Frage von der Schneider:
Hello,
ich hab mal ne theoretical question.
I was asked a making of a music video of spinning to make of the company where I recently had cooperated. I have the charge and made more synonymous aufm helped set.
Now I no longer work for the company and ask myself whether I did right s.den images?
rotating the whole was quite chaotic and I know nothing about the shooting of the framework contracts with the artists.
there are synonymous for me no contract or a tie. I was just there, have helped and rotated.
but there are known artist and I wonder whether the synonymous with the acquiescence of the recordings (usdirekte interview situation) at the same time a kind of consent have shown?
I ask this because I promised that I was for me the recordings may edit them on my pc should be digitized but are not on it ...
Antwort von veejay:
Hello,
Tolerance is only available in certain cases, the same permit.
With cameras such as the channel ZDF, RTL, etc, with the transmitter ID and as micro-foam with ID make it clear for whom and why revolves.
As in our own internal environment without clear presentation for whom and why you should turn, I would in no way condoning of a permit and the rights of other out.
That could very backfire.
Many greetings
Antwort von der Schneider:
Thank you for your opinion.
So I thought synonymous to me with regard to the toleration.
It was but synonymous to the theoretical case that I turn a little but "my" material does not get.
This case is now would not have occurred but interesting to know how much "right" man on "own" material has synonymous under the circumstances, the camera was borrowed.
But I think synonymous here, the man sowas in advance by contract must be clarified
Antwort von veejay:
Hello,
the author has a right, but the individual depicted synonymous.
Many greetings
Antwort von steff517:
If you've rotated, you have a performance right. That is, without your permission no one can use your material. However synonymous You can not use the material, since the actors, etc. are also a performance right and have depicted the likely content subject to copyright.
In your concrete case, but first you have the problem to prove that the pictures of you are ...
Antwort von der Schneider:
ah, high-performance protection right, but this is a nice word times ;-)
as I said is the whole theoretical reflexion. But to prove that I should have rotated it but the easiest thing to be. persuade pictures, etc. ..
Antwort von klaas:
torque, high-performance protection legislation refers to a black performer, a reproducible performance, etc.
I believe that applies to you in this instance the s.deinem copyrighted material, which under German law synonymous is not transferable.
the artist had in my view, a personality right, with whom he recorded against the procedure, because its not restricted schriftlic available. Furthermore the material you are allowed without appropriate licensing of any music publishing occurring.
gruß, klaas.
Antwort von steff517:
I've got something interesting on the subject found:
