Thanks for the reply. Hmmm. Worrying stuff. Sounds like I really am going to have to cut round the kids in my film.

Does your daughter's school also require you to get written consent from the parents of the kids in the play?

It's starting to sound like the next time a friend asks me to film a fun local event, my response will have to be "do you have the money to pay for an assistant who will spend the entire event getting release forms?". It's such a shame. Video is such a powerful tool for documenting cool local projects and for gathering local support.

Can someone explain the philosophical thinking behind rules like "you can't show kids in a video documenting a lovely local festival"? Don't get me wrong, I'm a very strong believer in protecting children from being manipulated or taken advantage of. And I'm a strong believer that some regulations are absolutely required and a good yard-stick for determining whether legislation is required is to ask "what's the worst that could happen" (e.g. building regulations are clearly a good idea because poorly constructed buildings can and do kill people). But what's the "worst that could happen" due to me filming some kids having fun at a festival?

I just don't get it.

Worst thing, is you could have a mouth full of fist, that would of course depend on whether the childs father saw you as a threat.

Whilst I fully agree with your concerns, and no doubt you are filming in good faith. Put yourself on the other side. How would you feel if someone you didn't know, was filming your daughter?

It is rather sad that we are now thinking this way, but that's what we have to accept.

How to get a video in Times Square
 

In March 2008 my wife and I were in New York, and we went to Times Square. Having read about video regulations in this city, we placed our tripod and the EX1 on what we thought was a perfect spot.

After some 15 minutes two policemen told us not to use a tripod there. "Yes, you can do it in NY, but not in Times Square".

So we took another shot close by with the camera on the concrete divider between the car lines. Too much concrete in the bottom of the shot, but that was easy to remove in post.

But back in Sweden, our agent now says "hmmm, probably too many trademarks in the picture". I think that these companies should be happy getting these trademarks published for free.

LentoVision: New York City

I'm surprised no one has mentioned it in this thread. The worst thing that could happen (and the reason why kids require more protection and are blurred in lots of TV) is that an estranged husband/wife etc could see a child that had been removed from them and put into protection, becuase of violence, court order or whatever, and track said child down because of the film showing them in an identifiable location.

That'ssomething I certainlywouldn't want on my conscience.

I would imagine this would only apply in a very small amount of cases.

Imagine if Cartier Bresson had been stopped from taking pictures, what a loss that would be.

The trouble is that we live in a politically correct society where everyone is suspicious of what you are doing. In the end we lose documentaries depicting real life. Now all we can show future generations is the "optical sewage" of reality TV.

I don't think there is an answer to this as far as we are concerned, although no-one has asked my permission to film me, I believe we are caught on CCTV at least 25 times every time we visit a shopping centre.

OK, sure - that sounds bad. Thanks for bringing it to light.

But, erm, has it ever happened?

I can't speak to Swedish law. However, in the U.S., the primary barriers to showing 3rd party trademarks in a film are trademark infringement, i.e. consumer confusion as to source, sponsorship or affiliation, and dilution by tarnishment, e.g. using a 3rd party trademark in porno film. Obviously, without seeing your film and knowing the context in which it would be used, I can't give a legal opinion. However, as a general rule, use of a trademark per se in a video is not necessarily a problem.

I make the animated billboards on Times Square for Budweiser and Michelob Ultra. It would be absolutly fine to have them in the background of a shot if no reference were made to them.
...and as easy as a phone call otherwise.
Very few companies will ever have a problem with free advertising. Heck, they have teams that arrange and pay generously for product placement. I'm not saying they'd pay you but often they'd surely not say no.