UK based. My company curated an art exhibition and symposium event and hosted it at a University. The event was not a university event, we were not working FOR the university, we simply used a room in their building to host the event.
My company asked for the event to be live streamed, using equipment based at the University - the event directly benefited the university and was funded entirely by ourselves so we were asked if they could assist in any way. The university agreed to stream the event but later changed their minds on account of portal security. My company also curated 'vox pops' and liaised with the media course department to use their equipment and student volunteers, on the understanding that it would provide good 'professional practise'/work experience for those students. Upon making the decision not to live stream the event, the University offered to record the event and I was told that I would then be able to upload the footage to OUR COMPANY's YouTube account.
No formal agreement was signed, no written correspondence exists beyond the agreement to live stream as we were informed of the decision not to live stream in person hours before the event was due to take place.
The footage contains art works not belonging to or created at the University. The footage also contains 6 pre-written talks not written on site and not written by any persons affiliated with the University.
My company has now decided not to use the recorded footage for a number of reasons, primarily because a number of the speakers have asked for the footage not to be distributed or made accessible online. We also decided that the sensitive content of the symposium would be inappropriate for our own intended use. However, the University has claimed that they own the copyright and can use the footage for promotional purposes.
Had this been put to me before the event I would never have agreed to filming. They claim that because the footage was filmed using their equipment and on their grounds that it is an original work that they own. I fail to see how this is the case when the content of the film was curated and originated by our company and our company's affiliates. Effectively, I 'hired' them to film the event.
Where do we stand on this issue?
My company asked for the event to be live streamed, using equipment based at the University - the event directly benefited the university and was funded entirely by ourselves so we were asked if they could assist in any way. The university agreed to stream the event but later changed their minds on account of portal security. My company also curated 'vox pops' and liaised with the media course department to use their equipment and student volunteers, on the understanding that it would provide good 'professional practise'/work experience for those students. Upon making the decision not to live stream the event, the University offered to record the event and I was told that I would then be able to upload the footage to OUR COMPANY's YouTube account.
No formal agreement was signed, no written correspondence exists beyond the agreement to live stream as we were informed of the decision not to live stream in person hours before the event was due to take place.
The footage contains art works not belonging to or created at the University. The footage also contains 6 pre-written talks not written on site and not written by any persons affiliated with the University.
My company has now decided not to use the recorded footage for a number of reasons, primarily because a number of the speakers have asked for the footage not to be distributed or made accessible online. We also decided that the sensitive content of the symposium would be inappropriate for our own intended use. However, the University has claimed that they own the copyright and can use the footage for promotional purposes.
Had this been put to me before the event I would never have agreed to filming. They claim that because the footage was filmed using their equipment and on their grounds that it is an original work that they own. I fail to see how this is the case when the content of the film was curated and originated by our company and our company's affiliates. Effectively, I 'hired' them to film the event.
Where do we stand on this issue?
