Life Story Video and Copyright Issues

What I really love about life story video documentary is the freedom to integrate footage, sounds, images and words from diverse sources into powerful, emotional, multi-media extravaganzas. But there’s a danger lurking here: US Copyright laws. Just because you find it on the web (or the TV, or your CD drawer) doesn’t mean you can use it. (Nor should you take any special comfort in the fact that other life story video producers have used the same material – it could still be covered by copyright.) So, what can you use?

Well, I am no expert. But I have my own production company and according to my internet resources, there are some issues you should definitely be aware of in making your own life story video.

  • Video you shoot
  • In general, you own the copyright in the life story video footage you shoot. The main exception is a “work for hire”: if you shot the video as an employee or if you shot it for another producer as part of a larger project then you probably don’t have the copyright. According to the US Copyright Office:

    Although the general rule is that the person who creates a work is the author of that work, there is an exception to that principle: the copyright law defines a category of works called “works made for hire.” If a work is “made for hire,” the employer, and not the employee, is considered the author. The employer may be a firm, an organization, or an individual.

    There are a couple of other minor exceptions to the general rule that you own the life story video you shoot and you should visit the US Copyright Office and download their helpful bulletins.

    US Government footage

    The federal government is not entitled to copyright protection.

    “Copyright protection… is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise.”

    Generally speaking, works created by the US government that have been made public are free of copyright restrictions. This category includes a vast archive of historical images and film footage (especially war-related) that are likely to be of interest to the life story video documentarian. But there could still be copyright in a compilation of assembled government footage and there is likely to be copyright in music or narration or graphics or text which accompany any compilation or reissue of government footage. For more information, Google: Frequently Asked Questions About Copyright: Issues Affecting the US Government.

    Is it worthwhile including diverse material into your life story video. Isn’t it just simpler and safer to keep away from third party material altogether? Maybe so. It is an individual decision. But keep in mind that the best documentary videos will contain a real diversity of material.

    • Material in the public domain

    Pretty much anything on which copyright has run out can be used in your life story video. The trick is knowing when that has happened. The general rule is that copyright lasts for the life of the author – plus 70 years. For corporate works (e.g. a Disney cartoon) the term is 95 years from first creation. Works created prior to 1923 should be in the public domain (but always check).

    The University of North Carolina has a neat table entitled “When works pass into the public domain” by Lolly Gasaway that was put together in 2003 that sets out the major time periods and the protection that applies to them. But again be careful. If a third party has compiled public domain material and created a new work or has added music or narration or graphics or text then it may have copyright protection.

    • Short clips that help explain: “Fair Use”

    Copyright law allows certain “fair use” of a work even though copyright is owned by someone else. This area is a bit murky, but using copyright material in a life story video in a historical sequence or to illustrate an argument or point might qualify as “fair use”.

    According to the Center for Social Media, there are various factors to consider in determining if use of material in a life story video documentary comes under the “fair use” doctrine. It would be important, they say, that the source was attributed, that the extract lasted no longer than strictly necessary, that more than one source was used, and that a license couldn’t be obtained or its terms would be excessive for the project. The publication by the Center for Social Media entitled “Best Practices in Fair Use” goes into more detail on this subject for life story video producers.

    • Works with the author’s permission

    This is obvious, but if you really want to use some piece in your life story video – it always pays to ask. If the piece is non/low-profit and not destined for broadcast, or if there is something to be gained by the copyright owner, then they may just say “yes”. Especially regards music, some new bands (look on MySpace among endless other places) are often interested in having their music featured (and credited) in a life story video film for no charge.
    If you are lucky enough to get the permission for use of third party material in your life story video, it helps to get that permission in writing. Other laws, other factors – What about the situation where you shoot some footage for your life story video to which you own the copyright, but the subject refuses to give permission to use it, or changes their mind? It is never a good idea to go against the wishes of the subject – it is bad business (if you are in business) and with all the laws floating around out there, it is potentially very time consuming. For example, you can be sued for “publication of private facts”. According to the Citizen Media Law Project:

    In most states, you can be sued for publishing private facts about another person, even if those facts are true. The term “private facts” refers to information about someone’s personal life that has not previously been revealed to the public, that is not of legitimate public concern, and the publication of which would be offensive to a reasonable person.

    Leave a Reply