Print

Print


> From: Ron Leming <[log in to unmask]>
> Organization: Silly Ole Bear Multimedia
> Reply-To: Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 20:49:50 -0600
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Copyright for Film Stills
>
> "The ONLY case I know of DID not involve and academic use but the
> publication Variety."
>
> Seems to me that suing Variety is an extremely stupid thing to do.
>
well this particular rights holder is VERY ornery and NOT to be messed with
I advice all of you to be VERY, VERY careful whenever even THINKING of using
a  Laurel & Hardy Image. In fairness while the guy is difficult , he is not
that bad IF YOU ASK HIM BEFORE you use something of his.
FYI I have been also been told by a friend of several successful cases
from the eighties in which MGM sued over frame enlargements. Now the uses
were COMMERCIAL ( cards T shirts etc) but I for one am NOT convinced that
frame enlargements are "safer" than publicity stills. I believe it is the
EXACT opposite since the enlargements are PART of a COPYRIGHTED work while
Publicity stills were produced for the PURPOSE of reproduction and in fact
despite disclaimers were rarely actually copyrighted.
One issue not discussed is uses OUTSIDE the US . In Europe and Canada
for instance rights are in fact much MORE restrictive and if the publication
in  question  is going to be sold outside the US it raises more complicated
copyright issues.

Kino has a policy of NEVER charging for such things and we will always sign
off on anything we own BUT I often receive forms requesting WORLDWIDE rights
which we very rarely own.

I still feel this whole issue boils down to nervous publishers who are
afraid to take a risk without signed documentation.
--
Jessica Rosner
Kino International
333 W 39th St. 503
NY NY 10018
[log in to unmask]

----
For past messages, visit the Screen-L Archives:
http://bama.ua.edu/archives/screen-l.html