70 million dollar lawsuit and my footage
 

I shot 30 hours of footage this past summer with the spoken not written permission of a young rock and roll concert promoter about a concert he was putting on that didn't happen. All during the shooting he gave me exclusive and intimate access and kept saying "we're partners on this right" so I stupidly assumed there would be no release problem. Now he's had a change of heart which means the documentary is dead. But he does want the footage for his 70 million dollar lawsuit against the people who cancelled the concert.

Question is....I put about 90 hours into the shooting. Now he wants the footage for his legal and monetary benefit and the hell with my film. What should I charge?
Thanks.....

Do yourself a favor and talk to an attorney, before you have any more conversations with your "partner."

All he needs is a subpoena and he's got your footage. Don't even think of getting paid for it. Won't happen.

I agree completely. This sounds like something I wouldn't rely on an Internet message board for advice on. :)

In fact, it would look bad for his case if he did pay you for the footage before acquiring the 'evidence'.

Hey Rich,

Isn't that the footage you accidently erased? Or was it the footage that you captured, edited and accidently left open on your network....and now it's flying around the globe being looked at for free by everyone?

I personally make it a rule to erase all clients footage when non-payment reaches 30 days (ok, not 30 days...but, eventually if i see no payment after a long while). Hey, it's my tape...and tape ain't cheap.

What do all you guys do?

Murph

Oh yeah, it is just like the computer algorithm I came up with, that a large company wanted me to testify to in court against a 3rd-party who was suing them for patent infringement. Since my public communication of the algorithm occured prior to the patent date, they think I can kill the other party's case.

Guess what, I did not hear the phrase "expert witness", gee, hard to remember something I came up with and tossed away more than a decade ago.

Why do these people think that we will put ourselves in the hot seat, being insulted by the other party's lawyers, subjected to perjury charges, just so they can save a few million dollars and we getting nothing for our trouble?

When I sent him an email asking for what I would have gotten if I was hired to shoot the footage his one word reply was "weak"
and my one word reply back was "trust".

He has now threatened me with a supeona. One lawyer has told me he can spend $75,000 in legal fees if I resist resist resist. He will also have one angry shooter (me) testifying at the trial.

Nuts.


















































































































The Battle of the Bulge

On December 21, 1944 the German forces had completely surrounded Bastogne, defended by the 101st Airborne Division. When General Anthony McAuliffe was awakened by a German invitation to surrender, he gave a one-syllable reply that has been variously reported and was probably unprintable. However, there is no disagreement as to what he wrote on the paper delivered to the Germans: "NUTS!" That reply had to be explained both to the Germans and to non-American Allies.

I'm staying out of this one, because my advice, although morally fine, may be somewhat illegal.

It's based on: if the guy is an a-hole, then treat him like one.

rich u should not have contacted him AT ALL.
go see a lawyer.
if ths person wants to claim damages, you should ask for your cut in it as wel as YOUR loss of earnings from HIM .

like i said, u shouldnt have made any contact at all.
from here, i would only speak to a lawyer, and arrange ur own damages claim against him.

if u have nothign documented, it shoudl serve as a lesson in business.. especially with somethign this big

good luck but i dont like ur chances
fact remains the tapes are urs
u were there with verbal permission and no production plan was discussed between urself and the guy suing the band
no releass are signed so u cant publish this stuff, but the stuff is still urse, regardless of the footage.
if he wants the footage, he DOES NOT OWN IT
you do

He gave me exclusive and intimate access to him during the time period I was filming which someone said might be considered "implied consent" which would give me the right to use it without a release from him.

You guys are losing your focus on the issue:

1) This guy wants to use Rich's tapes as evidence in a trial.
2) Rich wants to get paid for the work he did.

There is no direct connection between the two.

Rich does not need a lawyer for point 1. Getting his tapes subpoened will not cost him anything or involve more trouble than collecting the tapes. Even his shipping costs, if any, should be paid for.

There could be exceptions such as if turning over the tapes causes Rich harm in some way, directly or indirectly. In this case he might want to consider hiring a lawyer but this doesn't seem to be the case.

Point 2 is a totally different, unrelated, issue. Whether Rich feels he wasted his time and money on making the tapes means nothing to point 1.

I might warn Rich that if, at this point, he were to destroy the tapes he might be charged with destruction of evidence in a lawsuit.

I am not a lawyer but I do run businesses and have had some experience with these issues.

Rob is right.

Rich,

1) Stop posting about this right now.

2) Find a live in person lawyer to talk to about your potential obligations to supply the tapes, and your potential ability to recover money for your work.