Are signed releases needed for subjects filmed for Documentary on newsworthy event?
What is the name of your state? California
Hello Everyone,
I am producing a documentary film about a group of Western authors and renaissance thinkers who travel to India to meet the Dalai Lama to talk about solving some of the world's problems, and I have a question about the necessity of obtaining personal releases from the people who were there and are on camera.
The first question is:
whether you think that the gathering (it is called a "symposium"), which lasted a few days, would legally be considered a "newsworthy" event (therefore, no personal releases would be required)?
The factors of the "symposium's" newsworthiness are:
1) the meeting is of Western innovative thinkers and published authors (and some minor media personalities) who are meeting with the Dalai Lama to potentially solve some of the world problems.
2) According to the Symposium's materials that were given to everyone who attended, "The [the Western organizer of the event] has been invited by the Dalai Lama to inaugurate [the name of the meeting] at a small symposium to be convened in Dharamsala, India..... His Holiness [the Dalai Lama] has agree to serve as a participant and guide for the directions of our talks." Does tha fact that the Dalai Lama invited everyone to come to India for these talks make it a newsworthy event?
3) the issue of sanctions against Tibet came up during the event, and the Dalai Lama for the first time supported sanctions against China. Does the fact that the Dalai Lama mentioned his approval for sanctions against China at the gathering make the gathering and circumstances of the gathering a newsworthy event?
4) the symposium was broadcast internationally on the radio after the event was over (through a radio producer). Some of the Conference was also simulcast live on the internet. There was also a German news crew that filmed and broadcast some of the event, as well as a small Tibetan TV crew. Does the fact that a few media organizations were present make it a newsworthy event?
5) There were at least 3 cameramen and women (from our production crew) prominently filming almost every meeting and event at the symposium. Our cameras were very prominent throughout the entire multi-day event.
Because of the above factors, do you think that legally this wwould be considered a newsworthy event, and thus no releases would be required?
Question #2:
Also, I was wondering if you felt that individual personal releases from everyone who speaks on camera would be required under these conditions:
1) Everyone participating in the symposium was notified by email before they traveled to India that a documentary film crew would be filming the event. Although there was no mention that the film would be distributed, the emails mentioned in detail my film's company's broadcast credits on national television, so perhaps an intelligent person could assume that the documentary would be broadcast?
2) The symposium materials, which were mailed to everyone before people traveled to India, mentions that my film company was the documentary film crew. (i.e., implying that a documentary film was being made of the event, even though no specific mention was included about that the resulting film would be broadcast).
3) The film crew was mentioned at the beginning of the conference (I have this recorded on tape), and the film crew and the fact that a "Video" was being made of the event was verbally mentioned at different times at the conference.
4) At least 3 Professional Video cameras were present and prominently filming at almost every event. Would the fact that anyone spoke in front of those cameras (with a microphone) imply that they give permission to be filmed and included in the documentary?
5) Everyone who speaks on camera also had a private interview conducted (with a sound and cameraperson present). (Wouldn't this imply consent to be included in the documentary if they gave permission to be interviewed?)
6) I have a signed location release from the managers of the location of the symposium (in India) giving me permission to film anywhere on their property and include it in a broadcast film. I also have a signed agreement with the Synposium organizers giving me permission to make a broadcast documentary film about the event. (Though I may nullify the contract because of breach of contract since the symposium organizers did not send me the signed personal releases that they obtained, as they had promised to and agreed to in our written agreement).
Question #3:
I know that "Public Figures" are limited as to their right to privacy, and therefore I probably would not need to obtain a release from them.
1) What is the standard for determining if someone is a public figure?
2) Would a published author, well known in his or her field but not known to the average person, be considered a "public figure"?
2a) What if they travel and give talks about their books?
2b) what if they are featured and advertised speakers at other public conferences and conventions?
2c) What if they have been interviewed on TV about their subject of expertise?
3) Would a radio host who has a radio program broadcast internationally to a few dozen radio stations be considered a "public figure"?
Thank you very much for your thoughts and feedback,
Khashyar
What is the name of your state? California
Hello Everyone,
I am producing a documentary film about a group of Western authors and renaissance thinkers who travel to India to meet the Dalai Lama to talk about solving some of the world's problems, and I have a question about the necessity of obtaining personal releases from the people who were there and are on camera.
The first question is:
whether you think that the gathering (it is called a "symposium"), which lasted a few days, would legally be considered a "newsworthy" event (therefore, no personal releases would be required)?
The factors of the "symposium's" newsworthiness are:
1) the meeting is of Western innovative thinkers and published authors (and some minor media personalities) who are meeting with the Dalai Lama to potentially solve some of the world problems.
2) According to the Symposium's materials that were given to everyone who attended, "The [the Western organizer of the event] has been invited by the Dalai Lama to inaugurate [the name of the meeting] at a small symposium to be convened in Dharamsala, India..... His Holiness [the Dalai Lama] has agree to serve as a participant and guide for the directions of our talks." Does tha fact that the Dalai Lama invited everyone to come to India for these talks make it a newsworthy event?
3) the issue of sanctions against Tibet came up during the event, and the Dalai Lama for the first time supported sanctions against China. Does the fact that the Dalai Lama mentioned his approval for sanctions against China at the gathering make the gathering and circumstances of the gathering a newsworthy event?
4) the symposium was broadcast internationally on the radio after the event was over (through a radio producer). Some of the Conference was also simulcast live on the internet. There was also a German news crew that filmed and broadcast some of the event, as well as a small Tibetan TV crew. Does the fact that a few media organizations were present make it a newsworthy event?
5) There were at least 3 cameramen and women (from our production crew) prominently filming almost every meeting and event at the symposium. Our cameras were very prominent throughout the entire multi-day event.
Because of the above factors, do you think that legally this wwould be considered a newsworthy event, and thus no releases would be required?
Question #2:
Also, I was wondering if you felt that individual personal releases from everyone who speaks on camera would be required under these conditions:
1) Everyone participating in the symposium was notified by email before they traveled to India that a documentary film crew would be filming the event. Although there was no mention that the film would be distributed, the emails mentioned in detail my film's company's broadcast credits on national television, so perhaps an intelligent person could assume that the documentary would be broadcast?
2) The symposium materials, which were mailed to everyone before people traveled to India, mentions that my film company was the documentary film crew. (i.e., implying that a documentary film was being made of the event, even though no specific mention was included about that the resulting film would be broadcast).
3) The film crew was mentioned at the beginning of the conference (I have this recorded on tape), and the film crew and the fact that a "Video" was being made of the event was verbally mentioned at different times at the conference.
4) At least 3 Professional Video cameras were present and prominently filming at almost every event. Would the fact that anyone spoke in front of those cameras (with a microphone) imply that they give permission to be filmed and included in the documentary?
5) Everyone who speaks on camera also had a private interview conducted (with a sound and cameraperson present). (Wouldn't this imply consent to be included in the documentary if they gave permission to be interviewed?)
6) I have a signed location release from the managers of the location of the symposium (in India) giving me permission to film anywhere on their property and include it in a broadcast film. I also have a signed agreement with the Synposium organizers giving me permission to make a broadcast documentary film about the event. (Though I may nullify the contract because of breach of contract since the symposium organizers did not send me the signed personal releases that they obtained, as they had promised to and agreed to in our written agreement).
Question #3:
I know that "Public Figures" are limited as to their right to privacy, and therefore I probably would not need to obtain a release from them.
1) What is the standard for determining if someone is a public figure?
2) Would a published author, well known in his or her field but not known to the average person, be considered a "public figure"?
2a) What if they travel and give talks about their books?
2b) what if they are featured and advertised speakers at other public conferences and conventions?
2c) What if they have been interviewed on TV about their subject of expertise?
3) Would a radio host who has a radio program broadcast internationally to a few dozen radio stations be considered a "public figure"?
Thank you very much for your thoughts and feedback,
Khashyar
Last edited: