doesn't have, but now she can't even threaten.

 

[quincy]

Getting the release from the landlord was a good first step. That eliminates that threat nicely.

I do want to warn you that, even if someone does not currently have money, a suit can still arise if a case has merit and an attorney thinks there can be a recovery of damages. In other words, your former assistant director could still potentially sue you if there is any action available that makes a suit worthwhile.

Again, without a review of all of the facts, it would be impossible for anyone here to say whether that is a legitimate risk you could face now with your film or not. Hopefully it is not.

Good luck, mr_Goodbomb. I hope your second film will avoid all of the problems that your first film has encountered.